Every Match Revealed: A Comprehensive Analysis of all~2,000 matches played at MKM Fra

[Julian23]

Some of you will remember the amazing Too Much Information articles series the legendary Hatfield brothers used to run on SCG many years ago. In the spirit of this complete analysis of tournaments, including all the matches played, we have now analyzed the first big tournament of the post-Miracles era: the 437 player MKM Series Frankfurt in May.

Every Match Revealed: A Comprehensive Analysis of all~2,000 matches played at MKM Franfurt (436 players)

Special Thanks
I would like to take this opportunity to thank all the people involved in this project. First of all Bob Huang for the original idea and establishing the contact to Jesse Hatfield. Jesse had developed the algorithm to analyze all these matches and crunched the numbers afterwards, which I owe him a very big thanks for, too! I'm also very thankful for the MKM coverage team to provide me with all the decklists as well as Sebastian Reinfeldt of their judge team who reached out to their scorekeeper to send me every round's matchups after the event. You really wouldn't read this article if it hadn't been for all of those guys!

So long,
Julian

[Claymore]

Very interesting data. Now I'm curious about the sideboards used and how that skewed some results (ex, 4c loam, did they go with Swords package, or did they overload on hatebears and get crushed by DnT)...are decklists available?

[iatee]

One thing that all of the decks that have sub-50% win percentages (Eldrazi, DnT, Burn, RB Reanimator) have in common is that they are disproportionately played by new* players. I wouldn't be surprised if they always had sub-50% win percentages in tournaments because of this, independent of how well the deck is actually positioned.

*bad

[Sloshthedark]

Very interesting data. Now I'm curious about the sideboards used and how that skewed some results (ex, 4c loam, did they go with Swords package, or did they overload on hatebears and get crushed by DnT)...are decklists available?

Unless I was listed under "other" I'd like to ask fellow stormers what happened that I caused 2/3 wins vs Elves for my archetype...


I'd also ask the organizers how can they not facilitate prize splits but hand out all the decklists to public... not that I mind it, it's just weird... anyway thanks for the analysis

[resum]

Unless I was listed under "other" I'd like to ask fellow stormers what happened that I caused 2/3 wins vs Elves for my archetype...


I'd also ask the organizers how can they not facilitate prize splits but hand out all the decklists to public... not that I mind it, it's just weird... anyway thanks for the analysis

from what i can tell, they handed julian a stack of papers and he did the rest.

What i want to know, is the BUG delver variants were separated, but stifle vs therapy (or more accurately, stifle vs no stile) grixis was not. I wonder if there was any difference in win % for those.

[Scott]

Many thanks for all the work you put into this; it's great.

Somewhat related to this data, as Infect had a pretty large presence as it usually does in paper events: Is there a reason that Infect is nonexistent on MTGO? I don't play online, so am I missing that there's a card that's pricey, like Rishadan Port in Death & Taxes? Something about the different meta?

[Misersoneof]

Excellent article. It's easy to see that there was a lot of work involved in making it and you deserve a lot of kudos.

I am a bit of number crunch newbie so I'll ask everyone here. Has anyone done the math on the win percentages of stifle vs. therapy grixis delver? How would I go about doing that?

[jandax]

So obviously mods need to move Dragon Stompy to DTB section if that last graph is correct 😛

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

[Fox]

Somewhat related to this data, as Infect had a pretty large presence as it usually does in paper events: Is there a reason that Infect is nonexistent on MTGO? I don't play online, so am I missing that there's a card that's pricey, like Rishadan Port in Death & Taxes? Something about the different meta?

Infect is a pseudo-Delver deck, meaning it has a pretty terrible m/u vs an actual Delver deck. I doubt the amount of Grixis Delver online makes it an attractive choice.

[.dk]

Sweeeeet article. I really miss seeing data like this from legacy events. Thanks to you, Bob, and Jesse!

[ESG]

Thanks, Julian. Excellent work on this.

[MorphBerlin]

Thank you, very insightful, although I must say I would take your conclusions with a lot of caution. While agree wit most of the stuff you conlclude from the numbers, I think this still has a lot of variance (pilot skill, draws etc) because of the relative small sample size (you did mention that).

If this was available for all Legacy Tournaments it would be so interesting to see how the meta would shape up. Because people would see how the different decks actually play out and not get misled by t8/16 numbers.

[sjmcc13]

If this was available for all Legacy Tournaments it would be so interesting to see how the meta would shape up. Because people would see how the different decks actually play out and not get misled by t8/16 numbers.

They still would unfortunatly. Just looking at top x to see what is winning is allot easier then looking at a detailed matchup analysis.

[Tormod]

I just had a man-gasm

Thank you for a beautiful article.

[luckme10]

Thanks for the article and the insights Julian!

For those of you that want to see more on the Bant Deathblade he was talking about, watch Reid Duke play it against Julian.