WINNING A PRO TOUR QUALIFIER, A DEDICATED PLAN

[John Galli]

First off, make sure you read this post.

Secondly, take time to consider what I'm saying, as while the information is fairly straight forward, it's something that demands a lot but could ultimately pay off with some serious benefits.

That all said, allow me to propose my plan-

For the last 2-3 years, I have played Magic with a overlying goal of winning a PTQ. I even went so far as to include it as a New Year's Resolution, and made a valiant attempt at it (especially during last year's standard season). Travis, Chris, Pat, Matt, and to some extent Zach and Karl have also been along for that ride. We have all busted our ass trying to get our play skills in shape, fit in time for practice, and spend lots of loot to get singles we need. In the end, we've all had an enjoyable time playing a fantastically intelligent game and had some good finishes, BUT that PTQ berth still lurks.

The PTQ victory is not easy. If John Trevarnus has never done it and Jasper/Adrian haven't done it in a few years, that says a lot. They put in probably 2-3 days a week more testing on average, they play MTGO, and they proxy more. That said, they all have pretty firm holdings in their beliefs on cards and playstyle, and I think this is a major problem for that squad. Regardless, they are making an effort just as we are. I also wouldn't say our efforts aren't "a lot". We put in a lot of pratice towards what most would consider a casual hobby.

So onto my proposition. Lets cut the bullshit out of our equation for 1 month. We have what could be an awesome "Magic Team" but we're letting other stuff get in the way. None of us have the time or anti-socialness to dedicate our lives to Magic, but I think we can all take 1 month where we go HARDCORE and actually make a big run at a PTQ. States was fun in testing, but I'm talking way more hardcore. Lets pick a PTQ, maybe say 5-6 months down the road, and when it gets to be a month before the tournament, we agree to meet for practice sessions 3 times each week. We proxy all possible decks, we make adjustments as the meta adjusts, and we actually rotate what we play at testing instead of just playing the deck we want to play. We take notes. We talk during matches. We discuss travel plans ahead so that arrangements are firm and money does not become an issue. We all try to play the same deck - I know many of you hate that, but honestly you get so much better conversation and strategy from honing a deck as a team. Throw playstyles out the window, I'll play whatever until we make it work.

We're not John T, Adrian, and Jasper. I'm not trying to be like them. I like my life, and I like that Magic is just a part of it. But hot damn if I'm not playing this game with a zest to win something, to prove that I have what it takes to be an elite at this game. I know you guys are too. And I know you're capable of it, but none of us are without each other's help.

So I'm asking all of you, consider this proposition, don't post today (actually think it over), and when you're ready share your thoughts. I'm also asking that if you can refrain from posting other extended posts for a day or two, I'd like to keep this post at the top without making it a sticky.

[Travis Lannoye]

If this post is too early, too bad. I won't be able to get on the forums again until Monday, and I want to share my thoughts while they are still fresh in my head.

The first time I read this over, it sounded a lot like communism. Great idea, looks really solid on paper, but it just doesn't work in reality. We've all been in that mode of "all I need to do is grind hard-core for a month before a PTQ and I'll totally prepared and ready to go". Then, reality sets in, in the form of work/school/family plans/girlfriends/parties/other bullshit, and eventually we all end up in the same familiar place: at the side events, drafting with the other 1-3-drops.

Now, I don't want this post to sound like I am against the idea of going for a PTQ, because I think that would be really cool. HOWEVER, I think there are a couple of flaws in the proposal, and in the interest of positivism I'll try to offer alternatives or solutions if possible:

1. Limiting ourselves to one PTQ. One thing I know about winning tournaments in general (not just in Magic) is this: you always need a combination of luck AND skill to win. The luck factor is something that you just can't account for, even if you spend 12 hours a day, 6 days a week testing. Sometimes your opponent will just draw the nuts on you, and there's just nothing you can do about it. If we limit ourselves to just one PTQ, we make the luck factor that much more relevant. Furthermore, if we all enter that one PTQ, and we don't do well, then what? Did we really just spend a whole month of preparation for just one day? That seems wasteful.

ALTERNATIVE: Enter multiple PTQs in the same format, in roughly the same time period (within a week or two of each other). If we enter one PTQ, scrub out, and LEARN from the experience (like I did at the Madison PTQ playing Grixis Scepter), we'll be that much better at the next PTQ that we enter (which will likely be very similar, despite a few subtle changes). Plus, we can't ALL win the same PTQ (there can be only one winner).

