Rich Shay made day 2 with only 2 byes.
By the way, BrassDeck definitely evolved from Threshold. He started with UGB Threshold and I convinced him to cut Dark Confidant and add cards that are relevant. Many of the decks I've built over the past year are Next Level Brass inspired.
Magic Level 3 Judge
Southern USA Regional Coordinator
Originally Posted by frogboy
You got the wrong topic here, man. I did say nothing at all about pros playing at and winning Legacy tournaments being wrong. Pros of course have as much right to do well at a Legacy GP as anyone else, but the byes actually give them more of a right to do so.
I don't agree with rewarding people who devote most of their life to be good at Magic with byes. They are already rewarded by, you know, having good decks and very good playing skills (unless they devote their life without improving, but then they don't have byes anyway...maybe there should be byes for people with 1000+ posts on the Source, or for those playing at least five hours of Magic every week).
So yes, I find it unfair if someone who has had much success in playing Standard or Extended, improving his Magic skills, gets an additional advantage to do well in a Legacy GP. It would be unfair even if those players got their byes by playing Legacy.
The only justification for byes are that they get more pros to participate. That certainly adds something to the flavor of a GP, no doubt. But it comes at the cost of fairness, plus it keeps other players without byes away from the tourney (see previous pages). And don't tell me that many pros participating will generate more interest in Legacy, thus leading to additional GPs etc. That kind of argument has been proven wrong time and time again.
georgjorgeGeistreich sind schon die anderen.
I agree, that attitude is pretty tiresome, and it's certainly not helping the format.
Nassif winning the GP is the best kind of advertising Legacy can get, and there was nothing undeserved about it either.
Nassif IS a great player, but how is him winning the best advertising for Legacy? I don't think it attracts people to Legacy more than if they saw "LegacyPlayer XXX" beat Nassif in the finals, so there would be some unknown face on the front page of the coverage*.
*People are getting a bit nervous around here, so the disclaimer: the above post questioned the usefulness of Nassif's win for the promotion of the format, not his skills, attitude, or size of his genitals.
georgjorgeGeistreich sind schon die anderen.
Well hot damn this thread just exploded I just started reading it yesterday.
So I went to this event and did pretty fucking awesome for being a legacy enthusiast. I placed 20th with ichorid and I had no byes at all. If you look at my tie breakers they were awful because I didn't have the byes but it just gave me a tingling sensation that I did well against pros and semipros. I really dont mind the lack of byes I was just thrilled to be part of a huge tourny.
Now I guess I am a semi pro with 2 pro points(I had no clue what this meant until I asked a judge what it meant, since I only play legacy its really just bragging rights as far as I am able to understand). I hope everyone who attended has as much fun as I did.
Does anyone know what the next major legacy event might be I thought I heard someone say at GP Chicago the next one is in Tennesse but I have no clue if that is substantial. Now since I will have byes I might as well start looking forward to the next big legacy tourny.
Legacy has with quite some people the image of being a random format where luck is the predominant factor. The fact that Nassif won means Legacy is not that random as amny people may have thought, and then they will probably try the awesomeness that is Legacy.
That leads to bigger tournaments with bigger prize support, and because we beat the random people who just started Legacy, it means free duals for us for a while.
Well...at least that's the theory
If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, it's probably delicious.
Team ADHD-To resist is to piss in the wind. Anyone who does will end up smelling.
You just don't understand. Legacy has been a format that's thought of as the format "anyone can win in" because all the decks suck and it's about matchups. When a good player wins that usually means that skill is involved, and it's not just the above.
It's not just pro's, it's other people too. I have personal friends that only attend GP's far away because they have byes. Just because you don't have any, or whatever, doesn't justify that they shouldn't exist. I personally think it's totally fine to have a bye system, it attracts a LOT of people to go from coast -> coast for GP's, or long distance traveling.You got the wrong topic here, man. I did say nothing at all about pros playing at and winning Legacy tournaments being wrong. Pros of course have as much right to do well at a Legacy GP as anyone else, but the byes actually give them more of a right to do so.
I don't agree with rewarding people who devote most of their life to be good at Magic with byes. They are already rewarded by, you know, having good decks and very good playing skills (unless they devote their life without improving, but then they don't have byes anyway...maybe there should be byes for people with 1000+ posts on the Source, or for those playing at least five hours of Magic every week
So yes, I find it unfair if someone who has had much success in playing Standard or Extended, improving his Magic skills, gets an additional advantage to do well in a Legacy GP. It would be unfair even if those players got their byes by playing Legacy.
The only justification for byes are that they get more pros to participate. That certainly adds something to the flavor of a GP, no doubt. But it comes at the cost of fairness, plus it keeps other players without byes away from the tourney (see previous pages). And don't tell me that many pros participating will generate more interest in Legacy, thus leading to additional GPs etc. That kind of argument has been proven wrong time and time again.
Honestly, that's the first time I've heard about those misconceptions about Legacy, but I'm sure you're right about them (no sarcasm). I don't know where those are coming from...I can see people having those image of Vintage, what with all the one-ofs floating around, but why should Legacy be more luck-based than other formats?
