[Re: DTBs] WTF?

So.... I left the forums for like 3 days and found 2 completely different things going on.

1. Goblins is no longer a DTB... WTF? This is the deck that everyone based their decks against for years and now it just falls off the radar all of a sudden? WTF?

2. Where in the world did 43 land come from? I knew it was an ok deck and all, but a DTW? Seriously?

3. Why is UGW thresh still a DTB? Honestly I perfer the white splash personally o ver the red splash, but the red splash seems to be strictly better... at least that is what the records are saying (red been everywhere in T8s, but I haven't seen UGW nowhere).

4. Is Aluren really good enough to still be in the metagame forums? I have seen some random well placements, but no consistant data to keep it there.

5. If Tarmogoyf is soooo good, then why isn't it in every teir 1 deck?
I personally agree that he is good and all, but he is still just a creature.


I will be honest, I am a landstill player and the format has been treating me very well recently (lots of thresh and other aggro-control decks, along with breakfast).

I just don't understand how the printing of one card change the entire format sooooo drastically.

1. Goblins was its own demise. People pretty much refuse to play decks with bad Goblins matchups still due to its amazingly power and consistency. It is showing up less and less now. I am working on an article about it, I just need to finish it and submit it to someone who takes those.

2. Lands! (as it is ACTUALLY called; people incorrectly called it 43 Lands and now the names has stuck).

3. Strictly better means it is better is ALL possible situations. UGw Thresh can run Gaddock Teeg and Meddling Mage, both still excellent anti-combo cards, UGr Thresh still cannot. You choose which of the best three variants, UG, UGr, or UGw, you need for your meta.

4. Aluren is doing better than Goblins right now, so I would not complain.

5. Because Tarmogoyf sucks in Control and some Combo and there are two Control decks and one Combo dck that does not benefit from Goyf in the LMF. Tarmogoyf is amazing in Aggro and, especially, Aggro-Control. And it is EXTREMELY good in those.

How does one card change the format so drastically? Imagine Vial Goblins without Goblin Lackey. Or with Goblin Recruiter. If a creature is of sufficient power, it can easily warp the format.

Tarmogoyf is normally large enough so that Swords to Plowshares is the only commonly played removal spell that can kill it, strong enough that every other creature near is cost is much smaller, and cheap enough to be dropped early on, or with leaving mana open for other activities.

here's my question, what is the point of even including european legacy tournament results if we don't credit the T8 appearances simply because they haven't shown up in america?

The different regions of the american metagame are every bit as different as the difference between america and europe, this seems to be an unnecessary bias.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thefreakaccident

3. Why is UGW thresh still a DTB? Honestly I perfer the white splash personally o ver the red splash, but the red splash seems to be strictly better... at least that is what the records are saying (red been everywhere in T8s, but I haven't seen UGW nowhere).

---

What is Red offering over White? Pyroblast? In a format full of Tarmogoyf I would rather have Swords to Plowshares then Lightning Bolt, Pyroblast and Pyroclasm.

All of the changes have been determined by our tournament analysis over the last six months. Whatever changes you see, whether you like them or not, are fitting with the current metagame trends. It isn't as if this shit happens by random or anything.

I still think it's foolish to completely remove Goblins from the DTB/DTW list. For a long time, it was the Legacy metagame, and even now, it still defines a significant portion of it.

Quote:

---

We recognize that this system is neither perfect nor infallible. By analyzing only Top 8 data, we do not necessarily create an accurate or full representation of the decks that make up the metagame.

---

So let's exercise some reasonable judgement here. If you show up to a tourney, you're going to play against Goblins. And let's be honest here, unless you're playing storm combo, you've got a 50% chance to lose to Goblins too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by from Cairo

What is Red offering over White? Pyroblast? In a format full of Tarmogoyf I would rather have Swords to Plowshares then Lightning Bolt, Pyroblast and Pyroclasm.

---

I think people play red over white the majority of the time because in the first few rounds of the tournament, UGw scrubs out to the Goblin decks that UGr considers a bye. Then when you get to the top 8, the white splash looks a lot better, but the top 8 won't have near the diversity that you see in the early rounds.