2. Playing the same deck. Let me start off by saying that I totally agree with the point about getting better conversation and strategy from honing a deck as a team. This is absolutely true. It is highly advantageous to know how other decks work in addition to your own.

However, it's just not realistic for EVERYONE to play the same deck. For example, if the "group deck" happens to contain a full set of New Jaces, plus a full set of Baneslayers, how many people actually think they would be able to afford this deck? Certainly not everyone. I know I had to wait until tax season to get my Baneslayers. Let's not even discuss the difficulty of getting everyone a full set of Tarmogoyfs.

Another point on playing the same deck: there might not be just one good deck out there. Most competitive Magic formats are diverse enough that there are at least half a dozen "best" decks out there.

ALTERNATIVE: If the goal behind playing the same deck is to generate better conversation about how to build and play the deck, then we should switch decks during the testing process. For example, in Extended testing, we have Matt's Zoo, Karl's Bant, my Scepters, Pat's Gifts, and John's GW. Rather than have everyone playing the same deck over and over again, we should each take a certain amount of time (an hour, a day, a week, whatever) where we play AGAINST our own decks. This will give us a better idea of what other people are trying to do, and how things look from across the table. Plus, since everyone will have played each other's decks, we'll be able to give better feedback.

3. Waiting until one month before "the PTQ" to start testing. This just seems inefficient. If we're picking a tournament 5-6 months down the road, why not spend those 5-6 months testing and getting ourselves prepared? Why wait until just one month before the tournament? Suppose that one month is the month of June, and I can't make certain testing sessions because I have my birthday, my family reunion, and I'm standing up in a wedding? Or suppose it's the month that Pat has finals? Or John has his anniversary and his dad's birthday and...you get the point.

Furthermore, how do we know that one month of "cutting the bullshit" before a major tournament will be enough to push us over the top? What if it takes two months, or six months, or six days, or six years?

ALTERNATIVE: We start getting prepared as soon as we decide which event we want to prepare for. If we pick an event that's 5-6 months away, we prepare for 5-6 months. If we pick an event that's 2-3 months away, then we prepare for 2-3 months. But let's not waste valuable preparation time if we've identified an event down the road.

4. Throw playstyles out the window. That's just not going to happen. It sounds like an easy thing to do, but in reality people don't change who they are. I know I'm especially guilty of trying to do this, and it's hard to admit that, but it's true.

Furthermore (hot damn I sound like a broken record ), different play-styles are probably a good thing. Having a mix of red players (John), blue players (me, Rich), green players (Chris), white players (aren't we all?), and black players (Karl and John wish they were black players) brings different ideas to the table, ideas that we might not have thought about with just our own narrow perspectives.

ALTERNATIVE: We all try to play each other's decks, and try to get a feel for what other people are trying to do. We still have one main idea that's our own, but we try to get an understanding of not only what others do, but what they do against us (what they fear, what they can handle, how they can handle it, etc). Then, when it comes time to play in the big event, go with whatever you're most comfortable with. In the end, there are plenty of decks out there that have a good chance to win, so playing something you're comfortable with is more important.

Now then, on to the good ideas:
- Proxy all possible decks. This one goes without saying. If there's something out there that we haven't played against, we need to figure out how to play it and how to beat it. 'Nuff said.
- Take notes. This is something I've tried to do at times, but haven't done very well. It would be really nice to be able to look back at the last ten games I played to determine reasons why I won or lost against X player playing X deck. If we could identify those reasons, it would make it much easier to generate better results.
- Discuss travel plans ahead of time. Another one that goes without saying.
- Agree to meet for practice sessions 3 times a week. This seems reasonable. Between Tuesdays (standard), Thursdays (EDH) and Sundays (who really does anything on Sundays?), we've already dedicated this much time to playing the game. We just need to keep the eyes on the prize.
- Talk during matches. Figure out how a match (or a game) was won. This might sound like making excuses, but I really do believe that every game or match is won or lost for one or more reasons. Is it because I top-decked that Path to Exile? Is it because you curved out perfectly? Is it because I baited you into my Trap card? Also, what required the most attention? Did you feel the need to play around Negate, even if I didn't have it? Did you feel like you couldn't pump your Leech because I might Bolt it in response? Why/why not? Things like that are important to know.

