Choose your own standard

[Shadowhunter483]

It seemed like it was well received at the Invitational this year, what do you guys think of it as a constructed format? For anyone who doesn't know here are the rules. You pick any core set from 6th or above and two blocks. The banned list is anything banned in legacy or anything banned in its own block.

[Reindeercards]

I love the idea of the format but I'm not sure its friendly from a judge's point of view.

1) It'd be difficult for most judges to read through a decklist and figure out if its legal without consulting Gatherer.

2) Players will have questions about whether the cards in their opponent's decks are legal. And all of those will be resolved by a judge who will likely have to go look it up.

You might know you are officially playing from the card lists of 9th, Visions, and Scourge. But you are likely to be playing actual copies of cards printed in Revised through 10th plus cards from other expansions that happen to be on the 9th edition cardlist.

Even if someone isn't trying to be devious and hide which sets he is actually playing, a normal person's decklist is likely to be a jumble of cards from such a variety of sets that it'll raise questions.

[mercenarybdu]

The format is brilliant to promote on the larger scale.

I would like to see this format be played on the larger scale as well as Legacy to up the eternal format count to four.

But then again not many people are that bright by my understanding as they couldn't figure out if a certain card was in block k, block v or block i to even Core set 10 or 25? So there is a lot of stuff to be done with that format before it could roll out of the factory such as getting people familiar with the Eternal Pool of cards as well as where each card was printed along with what is not legal in both the Legacy and Block Formats (because Blocks IMTUM---M all have banned cards).

Or as I like to put it in terms of this format: it's the format where you are not allowed to use Tinker decks (tinker is still legal in Block) or Affinity decks (the whole deck type is only legal outside Block) (because those are the most obvious decks people are going to go for when they walk along into this format).

[PV]

Not a fan; There aren't really many options (sure, there are plenty of options, but some are just better than the others) and the cards are not easy to get.

[bsushort]

The format has some promise, but it's really hard to tell from just the invitational. Someone would have to run a large scale tournament before you really get a clear picture of the format and it's meta.

My hope is that it's on par with the current Extended card pool, but with hopefully an even larger variety of playable archetypes due to the enlarged card pool. Has anyone here played any small scale tournaments that can comment with a little experience? It would be good to have an some input from people that may have looked a little deeper at the potential meta.

[mercenarybdu]

The format has some promise, but it's really hard to tell from just the invitational. Someone would have to run a large scale tournament before you really get a clear picture of the format and it's meta.

My hope is that it's on par with the current Extended card pool, but with hopefully an even larger variety of playable archetypes due to the enlarged card pool. Has anyone here played any small scale tournaments that can comment with a little experience? It would be good to have an some input from people that may have looked a little deeper at the potential meta.

I haven't seen any events for this format but I have tried to put one of these decks together and it was fun as heck as the deck I was playing was an underpowered version of Recurring Gifts (Tempest/Kamigawa/X). I shook up the heads of my community when I asked someone to play their T2 deck against my crazy T2 deck. Since they were familiar with Kamigawa already the part that stuck them most was the Tempest Block part.

The deck worked but the problem was the card drawing part was kinda slow since I didn't have the Sifts in the MB to help me out.

[mercenarybdu]

I just recently posted my first deck review on this format on a prototype I built off the top of my head. The video could be found at the link bellow.......

https://www.youtube.com/mercenarybdu/

......I hope this could give you a clear indication that I am interested in that format other than just eternal ones. With a bit of luck that format could too make it to the grander stage other than just be something you see at the invitational for fun and kicks.

[MagicRage]

I like it, at least in theory. Admittedly I have never played the format.

It would be nice if StarCity or some other place that runs large MTG tourneys could be persuaded (perhaps by Wizards) to do a test tournament. Throw out a big prize and people will be convinced to participate. That way they can see what are serious problems.

Or maybe Wizards should try running their own at GenCon or something, alongside stuff like the Vintage & Legacy Champs tourneys?

One way to at least partially solve the "was that card printed in that block?" concern would be to have a place on the decklist where a player checks off the blocks & core set they are using.

Then again, while this is the most obvious hypothetical concern, is it really any worse than "FOO was in 8th and 9th Edition, but did they reprint in it 10th too?" or "what sets are legal in Extended?" or the rather sizeable B&R lists for Vintage and Legacy or players who show up with decks that are mostly/entirely foreign cards ("What is that card and what does it do?") In other words, I wonder if it would really be that much more of a problem than Extended, Vintage, or Legacy tournaments normally have?

BTW I think it is Core Sets starting with 5th rather that 6th.

[Shadowhunter483]

yea your right it is 5th forward sry

[gleemax]

I understand that there could be issues with judges having to do deck checks to verify cards, but it's really not as big of a problem as you think. The solution? Make the players do the work. When people submit there decklist simply require them to mark which sets the cards they are using are from. (Excluding basic lands) This can easily be figured out in the gatherer and if this format becomes big, they could make a new gatherer function where you can save cards you serached for and print them in a list similar to what the gather spits out. So a decklist would basically look like a card list with a couple of symbols after each card (assuming those cards got reprinted). Decklists get submitted and all are verified (or a random few if the tournament is too large) and whenever there's a question the judge can just pull up the decklist and verify that the symbols match what they should. Also, I guess, the could also raise the penalty level for submitted a deck with illegal cards in this format so that the punishment would be high enough so you just won't risk doing it.....maybe a public canning would be enough?

