I mean yeah, Naya Blitz is a tight deck and sideboarding choices can be really difficult.... but to just say "screw it" and go with out one? Seems iffy. Then again there was that Belcher deck that top 8'd with a 15 island sideboard.
As far as no spells go, I could see it I guess, still I think Boros Charm and Searing Spear are pretty nifty to have around.
I don't think you understand how skilled Frank Karsten is.
I assume he means luck as in that's how Blitz does well. Good hands/draws and the right match ups. Nothing much to do with player skill once you learn how the deck. It's literally a deck that plays itself.
I don't think you understand how skilled Frank Karsten is.
I don't know who the guy is, I'm sure he's a much better player than I. However, if you make deck building decisions that are strictly inferior to others, then the only way to make up for that is luck. Obviously it's not blind luck, at the end of the day you can usually take a deck like aggro, not have a sideboard and still do okay.
The whole point of a sideboard, even for aggro, is to take out 4-8 cards and put in another 4-8 cards and give yourself that incremental advantage over the opponent... maybe 5-10% better chance to win in some cases (vs not doing it at all I mean). So adding that all up over an entire day means that I would attribute those results to luck.
And another thing, people can talk about how skilled a player is. And I'm sure he didn't make any play mistakes the entire day which is something that separates pros from people like me. But, it doesn't matter how well you know how to play a deck vs anything... the majority of the reason why pros are as good as they are is they are able to find just the infinitesimal tech cards to put in their main decks and sideboards to give them just that little bit of edge. Obviously that didn't happen here. Playing nothing but creatures isn't tech against anything.
Frank Karsten is a PT Hall of Famer, and was considered one of the best constructed deck designers & players consistently during his time as a serious player.
Now though, he makes challenges for himself, he doesn't necessarily aim to build the best possible deck. Examples: showing up at various Pro Tours with highlander decks, going 6-6-6 in the swiss at Worlds '10 (or '09, I don't quite remember).
Well, his list is only 4 cards different from the stock lists. Also, in a lot of matchups you don't need Searing Spears - you much prefer to run people over with lots and lots of creatures.
There are a couple of really problematic creatures - Olivia, Huntmaster, etc - but if you can dodge them I can see how an all-creature build might do ok.
It's a testament to how much people respect Naya blitz as a real deck.
It severely punishes any deck with no relevant turn 1-2 plays and decks that can stumble on mana. No other deck does that currently, so not everyone builds with blitz in mind.
I would expect someone who is both a writer and a mod for this forum to at least go and google his name before insulting one of the most technically skilled players and deckbuilders in the history of the game. Frankly, I'm disappointed you don't know who he is, but the fact that you didn't even google him first speaks volumes about your incompetence.
And another thing, people can talk about how skilled a player is. And I'm sure he didn't make any play mistakes the entire day which is something that separates pros from people like me. But, it doesn't matter how well you know how to play a deck vs anything... the majority of the reason why pros are as good as they are is they are able to find just the infinitesimal tech cards to put in their main decks and sideboards to give them just that little bit of edge. Obviously that didn't happen here. Playing nothing but creatures isn't tech against anything.
Would you call a swordsman lucky because he can fight blindfolded, with his hands tied behind is back? Because I don't think anyone intelligent would.
I would expect someone who is both a writer and a mod for this forum to at least go and google his name before insulting one of the most technically skilled players and deckbuilders in the history of the game. Frankly, I'm disappointed you don't know who he is, but the fact that you didn't even google him first speaks volumes about your incompetence.
WOAH calm down dude, so he never googled your friend. don't get your panties in a wad...
I would expect someone who is both a writer and a mod for this forum to at least go and google his name before insulting one of the most technically skilled players and deckbuilders in the history of the game. Frankly, I'm disappointed you don't know who he is, but the fact that you didn't even google him first speaks volumes about your incompetence.
Would you call a swordsman lucky because he can fight blindfolded, with his hands tied behind is back? Because I don't think anyone intelligent would.
a blinded swordsman doesnt have that random factor like a 60 card deck does. You can easily get bricked and flood out. Thats bad luck.
As the saying goes "Its better to be lucky than good"
exactly. even then many sb choices are also creatures - ie nearheath pilgrim/boros reckoner vs aggro, fiend hunter, zealous conscripts for the heavier builds, etc.