In conclusion, although I have a few issues with specific parts of the proposal, overall I think it's a good idea. We've all been busting our asses and our wallets (which may or may not be near our asses) to try and make something out of this silly game. It's about time we got something to show for it!

[John Galli]

Wow, that was a shamelessly predictable response from you Travis. I have a thorough in-depth reply that I'll give at some point, but for now I'm having a good day and your post is about the only sour note on it. It's just another notch on the "I'm growing tired of Travis's attitude and closed mindset to things" that I've had going for quite some time.

I understand what your saying, and I've taken those factors that you mentioned into consideration, but I largely disagree with you on almost all fronts. This here is a difference in perspective, and there's some stuff you said that I'd largely like to discuss. I'll make a followup post at some point, hoping that it again doesn't fall on deaf ears as this monumental effort of a post I made has.

Lastly, I'd like to hear OTHERS thoughts from those of you who agree with this plan. If you don't, then no worries just don't get onboard with it. If you do, then we can start working on a month to enact the plan. Call my attitude here communist/conformist or whatever you want, but Travis I can pick apart major flaws with everything you said and like I mentioned before I plan on explaining fuller when I have time and when it's worth my time.

Plus rarely has anything I've heard you say or do ever worked, and I don't scrub 1-3 at PTQs and play in side events very often unless it's limited. So speak for yourself.

[Travis Lannoye]

You're absolutely right, John. Forget I ever said anything, including the part about how

Mar 5, 2010 11:53:50 GMT -5 Travis Lannoye said:

although I have a few issues with specific parts of the proposal, overall I think it's a good idea.

[John Galli]

yeah I read your entire spew, it doesn't make it any less displeasing

[Travis Lannoye]

Yet, all you seem to see is "YOUR IDEA SUX GTFONOOB", which is not the point of my post.

[matth]

I'm not going to get myself into this argument between you two, though it might become clear whose side I'm favoring, all I'm going to say is to some extent we all wish to get something more serious happening.
From my perspective:
Playing the same deck is nice if the team is uber-experienced and can play wildly different styles to what they're used to. Force me to play Negate in a tournament deck and I will quit. I went 1-3-1 at that PTQ partly because I had no idea how to play Negate in Zoo and subsequently punted against Living End, a match my build should have taken. I've since switched back to Tribal Zoo. I won't force my style of play on anyone else, either, for the same reason.
On what or which PTQ we should gun for, John, I think you're referring to how well we did at States and how much preparation we did. You're ignoring the fact that I played maybe one Jund deck the entire tournament and got several lucky topdecks against Adrian and the Grixis guy to get where I got. I also made a ton of mistakes. If you want to get ready for a PTQ 5-6 months down the line, and are really serious about it, I want you to show up at Magic Game Day tomorrow. I hope I speak for all of us when I say that we would rather go to a constructed PTQ than a Sealed PTQ. If that is the case, then we need to be prepared for the Amsterdam PTQs, which are Standard, and less than three months away. Jund -- or any other deck you're currently playing -- will still be a deck come June, so again, if you're this serious to make pointed and lengthy posts about being serious for the next PTQs, there is a Standard tournament at Misty tomorrow.
Finally, as for myself, my job is abusing me like a red-headed stepchild. I haven't had a night off this week, and I won't have a morning off all next week. I have much bigger things to worry about right now than a silly, little, expensive hobby, like planning my escape, which might just take me from Madison. If I don't seem all that committed to the "team," then it's because I have a lot of bullshit I'm wading through.

[crazedferret]

I like how travis was unable to color code me....

As much as I'd like to win a PTQ, I don't think that one month long hardcore playtest session in the midst of all else that I have to do for one tournament is going to cut it. Don't get me wrong, I'm not opposed to the idea either. There would clearly be strong benefits.

This is the way I see this game. There are several facets all of which can be controlled to a degree.

First of all there is the quality of deck- there are obviously lists that are better than others to fight the majority of the field. All of us are trying to accomplish this in our own ways which brings a lot of individual play style to the game. The month long session would certainly help a discussion of card choices and help us figure out what those choices need to be; however, I don't think it is possible for us all to agree on a "best" deck. The discussion would certainly be very beneficial.

