SCG Baltimore Classic top 4 split
So SCG Baltimore came into town this weekend. I didn't play in the main event as standard is too expensive for me. Also, if/when you have a wife and kid spousal capital to let you play on back to back days, all day, is extremely hard to come by. So I decided to play Aggro Loam again as I feel it is very well positioned. It is better than 50% against all of the "decks to beat" with Shardless and Eldrazi being 50/50. The tournament had 7 rounds with cut to top 8 with 87 players. I played the same list card for card that I placed 2nd in the Squabbles mox tournament last month. It's Alan Beaty's list from the Memphis Super IQ with a different sideboard.
Here is my list for reference:
http://sales.starcitygames.com//deck...?DeckID=100766
I took some notes on matches and will try to pull from memory how they went.
Round 1: Jeremy Hsu (local guy) 4c Deathblade
Jeremy and I know each other from the local scene, but I wasn't exactly sure what deck he was on as he played Aggro Loam 3 weeks ago at the mox tournament. I put him on lands as I have seen him play that too.
G1: I win the die roll and proceed to get the loam engine going to waste him off lands that with a punish fire for critters and 2 cycle lands in the bin was no match for his active Liliana.
SB: I miss sideboard a little as I thought he was on Shardless, but the Scrubland he showed should have told me better and I totally missed it. I sideboard as such.
Out: 3 COTV, 2 Mox, 1 Karakas
In: 2 Deluge, 2 Thalia, 1 Choke, 1 Garruk
G2: I think Jeremy mulls once here. I keep my 7 into an early Thalia, Teeg, punishing fire with grove has him dead before long.
(1-0)
With 30 minutes in the round to spare I check on two of my friends in the tournament.
Round 2: I think Ryan - I didn't write it down - Miracles
G1 and only 1: This was a long drawn out game where I would get a knight which he would swords then drop a Counter Balance which I would draw and abrupt decay for and start p.fire him again. This cycle went on for 2 more times. He finally got a Jace, but without a counterbalance and me having 3 p.fire and him at low life i never bothered to hit the jace ticking up. At the very end he STP his own clique to save from dying only to die two turns later. There were 10 minutes left in the round and knowing his own deck decided to concede the match to go out and smoke. I appreciate miracles players who know how slow their decks are. A side note, both rounds 1 and 2 went to time plus 10 minutes from miracles players. I'm not complaining as I wish everyone played miracles I would win every tournament :-p
SB: None no game 2
(2-0)
Round 3: Harlan Firer - Eldrazi
I last saw Harlan on the stream from SCG Philly. He knew what I was playing from being in close proximity the round before, but I didn't get a chance to see what he was on and totally forgot that he was on Eldrazi in Philly until after turn 1.
G1: He wins the die roll and gets out an early 2/2 endless one and mimic. I think I stabilize with p.fire and abrupt decay. Luckily knight comes down, but eats a dismember. Before knight goes I get maze to hold off his reality smasher. I grow an ooze up to 5/5 and get some life back. Loam finds my maze and he can't deal with my loam, recurring p.fire, maze, scooze and scoops it up at 18.
SB - This one is not set in stone as I seem to bringing in Thoughtseize more and more
Out: 4 CoTV, 1 Karakas 1 P.Fire
In: 1 Pulse, 1 Garruk, 2 Deluge, 2 Thoughtseize
G2: I keep an awful 7 on the hope that he is land light. 3 Wastes, 1 Mox, sylvan, knight, A.Decay. He is not land light and starts with soul into double mimic turn 1. I waste drawing no land. He plays soul. I waste no land drawn. 2/2 endless one joins the party for land number 3. No land drawn again and I concede. It was a gamble hand and I used to play a lot of storm so I like to gamble hahaha.
G3: He starts with Leyline - which I'm happy with as it is one less threat in his hand. He has a slow start with turn 2 or 3 matter reshaper. I believe I had a turn 2 sylvan and hit myself on turn 3 to grab a land and mox to make a turn 3 Garruk/wolf. He has a reshaper on board but I don't think he attacked. At one point he had a TKS take a KotR and I had a deluge in hand. I believe I attacked with my 2 wolves into his TKS and a 4/4 endless one allowing me to deluge for only 2 killing both his critters then I made another wolf and passed the turn. I eventually got out a 2/2 knight and was off to the races with wolves to take the match.