When approached about the deck, Frank had this to say:
"I realize that I did go a bit overboard by throwing my entire sideboard overboard. In all fairness, a sideboard of 11 basic lands, 1 Worldspine Wurm (as a good luck charm), and 3 Fiend Hunter or 3 Nearheath Pilgrim would have been better. Fiend Hunter or Nearheath Pilgrim are likely better than Thalia, Guardian of Thraben in the mirror match, while not diluting any synergies.... Even though I went overboard, there's a lesson here: Don't over-sideboard. Keep synergies intact. Don't dilute your main game plan. Ask yourself whether or not a sideboard card is truly an improvement. For a highly focused deck like Naya Blitz, sideboarding can do more harm than good."
It's very true that a good player can take naya blitz and get awful hands and do badly, and also that a bad player can get god hands repeatedly and win. More likely though is that you get a mixture of good hands and okay hands, which can top 8 in the hands of a good player or do mediocrely with a poor pilot.
This is just pointless showboating.
He's a good player, he played a good mainboard, but to not have a sideboard is simply dumb. There is literally no reason not to bring a board.
This is just pointless showboating.
He's a good player, he played a good mainboard, but to not have a sideboard is simply dumb. There is literally no reason not to bring a board.
Clearly that's not true. There are literally countless reasons not to bring a board... because there actually are, and that's what "literally" means.
But the one you named in your first sentence was probably his.
I would expect someone who is both a writer and a mod for this forum to at least go and google his name before insulting one of the most technically skilled players and deckbuilders in the history of the game. Frankly, I'm disappointed you don't know who he is, but the fact that you didn't even google him first speaks volumes about your incompetence.
I don't follow the pro scene. That shouldn't have an impact on my opinion.
Would you call a swordsman lucky because he can fight blindfolded, with his hands tied behind is back? Because I don't think anyone intelligent would.
That's not the best analogy though.
First of all, I'm not denying that this guy is a good player... apparently one of the better ones. Far better a player than me.
But what I am saying is that top 8ing a major tournament with nothing but creatures, lands and no sideboard, requires a bit of luck. Obviously it takes some skill to be able to even try to pull this off. And again, I'm not saying this guy doesn't have skills. But it also takes a good bit of luck.
And I'll repeat the same thing I said earlier. Pro magic players, the reasons they are pros is because they know how to maximize their odds via deckbuilding. First of all, they pick a deck that is best positioned (in their opinion) to win a tournament. They also tweak the deck and sideboard on a weekly basis based on what the popular decks are in the metagame. Playing a creature/land deck without a sideboard takes away from that advantage. All that is left is pure play skill. But if your opponent draws more consistently than you (because they have a sideboard and take out less efficient cards), it doesn't matter how much skill you have because they will be able to beat you just because their deck was designed better. The only way to overcome that is to have better draws despite the fact that the deck on average shouldn't give them to you.
I mean... if the same person t8'd a tournament with a deck full of obviously inferior cards mainboard and sideboard, even if he was a pro, you would say an element of luck was involved.
On top of playing no Instant/Sorcery/Planeswalker cards, he also played WITHOUT A SIDEBOARD.
What do you make of this?:afoot:
As far as no spells go, I could see it I guess, still I think Boros Charm and Searing Spear are pretty nifty to have around.
Standard-
WRG-Naya Humans
EDH-
RUG- Animar
RW- Brion Stoutarm
I don't think you understand how skilled Frank Karsten is.
I assume he means luck as in that's how Blitz does well. Good hands/draws and the right match ups. Nothing much to do with player skill once you learn how the deck. It's literally a deck that plays itself.
I don't know who the guy is, I'm sure he's a much better player than I. However, if you make deck building decisions that are strictly inferior to others, then the only way to make up for that is luck. Obviously it's not blind luck, at the end of the day you can usually take a deck like aggro, not have a sideboard and still do okay.
The whole point of a sideboard, even for aggro, is to take out 4-8 cards and put in another 4-8 cards and give yourself that incremental advantage over the opponent... maybe 5-10% better chance to win in some cases (vs not doing it at all I mean). So adding that all up over an entire day means that I would attribute those results to luck.
And another thing, people can talk about how skilled a player is. And I'm sure he didn't make any play mistakes the entire day which is something that separates pros from people like me. But, it doesn't matter how well you know how to play a deck vs anything... the majority of the reason why pros are as good as they are is they are able to find just the infinitesimal tech cards to put in their main decks and sideboards to give them just that little bit of edge. Obviously that didn't happen here. Playing nothing but creatures isn't tech against anything.
