Intentional Draw

24 posts / 0 new
Last post
I find it really frusterating with the lack of intentional draw button for major events like ptq's. We don't need it for dailys or anything. However is there a chance that we get the option to intentional draw with people in the future of mtgo?

Thanks! 
I find it really frusterating with the lack of intentional draw button for major events like ptq's. We don't need it for dailys or anything. However is there a chance that we get the option to intentional draw with people in the future of mtgo?

Thanks! 

Not likely.

IDs were originally a part of MTGO.  They were removed with the transition to v3 about 3-4 years ago, now.  It is one of those things where "online can do it better than paper", like the chess clocks.  If they could, they would remove IDs from real life MTG as well, but the logistics don't work out.

My forever unfinished blog of the 2010 MTGO Community Cup: if you're ever bored...
or there's the other possibility of they couldnt get draws to work right on 3.0 since it happened right when it came out, and didnt respond to it for a couple of weeks to a month
or there's the other possibility of they couldnt get draws to work right on 3.0 since it happened right when it came out, and didnt respond to it for a couple of weeks to a month

Yep, that's definitely a possibility.

My forever unfinished blog of the 2010 MTGO Community Cup: if you're ever bored...
or there's the other possibility of they couldnt get draws to work right on 3.0 since it happened right when it came out, and didnt respond to it for a couple of weeks to a month





This is more than likely the truth of the matter.
it just seems off that I can go 7-0 in a nine round event and not double draw into top 8....
it just seems off that I can go 7-0 in a nine round event and not double draw into top 8....




Wotc would 100% ban IDs in paper if the logistics permitted it.   The existence of the chess clock in MtGO allows the ban.  So you now consider paper OP to be the flawed version.


The base theory is that WotC will always value playing the game over not playing the game. 
4. Don't speak dumb, or you'll be struck dumb. Remember, the name of the game is heads I win, tails you lose.
Swiss pairings should not end in a top 8. They're not meant to do that. They're meant to continually yield a current standing, which magically transforms into a final standing after the last round.

On top of that, am I the only one who finds it odd that, apparently, there are ppl in paper who can get away with playing less than half the rounds of a 9-round tourney and still win prizes (start with 3 byes, win 4 rounds, draw, draw, shoulder claps all round)?
Free Speech
Free speech is the right to speak your mind without government censorship and without fear of extralegal retaliation like harassment or violence. That’s all! Free speech doesn’t include the right to speak your mind on any forum anywhere. The government may not prevent you from speaking, but private parties, like blog owners or corporations, aren’t required to let you use their property as your platform. Free speech doesn’t include the right to be believed or to be taken seriously. People may mock, ridicule or laugh at what you say, or they may reject it outright. Free speech doesn’t include the right to be listened to. People who don’t desire to hear your opinion can hang up on you, block you on social media, change the channel, close the browser tab. Free speech doesn’t give you the right to bombard people with harassing messages or otherwise force them to pay attention to you against their will. And free speech doesn’t include the right to suffer no consequences whatsoever for your expressed opinions.
ZOM nushae !!!
Byes and Swiss into top8 is indeed just foolish.

Now think further, about what the PT players club does (which already hands out byes, but this is the least thing it does) + top25 PT invites. All those should be handed out via more PTQs and Top8 GP = PT invites. (alot of stuff possible like 129+ players in a PTQ = 2 invites, and so on...)

On top of this the awkward Hall of Fame.
- This is, honestly, a grotesque advantage. Noah Weil on scouting, an attorney from Seattle with 20 Pro Tour appearances.
On top of this the awkward Hall of Fame.



What's wrong with the Hall of Fame?

As far as the bye, bye, bye, win, win, win, win, draw, draw thing, yeah it's lame.  I really think they should remove byes for Grand Prix.  And this is coming from someone who has a high enough limited rating in paper to have 2 byes at any GP.
On top of this the awkward Hall of Fame.



What's wrong with the Hall of Fame?

As far as the bye, bye, bye, win, win, win, win, draw, draw thing, yeah it's lame.  I really think they should remove byes for Grand Prix.  And this is coming from someone who has a high enough limited rating in paper to have 2 byes at any GP.

Not since planeswalker points...

My forever unfinished blog of the 2010 MTGO Community Cup: if you're ever bored...
Swiss pairings should not end in a top 8. They're not meant to do that. They're meant to continually yield a current standing, which magically transforms into a final standing after the last round.