(3-0)
Round 4 - Brandon - Miracles
G1: I lose the die roll and see Island top. When I used to play storm I was not ever happy seeing that, but with A.Loam I love it! This game goes really long as it always does with me trying to stick something. Early CoTV get countered. I draw tons of lands and finally find an abrupt decay to get the p. fire going on his life. I don't think he ever finds a second counterbalance or if he does I decay that one as well. P. Fire closes the deal
SB
Out: 1 Karakas, 1 Maze, 2 Mox, 1 P.Fire, 1 Ooze
In: 2 Thalia, 1 Choke, 1 Garruk, 1 Rec Sage, 1 Revoker
G2: I don't really remember what happened here to well as his life points indicate him only going to 15. I believe he may have mulled to 6. I got an early Thalia and kept him on 2 mana most of the game. Maybe 20/20 or he just scooped after I dropped Teeg.
(4-0)
Round 5 Joe Malia (top 8) Cloudpost
G1: I am able to hold him off with some wasteland and an ultimate Lili. I believe he concedes from 18 never having more than 3 lands in play and a chalice on 1.
SB
I don't have a cheat sheet for this deck so I can't exactly remember how I sideboarded only I know I sided out Abrupt Decay and a few P.fire. Leaving only one pulse in my deck, ugh, i pay for it in game 2
G2: I'm about to take the game away with a knight until he names wasteland with needle. Crap! I only have one out...sigh...I try to assemble Laige and am one turn off before Prime time Emrakul seals it.
Re SB this time bringing the Decays back in and even a rec sage.
G3: I get an early sylvan taking 8 damage once and 4 the next time drawing a bunch of cards. I am able to take out his lands until a needle names wasteland. I use maze to combo with my knight and zenith up a sage to take out needle thereby wasting his lands. He goes from 27 to 13 and then lights out.
(5-0)
Alright 5 wins nets me top two and able to double draw. I use this time to scout around into what will be in top 8. The other undefeated is Sean (top 8)on Nic-Fit something I do not want to battle. Kory (top 8) also playing A.Loam has to face a 3rd undefeated Travis (top 8). He ends up winning thereby securing the top 4. I get some food and hang out until the final round where I ID with Travis.
Round 6 - ID
Round 7 - ID
Let me take this moment to express an extreme use of rules enforcement (now finding out that it was not extreme use of rules enforcement so tread carefully) against the respectable long time playing fan of legacy Alix Hatfield. Hatfield was DQ's in the last round against my friend. I witnessed the whole event. For those that don't know it was game 3 Alix on Miracles and Mike on Stoneblade. Time was called and there was clearly going to be no winner. 2 judges were standing by. In Alix's last turn, turn 5, there was an awkward pause, which was broken by Mike asking Alix to concede as he had an EE on 0 for tokens and a batterskull. Alix had a top and no hand. Alix didn't want to concede. Mike said I don't think you have any more swords for my token. Alix said he still had Entreat and showed Mike that it was on the top to solidify that it was only a matter of time before he found an answer to get the EE off the table. When he flipped the top card of his library is when the infraction occurred. Both judges left to discuss with the head judge. He came back to ask both sides what happened. The infraction was revealing extra cards to determine a winner. It was clearly the game had ended and Alix was in no way trying to determine a winner by such means only to state why he was not conceding. This was a DQ for him and I'm sorry that it had to happen this way as he is a standup guy. My friend Mike even tried to reason with the judge away from the table, but it was no use. I feel they wanted to make an example out of him. A game loss would have sufficed fine or even a warning for revealing extra cards.
Ok back to the report.
We were trying to figure an 8 way split, but SCG forbid us to do so. No split was taken and we needed to play it out, at least the quarters anyway. I faced against my Round 5 opponent again, lucky me!
Round 1 of top 8 - Quarterfinals Joe on cloudpost
G1: I mull to 5 and the game goes on forever until he finally gets me after taking out my chalice on 1.
