Blog Post #2 - Catching up...

So, yesterdays post met the minimum threshold of page views for me to try another installment.  Be sure to spread the word if you want to see more.

I spent the first post gushing about some of my favorites, as those were the ones I was most excited to write about. Corbin Hosler (and others) told me that I can't just give positive reviews, and he was right.  As most people who have followed me for a while already know, I'm a commited troll, so I have plenty of negative things to say. However, I do like to give credit when it's due, and that's that.

For those of you who thought I was spreading too much love to SCG Premium, this next one is for you.
I just read Michael Jacob's most recent piece.  Don't get me wrong, I have mad respect for this guy, but he clearly just mailed it in on this one.  We got a half-assed tournament report (have I mentioned I hate tournament reports?), followed by a non-existent "revelation" he had about drafting Scars.  Seriously? You discovered that infect guys are good if you have a lot of them? Oh, and power pumping equipment is even better when you're playing infect? Wow! I didn't think of that the first time I read the spoiler 3 months ago.  The worst part is he says it took him 18 drafts of straight practicing to figure that out. Thanks MJ! Wait! That's not all, we then got 2 bullet points about his experience playing Valakut on MTGO.  "Mulligan if you don't have a Forest" and "Don't let your Harrow be Mana Leaked".  Holy SHIT! You mean, I need green mana to play my accellerants? And turning my accellerants to a Self-Stone-Rain is bad? I'm ready to run Valakut now! MJ obviously is a GENIUS deck brewer, and typically a very insightful writer. I revisit his post about sideboarding frequently (which should now be free in the archives).  This is why I jump all over his content when it goes up. This time, pretty disappointing. MJ is where I go for new tech, not 3 month stale Limited floundering.

The selfish upsides of this blog have already become apparent; being introduced to new content I didn't already know about, is pretty sweet.  I was contacted by James Dykes (@stillhadthese), and spent some time looking over his site.  Recently, most of the posts are his analysis of the Great Designer Search.  At first, I was reluctant to spend much time reading them, as I have been generally less-than-impressed with the GDS2. When it was first announced, it seemed like a cool idea to watch the process the "to-be-designer" goes through, but I found there was way too much crap to filter through to find entertaining bits.  This is actually why I endorse James' articles.  I read his most recent two posts, where he plays the role of "judge from the outside". His analysis, however, is much more in depth than you see from the actual judges in the search. Not to mention, the layout of the site and his articles are much more readable than over on the mothership. Any GDS2 fans should certainly be checking this out. Non-fans like myself, may still find this useful as a place to get all the info from the GDS2, with insight, and one clean place to find it all.

Over at ManaNation.com, I read an article that was about Building Off Mistakes by Christopher Walton.
The intro on the main page seemed pretty readable: "Christopher Walton shares mistakes to help make you better."  Make me better? Sweet, that's exactly why I'm here. *snap-click* To my surprise, I got a story about a really bad dragon combo deck, that lost to a really bad goblin deck which somehow slammed 4 copies of Force of Will post-board, and managed the amazing luck of drawing 2 of them to counter the combo FTW. So, lesson here? Play around Force of Will post-board against goblins?  What exactly was the mistake to learn from here?  I'm lost.  Later, he tells a story about how he got attacked by a hasty Emrakul on Turn 2. He then proceeded to lambast this deck. I'm sure the combo was janky, but attacking with a hasty Emrakul on turn 2 is a pretty powerful effect. I'd go to great lengths to have that pleasure. So props to whoever did the face smashing in that match! In the second half of the article we get, what I'm sure he considered to be, the meat of the article.  He gave 3 sections, about what makes decks bad. In reality, he just rehashed the same bad decks discussed in the first half of the article, and said some of the most obvious observations about how Force of Will shouldn't be the only blue card in a deck that runs no blue sources, and continues to shoot down horrible ideas that I'm pretty sure no one is trying. If this was directed at his casual play group, just tell them. He closes by saying that the solution to these problems is tp use a netdeck. Wow. So, in this article about learning from my mistakes, which is actually about deck design, closes by telling me to net-deck? I can't even bring myself to say another word about this article.

