It might just be for Pro Tours, but it is really interesting.
Basically, it says that for the first game in each Top 8 match, the player with higher swiss standing chooses to play or draw!
Wait what? So if you are doing better you get to decide as if you won the die roll? Sounds kinda annoying I guess. I guess it's really good for people with better standings but a kick in the pants if you didn't do AS well as your opponent.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Standard: Esper Spirits-WUB
Modern: Bant Geist-WUG
Legacy: Reanimator-UB-WRG
EDH:
Ramirez DePietro: Pirate Themed-UB
Riku of Two Reflections: "Oops I Win"-URG
When I first read "play or draw" I was thinking ... you can force a draw in a top 8? How does the next round get played out? Then my brain kick-started and I understood.
Sounds like an interesting approach. It removes some of the randomness and rewards good performance. Additionally, this might stop the irritating behaviour of "drawing" the last few rounds of swiss since you want as good a record as possible in order to improve your chances in the top 8.
Rules like this will make you see more games in the last rounds played, and less intentional draws. Getting that slightly higher position gives you an advantage through the top eight.
When I first read "play or draw" I was thinking ... you can force a draw in a top 8? How does the next round get played out? Then my brain kick-started and I understood.
Sounds like an interesting approach. It removes some of the randomness and rewards good performance. Additionally, this might stop the irritating behaviour of "drawing" the last few rounds of swiss since you want as good a record as possible in order to improve your chances in the top 8.
Errrr... isn't the point of competition and tournaments precisely that? The better.. you... do.... the ... better you do?
So the problem is tie breakers just like it has always been. My standing is based on Wins Losses and what my previous opponents have done. So I could have the same record as my opponent *which should happen every time unless people drop for what ever reason* And because of the dumbest tie breaker system I've seen ever I now lose the die roll because my opponent beat someone who is slighty better than someone I faced. My problem is more with the tie breaker system it's intensivly flawed in many ways. I.E. A win is a win I don't care who it is against if you want tie breakers then have the people who are in a tie play a game, almost makes sense because that's how they do it in every other sporting/game event.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Standard: Esper Spirits-WUB
Modern: Bant Geist-WUG
Legacy: Reanimator-UB-WRG
EDH:
Ramirez DePietro: Pirate Themed-UB
Riku of Two Reflections: "Oops I Win"-URG
It removes some of the randomness and rewards good performance. Additionally, this might stop the irritating behaviour of "drawing" the last few rounds of swiss since you want as good a record as possible in order to improve your chances in the top 8.
I'm guessing this is the "goal" behind the rule. I'm also guessing it will be largely unsuccessful. Guaranteed top 8 >>> the risk of losing out IMO.
So the problem is tie breakers just like it has always been. My standing is based on Wins Losses and what my previous opponents have done. So I could have the same record as my opponent *which should happen every time unless people drop for what ever reason* And because of the dumbest tie breaker system I've seen ever I now lose the die roll because my opponent beat someone who is slighty better than someone I faced. My problem is more with the tie breaker system it's intensivly flawed in many ways. I.E. A win is a win I don't care who it is against if you want tie breakers then have the people who are in a tie play a game, almost makes sense because that's how they do it in every other sporting/game event.
The tiebreaker system may not be perfect, but it does make sense: you get a higher ranking for playing more difficult competition.
Other alternatives cause other problems. Your suggested alternative does not work. It's not logistically feasible to schedule more tiebreaker rounds, which will take more time. Lots of tournaments already go WAY late into the night as it is.
the dumbest tie breaker system I've seen ever I now lose the die roll because my opponent beat someone who is slighty better than someone I faced. My problem is more with the tie breaker system it's intensivly flawed in many ways. I.E. A win is a win I don't care who it is against if you want tie breakers then have the people who are in a tie play a game, almost makes sense because that's how they do it in every other sporting/game event.
If you think the tiebreaker system is dumb, you don't understand it properly.
The players who played against the most difficult opponents get the nod in a tie. Does that not make sense? If two sports teams both won three games, but one won 3 games against the the #2,3,4 seeds in the league, and the other won against the #30,31,32 seeds in the league, which one deserves to be ranked higher?
Also, if everyone who was tied had to play a game, it would add a nearly infinite number of rounds to the tournament. It would also lead to circle ties (Player A defeated player B defeated player C defeated player A -- what order should they be ranked in?). It just doesn't work.
It might just be for Pro Tours, but it is really interesting.
