I have been awarded a singular honor — I am on the selection committee for this year’s Pro Tour Hall of Fame. Admittedly, it’s a big committee, but it is still an honor. . It will take some consideration. I’ll also share some anecdotes. Full disclosure or a chance to tell stories — you decide.
The ballot calls for me to vote for the five most deserving players from the 2009 list of qualified players. There are a lot of good players on that list. How in the world do I cut it down? I have enough trouble cutting my decks down to 60 cards — now I’m supposed to cut from 62 to 5.
Wizards supplies some guidance. The ballot tells us that “Voting shall be based upon the player’s performances, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, and contributions to the game in general.”
That’s a bit open-ended, but helpful. It’s also tricky. For example, I have actually played against — and remember playing against — three of these people. I have watched a bunch more play — but how do I balance the fact that I may have closely watched some players’ matches, but have never even seen others, much less while they were playing?
Let’s look at the criteria in a bit more depth.
Player’s Performance and Playing Ability
This one is pretty simple — I am just going to have to go with stats here. How many wins, how many points, how many finishes — the stats. That is the easiest way to judge, and it is the only way to judge the players I haven’t seen.
Integrity and Sportsmanship
I am going to use this one as a sieve more than anything else. This criteria will eliminate players if I know they have issues. For example, I have written about one player in the past, so you can probably guess how this affects him. However, if I’m not certain about the problems, or if I know someone who was a cheater in past life but straightened himself out, it would not be a deal breaker.
Contributions to the Game in General
This is by far the most interesting category. It is also the most subjective. For me, this will mainly be based on reaching out to the public, and actions that bring more players into the game or more fully into the game. I’m looking for people that went beyond playing to show the game in a good light. Those will include writers, podcasters, teachers, TOs and so forth. Personally, I think writers like Jamie Wakefield, Mike Flores and Zvi had/have more impact on the full player base, through their writings, than all of the non-writers currently in the Hall of Fame combined.
Well — excluding Randy Buehler, Alan Comer, or Mike Turian, of course. Anyone who works for Wizards in R&D has a pretty considerable impact on the game. However, I spend time with Pro players and with players for whom the highest REL tournament they will ever attend is a prerelease. The latter players may never have heard of the Ruel brothers, but they may well know people like Rizzo, Ben Bleiwiess or even — gasp! — me.
Actually, listing writers does not really chop that list down all that much. I started by comparing the StarCityGames.com featured writers list with the ballot, and got a lot of hits. Chris Pikula wrote an article for SCG. Daniel O'Mahoney-Schwartz did, too. Patrick Mello wrote two. Antonino De Rosa wrote five. Brian Kibler wrote seven — so far. Tomi Walamies did, too. Jeff “ffeJ” Cunningham wrote over a dozen. Craig Jones, David Price, Patrick Chapin, Scott Johns and Tiago Chan all wrote, well, lots — too many to count. And that is just using the StarCityGames.com archives — Scott Johns wrote for, and edited, a number of websites. Frank Karsten wrote one of the best metagame columns ever, over on the mothership. Alex Shvartsman was also a prolific writer, back in the day — and I’m sure I’m missing a few English writers, not to mention the players who wrote in their native languages.
A lot of those players / writers inspired and educated a huge number of players worldwide. They provided a significant contribution to the game in general. I will definitely take that into account, especially for the writers who kept a column going week after week. Writing one or two articles is simple. Writing a half dozen is tougher. Writing week after week — well, a better writer than I am described it well.
“Writing is easy. All you do is sit staring at a blank sheet of paper until drops of blood form on your forehead.”
Gene Fowler
Everyone on the ballot is a good player. They all have play skillz. Writing about the game in an accessible way, and teaching their readers, requires another set of skills. I think those skills should also be recognized. Writing skills are hardly sufficient for the HoF — after all, I really can’t see putting even “Bad Player” Flores, much less someone like me, in the Hall of Fame, but writing skills are definitely relevant.
