Introduction
I’ve been playing this game for a long time. For only a slightly shorter time, I’ve been playing tournaments. I’ve played with ante, played the first pro tour, the first draft pro tour, and hell of a lot of events since. I don’t say this to brag, but to emphasize that this article, which has been germinating for some time, has a little pedigree.
This article is written for the tournament player. Tournaments are fun and exciting, and I want tournament players to maximize their experience. It is also written for the casual player, about what they should expect at a tournament. And if you’re not sure where on the spectrum you fall, maybe this article will help you decide.
As I said, I’ve been doing this for a while. Through that, I’ve seen the same two concerns about tournament Magic raised over and over. The first is from people who want to succeed at tournaments, but are unable or unwilling to commit to win-positive behavior. The second is from people who think those behaviors, legal though they may be, are immoral and a detriment to the game. The former inflames the latter. The latter hobbles the former.
It is my hope to address these concerns head-on, and hopefully, change the discussion. I refute some of the common complaints about tournament Magic, and go into frequent areas of contention at the tournament scene. I discuss these areas to both bring them to the forefront (as opposed to amorphous “unsporting” conduct), and to allow the players the opportunity to add to their game. Why discuss them? While we should not complain when someone with more knowledge prospers, neither should we encourage ignorance. If people do have a concern, they should be able to specify what exactly they do not like. And if people want to win more, that’s as good a reason as any.
Tournaments and the Players Who Love Them. Also the Players Who Hate Them.
Two things spurred actually finishing this article, which as I said I’ve been kicking around for a while. The first was a local, heated discussion on Intentional Draws (IDs). My views on IDs, if not obvious yet, soon will be. But while I think the issue is a no-brainer, I was struck how everyone, on both sides, felt the same. And how surprisingly impassioned they got. The ID issue really sparked some emotion. It was interesting, and not uncommon to what this site’s been seeing lately. Casual versus competitive never totally dies down of course, but the Cedric discussion brought it front and center. Again, some very emotional responses.
The second thing was an article I read in a recent Wired. The article was titled Cognitive Surplus, and was a discussion on why projects like Wikipedia function, despite it surviving almost solely on volunteers. It’s a good piece, which you can read here.
It was this paragraph that really caught my eye:
We have a biological drive. We eat when we’re hungry, drink when we’re thirsty, have sex to satisfy our carnal urges. We also have a second drive—we respond to rewards and punishments in our environment. But what we’ve forgotten—and what the science shows—is that we also have a third drive. We do things because they’re interesting, because they’re engaging, because they’re the right things to do, because they contribute to the world. The problem is …we stop [analysis] at that second drive. We think the only reason people do productive things is to snag a carrot or avoid a stick. But that’s just not true. Our third drive—our intrinsic motivation—can be even more powerful.
Yes, it’s Maslow’s pyramid with a snappier title.
For first drive, of course we all need to drink and eat (in Wescoe’s case, live human baby). Not very relevant for this discussion. Second drive is more interesting. Do people play tournaments because of prizes? Well, no. The “$1,000,000 Pro Tour” makes for good copy, but no one gets into tournaments for the money.
True competitive Magic is something beyond mere winnings. It’s that third drive, where intrinsic motivation kicks in, where the act of playing competitively itself resonates with the player. Of course, someone may enter a tournament to win some Tarmogoyfs or a trip to Amsterdam. But no one starts the work needed to master tournament Magic for some prospective future prize (indeed, as both the article above and TOs will tell you, too many prizes can drive players away). Prizes can be a catalyst, but they’re never the source.
So if it’s not winnings, what it is it about tournaments that drive the competitive-minded to events? Maybe regular life isn’t intellectually stimulating, or your favorite people are tournament people, or you want to thrive in the arena, or whatever! There is no wrong answer here, because it does not matter. The real question is whether effective tournament practice resonates with you. To answer that, we need to define what tournament Magic actually is (and what is not).
Casual Magic’s constant is that it’s played with Magic cards. Beyond that, the players can do whatever they want. “Variants” and “house rules” have been around as long as the game itself. Ban land destruction? Start with two lands in play? Free mulligans? You can use any deviation from the Comprehensive Rules you want, and everyone would agree you’re still playing Magic. For a game that is notoriously customizable, that’s great.