Basically, it says that for the first game in each Top 8 match, the player with higher swiss standing chooses to play or draw!
To the original poster, please fix the broken link in your post!
He copied the link from Stark's post on Facebook probly - which had the incorrect URL in it cause facebook doesn't recognize ending punctuation as part of a URL. (and what moron uses punctuation in a url anyway... heh)
This seems really unneccessary. I don't know if it's better or worse, but it seems like a case of fixing something that wasn't broke in the first place.
A win is a win I don't care who it is against if you want tie breakers then have the people who are in a tie play a game, almost makes sense because that's how they do it in every other sporting/game event.
No, actually that is not how it is done in most sporting events. Most leagues look at W-L-T first obviously, but then they start looking at divisional records, head to head, opponents wins, ect. Most do NOT play tie breaker games because of the difficulty in scheduling. Magic would have the exact sampe problem. They are not about to add at least 1 hour in between the end of swiss and the start of the top 8 to play tie breaker rounds.
I'm fine with this. It is probbly the closest equivalent to home field advantage in sports. The person who played the best gets a small advantage (that someone must have) that doesn't automatically decide the game.
Hmm it seems to me this rule change is kinda intruging as it saves time for deciding who goes first in the first game of a match, then the player who loses usually ends up deciding to play or draw depending if he/she mulligans of course, i can't wait to see how this new rule ends up playing out.
The players who played against the most difficult opponents get the nod in a tie. Does that not make sense? If two sports teams both won three games, but one won 3 games against the the #2,3,4 seeds in the league, and the other won against the #30,31,32 seeds in the league, which one deserves to be ranked higher?
The issue with the tiebreaker system is that it creates an additional luck variable. I can win each and every game I played and still be considered inferior to another player due to tiebreakers. Sure, they may have played a more "difficult" opponent, but they were given that opportunity, I was not.
W/e the tie breakers have flaws. If you want to bring players history matches into play for positions, start pairing players up using their W/L and DCI Ratings too while you're at it. Nothing wrong with making players play magic.
If you think games last too long as it is. Do something about it, complain to WotC. Allow combo decks to be the rock to aggro's scissor and stop making creature based formats.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Standard: Esper Spirits-WUB
Modern: Bant Geist-WUG
Legacy: Reanimator-UB-WRG
EDH:
Ramirez DePietro: Pirate Themed-UB
Riku of Two Reflections: "Oops I Win"-URG
The issue with the tiebreaker system is that it creates an additional luck variable. I can win each and every game I played and still be considered inferior to another player due to tiebreakers. Sure, they may have played a more "difficult" opponent, but they were given that opportunity, I was not.
The problem is tie breakers are necessary for the same reasons time limits on games are necessary. Real Life has time constraints. Venues close, etc. magic isn't like a sports team that can just pay the employees bajillions of overtime. when the venue closes the magic players get kicked out.
Yeah, tie breakers, like time constraints, are the best methods of conducting a tournament that we currently have, but I don't want anyone pretending that it creates a situation that only rewards the best player. There are cases when that is not true.
This seems really unneccessary. I don't know if it's better or worse, but it seems like a case of fixing something that wasn't broke in the first place.
Except that IDing to get into T8 is, in fact, 'broken in the first place'. The DCI has hated it for years, and with obvious logical reasons. They just can't figure out what to do about it.
I like the idea that they're promoting here in spirit, but I imagine that it will be unsuccessful, as has been previously mentioned. People will still draw into T8 to 'be sure' they can get in, and will suffer the possibility of going second for G1. The fact that PT T8s are 5 game series makes this rule even less relevant, because winning the die roll just doesn't matter as much.
Still, it's progress. It means that they are trying to figure out a way to discourage/eliminate IDs, and I imagine they'll get there eventually.
Except that IDing to get into T8 is, in fact, 'broken in the first place'. The DCI has hated it for years, and with obvious logical reasons. They just can't figure out what to do about it.
I like the idea that they're promoting here in spirit, but I imagine that it will be unsuccessful, as has been previously mentioned. People will still draw into T8 to 'be sure' they can get in, and will suffer the possibility of going second for G1. The fact that PT T8s are 5 game series makes this rule even less relevant, because winning the die roll just doesn't matter as much.
Still, it's progress. It means that they are trying to figure out a way to discourage/eliminate IDs, and I imagine they'll get there eventually.
Personally I think what's needed for them to achieve that goal (and what this is a big step toward) is a culture change.
