Sean owes me a plane ticket to Orlando: A tl:dr 3rd Place Canadian Nats Report
- Thread starter Nu Gundam
- Start date
Bidier
New Member
results>>>what you think
Or maybe the fact that he is a good player and outplayed people all day. 9-0 then losing to ridiculousness is definitely not too bad.
Also he used Muk because he thought the majority of the field would be gg and it really isnt bad against it at all. Also he used it cause it was fun, not like he tested the deck or anything seeing as it was made at 2 am and played like twice before tournament.
After the tournament he wanted to take it out because he always had the muk or grimer prized
And the last thing, JUST because you play against GG/Plox doesnt mean that the player using it is as good as you are so the whole "a ton of luck to beat mirror" is definately not true
desert eagle
New Member
my chauffeur lost to him because of ridiculousness. he isn't as good of an in-game player as me and took drew's deck to top 4 only to lose to "ridiculousness". the guy that won nats's list isn't close to as good as the good list
and GG is just about the most autopilot deck there is. the only thing that tilts the matchup in anyone's favor is quality of decklist
i have nothing against malcolm. i just have a tremoundous amount of respect for drew, chad and everyone who was part of making our GG list as effective as possible
Bidier
New Member
Maybe He shouldnt have attacked when he had no followup, not playing intelligently is not an excuse
Not completely true, if you are a better player you will have a much better chance at beating your opponent and also the way you play the deck, yes there ARE multiple ways to go about a game.
Just qualify via grinder and show us whats up
sdrawkcab
Forum Moderator
It doesn't matter HOW good a player you are, theres NOTHING anyone can do to respond to a t2 psylock / wager
sar86
New Member
So... according to most of you, the only way someone could win Canadian Nats is by pure luck. This year Brendan wins with G&G, but apparently beating mirrors is all luck, so there's no way that it could be a skilled win. That's like suggesting that Kevin's 2nd @ S/P/T, 2nd @ Reigonals & 3rd @ Nats is all luck because he beat mirrors to get there, but we all know thats not the case. Even last year when a crazy unusual SD won nats most of you thought it had to be luck that he won. Is there a way to win Canadian nats by skill? winning with the BDIF seems to mean that you got lucky and winning with a red face paint deck seems to mean that you were lucky. If Jerry won with Empoleon, would that have been luck? Or is it only a skilled win if a "skilled" player such as Kant, Gordon, Greg C, Matt, or Kevin (sorry if I left anyone out) win? Good thing I didn't play and win Nats. I'd hate to be a lucky winner.
smacktack15
New Member
Sean: You left out me
:lol:
Troy: lol at your post:lol:
:lol:Troy: lol at your post:lol:
smacktack15
New Member
Sean: it was sarcasm
That logic is about as good as a poker player saying that he is the best player at the table because he just donked a bunch of chips with 7-4. Muk is not a legit tech option; there are about 20 other options better in mirror match.
Bidier
New Member
20?
Thats an awful lot of superior tech. Coupled with lake boundary muk is a good card. But like I said he didn't know how good it would do only that in theory it wouldn't be too bad of a card and it proved that it wasn't.
and yes the logic is perfectly applicable considering the fact that it was not just a single occurrence but it happened many, many times. Malcolm played against Kevina couple times the night before but that must have been luck as well, beating him t4 2-0 was luck again. I mean he definitely did not get the best hand game 1 so he lost it there but game 2 was not completely unwinnable.
Sean nailed it on the head just fine and it seems that the "good" players do not even seem to understand the playing aspect of the game. Just because you have a good deck doesn't mean you will beat someone with a slightly inferior list but they are smarter and better than you are.
Sad that people who have played so long seem still cant grasp certain concepts
Honestly, as long as you know basically what you should do in mirror, it's pretty much dependent on lists and luck. It doesn't matter who's better when one player gets a T2-3 Psychic Lock and wagers the other to 3 cards and just shuts them down the entire game. That's why the quality of your GG list is so important in mirror. You need outs and you need consistency. A bad start means you pretty much lose, no matter how good you are.
desert eagle
New Member
uve got to be kidding me
some decks take alot of skill to play, some don't. When 2 of the top 4 US nats players (mikey and drew) say that they want gg banned even though they won $$ and trips with it, obviously it shows that there isn't much skill involved in playing it and a format full of gg mirrors is bad for the format
skill in GG MAYBE changes a mirror from 50-50 to maybe 60-40 with similar lists, which isn't enough of a difference to make a significant impact on anyhting in a tournament.
from what alot of really good players tell me, decks like mewlock, lbs, blaze and even metanite took ALOT more skill than gg.
i dont know if ur implying that ur "smarter and better" than me, but if u are then lets compare lifetime win%
Bidier
New Member
Don't worry I definately wasnt implying that. It is just annoying when people seem to devalue the skill aspect so much.