Now though, he makes challenges for himself, he doesn't necessarily aim to build the best possible deck. Examples: showing up at various Pro Tours with highlander decks, going 6-6-6 in the swiss at Worlds '10 (or '09, I don't quite remember).
In this article - http://blog.mtgmadness.com/index.php/standard-ptq-season/ - a pro who made top8 of GP Verona explains the sideboarding strats and repeatedly emphasizes that you need to keep a high creature density.
There are a couple of really problematic creatures - Olivia, Huntmaster, etc - but if you can dodge them I can see how an all-creature build might do ok.
read my article!
check out this forum!
It severely punishes any deck with no relevant turn 1-2 plays and decks that can stumble on mana. No other deck does that currently, so not everyone builds with blitz in mind.
I would expect someone who is both a writer and a mod for this forum to at least go and google his name before insulting one of the most technically skilled players and deckbuilders in the history of the game. Frankly, I'm disappointed you don't know who he is, but the fact that you didn't even google him first speaks volumes about your incompetence.
Would you call a swordsman lucky because he can fight blindfolded, with his hands tied behind is back? Because I don't think anyone intelligent would.
WOAH calm down dude, so he never googled your friend. don't get your panties in a wad...
Dega midrange 1-0
a blinded swordsman doesnt have that random factor like a 60 card deck does. You can easily get bricked and flood out. Thats bad luck.
As the saying goes "Its better to be lucky than good"
Standard:RWUJeskai WinsRWU
Modern:GWBMelira PodGWB
Legacy:WDeath & TaxesW
read my article!
check out this forum!
"I realize that I did go a bit overboard by throwing my entire sideboard overboard. In all fairness, a sideboard of 11 basic lands, 1 Worldspine Wurm (as a good luck charm), and 3 Fiend Hunter or 3 Nearheath Pilgrim would have been better. Fiend Hunter or Nearheath Pilgrim are likely better than Thalia, Guardian of Thraben in the mirror match, while not diluting any synergies.... Even though I went overboard, there's a lesson here: Don't over-sideboard. Keep synergies intact. Don't dilute your main game plan. Ask yourself whether or not a sideboard card is truly an improvement. For a highly focused deck like Naya Blitz, sideboarding can do more harm than good."
No. I look at that and look at the things he does, and I say:
Its not luck, he's a total badass.
and some of it is luck, but all of us rely on luck even in our most skilled matchups.
I think it was finkel or Budde that say something akin to:
"I'm a good magic player yes, but I'm statistically better than other people at winning coin-flips... the net effect of which makes me great"
or some such. It might be something someone said about 1 or the other of them.
read my article!
check out this forum!
My deviantART; if you're interested in alters, PM me!
Spam infraction
-DarkRitual
He's a good player, he played a good mainboard, but to not have a sideboard is simply dumb. There is literally no reason not to bring a board.
Clearly that's not true. There are literally countless reasons not to bring a board... because there actually are, and that's what "literally" means.
But the one you named in your first sentence was probably his.
Currently Working On: Jund Ramp (RTR Block)
GR My Blog RG (Std)
WOTWC need to reprint some Swords to Plowshares, Elephant Grass and Lightning Bolt in M14 to balance some things out.
I don't follow the pro scene. That shouldn't have an impact on my opinion.
That's not the best analogy though.
First of all, I'm not denying that this guy is a good player... apparently one of the better ones. Far better a player than me.
But what I am saying is that top 8ing a major tournament with nothing but creatures, lands and no sideboard, requires a bit of luck. Obviously it takes some skill to be able to even try to pull this off. And again, I'm not saying this guy doesn't have skills. But it also takes a good bit of luck.
And I'll repeat the same thing I said earlier. Pro magic players, the reasons they are pros is because they know how to maximize their odds via deckbuilding. First of all, they pick a deck that is best positioned (in their opinion) to win a tournament. They also tweak the deck and sideboard on a weekly basis based on what the popular decks are in the metagame. Playing a creature/land deck without a sideboard takes away from that advantage. All that is left is pure play skill. But if your opponent draws more consistently than you (because they have a sideboard and take out less efficient cards), it doesn't matter how much skill you have because they will be able to beat you just because their deck was designed better. The only way to overcome that is to have better draws despite the fact that the deck on average shouldn't give them to you.
I mean... if the same person t8'd a tournament with a deck full of obviously inferior cards mainboard and sideboard, even if he was a pro, you would say an element of luck was involved.
No reasons that would make sense in a competitive tournament, as any reasonable person would realize.