Currently in magic culture it is expected that you will draw into top 8 if possible. with enough chipping away at it via minor things like this the culture can be changed to the point where, while still possible, it would be looked down on as "cheap" by the majority of players.
This wouldn't affect anything at the ptq or higher level, BUT it would affect local tournaments. I personally know people who won't go back because they feel they were gipped out of a chance at making the cut at a local tournament. Were they actually? no, probably not, but thats irrelevant. The point is if WotC can make the majority of players feel like its somehow wrong (although not illegal) then they will have achieved their goal on the stage where it matters the most.
We don't have draws on Magic Online anymore, and for the most part it is a good thing. People still draw and split winnings, but if you want to play it out, more often than not you can. I wonder if they will use this new rule online if it is a success.
I watched a buddy go 4-0 in a four-round sanctioned draft and get second place. Tiebreakers actually kept the two undefeated players from playing one another.
It seems like a fine idea. Players who do better get the advantage in game 1. Will it stop IDs? No. But is it a good rule anyway? Sure. It's not going to hurt anything, so they might as well institute the rule and see what happens.
W/e the tie breakers have flaws. If you want to bring players history matches into play for positions, start pairing players up using their W/L and DCI Ratings too while you're at it. Nothing wrong with making players play magic.
If you think games last too long as it is. Do something about it, complain to WotC. Allow combo decks to be the rock to aggro's scissor and stop making creature based formats.
Do you know why matching people up by DCI Ratings would be awesome? Because new players would get to go to tournaments and have a great chance of playing against some world class player. Fans of the game would love that.
The pros would hate it, though, as even with byes, it would increase the chance they might run into some jank deck instead of the meta decks they'd tested and planned for. ie, they'd have to face the same challenges as the rest of us.
The players who played against the most difficult opponents get the nod in a tie. Does that not make sense? If two sports teams both won three games, but one won 3 games against the the #2,3,4 seeds in the league, and the other won against the #30,31,32 seeds in the league, which one deserves to be ranked higher?
It's called "strength of schedule". College sports use this when determining rank, such as the BCS ranking system for football. The teams don't have control over their opponent's rank when they play them. They can only do their best and hope a higher ranked team loses or a team they beat has an unexpectedly outstanding season.
It might just be for Pro Tours, but it is really interesting.
Basically, it says that for the first game in each Top 8 match, the player with higher swiss standing chooses to play or draw!
EDIT: Link fixed, thanks guys!
Modern: Bant Geist-WUG
Legacy: Reanimator-UB-WRG
EDH:
Ramirez DePietro: Pirate Themed-UB
Riku of Two Reflections: "Oops I Win"-URG
Sounds like an interesting approach. It removes some of the randomness and rewards good performance. Additionally, this might stop the irritating behaviour of "drawing" the last few rounds of swiss since you want as good a record as possible in order to improve your chances in the top 8.
Errrr... isn't the point of competition and tournaments precisely that? The better.. you... do.... the ... better you do?
So the problem is tie breakers just like it has always been. My standing is based on Wins Losses and what my previous opponents have done. So I could have the same record as my opponent *which should happen every time unless people drop for what ever reason* And because of the dumbest tie breaker system I've seen ever I now lose the die roll because my opponent beat someone who is slighty better than someone I faced. My problem is more with the tie breaker system it's intensivly flawed in many ways. I.E. A win is a win I don't care who it is against if you want tie breakers then have the people who are in a tie play a game, almost makes sense because that's how they do it in every other sporting/game event.
Modern: Bant Geist-WUG
Legacy: Reanimator-UB-WRG
EDH:
Ramirez DePietro: Pirate Themed-UB
Riku of Two Reflections: "Oops I Win"-URG
I'm guessing this is the "goal" behind the rule. I'm also guessing it will be largely unsuccessful. Guaranteed top 8 >>> the risk of losing out IMO.
The tiebreaker system may not be perfect, but it does make sense: you get a higher ranking for playing more difficult competition.
Other alternatives cause other problems. Your suggested alternative does not work. It's not logistically feasible to schedule more tiebreaker rounds, which will take more time. Lots of tournaments already go WAY late into the night as it is.
About this:
If you think the tiebreaker system is dumb, you don't understand it properly.
The players who played against the most difficult opponents get the nod in a tie. Does that not make sense? If two sports teams both won three games, but one won 3 games against the the #2,3,4 seeds in the league, and the other won against the #30,31,32 seeds in the league, which one deserves to be ranked higher?