On top of that, am I the only one who finds it odd that, apparently, there are ppl in paper who can get away with playing less than half the rounds of a 9-round tourney and still win prizes (start with 3 byes, win 4 rounds, draw, draw, shoulder claps all round)?


I'm pretty sure Grands Prix are usually many more than 9 rounds. GP Orlando last weekend was 15 rounds before the top 8. The cut for day 2 was after nine rounds, but with six more rounds Sunday you're not going to ID rounds 8 and 9. Same at PTs.

As for normal swiss events (including PTQs), I've done the math on the round cut-offs the DCI (and MTGO) uses for normal events. The cut-offs aren't a straight 2^N progression, as you would expect to determine a first place. Rather, they are designed so that X-1 and better gets into the top-8. Not X-1-1, not X-0-2, X-1. So it is clear what the intention was when they established the system.

Magic and Magic Online Volunteer Community Lead. On Strike

I'm trying to make my official VCL posts in purple.

You posted saying my thread was moved/locked but nothing happened.


Show
Unfortunately, VCLs do not currently have the tools necessary to take moderation actions directly. VCLs submit their actions to ORCs, who then actually perform the action. This processing can take between a few minutes and several hours, depending on how busy/attentive the ORCs are.

If you see something that needs VCL attention, please use this thread to make a request and a VCL will look at it as soon as possible. CoC violations should be reported to Customer Service using the "report post" button. Please do not disrupt the thread by making requests of either kind in-thread.

General MTGO FAQ

Yes, the Shuffler is Random!
The definitive thread on the Magic Online shuffler.

Magic Math Made Easy
Draw probabilities, Swiss results, Elo ratings and booster EV

Event EV Calculator
Calculate the EV for any event with a fixed number of rounds and prizes based on record

Dual means two. A duel is a battle between two people. Lands that make two colors of mana are dual lands. A normal Magic battle is a duel.
Thanks to PhoenixLAU for the [thread=1097559]awesome avatar[/thread]!
Quotables

Show
"While a picture is worth a thousand words, each lolcat actually produces a negative wordcount." -Ith "I think "Highly Informed Sarcasm" should be our Magic Online General motto." -Ith "Sorry, but this thread seems just like spam. TT is for off-topic discussion, not no-topic discussion." -WizO_Kwai_Chang "Stop that! If you're not careful, rational thinking may catch on!" -Sax "... the only word i see that fits is incompitant." -Mr44 (sic) "You know a thread is gonna be locked when it gets to the hexadecimal stage." -Gathion "It's a good gig" - Gleemax "I tell people often, if you guys want to rant, you've certainly got the right to (provided you obey CoC/ToS stuff), and I don't even really blame you. But if you see something you think needs changing a well thought-out, constructive post does more to make that happen." - Worth Wollpert
Swiss pairings should not end in a top 8. They're not meant to do that. They're meant to continually yield a current standing, which magically transforms into a final standing after the last round.

On top of that, am I the only one who finds it odd that, apparently, there are ppl in paper who can get away with playing less than half the rounds of a 9-round tourney and still win prizes (start with 3 byes, win 4 rounds, draw, draw, shoulder claps all round)?


I'm pretty sure Grands Prix are usually many more than 9 rounds. GP Orlando last weekend was 15 rounds before the top 8. The cut for day 2 was after nine rounds, but with six more rounds Sunday you're not going to ID rounds 8 and 9. Same at PTs.

At PT they not only use IDs on Sundays, they also start the activity of taking match losses, just look at last Worlds. Now what can the reason for that be ?
- This is, honestly, a grotesque advantage. Noah Weil on scouting, an attorney from Seattle with 20 Pro Tour appearances.
Swiss pairings should not end in a top 8. They're not meant to do that. They're meant to continually yield a current standing, which magically transforms into a final standing after the last round.

On top of that, am I the only one who finds it odd that, apparently, there are ppl in paper who can get away with playing less than half the rounds of a 9-round tourney and still win prizes (start with 3 byes, win 4 rounds, draw, draw, shoulder claps all round)?


I'm pretty sure Grands Prix are usually many more than 9 rounds. GP Orlando last weekend was 15 rounds before the top 8. The cut for day 2 was after nine rounds, but with six more rounds Sunday you're not going to ID rounds 8 and 9. Same at PTs.

As for normal swiss events (including PTQs), I've done the math on the round cut-offs the DCI (and MTGO) uses for normal events. The cut-offs aren't a straight 2^N progression, as you would expect to determine a first place. Rather, they are designed so that X-1 and better gets into the top-8. Not X-1-1, not X-0-2, X-1. So it is clear what the intention was when they established the system.


