Levelling Up — Could Things Have Been Different?

The 2007 Magic Pro season is underway and the first quarter is almost complete, with one Pro Tour

and some Grand Prix tournaments behind. So far, my season has been very quiet, having only a Day 2 at

Pro Tour: Geneva, a Top 16 at GP: Dallas, a 0-3 at GP: Amsterdam, and another Day 2 performance at GP:

Kyoto. Reading it like this, it seems just a bunch of mediocre finishes… and that’s what

the records say, but I’d like to present you with another point of view of these stats.

At Pro Tour: Geneva I finished 77th, with the same match points as the 50th place finisher. In

Dallas, I finished 9th with the same points as the 8th place finisher. And in Kyoto, I barely missed

Top 64, finishing 73rd. In these situations it’s very easy to curse luck and to blame our final

standings on our bad tiebreakers, or our mulligans, or a topdeck from our opponent. Most Magic players

have a selective memory: they will remember their bad beats exactly. The rounds they lost because of

misfortune, for example, or the low tiebreakers that put them out of the money or the Top 8.

Since I have a lot of free time to kill during flights, I often rewind and go through the games I

lose to see if there was any possible different play that I could’ve made. And to ask myself the

important question… could things have been different? I believe so. Many of my losses were due

to play decisions I made, and it was possible (With the benefit of hindsight) to turn some of those

losses into victories.

At first I thought I was having a season of “almosts.” You know, when you

almost Top 8, when you almost finish in the money, or you almost make Top

64. Now that I’ve admitted the bad plays I’ve made in these three months, I believe

it’s almost all my fault. I’m not claiming I could’ve won all of my matches – far

from it – but there are losses where I could’ve maybe survived a couple more turns or mulliganed

into a better hand. Let’s analyze them together, loss by loss, at every event I’ve attended

thus far this season.

Pro Tour: Geneva – 9 wins and 6 losses

As you know, this was a Booster Draft tournament with two Time Spiral boosters and one Planar Chaos

booster.

Loss 1

What Happened?
Game 3 I’m on the play, and I decide to keep a hand with one Plains, one Island, a Spiketail

Drakeling, a Pallid Mycoderm, and three other cards. I drew the third land far too late, and it was a

Plains. I was never really in the game.

Why Did I Do It?
Because in Game 2 I had mulliganed to four cards on the play, and even though mulliganing this hand was

not a bad decision, my brain was too afraid of multiple mulligans once again, so I decided to call on

my luck and draw lands from the top.

Could Things Have Been Different?
My friend Kuniyoshi Ishii never keeps hands with two lands, be it on the play or on the draw. At the

time, it seemed okay not to mulligan this hand, but sending it back was never a bad option. In order

for this hand to be good, I needed not only to draw a land in my next two draws, but also for the land

to be an Island. (For reference, I had eleven Islands in the deck.)

Loss 2

What Happened?
I lost the round 1-0, failing to win the second game that would tie the match. I lost my early

advantage of having the combo of Merfolk Thaumaturgist and Saltfield Recluse by attacking with the

Thaumaturgist. He played Celestial Crusader and blocked. Even though I managed to save my creature by

using the Recluse in the Crusader, the next turn he enchanted the Celestial Crusader with Pentarch Ward

making it immune to my combo, and therefore making his White creatures big enough to survive my killing

combo. Later I countered a suspended Errant Ephemeron with Dismal Failure, since I was attacking in the

air, but then he played a Pulmonic Sliver that (together with Watcher and Poultice Sliver) nullified

my chances of winning in the air.

Why Did I Do It?
When you’re down one game, and need to win two games with not much time remaining, sometimes you

can’t keep a cool head… and you start playing more aggressively. About the Ephemeron: at

the time I had my own Ephemeron and Ghost Ship, and was attacking for six damage every turn. I

estimated I could win the game in two more attacks. However, the Ephemeron wasn’t a real threat.