SB: see round 5 above
G2: Turn 0 Leyline for him. I get out an early knight only to see an early needle on wasteland. I make the decision to fly over with 20/20 and take him out around turn 6 or 7.
G3: Another turn 0 Leyline for him. He gets an early needle again on my waste. I take it out with decay. I get out a Garruk. I don't need to zenith for rec sage as I drew it and take out another needle. He goes for SnT an Emrakul. I had been sand bagging Karakas and show that it bouncing his 15/15. I get a 2/2 knight on board. Eventually he gets out a trinket mage for a 3rd needle losing his top in the process. He names knight I transform Garruk and take out the blocker mage. I have 8 power on the board. He can't find anything and dies to the final swing in.
(6-0-2)
I end up getting the top 4 to split the tix pull 2400 each. Not as good as the money they used to shell out but 2400 does turn into $600 store credit which can sometimes turn into cash for the right purchase of cards. Since SCG player points are involved we need to determine the order of 1-4. Travis and I could care less about the invite, which we already got, as well as the player points. We both concede and Brad and Tyler decide who gets 1st and 2nd.
Props:
The Aggro Loam deck running on all cylinders in the current meta
2 Aggro Loam's running in top 8
The nice guy concedes so both players don't get a draw knocking them out - saw it happen twice
Slops:
Making an example out of Alix Hatfield
SCG stating at first we cannot split
The top 8 can be seen on SCG's website.
Re: SCG Baltimore Classic top 4 split
First, congrats on your finish.
Second, I believe the term Aggro-Loam was used from GP Lille of 2015. To this day, I still don't understand what it is trying to refer to. For the sake of clarity, since SCG calls it something else, and because there is no consensus what this deck should be called, a Link to your list on SCG would be nice, or just paste the list onto your report.
Last, regarding DQ, I remember there was a Miracles player got DQ against Elves for the most ridiculous sequence of events involving mulligan and dice. Who did not see it coming? Now you've mentioned another DQ incident involving Miracles, but this time it's the revealing of the top card(s) of his library. Without being there to witness, to understand the context, I feel the bottom line is to just play faster. If you run into a slow MU like Miracles vs Stoneblade, you have to be able to stomach the draw, as in you sign yourself up for the possibility of a situation like that when you bring Miracles to a tournament.
Re: SCG Baltimore Classic top 4 split
Quote:
Originally Posted by
twndomn
First, congrats on your finish.
Second, I believe the term Aggro-Loam was used from GP Lille of 2015. To this day, I still don't understand what it is trying to refer to. For the sake of clarity, since SCG calls it something else, and because there is no consensus what this deck should be called, a Link to your list on SCG would be nice, or just paste the list onto your report.
Last, regarding DQ, I remember there was a Miracles player got DQ against Elves for the most ridiculous sequence of events involving mulligan and dice. Who did not see it coming? Now you've mentioned another DQ incident involving Miracles, but this time it's the revealing of the top card(s) of his library. Without being there to witness, to understand the context, I feel the bottom line is to just play faster. If you run into a slow MU like Miracles vs Stoneblade, you have to be able to stomach the draw, as in you sign yourself up for the possibility of a situation like that when you bring Miracles to a tournament.
Thank you. I edited my post with a link to the list.
In reference to the name, I use the naming convention from the source which is where I feel legacy is born ;-)
Re: SCG Baltimore Classic top 4 split
Congrats on the finish!
How did Marit Lage behave? From what I can tell you got 2 kills with her. Would you like soemthing else over the combo?
Re: SCG Baltimore Classic top 4 split
I can't believe this DQ is real. These judges have some explaining to do.
When the game is stopped by his opponent somehow, Alix is being browbeated to concede.
Where were the judges when this was happening? Did they not understand that this was the situation as it was unfolding? How can Alix then be given a GAME LOSS.
Is it my understanding that this didn't happen at time in the round, but that the gamestate was stopped BY HIS OPPONENT? And then he revealed the cards?
Because, if that is so, and that's how the sequence of events happened, there is NO WAY they can give Alix the DQ for that. He would never have chosen to reveal anything if not prompted by his opponent.
They both should've recieved warnings, and finished playing magic. I can't understand how this happens.