It's obviously metagame dependent, like Cait_Sith said. You gamble on whether you're better off to be prepared for aggro or the mirror.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Cisco Kid

I think people play red over white the majority of the time because in the first few rounds of the tournament, UGw scrubs out to the Goblin decks that UGr considers a bye. Then when you get to the top 8, the white splash looks a lot better, but the top 8 won't have near the diversity that you see in the early rounds.

It's obviously metagame dependent, like Cait_Sith said. You gamble on whether you're better off to be prepared for aggro or the mirror.

---

I was under the impression that U/G with land-destruction in mind was the superior mirror match Thresh deck.

UGr for aggro-meta:

UGw for combo-meta:

UG for control-meta and/or budget version:

Or am I missing something here?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TeenieBopper

I still think it's foolish to completely remove Goblins from the DTB/DTW list. For a long time, it was the Legacy metagame, and even now, it still defines a significant portion of it.

---

The numbers don't lie. In the last 6 significant Legacy tournaments, Goblins has T8ed once. Goblins demise was written on the wall. It barely achieved DTB status last update.

What I like about our LMF update method is that it aims to remove as much personal bias as possible. I friggin' hate Thresh, and, to this day, I swear it's a bad deck. Imagine an opinion like that could sway the LMF.

Less opinon; more data. End of story.

the DTB thread needs less Aluren and more Ichorid, but the rest seems alright, goblins has been losing ground and ANY form of thresh is a DTB in itself...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bovinious

the DTB thread needs less Aluren and more Ichorid, but the rest seems alright, goblins has been losing ground and ANY form of thresh is a DTB in itself...

---

One ichorid deck has done anything in a 50+ man tournament. Read the rules, folks. Shit, I'm not even whining that Enchantress isn't in there any more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lonelybaritone

One ichorid deck has done anything in a 50+ man tournament. Read the rules, folks. Shit, I'm not even whining that Enchantress isn't in there any more.

---

It might be, if everyone playing it at a large tournament didn't have a name that started with Z and ended with Ach Tartell. (Ach, Tartell! Run! It's the Tarmogoyf!)

In addition to goblins, are storm decks on the decline as well?

I look at the Decks to Beat Forum and the combo decks listed involve graveyard strategies rather than storm cards.

I know Breakfast is good but is it, along with Thresh, that much of a storm combo killer?

Inclusion in the LMF is based on a clearly-defined system of data analysis that is designed to be as objective as possible. This system is not perfect, but there is no personal bias or black magic involved; numbers are plugged in and the threads get moved.

So far, none of the concerns brought up in this thread even attempt to transcend the realms of subjective reasoning and/or local metagame distortion, so they offer little meaningful criticism of the LMF or its contents. I'm sorry if you still think it's important to prepare for Goblins, or that you don't think 43lands is a metagame concern, but the performances of those decks seem to indicate otherwise. What else can the LMF reflect?

That said, if anyone has some ideas about how to improve the selection system, or even criticism of the philosophy behind it (maybe you don't think the process should be objective?), by all means speak your mind.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sammiel

here's my question, what is the point of even including european legacy tournament results if we don't credit the T8 appearances simply because they haven't shown up in america?

The different regions of the american metagame are every bit as different as the difference between america and europe, this seems to be an unnecessary bias.

---

Exactly - e.g. why excluding Belcher because it isn't part of the American meta while 2/3 of the named tournaments used to make the analysis are non-American? :confused:

Sure, it may be the general guideline of the LMF forum to exclude these decks, but can't we simply add a tag (something like [NAR] (non-America-relevant)) to those decks that are relevant for non-American metas instead of kicking them out?

Edit: At least the results for the American meta and the non-American meta should be shown seperate so everybody can draw his/her own conclusions. The current mish-mash does kinda ruin the information value behind these numbers.

Attention lonelybaritone and TeenieBopper!

Goblins is still a good deck. While it may be a good deck, it's suffering from Performance Anxiety--it just can't get it up in a 33+ tournament. By "get it up", I mean "make Top 8". If the little green men take the little blue pill and make more Top 8s, then it'll return to DTB status. Just because it was a DTB for 2 years or whatever doesn't mean it qualifies as a DTB in October, 2007. Members Only jackets were the absolute shit twenty years ago, but they have since fallen out of style.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by URABAHN

Members Only jackets were the absolute shit twenty years ago, but they have since fallen out of style.

