Chesham PTQ Results

[Daniel Royde]

Top 8:

Jack Ho,
Chifley,
Stu,
Eugene,
Rob Wagner (Leeds)
+3 others I don't know

Quarters:

Jack beat Eugene
Stu beat don't know
Rob beat Chifley
Don't know beat Don't know

Stu beat Jack,
Rob lost to don't know.

Stu vs don't know = I left...?

112 turn out, well run event in a nice venue-

Don't forget to say good things about it to help encourage Wizards to give them more PTQs.

[Tom Reeve]

Stu won :)

[Jason Savage]

The venue was nice and local places to eat! :-)

[Dan Barrett]

Yay!

Stu needs to get back on the train, cuz right now it feels kinda pointless entering PTQs - on the offchance I top 8, I'll eventually have to play Stu, and there is a 95% chance of losing such an encounter.

Tom Reeve said:

Stu won :)

[Gary Lynch]

Wasn't it you who wanted to get better and complained about the level of players at the games club?

Perhaps that's exactly the reason you should man up and play ptq's. There will be good people there for you to play against.

The other option is just continue drafting at the games club and use that as an excuse for not winning.

Dan Barrett said:

Yay! Stu needs to get back on the train, cuz right now it feels kinda pointless entering PTQs - on the offchance I top 8, I'll eventually have to play Stu, and there is a 95% chance of losing such an encounter.

Tom Reeve said:

Stu won :)

[Dan Barrett]

Fair point Gary - but playing good players is much more valuable in constructed than the much more luck-based sealed format, no?

Will be attending Gravesend and London for sure, just busy atm so couldn't make Chesham yday...

[Charlie Grover]

Stu isnt that much better than anyone else; I dont think hes much better than Rigby/ Scoones/ Me/ Barnett/ Jason/ Harle/ maybe matt light + quentin (the ringers) etc. He's just much more arrogant. He beat me in the bubble round at 4-1 and we decided after talking at the end of the game that we made the same amount of mistakes; he should have won the first that I won and I should have stabilized the one he won. He also massively misbuilt his pool, but Barnett rebuilt it for him.

[Gary Lynch]

Actually don't believe this sealed format is that luck based. It's just harder to build your deck properly. Lots of people at the ptq were siding in loads o cards or just into different decks completly. Add to that most of the good players made top 8 or went 5-2 and that says a lot.

Also constructed only counts if youbhave infi money for cards. Otherwise it doesn't matter how good you are.

Dan Barrett said:

Fair point Gary - but playing good players is much more valuable in constructed than the much more luck-based sealed format, no? Will be attending Gravesend and London for sure, just busy atm so couldn't make Chesham yday...

[Jason Savage]

I misbuilt my pool slightly and had to change it after game 1, even if I won game 1 and I still went 5-2 and was mana screwed and mull'ed to 5 in the last round, it was more disappointing as I think my deck was better than his!



That Ginger One said:

Stu isnt that much better than anyone else; I dont think hes much better than Rigby/ Scoones/ Me/ Barnett/ Jason/ Harle/ maybe matt light + quentin (the ringers) etc. He's just much more arrogant. He beat me in the bubble round at 4-1 and we decided after talking at the end of the game that we made the same amount of mistakes; he should have won the first that I won and I should have stabilized the one he won. He also massively misbuilt his pool, but Barnett rebuilt it for him.

[James Mills]

Sealed is not luck based - stop saying this!!!

Also are you honestly telling me that constructed isn't luck based after just coming out of a format where poeple keep complaining about losing to turn 3 SOLA.




Dan Barrett said:

Fair point Gary - but playing good players is much more valuable in constructed than the much more luck-based sealed format, no?

Will be attending Gravesend and London for sure, just busy atm so couldn't make Chesham yday...

[Glenn Goldsworthy]

all magic is luck based, but there are viarables, sealed you can get a better pool of cards than other people but constructed is a lot about pairings, it is the old swings and roundabouts.

I just generally hate playing magic at the moment so not sure why I am commenting, I am currently playing 15 lands in this sealed format and constantly getting flooded, managed mindslaver twice on turn 10 by tapping 10 lands, obviously lost those games as all I could do was not attack.

basically in any king of card game there is an element of luck

[Dan Barrett]

Dude, you can't say it isn't.

I opened 2 Venser's Journal, 2 lands, and 2 other unplayable rares while I saw others get 3/4 bombs.

Come on...

James Mills said:

Sealed is not luck based - stop saying this!!!

Also are you honestly telling me that constructed isn't luck based after just coming out of a format where poeple keep complaining about losing to turn 3 SOLA.




Dan Barrett said:

Fair point Gary - but playing good players is much more valuable in constructed than the much more luck-based sealed format, no?

Will be attending Gravesend and London for sure, just busy atm so couldn't make Chesham yday...

[Charlie Grover]

Yeah, but thats just as unlikely as double mull to 5 in round 1 of a constructed event. Its more luck based than constructed and draft, but you can get sooooo much mileage out of a bad pool; pretty sure Eduardo had 0 bombs but he was 4-0 going into round 5; but his luck turned as suddenly as mine. Stu didnt have any bombs and top 8'ed. I dont think Eugene's pool was bomby and he top 8'ed. This sealed format is nut high for skill based play.