Tourney Report: Paris PTQ, St Louis *First*

So, I’ve been playing magic for quite a few years, but yesterday I won my first PTQ. I would like to write a proper tournament report, but my notes from the event are nonexistent and my memory is pretty bad. I do however have all of the cards, so this lets me at least recreate my deckbuilding thought process for anyone who’s interested and after this I can say a few things I remember from the event.

Let me say before I post the cards that for me, deckbuilding is an iterative process that is very dependent on the mana curve. I think everyone considers their deck as a whole when building, but for me, I like to think things like “based on my mana curve, what am I likely to be able to do on a given turn (turn 3, turn 4, etc).” I use this to consider not only what mana and how much mana to play, but also to inform my cuts so that I have a relatively low curve, if possible.

Lands

2 glimmerpost

White

2 Auriok Sunchaser

Fulgent Distraction

2 Ghalma’s Warden

Glimmerpoint Stag

Glint hawk

Kemba, Kha Regent

Loxodon Wayfarer

Salvage Scout

Seize the Initiative

Soul Parry

True Conviction

Vigil for the Lost

Blue

Grand Architect

Halt Order

Lumengrid Drake

Plated Seastrider

Scrapdiver Serpent

Screeching Silcaw

Steady Progress

2 Turn Aside

Vedalken Certarch

Black

Blackcleave Goblin

Contagious Nim

Dross Hopper

Exsanguinate

Fume Spitter

2 Ichor Rats

Moriok Reaver

Plague Stinger

Psychic Miasma

Skinrender

Tainted Strike

Red

Assault Strobe

Barrage Ogre

Blade-Tribe Berserkers

Cerebral Eruption

Furnace Celebration

Galvanic Blast

Shatter

Vulshok Heartstoker

Green

Copperhorn Scout

Tel-Jilad Defiance

Tel-Jilad Fallen

Wing Puncture

Withstand Death

Artifact

2 Auriok Replica

2 Clone Shell

Darksteel Sentinel

Echo Circlet

Glint Hawk Idol

2 Golden Urn

Golem Foundry

Golem’s Heart

Grafted Exoskeleton

Horizon Spellbomb

Ichorclaw Myr

Iron Myr

Livewire Lash

2 Moriok Replica

2 Neurok Replica

Nihil Spellbomb

2 Origin Spellbomb

Perilous Myr

Razorfield Thresher

Soliton

2 Steel Hellkite

Sylvok Lifestaff

Throne of Geth

Trigon of Corruption

Trigon of Mending

Trigon of Rage

Step one in building a sealed deck is usually doing a comparative evaluation of the colors and figuring out which two (or three) colors I want to play. Step one in building this deck involved putting the hellkites into what would have been a fantastic 2-card deck if I had just stopped there, and then a little of this because of same. Next came REAL step one:

White – I want to play this color because it’s really deep, including a couple replicas, and two solid rares. I started with white in the deck.

Blue – Not nearly as deep or powerful as the white, and short on decent removal. I needed something that would complement the white better.

Black – Lots of infect cards, but not really enough to make a deck, plus I don’t really like infect in sealed unless you have decent black and green support cards, which this pool kinda lacked. I was sad to lose skinrender, fume spitter and the replicas, but the next color shores up my weaknesses a lot better.

Red – I love barrage ogre and furnace celebration, and the blast and shatter were really what I was looking for.

Green – Like I said this infect deck is going nowhere, and I’m not going to play infect guys in a non-poison deck (with very rare exceptions), so there’s only like one playable in this color, not counting the Horizon Spellbomb, which I will play in basically any deck.

Here’s my inital sorting, before I made any cuts:

1cc:

glint hawk (definitely playing, card’s fantastic)

salvage scout (not very good, but I was thinking I might need to get back a hellkite. Oh, such greed.)

seize the initiative (wound up cutting this for not being an artifact)

galvanic blast (rujk card is sick)

2 origin spellbomb (I’m not sure there’s an upper limit on the number of these I would play.

sylvok lifestaff (I don’t think I’ve ever cut this card from a limited deck, but it doesn’t look that great on face. cheap artifacts (1 or 2 cc) are really important in a metalcraft deck and this card is solid)

horizon spellbomb (so versatile!)

