Data, expertise and analysis
-
I have started to post here a bit more like I did back in 2018 as I have started to get more into Vintage again. I have also been following the Discord channels for Vintage for a few months and I have noticed a few things that I think should be discussed on in a forum like this one.
Tier level decks constantly evolve and the meta-game is constantly evolving, and this is good. There are a variety of ways to discuss these changes.
Some people will reference data, usually from MTGO and use that data to see where decks and card choices are at a point in time. Justin Gennari and Matt Murray often use data when discussing Vintage. This approach is useful when you play a lot of MTGO and especially useful for playing in large events.
Deck experts and content creators have a different frame that they use to discuss decks and meta. I really enjoy the analysis from the Eternal Glory podcast (Brian Coval, Bryan Cook, and Phil Gallagher). They use some data but they also use their expertise to inform people about the format.
There is also analytical frame that is not necessarily data or expert based that is useful. This analytical frame is more of what the So Many Insane Plays podcast (Kevin Cron and Stephen Menendian) use to do set reviews, analysis of the meta-game, and in game scenarios. Looking at the impact of certain cards and how they shift or change the meta. Also, looking at it over a period of time.
These various ways to look at the format help evolve the format. Recently, I asked a question on Discord about Dack Fayden.
Question: Is Dack Fayden dead now? He has dropped off from Xerox list. Is he even playable anymore?
This question was not well worded, I should have used a more defined lens to engage discussion. I have watched Dack Fayden evolve 2014 and he made a HUGE impact by 2016 where he was usually a 2-3 of in several decks. During the Treasure Cruise/Dig Through Time era he really earned his spot in the format. He reached an apex around 2018 where he a 4 of in the 2nd place deck and there were 3 in another top 8 deck in the 2018 Vintage Champs.
Everything I said above is "analysis". I can find the exact data and analyze that data, but first we would need to agree on some parameters and you need to set some agreed upon metrics. I know that paper events usually had less that 20 players in 2018. I played a lot of paper Vintage that year. I also played MTGO, where leagues and Challenges would often have a larger number of players.
The discussion about a card can range from the data about Dack Fayden where he is in X number of decks that have made top 32 on MTGO over the past Y time period. The discussion could also be, Dack Fayden enables Cantrip/Xerox decks an incremental advantage in blue control mirror matches and Dack Fayden can swing a game into your favor against workshop decks. Or, the discussion could be how many Dack Faydens are optimal for a Blue Control style deck to play in the current meta.
I have been playing Vintage for 25yrs. I have a certain level of expertise and I usually approach discussions from an expertise to an analytical frame.
The data frame I find useful when I am going to play in an event, but I usually only care about meta-game percentages. Everyone approaches discussion from a different vector and I think the more view points you get the better the discussion is.
-
Matt lost in the quarterfinals to Rich Shay. He didn’t get second place. https://www.eternalcentral.com/vintagechamps2018/
Eternal Weekend Commentator 2017-Present
Inventor of Noble Fish
Co-inventor of Cat Stax Fever, Amalgam Dredge, and Hogaak (Survival). -
It seems you didn't get the answer you wanted to hear and thus tried to spin it in your head in a way that makes you feel correct? The discord provided you with the answer that Dack Fayden is seeing just as much play in this year as he did in previous years and that he is still an integral tool for red xerox decks to fight shops and discard matchup specific duds. Not sure why you feel like my opinion does not contain expertise on the format when I play MORE Vintage than people like Eternal Glory.
-
-
@mike-noble I used mtgtop8 when I wrote the thread - https://www.mtgtop8.com/event?e=20486&f=VI
It shows the how the players finished before they played top 8, so that is my fault for not noticing that.
-
@iamactuallylvl1 Not sure what your point is here. I am a fan and I enjoy your content. You do a lot for the community.
Brian Coval is a Vintage Champion several times over and Bryan Cook has done well in Vintage last year and placed 9th the April Super Qualifier. Their podcast is for Legacy but the way that they analyze cards and the format use a frame of expertise.
There is no question that you have expertise, maybe I did not get the answer I was looking for Discord. That was my fault for not asking the right question. I am noticing that people appear to speak past each other because they are approaching the analysis from different angles and that is difficult to see on a thread on in a chat.
I'm studying Vintage right now and looking for something that I am not finding right now.
-
You wrote a lot of words in your original post, but I'm not sure I saw a question or a hypothesis in there. What is the purpose of this thread? What are you trying to accomplish?
-
Question: Is Dack Fayden dead now? He has dropped off from Xerox list. Is he even playable anymore?
-
I agree, there is no real question or hypothesis in the post, which is why my original response was just highlighting a factual inaccuracy and calling it a day. The only actual question marks in the post belong to an example bad question that Marland posted on the Discord.
