All B/R update speculation.

[Reeplcheep]

Yeah everytime a ridiculously OP card gets banned, you get people showing up to hottake about how this actually helps the decks that ran it because it frees up slots to run cards they could have been running anyway but didn't because the banned card was better.

Hahahahahah

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FKbYIb0X...png&name=large

[Ronald Deuce]

Hahahahahah

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FKbYIb0X...png&name=large

It's almost like Delver was always a better card.

I don't have a dog in this fight. Just sayin'.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Hahahahahah

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FKbYIb0X...png&name=large

I too like to flex about being bad at statistics

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Hahahahahah

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FKbYIb0X...png&name=large

Anyway, so now that we've had time to aggregate data and Delver has gone from 22% rep in top 8s to 15%, do you want to apologize and admit you were showing your ass here or what

[Reeplcheep]

Anyway, so now that we've had time to aggregate data and Delver has gone from 22% rep in top 8s to 15%, do you want to apologize and admit you were showing your ass here or what

What are you talking about. It’s 22% at one of the largest recent events. With everyone gunning for it with multiple maindeck pyroblasts, it still has tier 1 winrates.

[Rob Hack]

Anyway, so now that we've had time to aggregate data and Delver has gone from 22% rep in top 8s to 15%, do you want to apologize and admit you were showing your ass here or what

What are you talking about. It’s 22% at one of the largest recent events. With everyone gunning for it with multiple maindeck pyroblasts, it still has tier 1 winrates.

lol, fake profile guy pwned

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

What are you talking about. It’s 22% at one of the largest recent events. With everyone gunning for it with multiple maindeck pyroblasts, it still has tier 1 winrates.

Again, bragging about being bad at stats is a weird flex

https://www.mtgtop8.com/format?f=LE

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Expressive Iteration is a dumb card that will be banned

Also, feeling real good about this call rn

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Delver usually doesn’t have 2 lands plus a land drop on t3 (That means you haven’t wasted or dazed at all on the first 2 turns) or 0 mana proactive spells. Snap caster and TNN are considered lategame cards by delver standards.

Here's a guy who makes good calls about what cards do and will be played, definitely listening to this guy

[Reeplcheep]

Again, bragging about being bad at stats is a weird flex

https://www.mtgtop8.com/format?f=LE

Part of being good at stats is accounting for bad data. Top 2 of a 10 man event is essentially useless data.

[FTW]

Again, bragging about being bad at stats is a weird flex

https://www.mtgtop8.com/format?f=LE

28% at Major Events in Last 4 Months (Ragabanned 6 months ago)
https://www.mtgtop8.com/format?f=LE&meta=188&a=

Next biggest shares:
8cast 9%
UWR 9%
Nothing else over 5%

Under "Last 2 Months" UR Delver is only 15%, but that includes a lot of 10-30 player events with Tier 3 brews. Those take up more meta share in small events.
Stoneblade v MonoR storm top 2 of 13-player event, Hive Mind winning 18-player event, Aluren & 2 Food Chains top 8 of 32-player event, etc.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Careful that you don’t throw your back out, hauling those goalposts all over

[Reeplcheep]

Properly weighting the quality of your data is essential to being a good statistician. Second place in top 8 went 2-1. Every single person in the top 8 of a 80 man event won 3 in a row.

Otherwise you are like the crazies who think 12 double blind studies showing vaccines work and your moms cousins’s hairdressers son got autism are equally valid evidence.

[FTW]

Careful that you don’t throw your back out, hauling those goalposts all over

Can't shift goalposts when those are the first I've set.

You mean you disagree with mine. But what are YOUR goalposts? And what makes them right?

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Can't shift goalposts when those are the first I've set.

You mean you disagree with mine. But what are YOUR goalposts? And what makes them right?

The fact that I'm using the same metric for stat A and stat B, for starts.

You can't use one number for UR Delver prevalence with Ragavan, and another for UR Delver prevalence without, and then say, "Oh but the second stat is more accurate."

If you want to make that case that's fine in a vacuum but you need to apply it to both halves of the things you're comparing to each other

This is like stats 101, if not earlier. This is just basic good argumentation. Scrambling because number A is bigger than number B and that hurts your argument, so you try to find some way to reframe number B to be bigger while not applying the same change in metric to number A is just really obviously bad faith argumentation on a fundamental level.

Honestly it's fucking embarrassing that I have to explain this

[FTW]

The fact that I'm using the same metric for stat A and stat B, for starts.

You can't use one number for UR Delver prevalence with Ragavan, and another for UR Delver prevalence without, and then say

Except I never gave a stat A, so I never did anything inconsistent. I only gave data for UR Delver's current metagame dominance. Your patronizing is then irrelevant.

Where does this "before" stat come from? Reeplcheep compared Challenges before and after Ragaban: apples to apples. Nothing wrong there. You pulled out 22% without a source or anyone agreeing on it.

You have to decide on a reasonable way to measure competitive metagame share:
a) Large Events only
b) All MTGO Legacy events (Challenges & Leagues, not practice room)
c) All Paper Legacy events
d) All Paper and online events (b + c)
e) Paper and online events logged on mtgtop8

They won't all be the same. The online meta (B) is a bit different from the paper meta (C).

D & E are also different. mtgtop8 has good coverage of large events, but very inconsistent coverage of small events. Some LGS weeklies get posted, most don't. Once in a while an MTGO League result makes it up, but most of the 5-0 dump doesn't. It's a real crapshoot what makes it on there. Very far from all small events. It's not a random sample of them either. Just some of them. Then sometimes they only post top 4, top 2, or the winner. It's a mess.

So even if you wanted to define the metagame by what gets played at ALL events including small LGS Legacy nights (D), mtgtop8 (E) does a messy job of representing it. If you really included ALL paper and online Legacy play, I'd wager the Tier 1 DTBs make up a tiny metagame fraction - while brews and casual jank take up a fair bit. But we don't have good data on it so we'll never know anyway.

IMHO Large Events are the best indicator of the competitive metagame, especially to see if a deck is Tier 0. For small LGS weeklies and MTGO Leagues, players often play a worse deck for fun, even though they know their other deck is better, just because they're bored of Xerox. But when the large event comes up they pull out what they think is best. If Delver is 28% at large events, that says a lot about competitive dominance. The much lower share in small events just means people get bored of Delver, lower tier decks stand a better chance over fewer rounds (more variance), or the more casual players can't afford Volcanic.

To make a fair comparison, look at the large events before Ragaban. I never said to compare it to a different metric from before.