2cc:

2 auriok sunchaser (I wanted low drops and these guys are terrific if you can support metalcraft)

glint hawk idol (auto-include in white decks)

iron myr (my only mana myr. I longed for one or two more, even off-color would’ve gone in the deck)

perilous myr (perilous for the OPPONENT maybe)

shatter (this card is fantastic and was a welcome answer to some things I would’ve had serious trouble with otherwise)

livewire lash (always play this card)

3cc:

kemba (great with my two equipment! I considered playing echo circlet for his benefit, then came to my senses)

2 auriok replica (solid gray ogre with a sometimes invaluable ability that add to metalcraft. A++++++ would play again) (though, in decks with lots of three drops, I could totally see cutting one or both. That’s not this deck.)

fulgent distraction (I thought of myself as removal-light and figured I might need to tap their guys, plus I had not too many 3 drops. This wound up on the cutting room floor)

4cc:

2 ghalma’s warden (I don’t think I’ve ever actually played this guy before and . . . I didn’t today either. pretty expensive and just a big guy even with metalcraft. On turn four I would rather be playing two artifacts to get my sunchasers active)

glimmerpoint stag (a decent creature, for not being an artifact. wound up in the deck)

Blade-Tribe Berserkers (cut this one. I initially saw my deck as fairly aggro, what with the multiple 2-drop flyers, but I had better cards than this often-just-a-hill-giant)

Trigon of Corruption (very happy to have the removal, even though I couldn’t reload it [or could I?! stay tuned.])

5cc:

Barrage Ogre (I really like this card. I recommend it to anyone playing red)

2 Clone Shell (with these I’m sure to get a dragon every game! but I had too many things that cost more than four and I wound up cutting one)

6cc:

Darksteel Sentinel (a very solid six drop that also happens to be noticeably worse than my other three six drops. I cut him too.

2 Hellkites (“HOP ON MY BACK!”)

True Conviction (seemed ok.)

Notice that at this point I was not playing furnace celebration — I wound up playing it, but I wasn’t yet sure I had enough things that sac. 31 spells in this iteration, time to make major cuts.

-2 ghalmas warden

-blade tribe berserkers

-clone shell

-darksteel sentinel

-seize the initiative

-salvage scout

-fulgent distraction

now I have 23 playables. at this point I could probably have just tossed in 17 land and gone for it, but I felt light on removal, and I really like furnace celebration. I had 6 sac outlets (5 self-contained and the barrage ogre) not quite time to celebrate. I agonized over whether I should play the celebration with what I had and play 16 land (plus myr and green spellbomb for 18 mana sources) but I really wanted to play 17 land, so that I wouldn’t miss hitting hellkites. Ultimately, I cut the glimmerpoint stag for the very synergistic Golden Urn and played 11 plains and 5 mountains. My (somewhat flimsy, perhaps) rationale was that I wanted to make my early game as solid as possible, hitting glint hawk, his idol and metalcraft for sunchasers on cheap artifacts, and the urn gives me something else to sac for celebration, another bit of food for the ogre, and in the worst case scenario, gains me enough life to buy the time to find a hellkite.

The Tournament

My round one opponent kept a one-lander on the play in game one. I’ve heard before that drawing is better in this format, but I played at every opportunity. My deck had the ability to get aggressive and I didn’t want to get overrun by a quick infect draw. Also, one of the reasons to draw in this format is that you can make up lost tempo with myrs (thus making the card advantage relatively costless) but I only had one mana myr. Anyway, this fellow discarded a couple times before playing anything other than his first land, and he was never in that game. I don’t remember game two, but I know that he got mana and had some infect guys and some non-infect guys. I don’t recall ever being very worried that game.