Actually, that's not quite true.  I agree it's the intention, but for 8+ rounds, the cutoffs are too high.  It's possible to construct a 213-person tournament with 9 players at 7-1 or better and a 385-player tournament with 9 players at 8-1 or better; while 212 and 384 (respectively) guarantee the X-1's all make it.  (And actually, with 673 you can have 9 9-1's, but I don't think many non-Grad Prix Swiss tournaments with Top 8's get that large.)  The real cutoffs should be


129-212     8 rounds
213-384     9 rounds
385-672   10 rounds
673-1248 11 rounds,
etc.


I haven't tried to figure out an explicit formula to calculate the cutoffs (if there is one), but have generated the cutoffs up to 17 rounds (for at least 28,289 players, which should be sufficient for the foreseeable future Tongue Out).

Of course, byes complicate things.  The standard method is to treat people with b byes as 2^b separate players and calculate the number of rounds based on that; it is not difficult to show that this will always give enough rounds but will sometimes require too many.

As for the general discussion of IDs, I was a L3 judge back when they were first officially allowed in paper Magic, and believe me, a lot of us tried to find an alternative.  There really isn't one that I've ever heard, but if we had found one, I'm pretty sure IDs would never have been implemented.  The MtGO system is vastly superior IMO.

(And back in the day, wins were only 2 points instead of 3, so it was even worse back then.  My first PTQ Top 8 I went 5-0 and ID'd 3 times into the Top 8.)
"Why did the chicken cross the Möbius strip...?"
Actually, that's not quite true.  I agree it's the intention, but for 8+ rounds, the cutoffs are too high.  It's possible to construct a 213-person tournament with 9 players at 7-1 or better and a 385-player tournament with 9 players at 8-1 or better; while 212 and 384 (respectively) guarantee the X-1's all make it.  (And actually, with 673 you can have 9 9-1's, but I don't think many non-Grad Prix Swiss tournaments with Top 8's get that large.)  The real cutoffs should be


129-212     8 rounds
213-384     9 rounds
385-672   10 rounds
673-1248 11 rounds,
etc.


Went back and checked and you're right. I must've misremembered my own findings. Statement retracted.

Magic and Magic Online Volunteer Community Lead. On Strike

I'm trying to make my official VCL posts in purple.

You posted saying my thread was moved/locked but nothing happened.


Show
Unfortunately, VCLs do not currently have the tools necessary to take moderation actions directly. VCLs submit their actions to ORCs, who then actually perform the action. This processing can take between a few minutes and several hours, depending on how busy/attentive the ORCs are.

If you see something that needs VCL attention, please use this thread to make a request and a VCL will look at it as soon as possible. CoC violations should be reported to Customer Service using the "report post" button. Please do not disrupt the thread by making requests of either kind in-thread.

General MTGO FAQ

Yes, the Shuffler is Random!
The definitive thread on the Magic Online shuffler.

Magic Math Made Easy
Draw probabilities, Swiss results, Elo ratings and booster EV

Event EV Calculator
Calculate the EV for any event with a fixed number of rounds and prizes based on record

Dual means two. A duel is a battle between two people. Lands that make two colors of mana are dual lands. A normal Magic battle is a duel.
Thanks to PhoenixLAU for the [thread=1097559]awesome avatar[/thread]!
Quotables

Show
"While a picture is worth a thousand words, each lolcat actually produces a negative wordcount." -Ith "I think "Highly Informed Sarcasm" should be our Magic Online General motto." -Ith "Sorry, but this thread seems just like spam. TT is for off-topic discussion, not no-topic discussion." -WizO_Kwai_Chang "Stop that! If you're not careful, rational thinking may catch on!" -Sax "... the only word i see that fits is incompitant." -Mr44 (sic) "You know a thread is gonna be locked when it gets to the hexadecimal stage." -Gathion "It's a good gig" - Gleemax "I tell people often, if you guys want to rant, you've certainly got the right to (provided you obey CoC/ToS stuff), and I don't even really blame you. But if you see something you think needs changing a well thought-out, constructive post does more to make that happen." - Worth Wollpert
I never did any actual math on it, but back in the black/white days when I was a kid, I was taught about swiss when I joined a chess club. Swiss is a paring method that enables large amounts of ppl to play the entire tournament with a relatively small number of rounds.

the number of rounds is comparable to single elimination except that in swiss you're supposed to be able to lose once and still be in contention.