Also, if everyone who was tied had to play a game, it would add a nearly infinite number of rounds to the tournament. It would also lead to circle ties (Player A defeated player B defeated player C defeated player A -- what order should they be ranked in?). It just doesn't work.
To the original poster, please fix the broken link in your post!
The URL is NOT
http://www.thestarkingtonpost.com/articles/-/New_Play_or_Draw_Rule_Debuts_at_Amsterdam!
with the ending exclamation mark OUTSIDE the URL; it is
http://www.thestarkingtonpost.com/articles/-/New_Play_or_Draw_Rule_Debuts_at_Amsterdam!
with the ending exclamation mark INSIDE the URL.
He copied the link from Stark's post on Facebook probly - which had the incorrect URL in it cause facebook doesn't recognize ending punctuation as part of a URL. (and what moron uses punctuation in a url anyway... heh)
Agreed, especially with best of five pro tour top 8s. It won't really change anything.
No, actually that is not how it is done in most sporting events. Most leagues look at W-L-T first obviously, but then they start looking at divisional records, head to head, opponents wins, ect. Most do NOT play tie breaker games because of the difficulty in scheduling. Magic would have the exact sampe problem. They are not about to add at least 1 hour in between the end of swiss and the start of the top 8 to play tie breaker rounds.
I'm fine with this. It is probbly the closest equivalent to home field advantage in sports. The person who played the best gets a small advantage (that someone must have) that doesn't automatically decide the game.
EDH:1 vs 1
Talrand, Sky Summoner Retired.
EDH Multiplayer
Drana. Kalastria Bloodchief
Talrand, Sky Summoner
My Blog -
Tips to Writing
Tips for Freelance Magic Writing
W/e the tie breakers have flaws. If you want to bring players history matches into play for positions, start pairing players up using their W/L and DCI Ratings too while you're at it. Nothing wrong with making players play magic.
If you think games last too long as it is. Do something about it, complain to WotC. Allow combo decks to be the rock to aggro's scissor and stop making creature based formats.
Modern: Bant Geist-WUG
Legacy: Reanimator-UB-WRG
EDH:
Ramirez DePietro: Pirate Themed-UB
Riku of Two Reflections: "Oops I Win"-URG
The problem is tie breakers are necessary for the same reasons time limits on games are necessary. Real Life has time constraints. Venues close, etc. magic isn't like a sports team that can just pay the employees bajillions of overtime. when the venue closes the magic players get kicked out.
Except that IDing to get into T8 is, in fact, 'broken in the first place'. The DCI has hated it for years, and with obvious logical reasons. They just can't figure out what to do about it.
I like the idea that they're promoting here in spirit, but I imagine that it will be unsuccessful, as has been previously mentioned. People will still draw into T8 to 'be sure' they can get in, and will suffer the possibility of going second for G1. The fact that PT T8s are 5 game series makes this rule even less relevant, because winning the die roll just doesn't matter as much.
Still, it's progress. It means that they are trying to figure out a way to discourage/eliminate IDs, and I imagine they'll get there eventually.
Personally I think what's needed for them to achieve that goal (and what this is a big step toward) is a culture change.
Currently in magic culture it is expected that you will draw into top 8 if possible. with enough chipping away at it via minor things like this the culture can be changed to the point where, while still possible, it would be looked down on as "cheap" by the majority of players.
This wouldn't affect anything at the ptq or higher level, BUT it would affect local tournaments. I personally know people who won't go back because they feel they were gipped out of a chance at making the cut at a local tournament. Were they actually? no, probably not, but thats irrelevant. The point is if WotC can make the majority of players feel like its somehow wrong (although not illegal) then they will have achieved their goal on the stage where it matters the most.
You can find me on MTGO. My username is gereffi.
Do you know why matching people up by DCI Ratings would be awesome? Because new players would get to go to tournaments and have a great chance of playing against some world class player. Fans of the game would love that.
The pros would hate it, though, as even with byes, it would increase the chance they might run into some jank deck instead of the meta decks they'd tested and planned for. ie, they'd have to face the same challenges as the rest of us.
It's called "strength of schedule". College sports use this when determining rank, such as the BCS ranking system for football. The teams don't have control over their opponent's rank when they play them. They can only do their best and hope a higher ranked team loses or a team they beat has an unexpectedly outstanding season.