I could still attack with both my creatures. If he blocked the Ephemeron, they would trade and I would

still have a flying attacker. If he blocked the Ghost Ship, I regenerate it, and deal four damage with

my Ephemeron. However, this would’ve taken a lot more time. I decided to counter the Ephemeron,

and hope he didn’t have the Pulmonic Sliver that I saw in game 1.

Could Things Have Been Different?
I don’t know what else he had in his deck, but with the information from my side, keeping the

Saltfield Recluse and Merfolk Thaumaturgist in play longer would’ve delayed his game a great

deal. Also, I could deal with an Ephemeron on the table, but I had very little chance of getting

through a Pulmonic Sliver.

For your reference, here is the deck for the Losses 3 and 4.

8 Forest
7 Mountain
1 Plains

1 Strength in Numbers
1 Yavimaya Dryad
1 Ashcoat Bear
1 Greenseeker
1 Scarwood Treefolk
1 Utopia Vow
1 Thrill of the Hunt
1 Phantom Wurm
1 Spike Tiller
1 Mire Boa
1 Uktabi Drake
1 Search for Tomorrow

1 Sunlance

1 Radha, Heir to Keld

1 Lightning Axe
1 Blazing Blade Askari
1 Ironclaw Buzzardiers
1 Word of Seizing
1 Viashino Bladescout
1 Dead / Gone
1 Thick-Skinned Goblin
1 Flowstone Channeler
1 Orcish Cannonade
1 Brute Force

Loss 3

What Happened?
I lost a close round 1-2, in a mirror match between R/G decks. I believe his deck had an advantage in

the mirror by having better creatures: they were bigger, or they had card advantage like Nantuko

Shaman, while my guys were more tempo-based, with weenies and pump spells.

Could Things Have Been Different?
Since my opponent was sitting to my left in the draft, I could’ve drafted different Red and Green

cards and be passing him others. I could’ve made a lot of different choices during the draft.

While some different picks could’ve changed our decks in this matchup, I don’t think they

were correct. Drafting apart, during the games, the only decision I had to make was whether to block a

1/1 token that was attacking into my Spike Tiller. I let it through, and took an extra point of damage.

Loss 4

What Happened?
I lost the second game, and as a result I lost the match. I kept with 1 Forest, 3 Mountains, Uktabi

Drake, Mire Boa, and Word of Seizing. Other than a Brute Force, I drew only Mountains or cards with

double Green in the cost, like Spike Tiller or Phantom Wurm.

Why Did I Do It?
I guess you have to keep this hand. You have a good turn 2 drop, a Mire Boa, and usually you can assume

the Words of Seizing will take down two creatures, which didn’t happen.

Could Things Have Been Different?
Yes. I only play sixteen lands due to the low mana curve and because I had Greenseeker and Search for

Tomorrow… but the deck has four spells with double Green in the cost, and three spells with

double Red in the cost, plus one White spell. To minimize the chances of mana screw, I could’ve

played with one more Mountain, or (and this is very important) drafted more carefully. I’ll write

in detail on this topic in some other article, but I usually draft the card that is easier to cast,

which means picking a card that costs 3U over one that costs 2UU or 2R over one that costs 3R.

Loss 5

What Happened?
A mulligan to four cards in game 1, and a huge mana flood in game 2. I kept game 2 with 2 Plains, 2

Swamp, Saltfield Recluse, and two removal spells. I drew a couple more removal spells, and nine or ten

more lands, and no other creatures.

Why Did I Do It?
Because the hands I sent back in game 1 were unplayable, and the hand I kept for game 2 is a fine

keeper.

Could Things Have Been Different?
With the cards I was dealt and the ones I drew, no.

Loss 6

What Happened?
My opponent ended Game 1 on a single life point (or with one life if I attacked with everything). I

ended losing the first game and then the third. The game started with me suspending a Corpulent Corpse

on turn 1, playing a Benalish Cavalry on turn 2 that traded in combat with a flashed Sulfur Elemental,

playing Moorish Cavalry on turn 4, and a Castle Raptors on turn 5. On turn 6, I didn’t play the

Flickering Spirit in my hand.