---

He knows. His old ass was in High School back then.

I'm not certain why Belcher, which has more showings than any but 2 other decks, is dumped, but it's an issue we can discuss. You have to remember though, this site is primarily aimed at the US metagame, which is why the scales are tipped our way when it comes to large events. It may suck, but it's the way it is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nightmare

You have to remember though, this site is primarily aimed at the US metagame, which is why the scales are tipped our way when it comes to large events. It may suck, but it's the way it is.

---

And that's reason why I don't get it. By mixing American and non-American metagames, valuable information is lost or quite deceiving. Just have a look on the combined list:

DTB
Threshold - 16
Landstill - 5

DTW
Fish - 3
Cephalid Breakfast – 2
Aluren – 2 (both lists were recorded as Innovator Aluren)
43 Land - 2

OUT
Vial Goblins – 1
CRET Belcher - 4 - (No current USA appearances)

Now let's break it down into American and non-American metagame, only naming relevant, non-rogue decks:

Non-American metas: 4 Tournaments = 32 Top 8 slots
Threshold 9
CRET Belcher 4
Landstill 3
Baseruption 2
Survival Variants 2
UW Fish 2
Innovator Aluren 1
43 Lands 1
Cephalid Breakfast 1
Solidarity 1

American meta: 2 Tournaments = 16 Top 8 slots
Threshold 7
Landstill 2
Ichorid 1
Cephalid Breakfast 1
43 Land 1
Innovator Aluren 1
Aggro Loam 1
UBW Fish 1
R/g Vial Goblins 1

As we can see, Threshold and Standstill are the DTB. But Threshold is alot more relevant (44% vs. 28%) in the American meta than the DTB forum would suggest (33%).

I'm still suggesting seperate lists for American and non-American metagames. It makes things cleaner and alot less deceiving.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter_Rotten

I friggin' hate Thresh, and, to this day, I swear it's a bad deck. Imagine an opinion like that could sway the LMF.

---

Some of us don't need to imagine. :frown:

To those complaining about the lack of European meta inclusion:

Look how many people on The Source are principally from the United States. Consider where the epicenter of Legacy tournaments for the ENTIRE WORLD currently is. Consider how the East Coast American Meta and the European Meta look nothing alike.

It makes sense to do it the way they are. It isn't nice and shiny and fair, but it is necessary to provide the most accurate information to their principle constituents.

right but then ir shoudl be American ONLY not a combination of both...

I don't think people are complaining about the lack of european inclusion (we all know we have a different meta).
Just that it does look crazy to analyse all the euro tournies (Which lets face it is most of them) and then not include something because it hasn't been piloted to success in states.
Cait if I were to be honest I think the pinnacle of Legacy resides very safely in Germany.
Unfortunately mst Major tournaments are held in USA, and with the terrible prize support it's just not worth the effort for europeans to go.
I think Barook made a very useful point, If a deck took 5 T8's in Europe but only 1 in states it would qualify at a DTB but may not be that relevant to USA .
Using the european data makes sense as we hold 50+participant tournaments on a weekly basis, where as the USA struggles to field 1 a month.
Maybe the metas differ because Europeans just play a lot more tournament level legacy, so it's evolved faster ?
Looking at our data allows you to see where things are headed.
Ofc it doesn't really matter to me as I only pay attention to the European performances with marginal interest in USA t8's unless it was a huge event.
I just found it odd from a statistical point of view.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Obfuscate Freely

So far, none of the concerns brought up in this thread even attempt to transcend the realms of subjective reasoning and/or local metagame distortion, so they offer little meaningful criticism of the LMF or its contents.

---

You're right, I'm not being objective. I'm also not trying to be, at least not totally. I'm not criticizing the fact that Goblins isn't in there, I'm criticizing the system because Goblins should be there.

The prior DTB system was flawed in that it was almost entirely subjective. What I"m saying is the current system is flawed in that it's entirely objective. A better system, like most things, lies somewhere in the middle. I like the idea of objectivity, it's good to remove bias from the equation. However, when a situation arises where there is a deck that will be played more than any other at a large event, and that deck has an even at worst match up against the majority of the field, and it's not included in a forum that says "hey, these are the decks you're going to have to be able to beat at a large event," then I think it's reasonable to say, "you know what? Maybe the system is mistaken right here. Let's step in and fix this."