Alix Hatfield is an Icon of Legacy. These people, in my opinion, royally fucked up.
Re: SCG Baltimore Classic top 4 split
Quote:
Originally Posted by
troopatroop
I can't believe this DQ is real. These judges have some explaining to do.
I mean, unless you have better and more information than the OP (who was physically present), there's honestly not much to explain.
If a Tarmogoyf is put on top of your library with Submerge, it immediately becomes hidden information that is available to neither player. It doesn't matter if there are no other cards in your library at the time. It's still hidden information that is available to neither player. If you were to cast a Green Sun's Zenith where X=20, you are still entitled to fail to find because it is hidden information that is unavailable to your opponent.
Alix revealing that Entreat, no matter how innocent the behavior and no matter how "known", is still him deliberately revealing hidden information that isn't available to either player in an attempt to determine a winner. It's the complete equivalent of rolling dice for a win.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 5.2 Bribery
The result of a match or game may not be randomly or arbitrarily determined through any means other than the normal progress of the game in play. Examples include (but are not limited to) rolling a die, flipping a coin, arm wrestling, or playing any other game.
Re: SCG Baltimore Classic top 4 split
Quote:
Originally Posted by
iamajellydonut
I mean, unless you have better and more information than the OP (who was physically present), there's honestly not much to explain.
If a Tarmogoyf is put on top of your library with Submerge, it immediately becomes hidden information that is available to neither player. It doesn't matter if there are no other cards in your library at the time. It's still hidden information that is available to neither player. If you were to cast a Green Sun's Zenith where X=20, you are still entitled to fail to find because it is hidden information that is unavailable to your opponent.
Alix revealing that Entreat, no matter how innocent the behavior and no matter how "known", is still him deliberately revealing hidden information that isn't available to either player in an attempt to determine a winner. It's the complete equivalent of rolling dice for a win.
This exactly.
Re: SCG Baltimore Classic top 4 split
Quote:
Originally Posted by
aluisiocsantos
Congrats on the finish!
How did Marit Lage behave? From what I can tell you got 2 kills with her. Would you like soemthing else over the combo?
She was great. I would have lost the game against cloudpost without it. Kotr would have been too slow. I think it should be in every aggro loam deck, personal opinion of course. Also, although I didn't play against lands thespian stage can win you the game on its own.
Re: SCG Baltimore Classic top 4 split
Quote:
Originally Posted by
iamajellydonut
Alix revealing that Entreat, no matter how innocent the behavior and no matter how "known", is still him deliberately revealing hidden information that isn't available to either player in an attempt to determine a winner. It's the complete equivalent of rolling dice for a win.
I don't see how anyone could read the story and believe that was anything comparable to rolling dice for a win. One player had made his decision already, he decided the game was a draw and as such the match was over, and he was just explaining to his opponent why he made the decision he already made.
As someone who wasn't there I'm willing to believe it could have actually gone down differently. But operating on the assumption that nditiz1's story isn't missing any details, this seems like a case of overjudging - someone flexing his powers in a way that doesn't actually benefit the event or the players there. If he was doing it totally in accordance with the rules, then the rules should be changed.
Re: SCG Baltimore Classic top 4 split
Quote:
Originally Posted by
iatee
I don't see how anyone could read the story and believe that was anything comparable to rolling dice for a win. One player had made his decision already, he decided the game was a draw and as such the match was over, and he was just explaining to his opponent why he made the decision he already made.
As someone who wasn't there I'm willing to believe it could have actually gone down differently. But operating on the assumption that nditiz1's story isn't missing any details, this seems like a case of overjudging - someone flexing his powers in a way that doesn't actually benefit the event or the players there. If he was doing it totally in accordance with the rules, then the rules should be changed.
Or conversely, Alix did something that (unknowingly or not) he can't do, and the penalty for that infraction is a Disqualification. Your deck is hidden information and you can't use it to try to determine a winner of a match. It's really that simple.
I even found an article written when the change was put into effect, stating the SPECIFIC example of using the top cards of your deck. It's been almost 2 years since it went into effect.
http://www.channelfireball.com/artic...olicy-updates/
Re: SCG Baltimore Classic top 4 split
We're describing two separate situations:
1. Determining a winner through showing the top of your deck
2. Having already made a decision about the match ("My decision is it's a draw.") and explaining to your opponent why you made that decision.