[Reindeercards]

The problem is with the judges doing checking decklists and doing deck checks.

It doesn't do any good for a player to tell the judge, verbally or in writing, that Spitting Spider was in 9th. The judge has to know its in 9th...or he has to look it up.

Judges don't have all of that information memorized. Nor can they easily look up a dozen cards out of every player's decklist.

Once play starts, players are going to look at the other person's deck, raise their hand, and yell, "Judge". Then the judge is going to come over, maybe glance at the deck in question, and say, "hell if I know, let me see if they've checked this decklist yet". He'll go over and the decklist won't be checked because you can't get decklists checked in any reasonable time period. So the judge will have to kick the deckcheck person off of the computer and spend 10 minutes checking the decklist he's worried about. Then go back to the table, let the match resume, and give them an extra 10 minutes to finish.

Then that judge will answer one of the other 10-15 people who have their hands up because they have questions about their opponent's deck. Four or five hours later when round one is finished, they can start round two.

By the way, Spitting Spider was in 8th, not 9th.

[coboney]

I'm not sure if this is feasible - but perhaps what you do is have a different registration sheet. On this sheet you put what sets/blocks you are using and what edition your card is from. AKA if you are using Ice Age/Ravnica/5th Edition you write that down. For pain lands you have to write down - like Brushland - 1fifth, 2 Tenth 1 Ice Age. That way the judges could quicker varify - It doesn't deal with it all but it might speed it up slightly.

[mercenarybdu]

The format pushes the envelop on actually remembering which card came from which set and how many times it has been reprinted in a core set or in a general block set. I still like to see it go mainstream to see the reaction on the judges faces as well as the players other than an idea that bounces around the invitational tables for a shot at a special card to be printed in a future set.

[bsushort]

As a judge, I don't see it as that big of an issue for deck checks. Yeah, there are a lot of obscure cards that we may not know what set they are from, but most of those cards are the unplayable crap cards that don't show up in too many decklists (the heavily played ones should be fairly familiar). When they do, it should be easy enough to check it, but most lists will be pretty simple.

As for checking when an opponent calls a judge, that shouldn't be too tough either. At tournaments in my area we typically have at least one floor judge with a digital copy of Oracle ready. Yeah, he'll get a few more calls than usual, but it shouldn't be too tough. After all, it's only the reprints that are ambiguous. The rest will have the symbol right there on the card.

I'd love to see Choose Your Own Standard as a sanctioned tournament format. If nothing else, it will provide a new frontier for deck construction for a while, and one that could change more drastically with new sets than Extended or Eternal formats do.

[noticen24]

Not a fan; There aren't really many options (sure, there are plenty of options, but some are just better than the others) and the cards are not easy to get.

______________

teen porn
Prostate massage

[nirvana]

Wikileaks: Sudan's President Bashir 'stole billions'
President Omar al-Bashir (file photo) Sudan has denied allegations that Mr Bashir stole public funds
Continue reading the main story

* Darfur: World's favourite war?
* In pictures: Portraits of Darfur
* Q&A: Darfur conflict
* Who are Sudan's Darfur rebels?

Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir has been accused of siphoning off up to $9bn of his country's funds and placing it in foreign accounts, according to leaked US diplomatic cables.

Diplomats quoted the chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) as saying that much of the money may be stashed in London banks.

The allegations released by the Wikileaks website have been published by the Guardian newspaper.

Sudan has denied the claims.

The cables quoted ICC chief prosecutor Luis Moreno Ocampo as telling US officials that some of the funds may be held by the part-nationalised Lloyds Banking Group. He reportedly said it was time to go public with the scale of Mr Bashir's theft.

"Ocampo suggested if Bashir's stash of money were disclosed (he put the figure at $9bn), it would change Sudanese public opinion from him being a 'crusader' to that of a thief," one report by a senior US official said.

"Ocampo reported Lloyds bank in London may be holding or knowledgeable of the whereabouts of the money," the cable said.

Lloyds has responded by saying it has no evidence of holding funds in Mr Bashir's name.

"We have absolutely no evidence to suggest there is any connection between Lloyds Banking Group and Mr Bashir. The group's policy is to abide by the legal and regulatory obligations in all jurisdictions in which we operate," the bank said.

Correspondents say that if Mr Ocampo's claim about Bashir's fortune is correct, the Sudanese funds being held in London banks amount to one tenth of the country's annual GDP.
Claims 'ludicrous'

Mr Ocampo is said to have discussed evidence of the stash with the Americans just days after issuing an arrest warrant for Mr Bashir in March 2009 - the first issued by the court against a serving head of state.

Mr Bashir was indicted last year for seven counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity in the Darfur region, with a further three counts of genocide added in July.

A spokesperson for the Sudanese government dismissed the claim, describing it as further evidence of the ICC's political agenda in discrediting the Sudanese government.

"To claim that the president can control the treasury and take money to put into his own accounts is ludicrous - it is a laughable claim by the ICC prosecutor," Khalid al-Mubarak, government spokesperson at the Sudanese embassy in London, told the Guardian.

"Ocampo is a maverick, and this is just part of his political agenda. He has failed miserably in all his cases and has refused to investigate Iraq or Gaza - he needs success and he has targeted Bashir to increase his own importance."

"Attempts to smear not only Bashir but Sudan as a whole are well known, and are clearly linked with anti-Arab sentiments and Islamophobia," Mr Mubarak said.





__________________________________________________________________________________________________
English escorts
London Escorts

[Sponsored content]