This isn't 10 land stompy we're talking about. This is Goblins. You can't ignore it by saying "well, my deck is fundamentally better, so I'll just win." Are you suddenly going to start playing a deck that doesn't have an answer to Mountain, Lackey, go? No (but please, please do). If your deck can't beat Goblins, you're going to scrub out of a large event. It just astounds me that a deck that has an even to favorable match up against 85% of the decks posted in the DTB forum isn't itself a DTB.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by URABAHN

Attention lonelybaritone and TeenieBopper!

Goblins is still a good deck.

---

I know. That's my point.

I know it sounds like I'm just blindly defending a pet deck, but if Enchantress, or TES, or Belcher (PS- Belcher should be there. The data supports it) were all played as much as Goblins but hadn't made a T8, I'd be saying they should be in the DTB forum too. Which brings me to another point

re: Including non-US data but then excluding decks that haven't seen that success in the US. How in the fuck is that not subjective?

Quote:

---

Maybe the metas differ because Europeans just play a lot more tournament level legacy, so it's evolved faster ?

---

It's a size thing. Europe has 300 million people, but only takes like 20 minutes to drive across the entire continent. I guarantee that if the Virginians could hop on a 10 minute train ride to NY (and vice versa) every month, we'd have just as many, if not more large events.

I have to agree that it is confusing the way that non-American data is being used for the LMF especially since we are now getting data from Japan as well. It seems weird to use the non-American data only to confirm the results made in America. Threshold is helped by the numbers it puts up Europe and Japan, but CRET Belcher is penalized because it didn't make T8 at one of the 2 American tournaments of the last 6 tournaments overall. Its possible a cycle could even happen without an American tournament which essentially would obliterate this system of relying on American data.

But good luck changing it, the powers that be are in charge of that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TeenieBopper

You're right, I'm not being objective. I'm also not trying to be, at least not totally. I'm not criticizing the fact that Goblins isn't in there, I'm criticizing the system because Goblins should be there.

The prior DTB system was flawed in that it was almost entirely subjective. What I"m saying is the current system is flawed in that it's entirely objective. A better system, like most things, lies somewhere in the middle. I like the idea of objectivity, it's good to remove bias from the equation. However, when a situation arises where there is a deck that will be played more than any other at a large event, and that deck has an even at worst match up against the majority of the field, and it's not included in a forum that says "hey, these are the decks you're going to have to be able to beat at a large event," then I think it's reasonable to say, "you know what? Maybe the system is mistaken right here. Let's step in and fix this."

This isn't 10 land stompy we're talking about. This is Goblins. You can't ignore it by saying "well, my deck is fundamentally better, so I'll just win." If your deck can't beat Goblins, you're going to scrub out of a large event. It just astounds me that a deck that has an even to favorable match up against 85% of the decks posted in the DTB forum isn't itself a DTB.

---

I believe you are overstating the popularity of Goblins in the current metagame by a large amount.
In the last several large tournaments the popularity of Goblins is minimal (3 out 51 decks in VA and about that percentage at Eli's last tournament)

So why should I prepare for a deck that isn't making top 8s and isn't showing up in large numbers?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TeenieBopper

It's a size thing. Europe has 300 million people, but only takes like 20 minutes to drive across the entire continent. I guarantee that if the Virginians could hop on a 10 minute train ride to NY (and vice versa) every month, we'd have just as many, if not more large events.

---

That's the most ridiculous thing I have heard.
Europe is Huge, no wonder people question Americans Geography skills :s
It takes me more than 20 mins to drive across town , the UK may be small but Europe is quite sizeable.
Plus Virginians wouldn't have a language barrier to cross going to new york, Europeans do.
The German tournaments are mainly german players, there are just more players that care about Legacy.

Yes Anwar I was wondering what would happen if a cycle like that occured.

Hyperbole ftl, I guess.

I was being mostly sarcastic, but there is truth in the fact that western europe has roughly 2/3 the population fit into 1/4 the area. Simply speaking, more people live closer together. Your mass/public transportation system are highly advanced, making long distance travel much easier than the united states. I've been to Europe. You can hop on a train in France and go to the tourney in Germany for like 20 euros (not really, but travel expenses are much, much cheaper than driving from Virginia to NY) and be there in like 5 hours.

