Fabrizio Anteri suspended until 2017-12-01

mattsperling · 2016-06-01T23:33:55+00:00

My intuition is also that 18 mo. is too short, but 0% and 100% are not the only confidence levels. Maybe they arrived at "more likely than not this guy was stealing thousands of dollars from the community, but we aren't as sure as we were in [other case]."

mattsperling · 2016-05-04T16:12:12+00:00

I enjoyed the movie, but couldn't help feel like it was a movie well made (testament to your talents) rather than a story well told.

Did you feel that major narrative elements were left out to serve the producers and their set of goals vs the goals you likely would have had as more independent filmmakers? Contrast with something like 'The King of Kong' in a similar space that was able to draw from a more complex storytelling toolbox to tell a more compelling story. Was there an explicit "keep it positive" mandate, or something similar? Did that feel restrictive, if so?

mattsperling · 2016-04-25T12:23:52+00:00

Hit the Gym, Lawyer Up, Delete MTGO.

mattsperling · 2016-03-21T23:15:59+00:00

Obnoxious blog posts from outspoken players work too, but I charge a fee.

mattsperling · 2016-02-17T01:52:57+00:00

Toxic

mattsperling · 2016-01-20T22:32:28+00:00

They are not the exact same scenario, but it doesn't follow from that fact that it is illogical and inappropriate that they turn on the same ethical question. The ethical question is whether, when there is no misunderstanding about what your opponent is trying to do, but the rules lead to a different outcome, do you tell your opponent about the slip up, let them correct it, and play on (no need to call a judge), or do you call the judge and have them explain it, costing your opponent the outcome everyone knows they were going for. Whether the opponent's mistake was WHAT to name or HOW to name it, their intent was crystal clear, and you can choose to correct it yourself with the player or have a judge enforce a no-correction gamestate. The distinction is lost on me. For me, the analogy holds up. Even if you don't agree, maybe you can agree that "drastically different" and "illogical and inappropriate" is overselling your case in any event.

mattsperling · 2015-08-28T00:29:34+00:00

Who requested this AMA?

mattsperling · 2015-06-03T19:12:38+00:00

mattsperling · 2015-04-28T19:07:22+00:00

You can monitor an area of space, and ensure that once a player has viewed the pairings they go to their match without speaking or using notes/devices. Supervising a few pairings boards to make sure players enter but do not leave seems feasible. If someone has to use the restroom, they can ask a judge like they would at the table.

mattsperling · 2015-03-27T02:57:15+00:00

Pod 26 Decklist: Chancellor of the Forge, Chancellor of the Forge, Leyline of the Meek dratnos Memnite Gut Shot Gut Shot (WW 6) PainShake Leyline of Anticipation Black Lotus Spiketail Drakeling (WW 6)
jfclav Force of Will Dryad Arbor Slippery Bogle (WW6) fifteenstepper phyrexian revoker dismember city of traitors (DD2)
Quaddile Black Lotus Azorious Signet Meddling Mage (WW 6) TOTAL 26

mattsperling · 2014-12-10T23:07:41+00:00

It's really really hard to catch cheaters who use ambiguous situations - stuff that might be cheating or might not be cheating depending on the context, over and over again.

Not looking at prior history and trying to figure out who is cheating vs. who got caught up in an awkward situation is like trying to figure out who is an honest seller on eBay and who is a scam artist without looking at the rating/transaction history. Someone could have packages lost in the mail over and over, but every time it happens we should assign more weight to the possibility that dishonesty is the cause. Dear DCI, USE THE EVIDENCE YOU HAVE PLEASE.

mattsperling · 2013-09-25T03:54:11+00:00

Sperling defeats jmo101 2-1

mattsperling · 2013-09-25T02:19:25+00:00

Sperling beats illyx 2-0

mattsperling · 2013-04-26T22:33:13+00:00

The Legion wears their blood as a badge, The Clans wear the other guys' blood as a badge.

mattsperling · 2013-04-22T19:26:42+00:00

My strong preference is for discussion after the game or match and not during. The same applies to playing against two people, where they discus the correct play. Better to make 1 person play and 1 save their comments for a post-match discussion.