Round two I played a fantasy shop regular who thought he recognized me, and he looked kinda familiar to me too. It was his first PTQ, and he had some bombs, but my bombs were better so I won both games. I do remember getting kemba and lifestaff in both games, but in game one I actually MOVED THE LIFESTAFF ONTO MY FIRST CAT and said go. Rookie mistake that I didn’t repeat, though he noticed it at the time. Both games also involved a furnace celebration, iirc.

Round three I played someone who I’ve played a number of times before, but whose name I can’t recall. He had a decent black/red deck that would have scared me quite a bit more if he had applied more pressure game one, before I could cast my Hellkite (with the other one under clone shell, hl). Game two I also got Hellkite under clone shell, so when he furnace celebrationed the clone shell, I informed him “You’re not gonna like this” and flipped it over.

I hadn’t lost a game at this point. Round four I played Justin Pearson, and he had a very good GB infect deck that managed to hand me my first game loss. I came back in games two and three and recall shattering a sword of body and mind the turn he played it, in response to the equip ability. In hindsight, I probably could have waited for a better time to shatter. Against Justin, for the second time in the day, I refilled the charge counters on Trigon of Corruption by bouncing it with glint hawk. Definitely a fan of that play.

At this point there were four 4-0s and we all just IDd with each other two rounds in a row. I spent some time talking to Donovan who was my round five ID opponent. He explained that he never had any intention of going to Paris, since he would be busy with work in February, so his plan was to rare-draft and then concede to the first person he got paired against who he knew in top 8. Bad News: he played the first round of top 8 and lost. Good News: he was seated to my right for the draft.

Fortified with the quality passes from Mike on my right, my deck was a solid GWr, with Genesis Wave, Asceticism, 2 molder beasts, 2 arrests, arc trail, revoke existence, myr smith, palladium, gold and leaden myrs, and other solid cards. I played three GB infect decks in a row, and only lost one game, the other games weren’t particularly close. I remember my opponents mulliganed a lot. The fact that there were three people drafting infect means that none of their decks could really be that good, unless the packs were really deep with infect cards, which I don’t think they were. I did pass up the chance to get a fairly mediocre infect deck, shipping multiple plague stingers, tel-jilad fallens, blackcleave goblins, etc. I did cack an untamed might that I didn’t play. Honestly, I was trying to get a RGw or RWg furnace celebration deck, but I got no celebrations. molder beast was an acceptable substitute, given my already high amount of removal.

I feel like I should point out that I owe a ton of thanks to the people who helped me succeed yesterday. I’ve talked to Gregg about Scars limited several times per week since the set came out, and his experience has been invaluable. I also learned some choice advice from Gerry Thompson’s blog. Jim Boncek loaned me the sleeves that I used all day, and none of the judges seemed to have a problem with me hovering near almost every judge call. Also, it’s minor, but Matt Schmaltz probably did more to influence my sealed deck-building than any other person. It’s a shame he likely won’t be coming with me to my second PT, as he did to my first. I will probably be drafting at ogre’s slightly more often than before, in preparation for the PT, though I did miss tonight’s draft what with writing this stuff and all. I was going to say how preparing for this pro tour will really cut into my time playing Starcraft II, which I just bought on Friday, but no one wants to hear how heavy my gold is.

tl;dr version: open lots of bombs and draft next to someone who knows what’s good and passes it anyway, whenever possible. Oh, and if you’re gregg, actually going to PTQs works much better than not in terms of earning Qs.

Categories: Uncategorized | Leave a comment

At Long Last: The Payne-Stokes Debate Is Online

[This post was originally written for my employer’s blog, Show-Me Daily.]

On Sept. 30 of this year, at Dressel’s Pub in the Central West End, a small crowd gathered to watch David Stokes and John Payne debate the topic “Are Libertarians and Conservatives Natural Allies?” Now this wonderful debate and its ensuing audience Q&A are available for viewing on our website, or right here:

Enjoy!

Categories: Individual Liberty, Politics, Show-Me Institute | Leave a comment

Wasting Green on Going Green

[This post was originally written for my employer’s blog, Show-Me Daily.]

