The Medium Guide to Big Magic Tournaments (part 1)

This is part one of a multiple article series. The first article will cover gameplay improvements and suggestions. Part two will cover some meta decisions about how to do well at tournaments. Part three will cover logistical suggestions.

Image result for mtg draw

Over the course of a few years I went from coming back into magic with no cards and on a 5+ year hiatus, to finishing top 16 in Grand Prix tournaments in every format. I haven’t been the best at spiking tournaments, but I have done an above average job of putting myself into a bubble slot to get there. I think my perspective is more interesting because I am not a full time magic player, and I do not necessarily travel or prepare as much as other more entrenched players. I go to about 6-8 mostly local GP’s a year, many local PTQ’s, play almost zero online magic. In short, I don’t have as much play time in any given format as many of my opponents, have a full-time job, don’t spend a ton of money on travel, and am therefore closer to the average mtg player than many higher-level pros. The purpose of this article will be to give several small tips and other edges that I think will help you improve your win percentages in larger tournaments and maybe help with some of the other less talked about aspects of magic. Many of these may be obvious to you, while others might not apply, but hopefully one or two nuggets of wisdom stick and help in your future endeavors.

A draw is a loss

I’m going to start with one of my biggest pet peeves, and a point that I think is often misunderstood by newer players. A DRAW IS A LOSS.

Jace's Erasure

Don’t play to draw, especially in a large tournament, if you can help it. The first reason for this is literal, for the purposes of making day two and for pairings for the rest of the tournament, a draw functions as a loss. It doesn’t help for making day two, it doesn’t help for more pro points, and it only marginally helps with payouts at the end if you get that far. Until/if you get to the final round, then it might act as a “really good tiebreaker” on a loss at best. The second reason you don’t want a draw is because the draws tend to beget more draws. Once you are in the draw bracket at a GP, the only people you will be playing for the remainder of the tournament will also be people that took draws; these are players that probably will not set speed records for decision making and there is an above average chance that they are control players. The reason I am hyperbolic here is because I think the mental shift of considering a draw to be a loss will actively change how you play, usually for the better. By playing as if a draw is literally losing it forces you to change your perspective. You can also take all of this to mean that you should play faster. But I think it would be more precise to say “be mindful of time” and “be more efficient.” The clock system being used in paper magic is different from digital magic, and put constraints on both players very different from those online.

Sidenote: one can take advantage of knowledge of the draw bracket. For example, in legacy the draw bracket is usually dominated by bad miracles players, if you are playing something like post that is 70-30 against miracles, a draw might be an interesting heads up play. I say “bad” miracles players, because miracles is a deck with a lot of decisions and very few win conditions, and it takes a lot of practice to be able to make all of the necessary decisions quickly and the newer players to the deck tend to be glacial; this also applies to UW control in modern, and occasionally to win-conditionless standard decks. Basically, this is always kind of a joke scenario I discuss among friends, and I don’t recommend taking draws early just to try and beat inexperienced control pilots (which might backfire anyway, as they might play you into additional draws).

Worship

I have one unintentional draw in my magic career, and that is because of a spirits mirror where we both had worship in play; I was playing lightning fast trying to get to my 2 remaining outs to remove his enchantment (he was out of outs to remove mine). Honestly, it’s my fault for having the card in my sideboard in the first place. By the end of the season we had discovered that often Gideon Jura performed a similar role better (especially against other worship decks), and were using this in the same slot.

Slow Motion

There are several reasons I do not draw very often:

  • I try to get to my seat early to get a clear view of the round timer; being able to see the timer is a good way to be able to steer the speed of the match. My rule of thumb, if your first game looks to be going over the 15 minute mark, try to see how you can speed things up and evaluate how both players’ pacing is going.
  • Be willing to concede against a control or prison deck game 1 if you are less than 5% to win; this is/was especially key against decks like lantern control in modern (or if both players are on a control mirror in standard), where they are so slow that if you let the games play out all the way the match could be a single game affair. Sometimes if you can see that the match might go very long, it can be best to try to move along so that you have a chance to get to a reasonable game 3 if you win game 2.
Lantern of Insight
  • Often for decks like lantern the fault of “slowplay” isn’t on the part of the lantern player; rather, their opponent tends to take a longer time to make plays or refuse to concede because they don’t know they are beaten.
    • I have seen a local bay area grinder unintentionally draw himself out of top 8 contention on at least 2 occasions because he a) tends to play slower decks, b) is unlucky enough to face opponents that are both slow decision makers and unwilling to concede when effectively beaten, and c) doesn’t call a judge soon enough. This leads us to the next point.
Isperia, Supreme Judge
  • I am ready and willing to call a judge on my opponent for slow-play. You do not have to be rude about this. I usually give my own verbal warning first, something along the lines of “hey, it’s already been 15 minutes this game, let’s both try to play faster so we don’t draw.” After I talk to my opponent and they are still playing slowly I am happy to call a judge to watch our pace of play. This is not a dirty, shameful act, and your opponent does not have any reason to be salty because of this. It is in both players’ best interest to finish a match on time and judges are there to help for just that kind of thing.
  • My pace of play is slightly above average. This is largely because whenever there is downtime in a game, while someone is shuffling or my opponent is thinking, I am thinking about what my next move(s) will be, and what counter plays I might have to his possible moves. This is also useful for having meaningful bluffs; if you can jam your cards quickly without having to pause to think it makes you much more believable. I will adjust my sideboarding based on how much time is left and if I need to play to win quickly.
  • I tend to play proactive decks. Obviously this isn’t always correct (unless the format is modern: friends don’t let friends play control in modern) and it isn’t everyone’s style, but boy do I like having time between rounds in a large tournament. I will play a more controlling deck, but only if I have sufficient time to learn the deck thoroughly enough to not draw.
Words of Waste
  • I’m not an over-shuffler. We’ve all sat across from the player who takes 5 minutes shuffling EVERY TIME. Then they spend just as much time shuffling your deck as they did their own. Don’t be that guy. This is a substantial waste of time for both parties no matter how much you feel like you’re controlling your destiny by over-shuffling (you aren’t). 7 riffles is enough to sufficiently randomize; a few more is fine, but please for the sake of us all, don’t overdo it.