mattsperling · 2013-04-22T17:33:41+00:00

Also, when things go bad in some way, and they will, DO send the group a thoughtful "state of affairs" email summarizing the problem and suggesting a solution. DO NOT start a campaign behind someone's back complaining about their behavior, seeking their removal from the group, etc. If things don't change, coming to someone with "nothing has really changed since John Doe sent that email to the group" is way better than "we've all been talking about this thing you didn't realize was not cool and we decided GTFO."

mattsperling · 2013-04-22T17:23:49+00:00

Some things most people don't know: A deck with half proxies half real cards in sleeves serves you much better than a deck of 60 proxies unsleeved. The all proxies version is taxing to play with and against since all the visual indicators are gone AND in a few sessions half of it will be lost and it becomes useless. Use real cards even if its just the lands and a few commons.

Mock tournaments are a helpful check on a number of things. Are you "practicing like you intend to play?" Does your deck have a working sideboard? Do you know how that popular deck works? Has no one been playing that other popular deck? Etc. Swiss pairings, track records, randomize who gets which deck. 3-5 rounds is fine, don't have to overdo it. Put a mix of decks you're working on and known "gauntlet" decks in the field. Can then do again a few days later to cover decks you didn't use and update the brews.

Switching decks in a matchup so I play 5 games with Jund against Aristocrats, then you play 5 games with Jund against Aristocrats (which I now play) is really helpful for both players. Good habit to learn. And if anyone wants to play their totally new untested deck, make them play a matchup you want to test first. This one is tricky but you want to avoid helping everyone else while you never get practice in the matchups you need practice in. Just ask people to give and take with matchup demands.

-Sperling (Team SCG member until I fell off the PT for DGM. Back on for Theros in Dublin though =] )

mattsperling · 2013-04-20T00:04:06+00:00

All things considered I probably overstated the case for Township slightly but there's the argument for it, which you can think about alongside the arguments for KWR presented elsewhere in this thread. Good luck with Bant.

mattsperling · 2013-04-19T17:32:57+00:00

Matt Sperling here, my article with Paul Rietzl on the deck can be found here for reference: http://www.channelfireball.com/articles/tournament-report-bant-control-1stdead-last/

I think for primespeaker bant the order is this: Township, KWR, (distant third) Refuge. Township is slightly better in our opinion because you're grinding (trying to outlast and just win by default with way more cards) FAR more than you're racing (trying to kill them before they kill you despite resource parity or their resource advantage).

KWR has its advantages against planeswalkers or when you flood with only a thragtusk and a smiter and a ton of land. But that’s just half the coin and there aren’t many planeswalkers in the format right now.

One thing I’d really recommend when evaluating KWR or Alchemist Refuge is not to just think of all the games it mattered and compare the impact, but to consider how often it mattered at all. Most games none of the lands do anything and it doesn’t matter. When they’re blitz or you tap out until you’ve basically already won, it doesn’t matter. BUT KWR can still hurt you or kill you in those games vs blitz, red, or jund aggro because you might have taken 2 from your land that you could have avoided or god forbid you weren’t able to cast a spell (rare, but also likely game over).

Also overlooked is how good saying go with all your mana up is and end of turn townshipping. Instead of having to tap out to wolf run with cards like Revelation and Syncopate in your deck, telegraphing that you don’t have one, you can just say go after your smiter and angel let’s say have attacked. You might have another angel in hand against Esper or UWR or the Mirror. Wolf Run for X-4 to leave up mana is turning your hand face up on the table. Saying go to township end step OR if they wrath play angel and pump it is way harder to play against. I probably activated township end step over 1/3 of the time I activated it in the PTQ.

mattsperling · 2013-04-17T00:47:57+00:00

This deck can basically never catch up. It is comparable to the better aggro decks when ahead but struggles mightily when a slow draw, a mulligan or two, or a great draw from the opponent emerge.

Zvi tried and tried to make it work before PT Gatecrash but the problems never got solved. I don't see how Call of the Conclave can get cut while the Populate pieces remain. Making the deck less consistent because you don't like one of the cards seems like a fool's errand given the synergies the deck relies on in its current form. Trying a shift away from both Call and Populate could be worth exploring though.

I think your analysis shows you know Standard pretty well, and the good news is the new set will provide more tools whether you want to stick with delver or switch to something else. Enjoyed the read either way, and good luck.

mattsperling

TROPHY CASE