By contrast, tournament Magic is the same card game played in a predetermined format, for a predetermined prizes, to a predetermined finish (i.e. until a winner is you). The format may or may not overlap with casual Magic, but the biggest difference has to be those Floor Rules. Here’s a quote straight from WoTC:
For a tournament player, the Comprehensive Rules are only half the story. The DCI floor rules and Magic tournament rules describe tournament formats, procedures, and penalty guidelines.
Half! Here’s where we go back to IDs. The main complaint from the discussion was that IDs screw over people who more “deserve” to make Top 8.
I put “deserve” in quotes because it’s both meaningless and inaccurate. The idea, as far as I understand it, is that the closer a tournament comes to the “purity” of the card game, the more “just” the results are. To put it another way, it’s “wrong” that the “best player” didn’t win. All those words I keep “quoting” are meaningless words about someone’s moralistic view of how things are supposed to work. Opinion is well and good, but those views certainly are not the last word on how tournaments operate. We can turn to the floor rules for that.
I don’t know why tournament practice generates such vitriol. I’m trying to avoid a Strawman here, so I’ve lifted some quotes from other discussions, in a similar vein to the above:
James had complete control of the finals game, but Tom Ross held on and refused to concede. I never asked him why he didn’t concede, but it’s entirely possible that he made James play it out to see if he would make a third mistake. That sort of behavior is not very sporting, but it’s definitely not Unsportsmanlike Conduct either.
You see this a lot, “sporting” thrown around as if 1) it was an objective, measurable term, and 2) failing to adhere to the sporting ethos (whatever it is) is best described as “legal but unfortunate.”
What is unfortunate, although understandable (below), is that this sentiment was expressed by a judge. There’s no real complaint with aspiring to be sporting, except no one can draw a bright line on what it means, and judges really should not be concerned with it until it actually is Unsportsmanlike Conduct. Disapproving clucks of the tongue towards someone trying to win a tournament is, unfortunately, too common.
Hey, I’ve got an idea. In a game where, if you’re at all honest with yourself, actual profit is pipe dream, let’s sacrifice our moral decency and character for a slight and debatable advantage so that we can…break even. Better yet, how about we write an article about it.
I’m on it! But we can already see the common thread: an ephemeral standard of behavior that the author wants everyone to follow, or you are “bad.” Legal but wrong.
There will eventually come a day when everyone just cheats everyone and everybody tells everyone to piss off and then nobody comes out to play because it isn’t fun anymore. There will come a day when enough parents see some random pro gamer on their son or daughter’s Facebook page post an update about paying a hooker to let them put cigarettes out on her that the influx of new players will slow and eventually stop. This will only be accelerated by the regression of tournament integrity due to players doing “anything to win” and cheating. Current game protection standards are so low that you can literally cut a proxy card out of construction paper, slip it into a basic land’s sleeve and cast it as Fact or Fiction and the judge would likely give the other player a game loss.
First, that last line is pretty funny.
Second, conflating cheating with competitiveness is an interesting argument, but in reality the opposite is true. Tournaments are under the umbrella of the DCI Floor Rules. The true game is winning while staying within the rules everyone understands and theoretically agrees to before the event starts. True cheaters ignore the framework of a tournament entirely, and are therefore worthless non-players.
Now the argument about Magic dying out because no one is having fun is measurable, and deserves more discussion. It might even be true, although I wonder how many of the readers here realize how much of Magic profits come from tournament attendance (Hint: not as much as you think). In addition, the competitive style I advocate is for PTQ-level and up, i.e. serious events. Going full throttle at an FNM is self-defeating; driving out the local business is bad practice. I put the onus on store-owners more than players though, as it’s really up to them set the tone for the casual events. Another article perhaps.
This is why I only play casually anymore…because instead of playing the game, people attempt to use every resource they can in order to gain an advantage.
And here we have the great schism. “Instead of playing the game…” Using every resource in order to gain an advantage is the game! Where you fall on this divide indicates whether you should play tournaments.