If you care about going green, you should care about internalizing the costs of pollution.

If you care about sustainability, you should care about property rights.

Why do I bring this up? According to an article over at the Post-Dispatch, Jefferson City has been chosen as one of five state capitals to receive extensive attention from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), in the form of plans intending to make the city greener and more sustainable. The project is called “Greening America’s Capitals,” and calls for “a team of designers to produce illustrations on how targeted neighborhoods in chosen capitals can be improved,” with funding provided by taxpayers nationwide the EPA. The Show-Me Institute’s book club is currently reading a lot about public choice economics, and I could write an entire post about the dispersed costs and concentrated benefits of this particular scheme. Instead, I’ll focus on how everything that is proposed by this federal agency would be better handled by a reduction in hands-on government management.

First, the obvious (at least to me): Strong property rights lead to good stewardship. When the costs of harming things falls on those doing the harm, they tend to try to reduce the harm as much as possible. Namely, when something belongs to you alone, you tend to treat it with more care than if it belongs to someone else. Moreover, when the benefits of improving something accrue to those doing the improvement, more improvements happen. Namely, you’re more likely to work to improve your own things than someone else’s things. There are plenty of historical examples, including the dramatic improvement in crop yield and work participation among the early European settlers in America after switching from a communal system to one based on private property.

When I hear “sustainable” and “going green” I think “good environmental stewardship.” There are two components to this, the first of which is taking care to maintain or improve your own property. The second part involves externalities. For the unfamiliar, externalities are any cost or benefit that falls on someone not directly or willingly involved in an exchange. Maintaining a classic car provides a positive externality to those who enjoy seeing one driven around town but who don’t pay for its upkeep. Pollution is the classic example of a negative externality: harming people who had no say in the pollution’s production. This is a problem with no obvious solution, but (as public choice has clearly shown) a lot of bad possible solutions from the government. Ronald Coase is a Nobel Prize–winning economist who demonstrated that the problem of externalities is really a problem of transaction costs (such as the cost of information). Show me a government solution to an externality problem that doesn’t involve internalizing costs and I’ll show you the law of unintended consequences in action.

Greening America’s Capitals will not help the state of Missouri. It’s a fundamental waste that distracts from the real problems of insufficiently robust property rights and, especially, transaction costs. But these difficult technical problems will never be as broadly appealing as a visible, heart-in-the-right-place EPA program. This is not a new problem in politics.

Categories: Economics, Government Spending, Property Rights, Urban Planning | 4 Comments

New Blog Feature: Random!

[This post was originally written for my employer’s blog, Show-Me Daily.]

Whether you are a regular reader of Show-Me Daily, a sometimes visitor, or a first-time glancer, you can see that there are plenty of great posts right on the front page. But there’s also prolific content from our many authors going back all the way to February 2007. Today, we added a new feature: on the right side of the page, under the Facebook link, you’ll notice there’s a link that says “View a random entry.” You can click it from anywhere on the blog and be whisked away to a surprising, insightful, sometimes hilarious post from anywhere in the history of Show-Me Daily. It’s a random walk down our contributors’ collected wisdom applied to history, economics, and Missouri public policy.

Maybe I’m biased, but I found it to be really fun. I read about:

Granted, I’ve already read most of this before, but if you arrive at the blog only to see something you’ve already read or that isn’t your favorite topic, give the random button a spin — an unexpected insight that will make your day might be just around the corner. Give it a try!

Categories: Show-Me Institute | 2 Comments

Hater, thy name is Caitlin

My coworker, Caitlin Hartsell, has a real problem with me leaving my doors unlocked (and on sunny days, my windows down). She took it upon herself to teach me a lesson. She stole my dashboard koala, Koaladwig von Mises, and blamed it on a fictional villain that I created (with some help from Eric and Shelli), the Shark Ghost. She also brought Eric, Chrissy and Audrey in on it, possibly others. Read more »
Categories: Uncategorized | 20 Comments

A Minor Point About Minimum Wage

[This post was originally written for my employer’s blog, Show-Me Daily.]