Why Did I Do It?
Because I only had lands and the Flickering Spirit left in my hand after a great start, and was afraid

to lose many creatures to a Sulfurous Blast. I had a Moorish Cavalry, Corpulent Corpse, and Castle

Raptors in play to his empty board, so it seemed a little suspicious. I played the Flickering Spirit

later, but couldn’t deal enough points in time to win.

Could Things Have Been Different?
I still don’t know if he had Sulfurous Blast in his deck or not…

Grand Prix: Dallas – 12 wins, 3 losses

As you know, this was an Extended tournament. I played this deck:

Loss 1

What Happened?
Game 1, my opponent had a board of artifact lands, Cranial Plating, Arcbound Ravager with two counters,

Ornithopter, Pithing Needle on Flooded Strand, and Pithing Needle on Mindslaver. No cards in hand. I

have the complete Tron and Academy Ruins plus Mindslaver, but I’m unable to use it due to the

Pithing Needle. I also have a Solemn Simulacrum in play. End of his turn, I played Gifts Ungiven for

Exalted Angel, Triskelion, Repeal, and Decree of Justice, getting the first two into my hand. I played

a morph and the Triskelion, and my opponent responded by sacrificing his Ravager and putting two +1/+1

on the Ornithopter, and then attacked for the win next turn.

Why Did I Do It?
Playing morph plus Triskelion was the only way to have them both on the table this turn. I wanted to

attack with both next turn, so maybe I played too recklessly. I was aware my life totals were high

enough to survive double Shrapnel Blast, but I didn’t know they were not enough to survive an

attack off a creature equipped with Cranial Plating. Looking at my decklist, we can see the only good

cards I had left to draw were 2 Wrath of God (I had already used one), 1 Repeal, 1 Decree of Justice,

and 1 Exalted Angel. Only five cards in my deck were good, and only one of those – the Repeal – would

win me the game for sure. So I felt the need to play both my creatures right away.

Could Things Have Been Different?
Had I played the Angel face up, my opponent would only attack with the Ornithopter with Cranial

Plating, sacrificing it after damage on the stack for no life gain. I would trade my Angel for a single

Ornithopter, but I would still be alive, and with a Triskelion in my hand. It would’ve been a

topdeck game from this point. I needed a Repeal or a Decree of Justice, while he needed a flier or to

gather three or four creatures so that he could attack into my Solemn and Triskelion. I don’t

know how good my chances were of winning a topdeck game with so few outs, but they sure were better

than dying right away, and I also lost game 2 fairly quickly.

Loss 2

What Happened?
I mulliganed to four, then mulliganed to five. Occasionally, unfortunate situations like this occur. No

need to whine and to curse luck again, that’s not the point of this article.

Could Things Have Been Different?
Maybe, if I hadn’t mulliganed eight times in three straight games. (Game 2 of the last round and

games 1 and 2 of this one).

Loss 3

What Happened?
It was a U/W Tron mirror match. I lost the first with no chance, as I got a turn 2 Signet countered,

and only had colorless mana to play the mirror. I won the second. In the third game, my opponent

assembles the complete Tron before me. He plays and activates a Mindslaver. I played end of turn Thirst

for Knowledge to get rid of cards that could wreck me, and after discarding a Tormod’s Crypt and

another card that would destroy me, I kept a hand of Solemn, Remand, Decree of Justice, Azorius Signet,

and land. I had seven mana in play. Controlling my turn, he drew me a Gifts Ungiven and wrecked me from

there.

Why Did I Do It?
I believed that by playing the Thirst for Knowledge, I could keep a hand immune to Mindslaver, which I

did. Giving him the option to play the Thirst on my turn – controlled by him – was potentially more

dangerous, as he got to choose which cards to keep and discard and could still play more spells. This

way, I was only giving him one unknown draw.