The bottom line is that I believe this behavior is bad sportsmanship and is contrary to the spirit of the game.
I think the best conclusion that can be drawn from the Magic players that behave in this manner (whether it’s bad sportsmanship and/or opportunistically attempting to obtain any advantage they can) is that it says a lot about their character. I understand that this may be boiled down to “winning at any cost” and that sports and other endeavors are “results oriented” and we may not care how our team or side won as long as they won, but Magic is more of a hobby, and most players are not going to make enough money to support themselves in it, so having the reputation of trying to win at any cost may harm you in the future.
If you don’t believe me, then think about this. If a prospective employer knew that you were willing to behave in such a manner, do you think that they would want to hire you? It’s one thing to be a fierce competitor, it’s another to whine about every little rule or statement or twist and manipulate the facts to suit your purposes. Most managers would not find such attributes desirable or high on the list of what they seek from an employee.
Ah, the “it’s just a game” argument. You do this long enough, you see this sentiment over and over. In my view, there is no argument more disingenuous, or destructive.
“Just a game” means while you may enjoy an activity, and you may even generate feelings towards the activity, you are wrong to do so. Good lord I hate that. Do you have something that makes you happy, that you’re passionate about, that stimulates you? We should all be so lucky. People are complicated—an activity that can be fascinating for someone may be utterly boring to someone else. We don’t criticize someone for finding an activity they resonate with, we celebrate it! If something makes you happy, if it’s not ruining your life, and isn’t too illegal or too dangerous, Godspeed.
The last paragraph challenges the reader to “think about” a prospective employer. I did so, and turns out the idea is garbage. I took the Bar Exam a couple weeks ago, I know for a fact tournament Magic gave me the skills to prosper in the legal field. Magic has outright led to jobs, as well as given me plenty of stories to tell prospective, and actual, employers. Skills like problem solving, oral advocacy, interacting with new people vis-Ã -vis travel, and think-on-your-feetitude are never out of vogue. I can’t say Magic should replace a job, but I can say with absolute confidence it won’t bar you from one. Quite the opposite.
Here’s the point: tournament Magic is not the same as casual Magic. The stuff that would get you uninvited from some guy’s house is not just fair game, but necessary at a tournament. It takes more skills to win at tournament Magic than it does to win at card Magic. Obviously skill at the card game is important, critical even. But as far as tournaments are concerned, mere card skills are not the end of the story. Tournament Magic is not the same as casual Magic!
Tournament are holistic
Jon Loucks:
Winning means getting 1st at a PTQ or top 8 at the Nats qualifier. This is done through a tournament of Magic…Tournaments come with their own inherent games that go beyond Magic. [T]hings might have absolutely nothing to do with how good you are at Magic, but can have everything to do with how good you are at Magic tournaments.
Tournament Magic lets you play the card game and the meta-game and the mental game and the team game and the motivation game and the ID game and plenty more. Compared to the skill involved in winning a single game of Magic, an entire host of skills are needed to conquer a tournament, especially reliably.
Under the Spikes’ third drive, this is a good thing. Dimensions open up to the tournament player who embraces the opportunities of competitive Magic. By the same token, I seriously question any player’s competitive prospects when they complain about how the non-card aspects of tournament Magic. Regardless of any technical skill you may have, whining about players trying to win a tournament makes it likely you won’t be among them.
Why is a medley of skills needed to win a tournament? Because card skill is rarely enough. Tragically, sometimes a player gets a bad draw, or has a bad matchup, or just plain makes a bad call. Competitive players do not believe that is the end of the story. They would rather claw their way into giving themselves the opportunity to win an event. This is the competitive drive, and it separates the aspirants from winners.
The true game is about edge. To an outside observer it may look like the game was decided on a Baneslayer topdeck, or any other mythic tournament staple. But really, it’s about buying time to draw your bombs, or buying time to draw your answers, or just making it so it doesn’t matter what your opponent draws. Wins are the aggregate of good decisions. A few percentage points here and there is the edge that tips the scales. See an opportunity, use it, win more. Do it enough, win a tournament. Simple as that.