I understand what you say about decks though and of course it matters but the fact is that the majority of players make mistakes in this game and that is what separates a good player with a good list to someone just with a good list
I understand what you say about decks though and of course it matters but the fact is that the majority of players make mistakes in this game and that is what separates a good player with a good list to someone just with a good list
Omega_Prime
Member
Malcolm went 9-0 before losing to Brandon in the finals, beating Ploxes left right and center. Only 3 out of the 10 matches were not Plox. So i think it's safe to say that Malcolm is one of the few that had to play Plox all day long.
Since there's an agreement that Muk stinks (no pun intended) and Malcolm also didn't play common cards that majority of plox players use such as wager (which just so happens makes plox, plox). He also played 2-2 Gardy X, which everyone also looks down upon.
So with all this in mind yeah i guess Malcolm MUST of had a HORRIBLE list correct?
So how is it that he beat 6 Plox decks without the basic wager lock combo? doesn't that mean he's letting his opponent set up easier then he let's himself? Allowing his opponent to keep the cards in their hand and not "disrupt" them at will? If i can recall, Malcolm only used 2 Stevin's advices if not one as draw cards, and i REALLY hope everyone's not thinking "he top decked it everytime he got ploxed". I'll even make a bet that when Malcolm wasn't LOCKED he didn't use his opponent's wager every other turn.
6-0 after swiss makes it to top 2 beating opponents such as Sebastian, Kevin and even Brandon himself (during swiss) who just so happen to have high reputations with a "lucky" deck as well. I watched a few of Malcolm's games from the side lines and when it came down to his final prize and he fans his hand to himself to check his options, and i can see right away that he had more than 3 ways to win every time.
so luck may have a factor and Malcolm must of had a four leaf clover, a horse shoe, a rabbit's foot and every other luck charm there is in the world to go 9-0, losing to Brandon who JUST so happened to have one more lucky charm than Malcolm and allows Malcolm to shuffle his hand into his deck for Psychic balance (baltoy's first attack) to give Malcolm an automatic game loss.
P.S. i know i'm going to get flamed for T2 Geodude from last year because of this post, but seriously GET OVER IT, that was last year!
Since there's an agreement that Muk stinks (no pun intended) and Malcolm also didn't play common cards that majority of plox players use such as wager (which just so happens makes plox, plox). He also played 2-2 Gardy X, which everyone also looks down upon.
So with all this in mind yeah i guess Malcolm MUST of had a HORRIBLE list correct?
So how is it that he beat 6 Plox decks without the basic wager lock combo? doesn't that mean he's letting his opponent set up easier then he let's himself? Allowing his opponent to keep the cards in their hand and not "disrupt" them at will? If i can recall, Malcolm only used 2 Stevin's advices if not one as draw cards, and i REALLY hope everyone's not thinking "he top decked it everytime he got ploxed". I'll even make a bet that when Malcolm wasn't LOCKED he didn't use his opponent's wager every other turn.
6-0 after swiss makes it to top 2 beating opponents such as Sebastian, Kevin and even Brandon himself (during swiss) who just so happen to have high reputations with a "lucky" deck as well. I watched a few of Malcolm's games from the side lines and when it came down to his final prize and he fans his hand to himself to check his options, and i can see right away that he had more than 3 ways to win every time.
so luck may have a factor and Malcolm must of had a four leaf clover, a horse shoe, a rabbit's foot and every other luck charm there is in the world to go 9-0, losing to Brandon who JUST so happened to have one more lucky charm than Malcolm and allows Malcolm to shuffle his hand into his deck for Psychic balance (baltoy's first attack) to give Malcolm an automatic game loss.
P.S. i know i'm going to get flamed for T2 Geodude from last year because of this post, but seriously GET OVER IT, that was last year!