You are going to make mistakes

Unfun facts. You are going to punt important matches, you are going to make bad deck choices, you might mis-register your deck, be late for a round, or draw yourself into 9th (I just did this at a recent CFB legacy 3k), or misread an opponent and get beaten on a bluff. It is all your fault and you might feel bad about it.

Mental Misstep

I have found that the best thing for me is to acknowledge the mistakes, find the parts that you did not do wrong, and then kindly and gently (not forcefully, if that makes sense) shelve it and put it behind you as best you can. You brain will try to focus on the bad more than the good, and the only thing you can do is try to acknowledge it and move along. Similarly, you must trust the man on the ground. Looking back at video footage with future knowledge might make it easy to be down on yourself, but it is important to realize what you knew at the time. I unnecessarily gave Jeremy Dezani a 3 outer to beat me in game 3 of a legacy GP win-and-in. It bothered me immensely for a day or two, but eventually I had to calmly recognize that I made a mistake, and that is ok. This is doubly true mid-tournament, where it is very easy to go on tilt and cause additional losses. I think this is also important for team events. You’ve chosen your teammates beforehand, they will make mistakes and that is ok, just try to help each other out as best you can. My friends and I have a saying we will yell at each other when someone tilts mid-tournament: “new round new tournament!” This doesn’t really make sense, but it is a reminder that each round is an independent entity, and there is no reason to go in with baggage from previous rounds.

Don’t always do the same thing

I provide a lot of heuristics, as do various other authors, for what one should do in specific situations.

Ad Nauseam

These are great as general rules, but there are always times to improvise. I’ve been told by a few different storm opponents that I am difficult to play against; largely because when they present a difficult situation I will react differently or at least think it through each time. Many players, especially playing against a complicated combo deck like storm, will always do X. For example, some people will always counter the dark ritual, while others refuse to. Your opponent can take advantage of this, especially if they have played against you multiple times. If you always counter the ritual they can try to bait your counterspells with rituals. If you never counter they know they can just go off with ritual into duress. When you are playing a match you are building a narrative with your opponent. Maybe they have an overrun effect in sealed that they showed you the first game, and now they know you have to respect that overrun for the rest of the match. Similarly, I will often attack my 2/2 into their 0/3 early in a game/match. They either call my “bluff” and block, in which case I might be able to make the same play later and get them with a combat trick on a more important creature, or they give me free damage. Whatever way you do it, always keep in mind you are giving and receiving information from your opponent about what level you are on, how willing you are to bluff, and how you are most likely to respond to any given situation.

It is usually correct to jam, especially in limited

It is very common for midlevel players (grinders, I consider myself to fit this description) to want to play around everything. Maybe you are playing against standard control and want to play around turn two syncopate, or you don’t want to lose to overcome in sealed from the green deck. I think it is an important skill in magic to be able to realize what could happen that would make things go wrong. Maybe they have force of will, maybe you can get blown out by a combat trick, maybe they kill you when you let them untap in modern. However, knowing something can go wrong is not the same as acting like they always have it. I usually have a rough idea of what they might be able to do to stop me and what the percentages are based on card % and how they’ve been acting in the game. It is often correct, knowing the risks, to just make the proactive play.

Aggressive Urge

In sealed if I know that my all out attack to put them dead in two turns loses to a threaten effect, I will jam because a) they have to put threaten in their deck, and b) they might have wrath of god or something much worse waiting to get you dead if you give them extra time. I tend to play magic like Doyle Brunson plays poker: loose-aggressive. It is usually worth it to push your advantage rather than give them time to catch up. This is important for control players as well. Sometimes snapcaster mage’s job is to be ambush viper so that you can actually end the game against a combo opponent. This also depends on the level of your opponent. If they are a good player, they might be enticing you with a position of weakness instead of actively being weak, trying to get you to over commit into a sweeper. Basically, what I am trying to say is that most players, especially at the grand prix level, are on level 1. They probably are not bluffing, their obvious tells are actually tells, and they probably don’t have it. Of course, this is susceptible to how you read your opponent. I once lost a match against Dan Ward because I made an aggressive attack into him game one, thinking there’s no way he is main-decking threaten because that card is bad. Turns out he was and I was immediately punished.

Act of Aggression

This is a very loose heuristic, and one that gets me in trouble if followed without thinking. My win percentage for modern horizons has been significantly lower than other limited sets because I tend to play more aggressively. The problem is that modern horizons has many more powerful cards than most sets, and there are more ways to be punished for loose play. There are also many more modal cards that might otherwise be so-so such as stirring address. Basically what I am trying to say is don’t be too meek, each of use will lose games to being too loose or too defensive, but I would rather be on the too loose side, at least then I have time to get lunch. I play like an ape and get rewarded, and do best with decks that reward this behavior (Legacy show and tell). This isn’t for everyone. At a minimum however I think it is a useful skill to know all the ways that a thing could go wrong, know exactly what decision you are making, and then make the loose/aggressive decision anyway. Inaction is just as dangerous as pushing, and giving your opponent extra time is always a risk.

Thus ends this particular week’s ramblings. Tune in soon for part two of this article, detailing higher level meta decisions and other tournament prep notes.