Could Things Have Been Different?
Just a little, but in the end, he would play the Thirst for Knowledge main phase and draw into the

Gifts Ungiven (the third card from Thirst). He could’ve then discard to the Thirst the two best

cards in my hand, while keeping the Tormod’s Crypt. Then Gifts Ungiven and wreck me anyway, and

finish it all by sacrificing my own Crypt to remove my own graveyard. Anyway, this is only speculating

he would make the optimal play.

Grand Prix: Amsterdam – 0 Wins, 3 Losses

Two-Headed Giant Sealed…

Can we please skip this?

The first two teams we played against dispatched us very easily. Our third round looked like it was

close, but it was probably because they never played any bomb, and they each finished the game with

several cards in their hands. I’ve read somewhere on the Internet that they had a lot of gas in

hand and they could have won a lot more easily, but were unable to play some of the cards though mana

issues

To sum it up, even if we had perfect draws, and our opponents just average ones, we would never win

a game with our decks. Bad card pool? Yes. Bad deck building? Maybe. It’s very hard to reach an

undisputed best build. There was only one situation where my team-mate and I disagreed. I wanted to

play a Citanul Woodreaders right away to block, while Frederico wanted to wait for the sixth land to

play with kicker. We did my play, but now I think being greedy is better. Not in that particular game,

sadly, as it wouldn’t have made any difference. Now that I have more experience playing 2HG I

think it’s better to be greedy and don’t pass on the opportunity to draw two cards from a

kicker.

As for Grand Prix: Kyoto, I had four losses and a draw. I know there were some plays I

could’ve made differently, mostly because I wasn’t very versed in the format, so whenever I

had to take a decision, I relied on intuition and instinct. Kyoto is still very recent and I still

haven’t had the chance to rewind those games and to analyze the board positions. It seems to me

that those losses were mainly after close matches, most of the time ending 2-1, where I was just a

little unfortunate in the end which made the difference between winning and losing. However, the truth

might be different, as it’s very possible that I’m not distant enough to see it clearly.

I had a Journalism teacher who used to say you see an object from a very close perspective

(regarding time). You want to report the facts quickly, give the information, and answer quick

questions. But to analyze things, you need distance, like the distance that Historical analysis

provides. History studies the past, so we can better understand the present and foresee the trends in

the future. Who knows, maybe I’ll keep GP: Kyoto on file in case this kind of article proves to

be interesting for readers. If so, I’ll be sure to write some kind of series like this whenever I

have material for it, even though I’ll be struggling very hard to not pick up any losses at my

upcoming events.

Bonus sections

Three more scenarios where things could’ve been different.

Scenario 1: a side draft, playing against Mark Herberholz

What Happened?
I have the combo of Serendib Sorcerer and Merfolk Thaumaturgist in play. Mark attacks me with Shade of

Trokair and pumps it with all his Plains except for one, which he leaves untapped, and passes. In my

turn I activate the Sorcerer on his Shade – it resolves. Then I activate the Merfolk Thaumaturgist, and

Mark responds by pumping the Shade. In his turn, taking advantage of my combo creatures being tapped,

he plays something.

Why Did I Do It?
Because I thought the Serendib Sorcerer turned the creatures into 0/2 with no abilities.

Could Things Have Been Different?
I still won because the combo was too good, but I took extra damage I could’ve prevented, and I

had to go through two embarrassing moments. The first, when he pumped the Shade, the second when I had

to use a Healing Leaves to stay alive for the win.

As a side note, Mark Herberholz is (probably) always right when discussing the correct play.

Several times I’ve seen him discuss the correct play during side drafts with other pro players,

and every time he was right no matter what his team-mates argued back.

Scenario 2: a match at GP: Kyoto between U/B Pickles and Battle of Wits.