As someone who wasn't there, I can't say that it wasn't #1, but based on the story told it wasn't. The rule obviously doesn't exist to punish players who are just trying to explain to their opponents that they're not being scummy after they already made a decision not to concede.
Re: SCG Baltimore Classic top 4 split
Quote:
Originally Posted by
iatee
2. Having already made a decision about the match ("My decision is it's a draw.") and explaining to your opponent why you made that decision.
As someone who wasn't there, I can't say that it wasn't #1, but based on the story told it wasn't.
How are you coming to this conclusion? Because...
1) Although nditiz1 may not believe it, he clearly states #1.
2) Looking from a practical standpoint, this is the final round of Swiss. To give some context, assuming we're talking about the same Mike who came in 10th after breakers with "Jeskai Stoneblade", this match is for a potential top 8 win-and-in. If a draw was an acceptable outcome to Alix, why was there even a discussion in the first place and why would Alix's opponent ever think that Alix would concede? If a draw was Alix's goal, then mission accomplished and there's no awkward pause or necessary explanation from Alix.
Everything points to a decision being made to as to the definitive and official the winner of the game.
Re: SCG Baltimore Classic top 4 split
I don't think he clearly states #1:
"Alix didn't want to concede. Mike said I don't think you have any more swords for my token. Alix said he still had Entreat and showed Mike that it was on the top to solidify that it was only a matter of time before he found an answer to get the EE off the table."
It seems clear that his opponent wasn't going to concede because his opponent was significantly ahead on board and asking him to concede. He wasn't in a position to say "Actually I was likely to win" and wasn't trying to.
Refusing to concede when you are significantly behind is considered poor sportsmanship and he was just trying to show that he wasn't actually being that poor of a sport, his opponent just wasn't as ahead as he thought he was. I have been in that situation before. Obviously there is no 'necessary explanation' from Alix if he wants to act like a robot, but players are actually social animals who care about the way they come across to other people. Yes, even magic players.
Re: SCG Baltimore Classic top 4 split
For reference, a draw would've put both players in the top 32 while a concession from either would've put one in the top 8/16 and the other in the top 32.
So, please, explain why Alix wanted to draw.
Re: SCG Baltimore Classic top 4 split
Because he genuinely didn't think his opponent deserved a win when he probably wasn't even that far ahead? Conceding to an opponent who may or may not have won to knock a stranger out of the t8 is a lot different from conceding to an opponent who was absolutely going to beat you and the clock was the only thing keeping him out of the t8.
Re: SCG Baltimore Classic top 4 split
To hell with the law, to hell with strategy, to hell with gracious play! Alix is innocent because... he's spiteful?
There's actually no defense that can be conjured. As unpleasant as it is, everything points to his disqualification as justified and required. There's a reason they broadcast a warning at the start of the round.
Re: SCG Baltimore Classic top 4 split
I don't really care about this enough to argue much longer but - just on a theoretical level - I don't see how conceding to the person across from you and freezing a stranger who finished his game out of the t8 is totally acceptable - while explaining to your opponent why you're not doing that is DQ-worthy because you happened to show them one of the cards that was essentially in your hand - as your top cards are effectively your hand with a Top in play.
Yes there might be a technical difference between flashing your hand and flashing the top card on your library when you have a Top in play, but they are the same thing in practice and that's the type of exception a judge should make. Nobody would be hurt in the process.
I mean assuming I'm reading the story right, Alix could have spinned top, drew the Entreat just to show it to his opponent and not get DQ'd. But because he didn't use that ridiculous sequence, he did. That's kinda absurd.
Re: SCG Baltimore Classic top 4 split
Quote:
Originally Posted by
iatee
I mean assuming I'm reading the story right, Alix could have spinned top, drew the Entreat just to show it to his opponent and not get DQ'd. But because he didn't use that ridiculous sequence, he did.
Correct. And it's not absurd. It's completely reasonable, but because it's on such a small scale you're willing to gloss it over.