Let’s move on to some personal anecdotes. Here are some of the first things I thought of when I read these names.
Antonino De Rosa
Ant has an attitude — when he’s around, you generally know it. For me, people like that are sort of like salt on food. Up to a certain point, they enhance the flavor. Beyond that point, they pretty much spoil the meal. For me, Osyp is probably the limit, and Ant is a bit on the good side of Osyp. Watching Ant play is rarely boring.
I remember judging feature matches at U.S. Nationals. Each table held two matches — and one round I had Ant in the feature match on my left, and GerryT on my right. I was in no danger of dozing off.
I also learned something at that match. Since pros never bring tokens, I had a pile of Pro Player cards at the ready. (Here’s Ant’s — it’s worth a look.) Anyway, Ant’s opponent played something that generated a couple tokens early in the match. (Not Dragon Fodder — this was several years ago.) The opponent shuffled through the pile of Pro Player cards and grabbed a pair of Antonino de Rosa cards. It seemed funny, but less so as Ant got mana screwed turn after turn, and eventually died to those tokens. (Since then, my rule has been that players cannot use their opponent’s cards as tokens.) Ant was a good sport about it, but he was more and more subdued as the match wore on.
William “Baby Huey” Jensen
Way back, at Grand Prix: Milwaukee, we sat down for the player meeting. The player one seat over pulled out this gigantic deck — pile after pile. The players around him, me included, started asking him how he would shuffle it, whether he could do it in time, and some were suggesting that he change to something less “illegal.” Then I realized that we were seated alphabetically, which meant that the guy who looked like William Jensen probably was, and probably knew far more than us nOObs. I shut up.
I do remember that he tolerated the “advice” really well.
Mike Hron
Way, way back when I first started playing competitively, I was part of a store team in Madison. I was part of the JV, but the varsity team had H-ron and Bob Maher, plus Matt Severa, Bob Albright, and others. I learned a ton, and I still remember playtesting against Squee-Bind in the weeks before Mike rode that deck to the Top 8 in GP: Seattle. Eventually, the pros moved on to other, more elite teams, but after a year or so of testing and playing with them, I was an infinitely better player than I would have been had I just continued playing with my casual group.
Mike is also the only player on the ballot that I have beaten in sanctioned play, both in Limited and Constructed. The Limited wasn’t all that hard — we played in the same FNM drafts. Back then, I didn’t suck at drafts, and – given enough drafts – a combination of lucky opens, good draws, and maybe some mana screw or flood will let almost anyone will beat anyone. Still, looking over my match history, I see I played Mike a half dozen times, and won twice.
I also beat Mike in an Extended match at the Legion Invitational. This was a special three-format tournament held for the sixteen players with the most wins or Top 8s at Legion events the previous year — which included everything from PTQs to FNMs, and may have included the first GP: Minnesota. This was also one of the few times that I really read a metagame correctly and won because of it.
The format was Extended, back when Tempest and the Dual Lands were still legal, but Mirage block was gone. I was playing a variant of a Five-Color Rock deck that had made a splash a few weeks before. That deck had played Coalition Victory and Sliver Queen. The Sliver Queen was actually pretty good, but Coalition Victory only worked as a complete surprise. However, I liked the sideboard options the five color version allowed, and actually went to the extreme of replacing a couple Wall of Roots with Utopia Trees. That change was good against control and combo, but sucked against aggro. However, knowing the people that were invited, I correctly guessed that aggro would be scarce.
H-ron was playing a novel Blue-Green Control deck that drew cards like mad and regrew them. He cast Accumulated Knowledge at least 4 times game one — after Intutitioning for 3 early in the game. He also had Wall of Blossoms to stop beats, and Morphling as a win condition. The game ended when I cast Vampiric for Duress and saw a hand with 3 Counterspells, Accumulated Knowledge and some other bad stuff. Morphling was already on the table.
