@chubbyrain Cat Inspector is Inspector Shops with Slash Panther (clearly).
Posts made by diophan
RE: Vintage Challenge - 8/12/17
Vintage Challenge - 8/12/17
We had 50 players yesterday. Dazai won the tournament with Ravager Shops--congrats! This week we saw a fracturing of shops deck into Eldrazi-heavy lists like Thiim's winning decklist from last week, and more traditional ravager shops decks. In addition, many of the mentor decks which did well included a Tinker/BSC plan, likely to combat the ever increasing thorn presence online.
Note that some of the tags have been shifted around. To cut down on manual entry I (with some html parsing help from Vasu) created a python program to pull down the results from WOTC's website and tag lists. It wasn't clear to me how to write an aglorithm to tag decks as "blue control" or "big blue", so I went with tags that are more straightforward to identify.
Thanks to Matt for helping collect the results!
Vintage Challenge - 8/5/17
Apologies for the late post. There were 49 players last week. Thiim took down the tournament with an Eldrazi-heavy null rod shops deck which I know several people have been testing since.
Vintage Challenge - 7/8/2017
We had 54 players register for yesterday's vintage challenge. I was able to win with a less exciting mentor deck than last week's winner. Thanks to @chubbyrain for recording all the results from the swiss.
- diophan - Jeskai Mentor
- maegwiny - Ravager Shops (no tangle wires)
- scarcio - Ravager Shops
- desolutionist - Gifts Drain Tendrils
- Bradisek - Car Shops (no tangle wires)
- gunmaster7 - Unmask Dredge
- masedogg06 - Paradoxical Drain Tendrils
- stsung - Ravager Shops (no tangle wires)
Before anyone gets too excited about the Big Blue winrate, note that @desolutionist was the only pilot (we classify paradoxical decks in their own archetype). However if anyone is interested in a modern take on a classic archetype, I suggest checking out his list (JVP is a grindy recoup I imagine). The spreadsheet can be found here. As usual let us know if you spot any errors.
RE: Vintage Challenge - 7/1/17
First, that was not collusion. Matt didn't take a bribe; he conceded a match where winning would likely have netted him nothing but cost his friend the top8. If you're offended by conceding to a friend for no gain, I suggest you not look into what happens in situations where there are Pro Tour invites or points for Silver/Gold/Platinum on the line. You can basically bribe your opponent as long as you use the right phraseology.
Does it suck to be on the "X-1 and not paired down against a friend" part of the equation? Of course. I think this is misdirected though. A more constructive route would be encouraging Wizards to design tournaments without perverse incentives. As it stands someone is being called out for for streaming a tournament rather than having the concession happen in secret.
When I'm 3-0 and I get paired down against someone that's 2-1 in a daily I always concede because WOTC doesn't have a properly balanced prize pool. I don't feel bad about that, nor do I think anyone should be obligated to kick their friend out of the top8.
RE: NYSE Open V Metagame Report
@Bibendum Right. Apologies for lack of explanation in the first post (I'm leaving for Philadelphia this morning and wanted to put this up before then). If you look at the data Paradoxical Mentor was classified as the archetype Paradoxical and tagged with both. The archetype Mentor generally refers to decks running mentor with a gush style cantrip+Dack+delve draw engine. Paradoxical Mentor did well this tournament; Nate made the T8 and some of the Arabian Knights piloted a separate list to strong finishes. Note that the mentor tag had a winrate higher than either the mentor archetype or the paradoxical archetype. This implies (which you can verify with the include/excludes on the tag breakdown sheet) that Paradoxical Mentor decks a higher winrate than Paradoxical decks in general.
NYSE Open V Metagame Report
130 players made it out to Long Island last weekend. This was my first NYSE and I want to thank @Prospero for running a great tournament. You can read his report here, which contains the top8 decklists. I absolutely encourage everyone to make the trip out for the (hopefully occurring) next NYSE.
Congratulations to Ryan Glackin for taking home a lotus and amazing looking trophy!
The spreadsheet can be found here. Let Matt or me know if you spot any errors.
Vintage Challenge - 6/17/2017
46 players participated in yesterday's Vintage Challenge on MTGO. Congratulations to Jazza on his win!
- Jazza - Ravager Shops (precursor over wire)
- Smmenen - Jeskai Mentor
- Pascal3000 - Jeskai Mentor
- Dan9IN - Ravager Shops (wire)
- espiatrianero - White Eldrazi
- whateverfor - Jeskai Mentor
- desolutionist - Gifts Drain Tendrils
- Ponagger - Ravager Shops (precursor over wire)
The spreadsheet can be found here.
Shops and mentor again made up the majority of the top 8, which I am sure everyone who posts on these threads will be thrilled with. Note that almost all the shops decks in the top32 omitted tangle wire; it will be interesting to see what the shops decks which do well at NYSE next week look like.
Thanks to @ChubbyRain for his help with these reports.
Vintage Challenge - 6/10/2017
51 players registered for yesterday's Vintage Challenge on MTGO. Congratulations to Egget winning the tournament without dropping a match!
- Egget - SFM Remora Mentor
- hrymfaxe - Precursor Ravager Shops (without wires)
- joseortiz - BUG Oath
- ecobaronen - Updated Mentor Silence
- freakflag - Paradoxical Drain Tendrils
- svengosagan - Jeskai Mentor
- uncle_rico - Merfolk
- ravidel85 - Esper Mentor
The spreadsheet can be found here.
We've seen three primary archetypes vying for the best deck in any given week--shops, mentor, and paradoxical outcome decks. After last week's paradoxical outcome performance, we see mentor come back to dominate the top8. Note that these mentor decks were all quite different, and in general the metagame is still changing rapidly.
RE: Vintage Challenge - 6/3/2017
@desolutionist To clarify, we took out "tag mirrors" when calculating winrates so it's not necessarily true that winrates will trend towards 50% as the metagame saturation increases. (There was a time when we didn't calculate excluding mirrors.)
@HouseOfCards Although knowing which archetype finished "first" in a daily is interesting, keep in mind that there is no way to infer what the metagame looked like from the data that is published--only 4-0 and 3-1 decks are published.
Also to answer your possibly rhetorical "What does it matter if ravager shops can win vs 60%(i'd still like to know how this number exists) of the field when blue-based permission is clearly winning the most dailies and placing in the top 3 most frequently?" I'd say the reason it matters is that it suggests that you should play ravager shops. I personally started playing shops because of this data. If your goal is to win a tournament you should care what an archetype's winrate is. To take it to an extreme and from a slightly different angle, if FOW is 95% of the field and shops is 5% of the field and FOW wins 70% of tournaments, it would be foolish to play FOW.
Whether winrate or conversion to top X rate is the better metric would be an interesting discussion. Personally I prefer winrate since we already have limited data and conversion to X can be skewed more heavily by the results of just a couple of matches.