The most obvious advantage of course is that you play more matches per event. For chess other considerations are also important (such as having final standings that accurately reflect the player's strenghts, etc).

In any case, for the number of rounds the rule of thumb was that you took the 2-log of the number of players, rounded down, added 1, and that was the number of rounds.

So:

0-1 players: 1 round
2-3 players: 2 rounds
4-7 players: 3 rounds, etc

So the powers of N are lower bounds for each round.

If you play only 3 rounds with 8 ppl you would get the equivalent number of rounds for a single elimination, and you would be out of contention with your first loss - the rest of the games would purely be for enjoyment or rating improvements. Tournaments I played in were always "one round more than single elim".

In that context the "swiss gambit" should be mentioned: this is the practice of intentionally drawing in an early round so you can avoid facing the strongest opposition until the very last. In true swiss pairings that would theoretically (if you won everything else) put you against the undefeated player in the final round, with half a point less. If you lost that round you might not win any prizes, but your opponent is guaranteed 1st place by drawing with you and would usually do so. This way you could get 2nd prize without too much real effort.

The risk of this gambit is of course (beyond simply losing more points underway to the final round) that your final opponent doesn't draw and then you're pretty much screwed.

Needless to say that this is considered a dishonorable practice, even if it is very risky.

PS. Swiss Gambit is also a real opening (not a popular one): 1. f4 f5 2. e4 ...
Free Speech
Free speech is the right to speak your mind without government censorship and without fear of extralegal retaliation like harassment or violence. That’s all! Free speech doesn’t include the right to speak your mind on any forum anywhere. The government may not prevent you from speaking, but private parties, like blog owners or corporations, aren’t required to let you use their property as your platform. Free speech doesn’t include the right to be believed or to be taken seriously. People may mock, ridicule or laugh at what you say, or they may reject it outright. Free speech doesn’t include the right to be listened to. People who don’t desire to hear your opinion can hang up on you, block you on social media, change the channel, close the browser tab. Free speech doesn’t give you the right to bombard people with harassing messages or otherwise force them to pay attention to you against their will. And free speech doesn’t include the right to suffer no consequences whatsoever for your expressed opinions.
Actually, that's not quite true.  I agree it's the intention, but for 8+ rounds, the cutoffs are too high.  It's possible to construct a 213-person tournament with 9 players at 7-1 or better and a 385-player tournament with 9 players at 8-1 or better; while 212 and 384 (respectively) guarantee the X-1's all make it.  (And actually, with 673 you can have 9 9-1's, but I don't think many non-Grad Prix Swiss tournaments with Top 8's get that large.)  The real cutoffs should be


129-212     8 rounds
213-384     9 rounds
385-672   10 rounds
673-1248 11 rounds,
etc.


Went back and checked and you're right. I must've misremembered my own findings. Statement retracted.


I suspect what they did was take the expected number of players at X-1 or better and do the cutoffs like that; i.e., with 8 rounds, you expect 1/256 of the players to be 8-0 and 8/256 of the players to be 7-1, so with (8/9)*256 = 227.56 players you get on average 8 players at X-1 or better; similarly with 9 rounds, you expect 1/512 9-0's and 9/512 8-1's, so with (8/10)*512 = 409.6 players you get on average 8 players at X-1 or better.  This implies cutoffs of 228 and 410 compared to the published cutoffs of 227 and 410.  Of course by using the average, you basically guarantee that sometimes you'll have too many; the proper analysis should be worst-case.

It should also be noted that for small tournaments, the guidelines give too many rounds; for example, 4 rounds suffice for up to 24 players and 5 rounds suffice for up to 40 players.

Nushae, the difference there is that the chess tournament is designed to pick a single winner after the Swiss rounds, while the goal of the Swiss rounds in a Magic tournament is to cut to the Top 8.  So the cutoffs as you've described it work for determining a single winner but not a Top 8.
"Why did the chicken cross the Möbius strip...?"
Nushae, the difference there is that the chess tournament is designed to pick a single winner after the Swiss rounds, while the goal of the Swiss rounds in a Magic tournament is to cut to the Top 8.  So the cutoffs as you've described it work for determining a single winner but not a Top 8.



No, you misunderstand. The sole purpose of Swiss, period, is to determine a winner after the last rounds. Cutting to top 8 is incompatible with swiss.

Swiss "sorta" emulates single elimination, but in the swiss system the top 8 after all rounds have been played are almost never the same as the top 8 with 3 rounds to go (which is what the top 8 would be in single elim).