Re: SCG Baltimore Classic top 4 split
Just to point out for those too foolish to realise, it's... not ok to lie to a judge and cheat... If you do that will be a far bigger story.
Re: SCG Baltimore Classic top 4 split
Alix Hatfield here, and I'm sorry for not seeing this earlier and clearing things up.
Things happened basically how Nick described. Mike asked if I would concede, not because he expected me to, but because he felt he was somewhat ahead in the game and thought it was worth asking. I didn't think he was that far ahead, since I had a Top going and I had at least found an Entreat. I had several answers to his Explosives left in my deck, and he needed to bounce and replay his Batterskull to threaten my life total, so I was comfortable taking the draw.
Unfortunately, my only outward response to Mike's request was to mumble something about having the Entreat, and flip it over to show him. He pointed to his Explosives, and then we were interrupted by one of the floor judges, who told us both to stop everything. The two of them then went off to consult the head judge, while Mike and I slowly worked out what I had done wrong.
I honestly flashed the Entreat without thinking twice. I had been manipulating the top of my deck so much that I was almost taking it for granted that I knew what was there. Actually, a few turns earlier I had somehow physically botched a Top activation, looking at the top 3 and then knocking them across the board when I tried to put them back. The judges didn't issue a warning then, because I had just looked at the cards.
Revealing the Entreat on the final turn, amidst a discussion about conceding, is an entirely different matter. It was stupid of me to not realize that, and I understand why it is illegal to do so. At that point, the Entreat on top of my deck (in my library) was known to me, but not to Mike. If revealing it were to have influenced him to decide whether or not to concede to me, then the outcome of the match would have been determined by something it should not have. Just as if we had flipped a coin or rolled dice to determine the winner.
I do, however, think it was silly to get disqualified over something that I could have easily done without breaking any rules. As it was already pointed out, it would have been okay for me to spin my Top and show Mike any or all of those cards. I just didn't realize I needed to do that.
So yes, I am disappointed in the outcome of a situation that I put myself into by being dumb. Let it be said, though, that all of the judges I interacted with were polite, professional, and apologetic. They did what they felt they had to do, and they went out of their way to make sure I understood why things played out like they did.
Let it also be said that Mike was an awesome opponent, and I think he might've been more upset by what happened than I was. We had a good match, and I'm looking forward to the next time we play.
Thanks for the kind words here in this thread, guys. Take this as a lesson not to get sloppy at the end of a match; Wizards is very serious about maintaining the integrity of match results.
And congrats on crushing, Nick! Hope to see you again, soon.
Re: SCG Baltimore Classic top 4 split
The DQ seems almost certainly wrong.
Quote:
I mean assuming I'm reading the story right, Alix could have spinned top, drew the Entreat just to show it to his opponent and not get DQ'd. But because he didn't use that ridiculous sequence, he did.
This above quote basically sums up the situation.
- The philosophy behind the rule is that by playing the "let's see who would have won" game, flipping unknown cards off the top of your library, you're accessing information you didn't have access to in-game in order to decide the match outcome, so it's 'randomly determining a winner' in disguise.
- There is already a precedent in the IPG that judges can/should take into consideration players knowing the position of cards in their library, as part of the fix of the 'Looking at Extra Cards' infraction:
Quote:
Additional Remedy: Shuffle the random portion of the deck, including any previously unknown cards that were accidentally seen.
- Therefore this situation should not be any different to the acceptable example given in the CFB article:
Quote:
You can still ask your opponent to concede. This happens all the time. Saying “you’re at 1 life and I’m at 5 million life, I would have won” is a statement about information you had access to during the game. So is, “I had a Lightning Bolt in hand.” These are fine. Once you start using outside information instead, whether it’s randomly rolling dice or randomly flipping the top 5 cards from your library, it’s no longer considered information from your game.
He's not even trying to make any agreement with the opponent about deciding the outcome of the game. All he's saying is "I have access to X information, therefore I am not conceding"
Re: SCG Baltimore Classic top 4 split
I think the biggest thing here that I had not considered is that, in light of the revealing of information (Entreat) from Alix, it could have prompted Mike to concede instead, which is why its not ok.