The first job I ever got paid for was probably mowing lawns in the ’90s when I was a teen. Earning $10 per lawn sometimes didn’t seem worth it while pushing the mower in the sweltering heat — but I had a friend named Jonathon who, with a ton of initiative and some help from his dad, started a small operation where he mowed several lawns every weekend all summer long to begin saving for college.

The first job for which I ever received a paycheck was developing photos at Walgreens, right around the time I turned 18. I made $6 per hour, and developed lots of photos and stocked lots of sodas and milk during my time there. I never felt entitled to any more money than the people I worked for back then felt inclined to pay me, and I now understand the economic rationale for my relatively low pay back then: I wasn’t very productive.

Compared to Jonathon, or even to the photo clerks who had been there longer than me, it was obvious that I couldn’t do what they did in the same period of time. Jonathon mowed several lawns every week because he made it a point to develop relationships with customers that would last all summer, and touched base with them to make sure they were getting the service they wanted. More senior Walgreens clerks were better at juggling many tasks and completing all the little tasks that needed doing, often because they had both experience and initiative.

By and large, people earn in proportion to what they produce. The Post-Dispatch ran a very well-written op-ed today by 17-year-old Miles Larson, which seems to lack this insight (link via John Combest). Larson argues from an assumption that, given the opportunity, businesses will pay their employees as little as possible. This is true in a sense, but ignores the fact that businesses employ people at all because they produce something valuable. If the value of their production is much higher than the wage they are paid, it creates an incentive for competing businesses to offer to pay them more, and steal them away as an employee. Usually employers are smart enough not to let that happen — not least of which is because they don’t want to have to train a replacement. Most of the time, they just pay employees what they are worth.

There’s a reason that so many teenagers earn minimum wage: They are simply less productive than older, more experienced workers. As one study from the Show-Me Institute pointed out, most workers who earn minimum wage are young and still in school, while older workers — even poor ones — tend to earn well above minimum wage.

Younger workers earn less because they are less productive, not because employers are predatory. Minimum wage is not a refuge for the poor and underprivileged, it is a barrier preventing people whose labor is worth less than $7.25 per hour from selling their time to employers, leading to greater unemployment among the very demographic that minimum wage laws are ostensibly designed to protect.

Categories: Economic Freedom, Economics, Regulation | 13 Comments

The Earnings Tax Is Still Bad, for All the Reasons We’ve Already Said

[This post was originally written for my employer’s blog, Show-Me Daily.]

The Kansas City Star‘s website has a piece today by two Saint Louis University professors arguing against the repeal of the earnings taxes in St. Louis and Kansas City. The bulk of their commentary is intended to be a criticism of this 2006 study by Show-Me Institute executive vice president and University of Missouri–Columbia economics professor Joseph Haslag, but the SLU professors, Lisa Gladson and Jack Strauss, have crafted an argument that doesn’t really address Haslag’s findings. In fact, they seem to have missed the point entirely.

In the Show-Me Institute study, “How an Earnings Tax Harms Cities Like Saint Louis and Kansas City,” Haslag shares his findings that there is a measurable negative impact for cities with an earnings tax. The opening of the paper itself provides an ideal summary: “About one in four large cities in the United States has an earnings tax. I attempt to quantify the relationship between the earnings tax rate and the growth rate of cities relative to their metropolitan statistical areas (MSA). I find that cities with an earnings tax tend to have a significantly lower ratio of city income to MSA income than those without them.”

Haslag goes on to argue that the earnings tax distorts the growth of the MSA, encouraging people to locate in outlying areas rather than in the city center — discouraging investment in the city and reducing per-capita income.