The “trick” is expanding your view of a tournament match. The game is far more than the cards you draw. You have an opponent not just with their own deck, but their own personality. And you have a position in the tournament that changes every round. Everything adds up to give the tournament player opportunities to pull ahead of an opponent. Substantial edge is lost to those who focus on the cards—to the exclusion of everything else.
I discuss various edge moves, moves divorced from the cards, in a moment. Beforehand, I want to discuss two critical Floor Rules that every tournament player should thoroughly memorize:
4.1 Player Communication
Communication between players is essential to the successful play of any game that involves virtual objects or hidden information. While bluffing may be an aspect of games, there need to be clear lines as to what is, and is not, acceptable for players to say or otherwise represent. Officials and highly competitive players should understand the line between bluffing and fraud. This will confirm expectations of both sporting and competitive players during a game.
The philosophy of the DCI is that a player should have an advantage due to better understanding of the rules of a game, greater awareness of the interactions in the current game state, and superior tactical planning. Players are under no obligation to assist their opponents in playing the game. Regardless of anything else, players are expected to treat their opponents politely and with respect. Failure to do so may lead to Unsporting Conduct penalties.
5.4 Unsporting Conduct
Unsporting conduct will not be tolerated at any time. Tournament participants must behave in a polite and respectful manner. Unsporting conduct includes, but is not limited to:
– Using profanity
– Acting in a threatening manner
– Arguing with, acting belligerently toward, or harassing tournament officials, players or spectators
– Failure to follow the instructions of a tournament official
To sum up: Bluffing is okay, ambiguity is a grey area (but usually a bad idea anyway), fraud will (rightfully) get you kicked out, and being rude to your opponent is both against the rules and stupid. This is the baseline stuff, often your best move is to be more communicative than the rules require. But more on that in a bit.
Below are some areas that spark controversy. I have my own take on them of course, but if you’re considering entering or advancing your tournament career, some forethought in these areas will serve you well.
i. IDs
I can see the argument against IDs, especially if you were “screwed” out of a Top 8 berth via someone else’s ID. IDs are, unfortunately or not, a concession to the logistics of tournament Magic. I don’t think they’re inherently sinful, but more importantly, they are functionally impossible to prevent. Unintentional draws are the same issue really; how often do time limits prevent the “better” player from earning a round win? But we accept time limits because we want an event over before sunrise. Each table should have chess clocks and automatic shuffling machines, but again, logistics.
Instead of gnashing one’s teeth against IDs, just learn the math. A reverse Pascal’s Triangle or mathematical series will give you a rough sense of the scores needed to make Top 8 (just insert the # of players and go down by # of rounds):
IDs are a bonus for getting a certain amount of points within a certain time period. You are always free to refuse them, but doing so may add the risk of that bad, unnecessary round. Automatic Top 8 is pretty good edge.
ii. Netdeckery
Once upon a time, lifting a deck from the internet was frowned upon, a.k.a. “scummy but legal.” Those days are probably gone, although I’m told people still sigh when their opponent leads with Turn 1 Savage Lands.
Still, rogue decks get vilified or put on a pedestal depending who you talk to. Coming into a tournament with the best deck is fantastic edge, but it only counts if you play it correctly. Sometimes that means playtesting the hell out of it, sometimes that means adding your personal touch, and sometimes that means playing the second best deck if it’s one you can actually pilot. A netdeck is neither good nor evil, merely an opportunity.
If building decks is your third drive, obviously you would be foolish to netdeck. For everyone else who just wants to keep the tournament going, plumbing the net for your weapon of choice is perfectly reasonable.
iii. Health
A lot of edge comes from being in good health, and by extension, a lot of edge is lost when you’re not taking care of yourself. Drink water, get rest, and if you happen to be sick on tournament day, you should probably stay in bed.
…
Quit going to tournaments when you’re sick!
iv. Scouting
How contrary was scouting? Once upon a time it was outright illegal. That rule went by the wayside when, yet again, it was unenforceable.