Maybe people will look at the coverage and say "Hey, Nassif won that one, so it must be a good format!". But I doubt that. The response I anticipate would just be "Hey, Nassif won another tournament in a format he doesn't even play, he's just so good" (nothing wrong with that one). Well-known pros winning leading to a greater attraction of Legacy, leading to more attention from Wizards, leading to more Legacy GPs seems a rather blurred connection (especially knowing Wizards' stance on Legacy), while byes giving players an unjustified edge over others is rather obvious. I'd love to have more support from Wizards (or just to get a GP in Europe for once), but I don't really believe it.
georgjorgeGeistreich sind schon die anderen.
Legacy has by far the largest pool of viable decks. That makes the meta always unpredictable. Some people think you need luck with your match-ups. This is ofcourse wrong: luck helps, but a deck that's good against a great portion of the field and know-how on how to play it still weigh alot stronger than simply having luck with match-ups. Nassif 'proved' this.
If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, it's probably delicious.
Team ADHD-To resist is to piss in the wind. Anyone who does will end up smelling.
This page is dangerously close to being chewed up and spit out by me. Keep your shit together, people, because I've about had it.
Also, my report is up.
http://saltcitymagic.blogspot.com/
Just to put an end to that pro-bashing. I know Pat Chapin and have for a really long time. Gabe is Pat's roommate. He plays quite a bit of eternal formats, just doesn't post here. Pat is a huge fan of Vintage and plays that more than anything else. Gabriel tests against Pat and Brian DeMars (another big eternal player). So if it's any consolation, he does play eternal also. So technically an eternal player did win. He is just damned good at all formats and well face it, it's been a while since we had anything relating to legacy at all to prove his worth at.
Wait, Nassif lives in the USA now?
YOU'RE GIVING ME A TIME MACHINE IN ORDER TO TREAT MY SLEEP DISORDER.
Really? I've heard this from non-Legacy players. I've certainly never heard anyone complain that the Pro Tours should have byes, for instance. I think there's a general consensus that byes lower the legitimacy, from a competitive viewpoint, of the GPs.
But pros have the Pro Tour to reward effort. GPs are supposed to be accessible to the common man, yet without byes your chances of Day 2 are literally a fraction of what they are if you have 3 byes, assuming exactly equal amounts of skill and preparation.Byes are to reward people who devote most of their life to be good at magic (overall). And it makes the trip to GP's worth it for many pro's.
I have absolutely no problem with pros having more skill and caring more about the game, nor is this a Legacy specific complaint. It's simply a pragmatic argument; why are you tilting the odds in favor of someone who's already better at the game? It seems weighted on the old argument that Magic is a game of luck rather than skill, which I hope no one really believes anymore.I assume you think it's unfair because they don't play legacy ever (because it's irrelavent to them), but still get byes. Just like it's not fair that someone who is better than everyone here wins the GP despite not testing.
(get over it, etc)
For my confessions, they burned me with fire/
And found I was for endurance made
FYI:
Got an email from Brian David Marshall this morning which said that he is messaging all top 16 players that he doesn't know/who are Legacy or Vintage players (as opposed to pros). The e-mail came with a set of questions about the format and our plans for the Pro Tour, as well as our opinions on the metagame and health of the format.
He said that some of these will be included in his article The Week That Was for this week. So we can look forward to a Legacy article on wizards.com this week!
Sweet, at least we'll get one. Well, I guess we can also count on one with Flores all over counterbalance's nuts as well.
The other thing to keep in mind about how many people made day 2 is the fact that there were 1230 players, 50% more than the necessary 800 to offer 124 people the ability to get into day 2.
As far as byes go, people who have earned a high rating by playing well over a period of time, who have worked hard to be successful at the PT or earned the appropriate amount of points, or won a GP Trial should be able to have the appripriate amount of byes and a small advantage over someone who hasn't invested the same amount of time into the event.
I did a rough count and I found roughly 30 names that I recognized as having byes that made day 2, I could be off by quite a bit since the player list is no longer available and that often includes the number of byes each player has.
Anywho, I started writing this yesterday so I think I lost my train of thought.
Byes are an integral part to help motivate people to travel great distances to events like this. I had 1 bye and went 4-0, 0-4, with a final record of 5-4 missing day 2 by 2 wins. Needless to say beating Heezy in round 4 was a blast but not as much fun as making day two like he did. lol
PTPaul :-)
Ok, so both sides of the argument on byes have been made, and keep repeating themselves. I'll leave it alone now.
Nice report! Those crucial mistakes hurt...myself, I usually know the correct play in a certain situation 1 second after I make the incorrect one. I'm not sure how I can improve this, since I know the correct play, it just enters my mind too late to be made.
georgjorgeGeistreich sind schon die anderen.
Make the incorrect play in your head first?
I'd be willing to wager that pros that play slowly do so because they are considering many of the plays and counter-plays that can be made in the next turn or two. Once you know what your opponent's deck is, you have a (generally) pretty good idea of what he's going to be able to do to answer your play. Saying to yourself, "If I make Play X, my opponent can respond with Y and Z, which means I'll have to do A, B, or C..." generally helps you weed out the options that aren't good. Generally, the longer one of those response chains becomes, the worse the play is.
There's also just playing a lot. Playing lots of Limited has definitely improved me as a player because it allows you to practice these sorts of chains of logic in every game. Because the format is small, and there are only so many possible plays a certain deck can realistically make, you can be reasonably certain that your analysis will be correct. It also makes doing these analyses much more important, so you get a lot of practice in anticipate plays and counter-plays.
tl;dr take more time to think and play lots of Limited.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Reply With Quote