The counter offered by Gladson and Strauss is responding to a different point — one not made in the Show-Me Institute study. They claim that Haslag’s study “offers a simple negative correlation between cities with earnings taxes and real per capita income growth.” This is emphatically not the point being made in the study. Growth implies a comparison over time, whereas the Show-Me Institute policy study to which they refer used side-by-side comparisons of population proportions and where they happened to be located within the MSA. Haslag does not make any arguments about the level of growth, but rather about where the people are located. It may be that the MSAs grow faster or slower because of the presence or absence of an earnings tax, but Haslag’s study drew no connection between growth and the presence of an earnings tax. Haslag may or may not be surprised to learn that Gladson and Strauss “found no relationship between earnings taxes and a city’s income growth, and no evidence that earnings taxes are a reason for a city’s slow growth,” because this is not what he looked at in his study.

Haslag found, with careful, externally reviewed analysis, that the presence of an earnings tax negatively impacts the income of the cities that implement them when residents can easily shift to a nearby area without such a tax. Perhaps after a more careful reading of the piece, Gladson and Strauss will find some salient point on which they can disagree with this study, but for now their offering is an argument without an opponent.

Categories: Local Government, Show-Me Institute, Taxes | 4 Comments

The Story of the Shark Ghost

So, my friend and co-worker Chrissy is afraid of ghosts. And sharks. This weekend I mentioned this to Robert and he got a great idea and called her, anonymizing his call. His whole end of the conversation was basically “Hello? This is the ShaAaAaAark GhoOoOoOost.” End call.
This set off a surprisingly epic typhoon of brainstorming and interneting. We created some google accounts and sent her text messages as well as facebooking, etc.
Here's the rest

Categories: Uncategorized | Leave a comment

take home test from my first semester at UMSL

I came across this today, and I really like it, so here it is:
Many will consider this dry.

Categories: Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Year End Update

crossposted from my LJ:http://zaxec.livejournal.com/45134.html

I wish I had accomplished more this year. Here's what I did.

In the last couple days I received this in the mail. I am typing this entry on it.

I have been cubing a lot more and got my best time ever the other night: 30.19 seconds.

I won one whole piece of power, half of another piece and traded for a third.

I quit driving the taxi, which is sort of a sign that I can make it without doing that. I'd been driving the taxi for three and a half years and was beginning to think that I would never do anything more. Now I support myself partly from my work at the show-me institute and mostly from my financial aid. Hopefully my degree will make me sufficiently employable that I will earn enough to pay off my loans and still survive without driving a taxi.

Mary and I have been together for almost four years and I am as happy about that as I could ever imagine, which is a lot.

I decided this year that I want to become an actuary. I hope that I can make large strides in that direction next year and not have to leave this city, which contains most of my favorite people in the world.

I continued playing the guitar. I hope I never give up and continue to progress in this and the rubik's cube.

I have pretty much completely lost contact with Nick. He and I seem to be in very different places in our lives. I loved the time we spent together as friends, and I am happy with the person it made me. I guess I wonder if something will change to cause us to interact more in the future. In the near term, I just don't see it.

I became more comfortable with being an atheist this year.

Veen went away this year, but I think we will stay close. We can't help it.

If I'm not mistaken, S/A has been going out of her way to make sure we still hang out, despite me no longer cabbing. I am very happy about this. Of course there's book club. If anybody wants to see me socially, I recommend coming to there, or stopping by my apt. I'm usually at one or the other in the evenings.

SMI sent me to Asheville, NC for a three-day conference for free-market state think tanks in November. That was incredible, and I think I got a lot out of it. It was also the first time I had been on a plane since Venice in 2003.

It was this year's visioncon where the whole gang and I did our First Annual Whedonstravaganza Singalong. That was excellent. Also, our group won the visioncon masquerade. I was Dr Emmet Brown.

I did more computer programming this year than I have since HS and I enjoyed it immensely.

I went shooting for the first time this year since I went with Vroman like 5 years ago.

I finished another year of college and am now one semester from my degree.

I watched a lot of movies and read a number of books. Mary and I read entire books out loud to one another. Among the books we've done this with this year that I hadn't read before: brave new world, the pillars of the earth, and bridge to terabithia.

This year I decided to start keeping track of things like this by writing about them before the year is over. (in about 6 hours)

Categories: Uncategorized | 4 Comments