I do think there is an implied hypothesis that Marland hints at throughout the post and throughout his response to the bad Dack Fayden question on the Discord. Marland wants to be recognized as a having expertise in Vintage analysis. The accolades for this expertise are rooted in a lifetime of playing Vintage, ownership of Vintage cards, and his ability to evaluate the metagame shifts surrounding the card Dack Fayden. I'm going to break down why each of these doesn't come with inherent expertise.
- "I have been playing Vintage for 25yrs"
Me too, bud. I started playing in December '94 and haven't let up. However, doing something for a long time doesn't mean you've become an expert at it. The biggest piece of this is reframing how long you've been doing something. Sure, you've been playing for years, but how many hours have you been playing? I'm not talking about a simple multiplication problem, but the actual dedicated time that you are playing the game. Unfortunately, practice needs to not only be actively pursued, but actively pursued in the recent scope of the game. While some of what you may play today resembles the decks of yore, the information contained from past metagames expires. You'll keep tiny bits, like not casting a turn one Ancestral Recall during your turn and discarding to hand size, but the bulk of what sees current Vintage play is heavily dependent on how the game has evolved over the past two years. Sometimes you're known for your Noble Hierarch deck, then one day Deathrite Shaman is printed and everything you know about building Fish decks needs to be rebuilt from the ground up.
- "I have 4 [Dack Faydens] online and 6 copies in paper."
Magic, as a game, isn't about card ownership. That's the collectable side of things. With formats like Vintage it can feel like the two are one in the same, having to build budgets and make lifestyle choices for the sake of having the cards to play. That's unfortunately how hobbies work, especially expensive ones. When it comes down to it, you don't get rewarded in gameplay for owning six copies of a card. You don't get rewarded for having a thousand digital objects sitting unused in your MTGO inventory. Buying the prettiest possible deck doesn't make you the expert. Just because I lent my entire Workshop deck to Ryan Glackin for 2011 Vintage Champs doesn't mean I top eighted the event.
While I was in college I sold down my entire collection to just 77 cards, a Vintage deck and a card each from my first booster pack and first tournament pack. If I needed to make changes before a tournament I would go to my LGS the night before, buy what I needed, sell what I didn't need, and be on my way. I swear I won the same Mox Pearl three times during that period of my life. 75 was all I needed to play.
- Is Dack Fayden dead now? He has dropped off from Xerox list. Is he even playable anymore?
Finally, we get to the precipitating factor that led to this thread. Why are these bad questions, and why would someone think you're not an expert when asking them? The problem lies in the absolute nature of the questions. By asking if Dack Fayden is dead, you're communicating that you have come to the conclusion that Dack Fayden is seeing zero play in the metagame. Dead means gone. This is compounded by the second question, doubling down by suggesting that zero Dack Fayden is the way going forward since you have deemed the card unplayable. When asking these questions in tandem, people are seeing someone that both doesn't know the past or the present of a card, and therefore has no expertise playing it.
So what are better questions? You could ask if Dack Fayden has been seeing play in lower numbers, especially during a given time frame. You could ask if the decks that Dack Fayden is seeing play in are putting up results. You should ask about trends, not absolutes. Especially not absolutes that are proven wrong by one easily-had link to a result. Expertise is a two way street and something that can only be expressed through dialogue. If you find yourself not getting the response or respect you're looking for, think about what assumptions you're making about your audience. They can only see your words and can't read your mind for the "what I actually meant" interpretation. And most of all, be ready to be wrong and to be humble about it. The real experts of Vintage are the ones that are able to find the holes in their game a their logic and patch them up.
TL:DR - Matt Sperling's deck literally can't exist today due to the Mental Misstep restriction.
Eternal Weekend Commentator 2017-Present
Inventor of Noble Fish
Co-inventor of Cat Stax Fever, Amalgam Dredge, and Hogaak (Survival). -
-
@mike-noble No question, just a middle-aged guy trying to work some stuff out. I am no expert, especially not in Vintage and especially not now.
I do not care if people have cards, proxies are fine with me. I am looking for something that probably no longer exists here and I'll stop wasting everyone's time.
Thanks for the responses.
-
Dack is currently seeing play in 24% of decks at 1.9 copies per list.
I didn't participate in this discussion but starting with a flawed premise is unlikely to generate useful analysis no matter the frame.
-
@moorebrother1 said in Data, expertise and analysis:
@mike-noble No question, just a middle-aged guy trying to work some stuff out. I am no expert, especially not in Vintage and especially not now.
I do not care if people have cards, proxies are fine with me. I am looking for something that probably no longer exists here and I'll stop wasting everyone's time.
Thanks for the responses.
Hey I just wanted to say that I really appreciate that you took the time to write out this thread and I enjoy following and thinking about topics like this. Please don’t be discouraged
-
You'll do a better job finding what you want if you ask for what you want. I made a educated guess at what you wanted and it sounds like I was wrong (for people to trust you as an expert) but partially right (there is something locked in your head that you've been unwilling/unable to communicate). What do you want?
-
I am interested in this but I also don't understand the question.