Soon-to-be Player of the year, Brad Nelson, put up his latest edition of Fffreaky Friday. Talk about awesome. Seems like the interwebz have been-a-buzzing with people moping about the current Standard format.  This is an excellent summary, and brings a lot of insight to see a top pro's preparation for Worlds.  However, he did put WW quest at #5 deck in standard right now. How is that still even a deck? It seems so bad, and cold to nearly all the sideboard cards people are already running. If you're looking for a solid list to sleeve up tonight for FNM, or looking to dig deep into the format so you can brew up something fresh, no doubt you'll find what you're lookign for here.

Right next to that gem, was a post from one of my personal favorites, Conley Woods, who writes about Credit Where Credit's Due. I typically really enjoy his wacky brews, and especially his new Deck Doctor series.  This, however, was about the people who influenced his magic career in a positive way.  But why is this post even an article?  It has even less relevant content than this blog does.  This should have been an email, cc'd to the people he's talking about, as a lengthly "I love you, bro" letter. Appears to be an ego-stroke for his closest friends.  Cool, glad I could oblige.

I don't plan on doing too many reviews of podcasts and videos.  Here's my reasoning: I can read nearly all the MTG articles posted on a given day.  Most podcasts run an hour+, and most draft/constructed videos are also quite long. The amount of content/hour is so minimal. How am I supposed to spend time actually brewing and testing, if I'm spending my entire lot of free time watching one draft video or listening to a podcast? So when I do reccomend a podcast, it's saying a lot. I haven't taken the time to listen to the newest cast, but Limited Resources is far and away the only podcast I religiously listen to, and I look forward to listening to it tomorrow. Anyone who takes their limited game seriously, should be checking this out.  Specifically, the set review they put out for Scars of Mirrodin was phenomenal. We're talking hours and hours of the most indepth analysis of archetypes, card strength, pick orders, all put you miles beyond the competition when Pre-Release hits.  Keep these guys on your radar.  Also, they welcome people to their MTGO Limited Resources clan, which hosts a great collection of 500+ limited players who are always chatting away, filling my time between rounds of draft, or when I'm simply bored.  I will occasionally comment on these casts, but don't get your hopes up for various video/podcast reviews. Podcasts are typically for entertainment value, and for that, they are great. But for consuming tech and content, it simply doesn't cut the mustard.  Limited Resources is the exeption to that rule.

This blog has also forced me to do the unthinkable: Attempt to navigate TCGPlayer.com.  This site is seriously the most awful thing on the internet.  The font is tiny on the main page, making finding the relevant information nearly impossible. The advertisments take up almost the whole page, while the listing of articles looks like its the side-bar google ads in tiny font off to the side. Not only that, but the content is less than desirable. With the exception of Mike Flores or AJ Sacher (if you haven't, read his non-mtg blog, very enjoyable read) this site is just full of noise. I just finished reading Wescoe's newest travesty to Magic, writing and the internet.  A formal apology to Al Gore should follow. He begins the article posting his results testing out his new deck. A losing record which he blames on various bad versions of the deck that he's since given up on. Yes, good observation Craig, Masticore does not fit in a deck with only 5 creatures in it. So glad I look to the pro's for sick tech! If you've identified the problem, why don't you rebuild your deck, and post the records of THAT deck, not the version that you say sucks?! Not to mention, the list is simply a worse version of the U/b control decks that already exist. I do agree, that Mind Rot isn't a terrible card right now, but this deck isn't doing anything amazing, and boasts finishers like a singleton Wurmcoil Engine, Creeping Tar pits, and Jace's ultimate.  I just don't see how he expects to win the game with this deck.  I'm certainly not in a place to be criticizing card choices, but this article really brings nothing to the table. He does cover his reasons for a handful of his card choices, which i'm glad he did, and DID have some useful insight there; however, IMHO, the real issue at hand is rule #1. How is this deck any better than the existing U/b deck in the format that is performing well?  I can think of some ways its worse.  It has less threats than an already threat-light deck!  Also, Calcite Snapper should really never be a 2-of.  You either want it turn 3 every game, or you don't want it. 3 would be a minimum, but if you want this card, seems you would want 4 copies.

So, today you got a few more of the "thumbs down" reviews, but some diamonds in the rough as well. Now that I'm caught up on all the stuff I've read this week, updates will be more regular (as long as interest in the site remains).
I guess we'll see if any of the authors above want to yell at me.  Let the trolling begin.

Chad
chad at torerotutor dot com (for review requests)
@torerotutor (for twitter trolling)
chaders (for beating my ass on MTGO)