My entire point was that what WotC does, namely cut to top 8 based on swiss final standings, is WRONG.
Free Speech
Free speech is the right to speak your mind without government censorship and without fear of extralegal retaliation like harassment or violence. That’s all! Free speech doesn’t include the right to speak your mind on any forum anywhere. The government may not prevent you from speaking, but private parties, like blog owners or corporations, aren’t required to let you use their property as your platform. Free speech doesn’t include the right to be believed or to be taken seriously. People may mock, ridicule or laugh at what you say, or they may reject it outright. Free speech doesn’t include the right to be listened to. People who don’t desire to hear your opinion can hang up on you, block you on social media, change the channel, close the browser tab. Free speech doesn’t give you the right to bombard people with harassing messages or otherwise force them to pay attention to you against their will. And free speech doesn’t include the right to suffer no consequences whatsoever for your expressed opinions.
Nushae, the difference there is that the chess tournament is designed to pick a single winner after the Swiss rounds, while the goal of the Swiss rounds in a Magic tournament is to cut to the Top 8.  So the cutoffs as you've described it work for determining a single winner but not a Top 8.



No, you misunderstand. The sole purpose of Swiss, period, is to determine a winner after the last rounds. Cutting to top 8 is incompatible with swiss.

Swiss "sorta" emulates single elimination, but in the swiss system the top 8 after all rounds have been played are almost never the same as the top 8 with 3 rounds to go (which is what the top 8 would be in single elim).

My entire point was that what WotC does, namely cut to top 8 based on swiss final standings, is WRONG.


Not buying your premise. Just because the original intent was different does not mean Swiss is unacceptable to determine a top 8. Swiss is a common-sense way to run a competition where each match involves a limited number of participants and a full round-robin isn't possible. Indeed, swiss probably makes more sense when you care about more than just the top spot. A single-elimination tournament effectively identifies the best player, but it isn't good at much beyond that. Swiss, while not providing the best fine-grain determination between places, at least organizes players into the approximately appropriate position.

Magic and Magic Online Volunteer Community Lead. On Strike

I'm trying to make my official VCL posts in purple.

You posted saying my thread was moved/locked but nothing happened.


Show
Unfortunately, VCLs do not currently have the tools necessary to take moderation actions directly. VCLs submit their actions to ORCs, who then actually perform the action. This processing can take between a few minutes and several hours, depending on how busy/attentive the ORCs are.

If you see something that needs VCL attention, please use this thread to make a request and a VCL will look at it as soon as possible. CoC violations should be reported to Customer Service using the "report post" button. Please do not disrupt the thread by making requests of either kind in-thread.

General MTGO FAQ

Yes, the Shuffler is Random!
The definitive thread on the Magic Online shuffler.

Magic Math Made Easy
Draw probabilities, Swiss results, Elo ratings and booster EV

Event EV Calculator
Calculate the EV for any event with a fixed number of rounds and prizes based on record

Dual means two. A duel is a battle between two people. Lands that make two colors of mana are dual lands. A normal Magic battle is a duel.
Thanks to PhoenixLAU for the [thread=1097559]awesome avatar[/thread]!
Quotables

Show
"While a picture is worth a thousand words, each lolcat actually produces a negative wordcount." -Ith "I think "Highly Informed Sarcasm" should be our Magic Online General motto." -Ith "Sorry, but this thread seems just like spam. TT is for off-topic discussion, not no-topic discussion." -WizO_Kwai_Chang "Stop that! If you're not careful, rational thinking may catch on!" -Sax "... the only word i see that fits is incompitant." -Mr44 (sic) "You know a thread is gonna be locked when it gets to the hexadecimal stage." -Gathion "It's a good gig" - Gleemax "I tell people often, if you guys want to rant, you've certainly got the right to (provided you obey CoC/ToS stuff), and I don't even really blame you. But if you see something you think needs changing a well thought-out, constructive post does more to make that happen." - Worth Wollpert
Not buying your premise. Just because the original intent was different does not mean Swiss is unacceptable to determine a top 8. Swiss is a common-sense way to run a competition where each match involves a limited number of participants and a full round-robin isn't possible. Indeed, swiss probably makes more sense when you care about more than just the top spot. A single-elimination tournament effectively identifies the best player, but it isn't good at much beyond that. Swiss, while not providing the best fine-grain determination between places, at least organizes players into the approximately appropriate position.



Ok, look at it from a pragmatic point of view then. Two questions. One, do you consider intentional draws among the top players in the final few rounds desirable or undesirable? Two, how many such intentional draws would occur if the swiss final standings directly determined the prizes, and not the top 8 cut they currently base on it?

