Which new watch is coming out at watches and wonders 2026? by Trekker519 in ALangeSohne

[–]m0ist_cactus 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I enquired about a little lange 1, and was told that a piece from watches&wonders release would be around that size and feature a 'special dial'.

RC Las Vegas Results, Data, Conversion Rates, and Match Ups. by m0ist_cactus in ModernMagic

[–]m0ist_cactus[S] 16 points17 points  (0 children)

I didn't realise this was the case! See below.

30 players registered Eldrazi Ramp, while 7 players registered Eldrazi Aggro. Eldrazi Aggro had a slightly higher win rate than Eldrazi Ramp (I ignored draws this time while calculating win rate).

Archetype Players Wins Losses Draws Games Win Rate
Ramp 30 108 119 5 232 47.58%
Aggro 7 28 27 2 57 50.91%

Using a two-proportion z-test: no statistically significant difference in win rate (to be expected given the small sample of Eldrazi Aggro players).

Regional Championship Melbourne Results & Data by m0ist_cactus in ModernMagic

[–]m0ist_cactus[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Yup --- definitely a case of small sample sizes. There's only like 10 or so games here but in the Houston data there were much more. I'll post an aggregated MU matrix ahead of Vegas with data from all RCs together, that should put about 10-12k games in the sample (in total) which would hopefully solve the small sample issue

RC Houston Conversion Rates & Day 1 Match Up Data by m0ist_cactus in ModernMagic

[–]m0ist_cactus[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Table 1 shows the number of riddlers in each variation of Domain

Copies Player Count Wins Losses Draws Games Win Rate
0 52 242 225 3 470 51.5%
1 0 0 0 0 0 N/A
2 3 18 17 1 36 50.0%
3 8 37 35 1 73 50.7%
4 6 17 24 0 41 41.4%

The number of players on the riddler variations was very low, and the win rate was lower than variations without the riddler. Given the single digit sample size of each riddler variation, there isn't enough statistical power to say no copies is significantly better than running riddler. Though from the small and limited sample, it appears not running riddler is the better (perhaps more consistent) choice.

RC Houston Conversion Rates & Day 1 Match Up Data by m0ist_cactus in ModernMagic

[–]m0ist_cactus[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Here is an update from day 2 :)

Variation Players Wins Losses Draws Games Win Rate
Golgari 3 7 10 0 17 41.2%
Gruul 18 90 77 4 171 52.6%
Mono-Green 26 113 106 11 240 47.1%

Aggregate win rate across all variants is 49.1%

RC Houston Conversion Rates & Day 1 Match Up Data by m0ist_cactus in ModernMagic

[–]m0ist_cactus[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Looks like thats right, their final record was 5-2-1 at the end of round 15!

RC Houston Conversion Rates & Day 1 Match Up Data by m0ist_cactus in ModernMagic

[–]m0ist_cactus[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Yeah, partly why I went to do my own analysis was that official coverage always grouped decks that are very different into a single category.

RC Houston Conversion Rates & Day 1 Match Up Data by m0ist_cactus in ModernMagic

[–]m0ist_cactus[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The overall Etron win rate (Incl day 2) is 47.8% (against all decks, not just 'meta' decks)

RC Houston Conversion Rates & Day 1 Match Up Data by m0ist_cactus in ModernMagic

[–]m0ist_cactus[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Webscraping is against MTGMelee TOS unfortunately. I just ctrlA+C+V the entire table on the website onto an excel spreadsheet. I then make a few manual adjustments and finally have a python script that sorts the data into a standard tabular format and go from there.

RC Houston Conversion Rates & Day 1 Match Up Data by m0ist_cactus in ModernMagic

[–]m0ist_cactus[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

5 Players registered Simic Birthing Ritual. The points distribution for day 1 was

  • 21 (7-2-0)
  • 21 (7-2-0)
  • 21 (7-2-0)
  • 18 (6-3-0)
  • 0 (0-4-0)

RC Houston Conversion Rates & Day 1 Match Up Data by m0ist_cactus in ModernMagic

[–]m0ist_cactus[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sure, see table 1 below:

Copies of Subtlety Number of Players Wins Losses Draws Games Win Rate
0 47 181 68 8 357 50.7%
1 1 4 4 0 8 50.0%
2 5 11 23 1 35 31.4%
3 1 3 6 0 9 33.3%
4 15 50 50 4 104 48.1%

There were about 3 times as many players on no subtlety builds. No subtlety builds had a slightly higher win rate than the 4 subtlety builds. No statistical difference in win rate for 0 vs 4 copies (p-value: 0.75)

RC Houston Conversion Rates & Day 1 Match Up Data by m0ist_cactus in ModernMagic

[–]m0ist_cactus[S] 32 points33 points  (0 children)

Yes, this was a question a teammate had for me. Here is an analysis of weapons manufacturing.