I understand the language barrier, but you guys have had two millenia to work that out. I'd say you've got it down pretty solid.

EDIT: okay, German tourneys are mostly german players. that's fine. However, even then, my argument of population density and ease of travel still hold true.

We should use German tournament data. We should use Japanese data. We should use all non-US data.

We should use them all on equal grounds. Excluding Belcher from the DTB because it is only doing well in Europe is retarded. That forum is not going to have much credibility without European data.

Attn. Legacy Format: can we stop pretending Europe isn't there now? Their designers are at least as good as ours and this self-imposed ignorance of their work is very stupid. Their tournaments are bigger than ours and more regular and we're basically burying our heads in the sand by treating the results differently.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Machinus

We should use German tournament data. We should use Japanese data. We should use all non-US data.

We should use them all on equal grounds. Excluding Belcher from the DTB because it is only doing well in Europe is retarded. That forum is not going to have much credibility without European data.

Attn. Legacy Format: can we stop pretending Europe isn't there now? Their designers are at least as good as ours and this self-imposed ignorance of their work is very stupid. Their tournaments are bigger than ours and more regular and we're basically burying our heads in the sand by treating the results differently.

---

Or change titles.

DTB could be decks that perform well in both metagames, ADTB could be American DTB's and EDTB could be European. This lets any new meta come in, and keeps the old system pretty well intact.

That's stupid. A DTB should be a DTB. Look at the top 8 thread. The American metagame isn't all that different from the European one. Ours is heavily dominated by landstill/thresh. Guess what, those decks were in the European/Japanese top 8's too. Pilots of CRET Belcher in Germany have to deal with the same shit as CRET Belcher pilots would in the US.

The reason CRET Belcher isn't in American top 8s is because Americans have an irrational fear of any deck that isn't blue based (aggro/)control. $20 says competent CRET Belcher players would do just fine over here, if they existed. The lack of appearences of the deck in America isn't a flaw of the deck, it's a flaw of the players.

I think the DTB system is very flawed if it yields ALUREN (WTF???) as a DTB, but not Goblins. CRET Belcher and Ichorid are closer to DTBs than Aluren I mean come ON...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bovinious

I think the DTB system is very flawed if it yields ALUREN (WTF???) as a DTB, but not Goblins. CRET Belcher and Ichorid are closer to DTBs than Aluren I mean come ON...

---

This? This is bad subjective. If a deck's putting up the 'W', it should be included.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Machinus

can we stop pretending Europe isn't there now?

---

We never had. Non-American tournies have always been factored into the LMF selections. However, the vast majority of consituent members of this site are American. The LMF exists to provide our members with useful information when preparing for a competitive tournament. If a deck is dominating the German meta and isn't played at all in America, how is it not misleading to suggest to an American player that the German deck should be prepared for? Requiring that a deck which performs well outside of the States make just one placement here in order to be considered a DtB amongst American players doesn't seem too far-fetched.

Oh yeah 2 top8s is really putting up the 'W'... The fact of the matter is that Aluren is not DTB in that people dont consider Aluren while making their deck because it is 1) Not played, and 2) Not really a threat when played. People SB 'Clasm/EPlague for Goblins, Chalice/EE for CRET, and Crypt/Leyline for Ichorid. People build their decks with these decks in mind (along with Thresh, Breakfast, etc) because people worry about being able to beat them, AKA they are DECKS TO BEAT. Not obscure-deck-revolving-around 4CC-enchantment-that-no-one worries-about (and rightfully so). When was the last time you heard ANYONE worry about or discuss their decks 'Aluren' matchup? It almost never happens, I gaurantee.

This is partially subjective, but I dont think thats a bad thing. It is also objective in that people actually, you know, worry about Goblins, CRET and Ichorid, as hsown by deck construction and SB choices, while they either laugh at Aluren or dont even know it exists.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GodzillA

We never had. Non-American tournies have always been factored into the LMF selections. However, the vast majority of consituent members of this site are American. The LMF exists to provide our members with useful information when preparing for a competitive tournament. If a deck is dominating the German meta and isn't played at all in America, how is it not misleading to suggest to an American player that the German deck should be prepared for? Requiring that a deck which performs well outside of the States make just one placement here in order to be considered a DtB amongst American players doesn't seem too far-fetched.