Your ideal world has a group of like-minded players sharing information. Round 7 pairings go up, your group convenes and shares info if anybody had played someone else’s opponent. If you’re flying solo, or just way ahead in the standings, it’s on you to do recon. Go to the tables of your point bracket and watch games. Specifically watch the games of people playing the same deck as you, and specifically specifically, watch how their opponents sideboard. This information cannot be more valuable, yet I constantly see people after their match is over talking to their friends, or getting a smoke, or using the bathroom, or taking insulin, or any other number of amateur moves. Tournament Magic utterly revolves around information and perception. Knowing that a potential future opponent sides out Bolts or Telim’Tors or whatever the hell people play in Constructed these days… it’s edge. Maybe worthless, maybe not, but at least you give yourself the opportunity to make an informed decision.
v. Communication
Remember 4.1? Go ahead and read it again. Ready?
For those that enjoy this kind of thing, this is an area is rife with potential. Focusing on your opponent’s cards, rather than your opponent, is pure tunnel vision. Tournament Magic is a people game played with cards, and if you’re ignoring the person aspect, you’re selling your chances significantly short.
I like the “talking game.” I like being random and dynamic and congenial, to make my opponent feel more at ease and/or give up some edge. Some people like to come across as Badass McToughPants because they think it’s intimidating, but I think it just makes an opponent more focused. I find being disarmingly cheerful and abstract more effective.
Is this manipulative? Well we’re back to third drive again, and I genuinely enjoy talking to people, but the short answer is yes. I pretend to be more friendly and less concerned with the match than I actually am. I will ask about previous rounds to look for information. I will engage the crowd if I think it will make my opponent more nervous (or just for fun). And I will completely change gears if I think it will help me win. It’s manipulative because I have an overridingly interested in winning the match, and I try to obfuscate that drive as much as possible (tell-all article notwithstanding). But this is a very personal thing. I think lying is lazy and ineffective, but I know lots of players get off looking for opportunities to lie to their opponents.
I played a fellow at Nationals last year who said he needed to win to buy medicine for his daughter, or some garbage like that. There’s probably a rules violation there somewhere, but I merely told him he was the worst father in the world, asked what county he lived in so I could call CPS, then beat him senseless. It was a very friendly match.
If you are interested in developing your communication game, start off subtly. Add a little conversation to the match. The ideal time is when your opponent is thinking of a complicated board situation. One of my common ones is to pass the turn [beat] then ask them how many cards are about to be in their hand, in the hope they forget to ping me with Prodigal Pyromancer, or whatever. This works a lot. If you want your opponent to attack you, pick up your pen in anticipation of changing your life total. It’s practically a siren’s call.
The defense to this stuff is simple, albeit requiring a lot of effort. You, the player, need tremendous focus. Tournaments in general require this focus, at the very least to look for opportunities. But the reason the pen trick works is because people are lazy, and they want a reason not go through the effort of calculating. It’s comfortable to have a schema, and rely on it for the length of the match. High-end tournament players know this well, and use it to their advantage. It’s not immoral, it’s just another opportunity for a competitive player to get edge.
What about communication and the cards? Let me start that with the ultimate protip: Don’t try to align playing a card with its rules text. The editors do a pretty good job, but awkward text regularly slips through. Instead, just play a card using plain [English]. If you’re playing a Charm-like card, just say what you want to happen and where, e.g. “you discard 2, I draw 2, etc.” For Harm’s Way (a card too complex for a base set anyway), you should say “I want 2 damage from there [waiving motion] put over there [jabbing motion]. I guarantee speaking like a normal person will save you infinite heartache. Anyone who wants you to speak more obtusely is trying to get an edge.
I’m not a great fan of ambiguously playing cards, because I think it’s rarely effective for the effort it takes. I can’t think of an example off the top of my head, but I’m sure I’ve done it before. Rather than some Hail Mary move, it’s likely my opponent said something that triggered an idea and I just ran with it. Trying to set up something ambiguous may be ineffective or outright backfire. Better to exploit their mistakes than try to create a zone for them. But, other players may disagree. This area is all about feel.
vi. Judges and the Rules
Judges and rules are areas the tournament player must interact with, and thus may gain edge. In all honesty there may be some advantage to work with, but trying to exploit something is almost never worth it. The rules have gotten clearer, and judges have gotten infinitely more competent in the last seven years or so. That being said, human beings are human beings.