Second there is skill of the player. We all are pretty well skilled at this game having played it so long and certainly the more we play the better we'll be and certainly hardcore testing would help here. It would develop a familiarity with the card sets and deck play styles which is obviously good; however, I think it is critical that we mimic the current tournament environment (I call it tourney meta) as much as possible. Which is easiest accomplished by going to tournaments and I mean lots more than one. This route would give us better idea of what needs to happen with our decks to fight the field and better control of some of the intangibles.

3rd, Intangibles, What I'm talking about here is the misplays, the psych-outs the mental in game choices, the nerves, the fatigue of a day long endurance event, etc. Certainly these things can be improved upon with hardcore testing, but only if it truly mimics the tournament atmosphere. Also in game notes are not a bad idea to help with these as well.

4th Money, Buys cards necessary to play the "best" deck list, gets into tourneys etc. It is also in short supply for me at least. Ultimately how much money is needed depends on how you go about things, but to truly do things right IMO you should really have 4 of all playable cards or at the very least access to them for whatever type you play. This would allow for ease of audibles changes etc, if you find the tourney meta is completely different from what you expected. This is not really controllable for me as I work maybe 18 hours a week and most of my income goes to gas, food, and credit bills. So I cannot really work some idea that I have access to none of the cards for, unless of course you want to buy it for me

5th Time, I have very little available. I would assume that is part of the reason you want to put a hardcore months worth of effort together. AGAIN I'm not against this, but I would find this difficult regardless. Where I use my time is not something I can control right now. School beats out magic for me. When summer roles around maybe I will have more discretion as to where I put my time, but it is pretty likely that I will either have to spend it finding a new job (this store may be sold soon) or working as much as possible to pay for school.

6th Luck You cannot deny that this plays a factor. You can have the best deck, the most skilled player, all the best cards, experience playing many tourneys, flawless in game performance, all the time and money needed and still lose. Land screw anyone? Top deck anyone? It happens. And as tourneys are typically around 8 rounds (at least the major ones) there is more room for luck to play a factor throughout the day. You can diminish the impact of luck but you cannot actually control luck unless you cheat. The only real way to control luck is to put yourself in the position often enough to succeed until you finally do succeed. (and then of course claim it was all skill)

So If I could remove all time management and money issues from this game, I think the most important thing to do would be to play in as many tournaments as possible. This way
we learn tournament meta - a more global concept - as opposed to solely local meta - shop meta (skill and deck tech aspects), we maximize our chances of winning a PTQ by quantity (luck aspect), we get good at being in a tourney (intangibles), then follow it up with play and research in the between times to keep the practice and familiarity levels high.

Having said all that, I'm STILL up for a month long hardcore play-test session in preparation for one shot at a PTQ event even though I don't think it is the right way to got about it simply because I enjoy playing the game.

[karl]

i am all for putting in work for a ptq that i dropped down to 32 hours a week at work so i could have a little more time to test. the thing is if we want to give it our best shot at winning a ptq that this will have to be our jobs. if i have the time i will be with you at the front line giving it my best shot you can always call me if i am off i will do my best to be there

[karl]

yo travis i am as black as night playa

[JediCheese]

I wanted to do a variant of this, but it isn't possible with my current work schedule and income.

First, you need lots of weekends off to go travel and play in many PTQ's. Planning for a single PTQ doesn't do anything because you end up getting even a little unlucky in two rounds (bad draw, opponent top deck, bad matchups, whatever) and you are going home without anything.

Second, you need money. Either you buy sets of whatever is out before they release or you end up paying through the nose to pick up whatever is the deck de jour at the moment. I thought my job could support it but it can't. You need to dedicate $4000 a YEAR to buying cards in order to play on the PTQ circuit (this doesn't count entry fees or traveling costs). Why so expensive? It will cost you $800 for a playset of every set that comes out (4 sets a year) and another $800 to pick up older stuff you don't have yet.

[an aside, how many years of $800 per year would allow you to buy playsets of dual lands, rav lands, old fetch's, and everything else needed to play competitive decks in older formats? From a casual glance, I think you could put together a pretty impressive extended legal set in ~2 years and another ~3 years for Legacy. It would take you much longer for Vintage but IMHO I think the majority of the cost going from Legacy to Vintage is the Power 9 which is will cost you something like $4500 which is multiple years of buying power...]

Ultimately, I have come to the realization that for a various number of reasons, those on this board have been unwilling or unable to put down on this goal (including myself). It's not like you have to be on the Pro Tour in order to have fun playing Magic. I enjoy playing Magic and if I find a situation that allows me the time and money to make a run at the Pro Tour, I think I will do it.