Throne0fLegends
New Member
Muk is not a legit tech option? Just because the majority of Plox players don't use it? I don't see how you get to decide whats viable as a tech and whats not. I don't know about luck or skill, but if a player can go through a big tourny like nats without losing a game until his last match... like even sweeping decks in the top cut 2-0 then I think it says something both about the deck and the player that shouldn't be discredited.
I mean, I would agree that the deck would take no skill if the outcome between two players with identical lists that are at different skill levels is 50/50. But I don't think it's the case here. And if you want to compare a deck because it can get a turn 2 lock + wager ... then I applaud your deck for such high consistency, but personally I haven't seen a list that can do that even once out of 5 games let alone count on that strat as a means of winning.
Sean's right.. it just seems when something out of the ordinary happens, that it must be the cause of luck. Not every tournament you go to will yield the results you want and just because another player does well, it doesn't mean he got there by luck and the wins he achieved were through unskilled ridiculous coincidence.
Final note... in all of Malcolm's games he probably only locked at most three times per game. He doesn't play wager and doesn't use claydol half the time. It was built like that for a purpose and muk fit in perfectly to the decks style.
I mean, I would agree that the deck would take no skill if the outcome between two players with identical lists that are at different skill levels is 50/50. But I don't think it's the case here. And if you want to compare a deck because it can get a turn 2 lock + wager ... then I applaud your deck for such high consistency, but personally I haven't seen a list that can do that even once out of 5 games let alone count on that strat as a means of winning.
Sean's right.. it just seems when something out of the ordinary happens, that it must be the cause of luck. Not every tournament you go to will yield the results you want and just because another player does well, it doesn't mean he got there by luck and the wins he achieved were through unskilled ridiculous coincidence.
Final note... in all of Malcolm's games he probably only locked at most three times per game. He doesn't play wager and doesn't use claydol half the time. It was built like that for a purpose and muk fit in perfectly to the decks style.
He only ran 1-2 Steve as draw cards? I think that proves our point about consistency and luck.
I'm not bashing the guy's win, he must have skill to get there, but he must have LUCK too. I T4ed Nationals, and sure I played most of my games very very well, but I also had to get LUCKY too! Vs Pooka in T32, I Wagered him to 3 at one point and he drew 3 Energy and I Psychic Locked. Lucky? YES! Vs Ness in T16 he starts with Holon's Castform. Lucky? YES! Sure, I played those games extremely well IMO, but had things like that not happen, I might not have gotten to T4. Come on now, you can't attribute wins 100% to skill OR 100% to luck, it's always a combination of the two.
I just want to know HOW it beats the standard GG more than other decks, because I'm not being convinced from what I hear right now.
I'm not bashing the guy's win, he must have skill to get there, but he must have LUCK too. I T4ed Nationals, and sure I played most of my games very very well, but I also had to get LUCKY too! Vs Pooka in T32, I Wagered him to 3 at one point and he drew 3 Energy and I Psychic Locked. Lucky? YES! Vs Ness in T16 he starts with Holon's Castform. Lucky? YES! Sure, I played those games extremely well IMO, but had things like that not happen, I might not have gotten to T4. Come on now, you can't attribute wins 100% to skill OR 100% to luck, it's always a combination of the two.
I just want to know HOW it beats the standard GG more than other decks, because I'm not being convinced from what I hear right now.
Throne0fLegends
New Member
hahaha, why would you need to run more draw cards? 1 Steven's and 2 TV Reporters, 2-2 Stantler Pachi.. it's not luck if you always get what you want. If they wager + lock... just lead again for a TV or Stevens.. simple as that. Everybody needs luck.. it's a TCG... and it's record stands at 24-2 from Eastern Regionals and Nationals, playing about 20 of it's 26 matches against GG because it doens't rely on powers such as telepass and claydol, and it always goes for the OHKO.
That's one of the first things I've heard you say that actually makes sense!! :lol:
See you guys at worlds!
Bidier
New Member
he ran other cards to draw as well and trust me malcolm is NOT the most luckiest of players around and based on watching him play no one can say otherwise.
Like I said before
results>>>>>>>>>>>>>what you think about his deck
last thing, IT IS A CARD GAME OF COURSE LUCK IS IN IT NO ONE SAID IT WASNT.