My threshold for even playing a tournament is competent judging staff, at least the head judge. I will presume judge competence absent information to the contrary, and thus I have no real fear in playing at a new venue. However, there have been places with judging staff so incompetent and/or corrupt that I simply will not set foot there. I have zero regrets about missing those events. If you know of a similar place, I would avoid it too. Fighting corruption or stupidity is a really, really uphill battle.
The primary question for a player is determining when and why a judge is to be called. You should know how your deck works backwards and forwards, but if you do have a rules question, step away from the table and ask them. You certainly want to stay in compliance with the rules. Think carefully about your deck before the event starts or even between rounds; these are better times to get a judge’s assistance regarding interaction.
A very common reason a judge is called is that a rule done got itself violated, or at least there’s an allegation. Your goal is to present your case to get the fairest result. This is simply a question of advocacy. Take control and be honest, and don’t be afraid to appeal if you think the floor judge got it wrong. Some floor judges try to present an absolutism to their rulings, as if the idea a supplicant could disagree with their decision is heresy. Ironically, these are usually the judges most likely not to “get it,” so just politely inform them you’re appealing their decision. If you really have an issue with it, call over a judge for something really stupid (“I can play 4 lands on the first turn, right?”) then appeal. If you can accomplish that, you’ll have no issue with actual close calls.
Your opponent may try to get you to avoid calling a judge, which is so dangerous I hesitate to present it as ever an option. If it’s 1) a minor violation, 2) easily correctable, and 3) no one cares about giving out a warning, you can (but do not have to) resolve it yourself. An anachronistic example would be someone untapping their lands under Winter Orb. Not a big deal to settle yourself.
Since the baseline is competency, there really is no reason to not call over a judge when a situation arises. Erring on the side of overcalling rather than undercalling is a fine instinct. Take something like slow play. The judge needs to see the pattern of slow play; calling them over after 20 minutes of stalling means, at best, those 20 minutes are already lost. If someone starts off by screwing around with the time, jump on that pronto. If they complain about it besmirching their good name or whatever, well, who cares? They’re your opponent. Calling a judge when stuff isn’t right is tournament practice 101.
Besides, warnings have intrinsic value. Calling a judge can be very intimidating which itself is a good thing. Also if your opponent gets a string of warnings, they are more likely to get a game loss. I know I’m the devil for even suggesting that’s a good thing. Yet I hardly see it as a tragedy the competitor who can play without breaking the rules gets rewarded.
The real schism about competitive players and casual players/judges comes from ideology. To vastly over-generalize, players are from Orzhov, judges are from Selesnya. To the competitive-minded, rules are intrinsically a method to advance the most “deserving” player. To the judge, rules are to effectuate the method (i.e. playing cards) of advancing the most “deserving” player. To put it another way, for some players the rules are a shield, and for others they are a sword.
Again, this is a vast over-simplification. Nonetheless it provides a method of advocacy. A player who presents a scenario to a judge shouldn’t just rely on the fact a rule was broken as its own sin. The player should convey why the violation impacted a fair game state. For example, if my opponent scooped up their morphs without revealing them, I would not say “Rule 504.6 requires morphs to be revealed at the end of the game. My opponent did not do so” and leave it at that. I would say “My opponent played a morph. I conceded, and my opponent just scooped everything into his deck. I now have no idea what the morph was, or even if it was a morph at all.” Your best bet is applying the rule to the tournament experience (if possible).
Again, this is a question of ideology. I believe, and other players agree, that the rules are a resource for success. I don’t think anyone goes in with the intent to “rules lawyer,” but rather takes advantage of a presented opportunity. If an opponent offers a slow pitch, it’s hard not taking a swing at it.
Where’s the line?
Now this portion may look like a retraction of everything above, but it is not. I’ll repeat my motivation for writing this article: Tournament Magic is fun and exciting. Tourney players should feel free to maximize their experience.