---

It's dishonest if the site isn't subtitled "your source for American Legacy." Either we care about Legacy overall, or we just care about our own country.

I think we should give up that attitude and start caring about the decks Europeans are playing. It is a senseless excuse to say that some very popular deck in Germany could have no effect on tournaments before. Have you ever been to a real American Legacy tournament? They are random beyond metagaming and anyone who prepares for the general format at their local store doesn't know what they are doing. I think it's time we gave up this self-limiting practice and just accepted worldwide innovations.

Quote:

---

Oh yeah 2 top8s is really putting up the 'W'... The fact of the matter is that Aluren is not DTB in that people dont consider Aluren while making their deck because it is 1) Not played, and 2) Not really a threat when played. People SB 'Clasm/EPlague for Goblins, Chalice/EE for CRET, and Crypt/Leyline for Ichorid. People build their decks with these decks in mind (along with Thresh, Breakfast, etc) because people worry about being able to beat them, AKA they are DECKS TO BEAT. Not obscure-deck-revolving-around 4CC-enchantment-that-no-one worries-about (and rightfully so). When was the last time you heard ANYONE worry about or discuss their decks 'Aluren' matchup? It almost never happens, I gaurantee.

---

Aluren isn't labeled as a DTB, it is a DTW. There is a great difference between DTB and DTW. I suggest you read over the LMF guidelines once more so you can get an idea on what exactly you are talking about.

This is true, but despite the DTW status, it is in the "Decks to Beat" section, implying it is a deck to beat. Aside from the fact the DTB forums name apparently doesnt hold true for all threads inside it (at the monent the only DTB is Thresh apparently...), not everyone (read: very few people) accept DTB/DTW/ATW as meaningful labels for decks, from what I can tell. My point isnt over meaningless labels arbitrarily created by the mods which have no meaning to most of the members, it is about Aluren, which is by no means a deck to beat, being in the "Decks to Beat" forum. At the very least, if Aluren is magically now a deck to beat, Goblins, and probably CRET Belcher/Ichorid deserve this status as well, as they are decks which people actually aim to beat, and are just better overall even despite Aluren's apparent 2 top8s.

How is it 'magically a deck to beat'???? Aluren IS putting up the numbers. If you READ THE RULES of the LMF then you will understand.

Aluren has met the specified requirements to become a DTW. It's that simple. Goblins has not met the requirements.

If you want the system to be changed, then say how. Don't just argue that Aluren doesn't belong, because under the current rules it does belong.

I do believe that there could be a better method of choosing DTB's and DTW's. Looking at what everyone is playing would be best. Knowing what percentage of the field is playing what deck. That way if goblins doesn't make top 8, but 20% of the field was playing it, people will know they have to prepare to do well. Now the problem is getting deck lists for every tourney entry...

I understand that under the rules its a DTW, but I strongly believe that any system that puts Aluren in the DTB forum and not Goblins/CRET/Ichorid is extremely flawed. Rather than complain more, I'll say how I think the system should be changed. Actually put decks that shape the metagame (decks to beat) in the deck to beat forum, dont base what goes in there purely based on top8s of the last few tournies, especially since some of those were in Europe or other places where apparently Aluren (LOL) can make a top8...In my opinion the DTBs are Thresh, Breakfast, Landstill, Goblins, and possibly CRET/Ichorid/43Land. Basically, I'm saying the system should be part subjective and part objective, and more common sense should be used to keep Aluren and the like out of the DTB and Goblins and the like in the DTB, no matter if Aluren barely earned the right or Goblins barely lost the right under some arbitrarily set up system.

In other words, you're intent on arguing with the results. Unfortunately, and I'll say this of experience, that's one argument you aren't going to win. Basically, what better criteria is there for avoiding personal bias and for providing objective data than using a system with no human factor involved? Isn't the point to tell people what's good and what's winning on the field? That's what they should prepare for too. The system isn't perfect, of course, but the results aren't going to change by saying: "This isn't what I want DTB to look like!"