Jan 18, 2013 -- 3:34AM, Telir wrote:

Jan 17, 2013 -- 12:05PM, DragonWarriorLeader wrote:

Jan 16, 2013 -- 6:29AM, Zlehtnoba wrote:

Two things:

An algorithm is never random; it is a predetermined recipe for converting one number into another. You achieve randomness in the results (shuffles) by inputing random numbers in the shuffling algorithm. It is relatively easy to cook up a number using some system properties in such a way that it has no relation to what was used, say, yesterday. It's a bit harder to make sequences of random numbers, that is, numbers calculated from, but not predictably related to, the previous number in the sequence; but it's also not time-intensive, if you decide to use, for example, round-off errors. As Telir said, there are many well-known, well-working programs for that purpose. 

The very great number of shufflings that goes on online makes true random unnecessary; basically, because between any two of your shufflings, there are many others, so it is not really important if the next shuffler seed is less than ideally random regarding the last one, you will get one that is randomly far away in the sequence anyway (because the number of shuffles between your shuffles is big and random).

What I'm saying is of course not a proof that the MtGO shuffler is truly random; I'm just trying to tell you why your arguments are not good enough to convince me. You're on the right track saying you intend to test it, but you should consider that this has already been done, and the results should be somewhere in this thread.

The reason i want to prove it its not only to show to people its not 100% random is to show something is wrong too like the theory of doom switch basically to show the shuffler is set up in a way thats make it you win or lose before starting the games .

That is a quixotic quest if there ever was one. Magic is such a strange and fantastic game that there is no way to guarantee win/loss before starting except within the minds of the players assuming the deck match ups are relatively fair.

I've won games after a mulligan to 3 without a combo and have lost games I should have won. Skill, decision making, etc play an enormous role in the outcomes. You may percieve the failure of your deck to provide adequate mana as a flaw in the shuffler but odds are it is a flaw in your deck design.

Yes maybe for some players but i am playing since 1993.

I am a pretty good player and before somebody say anything about it yes its have better player then me and its will always have and i can admit it when i see better players then me.

I know when i make mistake and i know when my deck have design problems same goes for lot of my friends thats thinks the same way i think its easy to say maybe its design in my deck and i understand why you say that too i understand lot of people will cry about shuffler because they cant see they own error they makes but for my part i know the error i can make.

and to Xtofyr : its not becuase its not buggued for someone thats its not to others people remember the shuffler is an algorithm they can put whatever they want in this algorithm the proof of somebody thats the shuffler works good for him prove only its works good for him not the others thats the logic

Jan 19, 2013 -- 7:13AM, DragonWarriorLeader wrote:

Jan 18, 2013 -- 3:34AM, Telir wrote:

Jan 17, 2013 -- 12:05PM, DragonWarriorLeader wrote:

Jan 16, 2013 -- 6:29AM, Zlehtnoba wrote:

Two things:

An algorithm is never random; it is a predetermined recipe for converting one number into another. You achieve randomness in the results (shuffles) by inputing random numbers in the shuffling algorithm. It is relatively easy to cook up a number using some system properties in such a way that it has no relation to what was used, say, yesterday. It's a bit harder to make sequences of random numbers, that is, numbers calculated from, but not predictably related to, the previous number in the sequence; but it's also not time-intensive, if you decide to use, for example, round-off errors. As Telir said, there are many well-known, well-working programs for that purpose. 

The very great number of shufflings that goes on online makes true random unnecessary; basically, because between any two of your shufflings, there are many others, so it is not really important if the next shuffler seed is less than ideally random regarding the last one, you will get one that is randomly far away in the sequence anyway (because the number of shuffles between your shuffles is big and random).

What I'm saying is of course not a proof that the MtGO shuffler is truly random; I'm just trying to tell you why your arguments are not good enough to convince me. You're on the right track saying you intend to test it, but you should consider that this has already been done, and the results should be somewhere in this thread.

The reason i want to prove it its not only to show to people its not 100% random is to show something is wrong too like the theory of doom switch basically to show the shuffler is set up in a way thats make it you win or lose before starting the games .

That is a quixotic quest if there ever was one. Magic is such a strange and fantastic game that there is no way to guarantee win/loss before starting except within the minds of the players assuming the deck match ups are relatively fair.

I've won games after a mulligan to 3 without a combo and have lost games I should have won. Skill, decision making, etc play an enormous role in the outcomes. You may percieve the failure of your deck to provide adequate mana as a flaw in the shuffler but odds are it is a flaw in your deck design.

Yes maybe for some players but i am playing since 1993.

I am a pretty good player and before somebody say anything about it yes its have better player then me and its will always have and i can admit it when i see better players then me.

I know when i make mistake and i know when my deck have design problems same goes for lot of my friends thats thinks the same way i think its easy to say maybe its design in my deck and i understand why you say that too i understand lot of people will cry about shuffler because they cant see they own error they makes but for my part i know the error i can make.

and to Xtofyr : its not becuase its not buggued for someone thats its not to others people remember the shuffler is an algorithm they can put whatever they want in this algorithm the proof of somebody thats the shuffler works good for him prove only its works good for him not the others thats the logic

- I've been playing since mid '94 and have had cards since '93. So what? I'd never claim to be good. At best I am mediocre. Longevity doesn't prove skill. (Results do.) I get to say I'm a veteran and let people infer (incorrectly usually) a vast skill that I don't actually possess. But I do not have a claim to any pro points or other grand m:tg accomplishments. (I am noted in a very minor way for being a journalist of the game.)

So this is just not where we want to start. We want to start with: What MOCS, GPTs, PTQs, PTs, GPs, SCGQs, SCGOs have you placed in, etc. If none of the above then you are like me, a mediocre player despite perhaps having potential to be better than you currently are. Let us humblebrag appropriately please.

- What are you smoking? There are no separate behaviors of the shuffler for different people. Only different observed results. This implies to me that the shuffler is random and that people are uncomfortable with just how random it is. My experience is that shifting lands/nonlands around even just 1 for 1 can have a profound affect on how good opening hands are.

- You say you can recognize when there is a flaw in your deck design. Oh really? Tell me more about your insanely great deck building and analyzing skillz. I think we are going to have settle for "Sometimes I am aware of my deck's flaws." Because no one is always 100% aware of every bit of data about their deck unless they are Jon Finkle. You've already admitted you aren't him by saying there are better players than you. (Also he speaks English fairly well. :p)

I submit to you the notion that the nuances that make deck design an art form include knowing how to build our decks to maximum opening hand draw potentials. The more complex the deck idea the finer the subtleties that consitute opening hand quality are. And the finer they are the more skill is needed to see them.

Jan 19, 2013 -- 11:17AM, Xtofyr wrote:

As an aside, one of my favorite all-time posts from this thread was from an individual who tracked their opening lands and posted the data, claiming a flaw in the shuffler. It turned out their results conformed very closely to what one would expect if there was no problem whatsoever. Then the poster flipped his position and claimed the shuffler was TOO random.

I must have missed that post. Did they offer any proof that it was too random?

My imagination isn't good enough to comprehend what "too random" would be like.