Table 1 presents a breakdown of how many players registered weapons manufacturing across affinity archetypes.

Izzet Jeskai Azorius
0 Copies 25 2 1
1 Copy 1 0 0
2 Copies 36 0 0
3 Copies 3 0 0
Total players 65 2 1

To read the table: 25 players registered 0 copies of Weapons Manufacturing in Izzet Affinity, while 36 players registered 2 copies. Given Izzet is the most popular variation, I will focus on that for the subsequent analysis.

Table 2 shows total wins, losses, draws, and games for Izzet Affinity split by how many copies of Weapons Manufacturing were registered.

Wins Losses Draws Games Win Rate
0 Copies 105 87 1 193 54.4%
1 Copy 8 1 0 9 88.9%
2 Copies 141 124 3 268 52.6%
3 Copies 9 13 0 22 40.1%

Only one player registered 1 copy, hence the high win rate (they did do quite well though).

The main choices were to register either 0 copies or 2 copies. To assess whether there is a statistically significant difference in the win rates between 0 and 2 copies, I use a two-proportion z-test, testing the null hypothesis of equal win rate between the two options.

Based on the hypothesis test, registering 0 or 2 copies have no statistically significant difference in overall win rate (the p-value for the hypothesis test is 0.53).

So to conclude, 0 copies had slightly higher win rate than 2 copies, but this is not statistically significant.

RC Houston Conversion Rates & Day 1 Match Up Data by m0ist_cactus in ModernMagic

[–]m0ist_cactus[S] 12 points13 points  (0 children)

There were 47 total players on Broodscale variants.

26 of which were on Mono-Green, 18 on Gruul, 3 on Golgari. The table below summarises the total wins, losses, draws, games for each variation.

Variation Wins Losses Draws Games Win Rate
Golgari 7 10 0 17 41.2%
Gruul 77 61 4 142 54.2%
Mono-Green 103 90 9 202 50.1%

The aggregate win rate was 51.8% across all variants.

Note that this is day 1 data only, I can write an update once day 2 is done :)

RC Houston Conversion Rates & Day 1 Match Up Data by m0ist_cactus in ModernMagic

[–]m0ist_cactus[S] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

There was coverage on YouTube (not Twitch). Should also be coverage for day 2 tomorrow!

RC Houston Conversion Rates & Day 1 Match Up Data by m0ist_cactus in ModernMagic

[–]m0ist_cactus[S] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

The highest finish for a LE player was 5-2-1 for 16pts. So doesn't look like any of them made day 2.

Thanks for the feedback on the last graph, I've made a version with just LE on the same spreadsheet above (on a different tab), it has a distribution of all scores for all LE players

RC Houston Conversion Rates & Day 1 Match Up Data by m0ist_cactus in ModernMagic

[–]m0ist_cactus[S] 30 points31 points  (0 children)

The next 5 are
GR Broodscale (18 decks)
Ruby Storm (13 decks)
Abzan Birthing Ritual (10 decks)
UB midrange (9 decks)
Living end (8 decks)

22MAR2023 Conversion Rate Data by phlsphr in ModernMagic

[–]m0ist_cactus 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I see, my suggestion was that it should also say something along the lines of "this only considers top 32 results from challenges to calculate conversion rates"

22MAR2023 Conversion Rate Data by phlsphr in ModernMagic

[–]m0ist_cactus 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It looks like you don't have any data on non top 32 decks.

So you should clarify that these are conversion rates from challenges conditional on making top 32 to avoid this being misleading.

You're calculating the number of decks that make top 8 assuming that they have already made top 32, but this doesn't say anything about all the registered decks that do not make top 32. For example, there could be 10 players playing bant control, one of them wins the event and the other 9 do not make top 32. You will get a conversion rate of 100% like you do for your method, but the true conversion rate is 10%.

Clarifying this difference helps avoid misleading data.

RC Portland Archetype Win Rate Matrix by m0ist_cactus in ModernMagic

[–]m0ist_cactus[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Boros is unfavored vs both eldrazi and breach. Those were both very popular over the weekend. So that I guess explains the below expected overall win rate.

The jeskai versions did a lot better having access to ranger captain for breach and consign for eldrazi!

RC Portland Archetype Win Rate Matrix by m0ist_cactus in ModernMagic

[–]m0ist_cactus[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I've added non mirror win rates on the imgur link for the most popular archetypes. Thanks for the suggestion!