What Happened?
It’s game 3 between Kazuya Mitamura playing Battle of Wits, against Portuguese player Paulo

Carvalho with Pickles. Kazuya played first, and tried for a turn 4 Careful Consideration, which Paulo

let resolve. In his next turn, Paulo laid the fourth land and cast Persecute on Kazuya. Kazuya removed

two cards from the game to play Commandeer, and redirected the Persecute to Paulo, naming Blue, which

left Paulo with zero cards in hand. Some of the cards he discarded included a Mana Leak and two

Rewinds. Next day, Paulo checked on the coverage that Kazuya only played a single copy of Commandeer,

and cursed his bad fortune.

Why Did He Do It?
Because he played greedily, saving the counterspells in his hand, hoping to net more cards with

Persecute after Kazuya played Careful Consideration.

Could Things Have Been Different?

Yes. Had Paulo played Mana Leak on the Careful Consideration, Kazuya might not have the Commandeer

in his hand at this point, or the Commandeer plus two Blue cards. Even if he did have it, when he

Commandeers the Persecute Kazuya is left with fewer cards in his hand, because the Careful

Consideration was countered. All in all, it seemed a reasonable play to counter the Careful

Consideration, as it prevented him from drawing lands or cards from other colors. Letting it resolve

was probably greedy.

Scenario 3: a side draft, with Jelger Wiegersma against one of the Top 5 Limited

players in the World.

Jelger is teaming with Rich Hoaen and I in this draft.

What Happened?
Jelger had six lands in play, with a Grapeshot and an Evangelize in his hand. The board is Corpulent

Corpse, Watcher Sliver enchanted with Griffin Guide, plus Quilled Sliver for Jelger. His opponent has

an untapped Greenseeker and a tapped Vorosh the Hunter with six +1/+1 counters, and two cards in hand.

If Jelger gets hit by the Dragon he loses, but his opponent is at nine life. Jelger drew Poultice

Sliver. After consulting with me and Rich for a while about the tricks his opponent may have, he

decides to attack with everyone. The Watcher Sliver with Griffin Guide plus the Corpulent Corpse make 7

damage, plus playing the Poultice Sliver and Grapeshot with storm are good enough for the final two

damage. The downside is, if his opponent has any trick, Jelger loses. I thought of a safer play and

told Jelger not to attack, but it was too late as his opponent promptly pointed a Strangling Soot at

the attacking Corpulent Corpse.

Why Did He Do It?
Jelger’s play is good enough to guarantee a win on that very turn. Let’s remember

he’s facing a 12/12 Dragon that has to be blocked. After asking Rich for what cards could his

opponent have (from the cards saw in previous games), we thought it was a risk worth taking, hoping

that his opponent didn’t had a trick.

Could Things Have Been Different?
Yes. We were aware this was an all-in play. But instead of blaming this loss on how lucky his opponent

was by having a trick, we tried to figure how could’ve we played differently. When I tried to

stop the all-in attack, the play I had in mind was to attack just with the Corpulent Corpse and the

Quilled Sliver for four damage. If he has the trick, it sets us back in this plan, but at least

it’s not game over. Then play the Poultice Sliver, having three mana left untapped. This allows

us to block the Dragon with the Watcher Sliver and regenerate it. This way, we’re two attacks

away from winning, and next turn we can play the Grapeshot on the Greenseeker leaving enough mana to

regenerate the Watcher Sliver. If we draw a land, and he doesn’t play another creature or plays a

one worthy of stealing, we can Evangelize him, getting the Dragon or another goodie, while having a

Watcher Sliver and a Griffin Guide as insurance. Actually, I don’t know if this play is better

than an all-in attack, and when I tried to prevent Jelger from attacking, I wanted to discuss this

play. Regardless of the play’s strength or weakness, it’s a fine example to show us that

there were alternatives for games we lost.

The next time you lose a close match of Magic, remember that it’s useless to keep complaining

and talking about how unfortunate you were, especially because very few people care, and no one will

really fell sorry for you. Instead, after you have recovered from the tournament, ask yourself this:

Could Things Have Been Different?”

Thank you for reading, and I hope to see some of you in Fitchburg this weekend!

Tiago