So with that in mind, I personally do not press for every advantage possible. Many years ago I used to be about as cutthroat as it was possible to be. I’m not ashamed of this phase, and I did not cross the legal line, but the fact was it wasn’t enjoyable to play that way. I want to make this point clear: there is no moral judgment involved with playing more or less competitively. It would be very hypocritical, and ineffective, to criticize someone for using a winning strategy. Rather, it is simply a question of what you, the individual player, want to do. It’s your call to make.
For example, speaking for myself I’m pretty forgiving when I’m playing kids. A few years ago a young person, 10-12, suggested some collusion. I perceived the offer as mere ignorance of the rules, informed him of the rules regarding those kinds of offers, and we played a normal game. I probably could have called a judge, and the rules said I was obligated to. I chose not to, and if that resulted in a penalty for me, that’s an outcome I would accept. I’ve spoken to multiple players who would be personally uncomfortable with that call. But as their livelihood is so tied up in playing or doing coverage, for them any risk is too much risk. Similarly, some players have their personas so tied up as official representatives, they have to dial things down. I have the luxury of being diversified, so I can make a different call. Again, a personal choice. If you have the opportunity to take an action you don’t want to make, no one says you have to. Your chances of winning may decrease, but it’s yours (as in, no one else’s) call to make.
People have their invisible lines, which as I say above, is perfectly reasonable. But the person who won’t do anything but shuffle and draw their 7 are shooting themselves in the foot. The “purity players” will say “I don’t want to win a Pro Tour that way” which I think is like saying “I don’t want to fly to Jupiter today,” but whatever. Adjust your thinking. Tournament Magic is not the kitchen table.
Conclusion
My intention here was to change the discussion of tournament dynamics. The critics who find tournament practice distasteful are either ignorant of what it means to compete, or simply don’t have the same interests as the competitive-minded. If, after reading about the opportunities available the process remains unappealing, than tournaments are not for you. That’s okay, although there’s no reason to inject morality into the discussion.
My goal is not to convey the “correct” way to win tournaments vis-Ã -vis demonizing casual players who shame competitive ones into hindering themselves. I no longer feel righteous indignation at players who feel entitled to tell competitors the one true way to play cards, with any other version being wrong for the player and the game itself; players that will allow you to win, but only on their terms, with any other victory being a false one. Okay, there’s a little indignation.
I can only speak for myself, but my motivation is pretty simple. I get a thrill out of using the totality of a match to win, not merely relying on cards drawn. I’m fairly sure other competitive players do too. According to our mix of genes and environment, we find it fun. Looking for ways to gain incremental edge is just another game. We like games, right?
For the fence-sitters, all I can suggest is trying it out. Use some of the techniques here, or better yet, make up your own. Step outside your head for a minute and take in the entire picture of a match. There are a lot of things happening in a game, and a tweak of one thing can have delightful effects somewhere else. Games within games. Have fun.
BONUS SECTION
Pro Tour: Amsterdam is coming up. I’ve never been to The Netherlands, so I was really excited to head out there for the tournament. Sadly, events construed against me.
First, if you’re coming from the States a tip: I’ve been in international arrivals when travelers were coming back from Amsterdam. To a man, U.S. Customs scours their luggage. Be smart.
Now as I said, I couldn’t quite pull off getting out there, although not for lack of trying:
…
From: Noah Weil
To: Larabee, Scott
Subject: Quick favor
Scott,
I caught the schedule for next year’s PTs, and I noticed a problem. Specifically, I’m getting married on the weekend of PT Amsterdam. I’d really like to go to that one, so if you could move the PT back or forward a week that would be great. Thanks, I owe you one!
Best,
Noah
…
RE: Quick favor?
From: Larabee, Scott
To: Noah Weil
Obv, that won’t happen. Congrats on getting married, tho.
Thanks,
Scott M. Larabee
Senior Content Designer
Magic/D&D Minis Premier Org. Play
Wizards of the Coast
…
It’s depressing to learn you don’t have the pull you used to!
Ladies, frontier skills will win a man’s heart every time. I’m very excited to marry such a wonderful person. Good luck to all the competitors in Amsterdam, but as far as that weekend is concerned, I’ve already won.
Thanks for reading.
Noah Weil (Coolnoah _at_ geemailll.com)