My answers are "undesirable" and "far less". The way the swiss + cut to top 8 works in a magic tournament, it effectively reduces the number of meaningful rounds that are played in the swiss portion. While in a real swiss tournament you have to play-to-win until the last round, all you have to do with a top 8 cut, is make sure you are in the top 8. This is what leads to the intentional draws in the last few rounds, effectively shutting out those who would still be in contention if all rounds were played for real.

There are quite a few variants on the basic swiss scheme. Even the one used for chess is not standard (measures are taken to balance the times a player has black and white). In bridge, and I think also scrabble, the "never meet twice" criterion is dropped in the later rounds, to make sure that the "biggest match" is not accidentally played in round 1 or 2. In many swiss tournaments, for the same reason the initial pairing is usually not done at random but based on current ratings (in an attempt to avoid pairing the top players too soon).

Swiss's purpose is practicality: how do we reach accurate standings for large amounts of players with a minimum number of rounds. (If accuracy is not a goal, single elim will suffice, if the amount is not large but accuracy is important round-robin is preferable).

However the variants are almost exclusively with the aim to make the tournaments more interesting for spectators, after all some sort of climax is more dramatic. We crave suspense.

There's nothing wrong with that, you should just be aware that there is a tradeoff with the accuracy of your results (which is presumably you use swiss in the first place) - in magic tournaments the 8 prize winners are not guaranteed to be the 8 best players in the tourney!
Free Speech
Free speech is the right to speak your mind without government censorship and without fear of extralegal retaliation like harassment or violence. That’s all! Free speech doesn’t include the right to speak your mind on any forum anywhere. The government may not prevent you from speaking, but private parties, like blog owners or corporations, aren’t required to let you use their property as your platform. Free speech doesn’t include the right to be believed or to be taken seriously. People may mock, ridicule or laugh at what you say, or they may reject it outright. Free speech doesn’t include the right to be listened to. People who don’t desire to hear your opinion can hang up on you, block you on social media, change the channel, close the browser tab. Free speech doesn’t give you the right to bombard people with harassing messages or otherwise force them to pay attention to you against their will. And free speech doesn’t include the right to suffer no consequences whatsoever for your expressed opinions.


There's nothing wrong with that, you should just be aware that there is a tradeoff with the accuracy of your results (which is presumably you use swiss in the first place) - in magic tournaments the 8 prize winners are not guaranteed to be the 8 best players in the tourney!



In Magic, unlike chess, luck plays a role, and this is not guaranteed anyway, even after a full round-robin or swiss without a cut. So a top-eight cut can be seen, at least in limited, to even out a field a bit by giving the finalists a new shot at lucking out with the sealed pool or draft picks.

Go draft, young man, go draft!

I know of at least one guy from texas who won a online PTQ.


The trick with MOCS/online PTQs is they are setup to get around gambling laws anyways since NONE of them payout direct cash etc you have to go to the event. My guess is even if you get popped they would just remove your "pack winnings" from whatever event it was(mocs/ptq) and lets be honest... who cares about the packs at that point.
Owner of TheCardNexus chain on mtgo.


There's nothing wrong with that, you should just be aware that there is a tradeoff with the accuracy of your results (which is presumably you use swiss in the first place) - in magic tournaments the 8 prize winners are not guaranteed to be the 8 best players in the tourney!



In Magic, unlike chess, luck plays a role, and this is not guaranteed anyway, even after a full round-robin or swiss without a cut. So a top-eight cut can be seen, at least in limited, to even out a field a bit by giving the finalists a new shot at lucking out with the sealed pool or draft picks.


Not to quibble (well, okay, I'm quibbling), but if you play a lot of chess competitively, you'll find luck can be a decisive factor from time to time.

That aside, I like the cut to top 8 in limited only.

I can't spare a moment for the dog faced boy I won't lend another hand to the worm girl of Hanoi Don't deplete my oxygen for the guy who's turning blue But ask me, and I'll do anything for you
Not to quibble (well, okay, I'm quibbling), but if you play a lot of chess competitively, you'll find luck can be a decisive factor from time to time.

That aside, I like the cut to top 8 in limited only.




Agreed. Chess has luck factors in it that have nothing to do with the pieces. (Opponent strength and their state of mind at the moment, distractions, your own state of mind which be affected by events outside of your control.) Though I think you will agree that these factors generally don't favor the less skilled.

Winter.Wolf