Game 2 was mixed. His Opt during my end of turn let me cast Seedtime, which allowed me an unopposed Yavimaya Elder on turn 2.5, but he gradually stabilized. I traded the Elder for a Call of the Herd token (after adding one spike from a Feeder), but he hit critical mass and started countering everything I had. His friends had been kidding him about never going aggro, so he tapped everything but one Island for Morphling. I had a Pernicious Deed, two Birds and an Elder on the table — and he would have been completely happy having me use my reset to clear the board. I’m pretty sure that he also had Annul in hand, and Annul would have stopped Coalition Victory or similar enchantments, and the Blue could also stop any removal targeting Morphling. What it could not stop was my metagame call — the sideboarded Armageddon. I ‘geddoned, then played the Treetop Village in my hand. Three turns later, it was all over.
Game 3 I just ran him over, but the highlight of that match was playing the Armageddon. It is one of the two or three times in my playing career that I was able to play a seriously tech card and get an “Oh, wow” reaction out of the really good players watching. It’s a good memory.
Anyway, I like Mike.
I think I’ll need to make these shorter, or I’ll never finish.
I remember the white suit in Hawaii. Actually, it is going to be pretty hard to forget that suit. I also remember watching a pretty happy guy playing some pretty solid Magic up at the top tables, especially during the Constructed rounds.
I have watched Patrick play in everything from Worlds to StarCityGames.com $5Ks. He is intense. He is also pretty good, both at playing the game and maneuvering his opponents into misplays. I have problems with the more extreme “jedi mind tricks,” but Patrick has always been very clear and very careful to stay within the rules. My most vivid memory, though, is watching him playing at the bottom tables, well out of contention, at PT: Hollywood. He was playing just because he likes playing Magic, and I have to respect that. I also have to respect his writings — both quality and quantity.
Frank Karsten
I have few specific memories of Frank, just a sort of merged memory of him smiling and playing at a number of events. As a judge, I generally just wandered by and watched him play a bit. He never made mistakes I had to penalize, never was loud or anything but polite — he just won his matches and played on.
I also remember that his articles were the first things I read the mornings they came out — and that I was really bummed when he stopped writing.
Another pro on the ballot that I have played — but not one I beat. I remember playing him in a Type I side event at GP New Orleans. I was winning, when he carefully baited me into a misplay and stole the game and match. I remember the shock of realizing that what I thought was a good read and understanding of where the game was going was anything but. I learned what a really good poker face was that day, and that anything I had seen had been exactly what Mike wanted his face to say. Dr. Pustilnik was a really nice guy, and his play wasn’t shady in the slightest — he just invited me to stick my head in the noose, and I did.
I also remember watching him play at GP: Las Vegas. We were playing the same deck, but there the similarity ended. He won, while I punted day 2.
At GP: Detroit, back in 2003, I watched Alex playing. I can’t remember whether I was eliminated, between matches or judging — I just remember watching his match. He dropped what proved to be one of the tech cards for that event – Form of the Dragon. He did a little “Form of the Dragon” pose when he did so — at least the time I was watching. (Too bad it was back in the day before cell phone cameras.)
I have never seen him play, but I read him, and read about him, throughout my early years. If Ball Lightning can make a comeback, maybe the King of Beatdown can, too.
…
I probably could continue, but the rest of the stories get even less interesting. I had dinner with Craig Jones in Hawaii. I played Tomi Walamies Operation Dumbo Drop deck in some events. I have played the not-tournament-legal version of Brian Selden’s 1998 Worlds RecSur deck. I have seen David Williams, Kamiel Cornelissen, Antoine Ruel and a bunch of others play at events. Etc.
Moving on — let’s look at some data. Fortunately, Wizards has provided a lot of data on the players on this year’s ballot.
Data Crunching
I am going to look at the players I know, and compare their results with others. For each category, I’ll list their results and standing in that category. (Note — it looks like the table updated since the first time I crunched these numbers. Sorry for anything that is out of date.) For comparison, I’ll also list the top two or three players in that category. Let’s see what that tells us.
Pro Tours Attended
Antonino De Rosa 46 / 5th
William Jensen 34 / 17th
Mike Hron 25 / 41st
Craig Jones 25 / 43rd
Patrick Chapin 28 / 32nd
Frank Karsten 47 / 4th
Chris Pikula 29 / 31st
David Price 39 / 10th
Michael Pustilnik 38 / 11th
Alex Shvartsman 38 / 12th
Tomi Walamies 26 / 40th
First: Bram Snepvangers with 58
Second: Tsuyishu Ikeda with 52
Third: Antoine Ruel with 50
Pro Tour Top 8s
Antonino De Rosa 1
William Jensen 4
Mike Hron 2
Craig Jones 1
Patrick Chapin 2
Frank Karsten 3
Chris Pikula 3
David Price 1
Michael Pustilnik
Alex Shvartsman 1
Tomi Walamies 3
First (tie): Kamiel Cornelissen and Scott Johns, both with 5
Six players are tied for third at 4 PT Top 8s, including Antoine Ruel
Grand Prix Top 8s
Antonino De Rosa 10
William Jensen 8
Mike Hron 2
Craig Jones 1
Patrick Chapin 1
Frank Karsten 6
Chris Pikula 4
David Price 3
Michael Pustilnik 7
Alex Shvartsman 21
Tomi Walamies 1
First: Alex Shvartsman with 21
Second: Antoine Ruel with 18
Third: Itaru Ishida with 17
Pro Points
Antonino De Rosa 242 / 8th
William Jensen 214 / 12th
Mike Hron 127 / 45th
Craig Jones 100 / 62nd
Patrick Chapin 140 / 36th
Frank Karsten 285 / 3rd
Chris Pikula 133 / 40th
David Price 166 /22nd
Michael Pustilnik 208 / 13th
Alex Shvartsman 232 / 11th
Tomi Walamies 168 / 19th
First: Antoine Ruel with 364
Second: Kamiel Cornelissen with 306
Conclusions
Here’s the part I hate. I have to cut.
Tomi Walamies and Craig Jones: Out. There are a lot of good players on this list. Their numbers are not that good, and I have to start somewhere.
Chris Pikula: I loved the Invitational, and all that, but I can’t find room. Maybe if I had seen him play — but I could say that about a lot of players.
Antonino De Rosa: His numbers are high, but not quite top of the heap. He is a very tough cut, but five is such a small number.
William Jensen: Baby Huey’s numbers are even better than Ant’s, but I can’t find room. Dammit!
Patrick Chapin: He is StarCityGames.com biggest name writer, and a very good player. The writer part alone is a huge plus in my book. On the other hand, his numbers aren’t that good — yet. However, Patrick is hot, and his numbers are going to get better year by year. I am going to cut him from my list, simply because I know he is going to be an even better candidate in the next couple years.
David Price, Steve OMS & Michael Pustilnik: As much as I would like to take the opportunity to reach back and add some of the old-time greats, I still have that five player limit.
Brian Kibler: The suit — and the numbers — are not quite enough. However, if he keeps making Top 8s, that might change.
Scott Johns: Five Pro Tour Top 8s. Writer. Editor. He is so close.
And my Ballot, at the moment. It’s not final, but here’s where I’m at so far:
Antoine Ruel & Kamiel Cornelissen: I have to keep them on the short list, simply because of their stats.
Mike Hron: I doubt that he is going to get a ring, but I think he has to stay on my short list. Think of it as home field advantage.
Frank Karsten: His numbers are excellent, as is his writing. He even plays when he’s sick as a dog. He scores very highly on every criteria, so for me he is pretty much a lock.
Alex Shvartsman: Alex was the original “Road Warrior,” attending an endless string of Grand Prix’ back before players got travel payments and appearance fees. He also wrote a lot, including a stint on the flagship. He’s been a TO, and his numbers are very good. (see Grand Prix Top 8s.)
I welcome any and all feedback, either in the forums or via email. I have a couple weeks before I have to submit my final vote.
PRJ
pete {dot} jahn {at} Verizon {dot} net