Oh, and I would totally expect this to be a multi-year effort. The first year would be learning the ropes. Knowing the rules for Extended and then practicing them a little so you know all the various interactions would take a year easily. Then your second year you try to make a run at top 8 in PTQ's. I would be amazed if you got a Top 8 in your first year of PTQ'ing (and I'm talking about going to 40+ PTQ's a year).

I came VERY close to a top 8 in extended last year and I hit 6 PTQ's, practiced that deck ALOT, and played a very easy deck to learn and doesn't require many choices. If I was playing a deck like Faeries or whatever the blue deck is running around, I wouldn't have had a chance that first year.

PS: if you want to get on the Pro Tour, go playtest with Adrian/John T/Jasper. You will learn a ton off them and learn faster than trying to reinvent the wheel.

[matth]

Knee-jerk reaction, but I have to disagree with the extreme financial cost:
$4000??
I'm not going to claim that this is a cheap hobby, but I've gotten by pretty well the past year with just drafting and picking up Extended cards out of season and grabbing cards you know you'll play before they shoot up in value. Carpooling to PTQs and the like also saves a lot of money, though I know we have yet to take a proper road trip this year.

Your multi-year plan doesn't make any sense either. What's so wrong about trying to gun for the top from your first PTQ? Even if you can't playtest as often as Adrian/John T/et al, there are plenty of good articles on multiple sites that explain the top decks and what to expect from them. Let's not forget sealed PTQs, where luck plays a much greater role in determining success.

[Travis Lannoye]

There's nothing wrong with TRYING to go for the top at your first PTQ, or your second, or your tenth. However, it is about as realistic to try and assume that you will make the final table of a major poker tournament with a couple hundred people in it. Even the best players in the world scrub out of tournaments, but I think it's more than coincidence that those who succeed at PTQs are the ones who go to multiple different events.

EDIT: I should also point out that I agree with Matt's statement about how much cheaper it is to acquire cards via drafting than it is to shell out the cold hard cash. Even if you go through eBay and all the other online dealers for the best prices, it's still cheaper to pay $12 for a draft set and win your money's worth in stuff. If I had more time to draft, I like to think I would.

[JediCheese]

Mar 9, 2010 14:57:55 GMT -5 matth said:

Knee-jerk reaction, but I have to disagree with the extreme financial cost:
$4000??

I took every card on SCG that is >$5 and is in extended and then put it into findmagiccards.com and found out a total price for a set of them. It'll cost you $1,287.09 for a single set of that alone.

Apathy House puts the list at $973.77 (ebay prices). Of course, we would want four of each set and thus we are easily pay $4,000 for a playset of every card over $5.

I built playsets of Alara block and bought 18 BOXES of cards (this doesn't include various singles I picked up or the trading I did). If you want to draft your way to playsets, expect to buy 4 cases of cards a year which will run you $2000+ before the sets are released.

Mar 9, 2010 14:57:55 GMT -5 matth said:

Your multi-year plan doesn't make any sense either. What's so wrong about trying to gun for the top from your first PTQ? Even if you can't playtest as often as Adrian/John T/et al, there are plenty of good articles on multiple sites that explain the top decks and what to expect from them. Let's not forget sealed PTQs, where luck plays a much greater role in determining success.

So just because you know how the rules work doesn't mean you are going to win. I would consider this foolish to expect to win in your first PTQ. Especially if it is extended. You need to know card interactions and how it all works.

[John Galli]

I'm honestly surprised you guys are still going on and on and on at this post. My original post was taken way differently then I intended and I think the flow of comments has just emphasized that we all have a different approach and theory about how to play the game (both from a tournament standpoint and from an investment standpoint). I would hope that the bickering and back and forth debating about how one should play could stop, because it's really a joke considering that we're all not going to agree on here.

Karl and I, along with another guy from the shop, have all mentioned that we are mostly onboard with my original plan of just trying to gun at specific events with heavy playtesting. One of the guys at the shop mentioned that the 5k circuit might be a better one to pursue at first, because if you do well enough there on a consistent basis you could arguably get your rating up enough to start giving you byes or qualifications for other pro events. Now that they've added the Midwest Master Series to the Starcity Games 5ks, there's a decent amount of tourneys in this area and on top of getting high rating they're giving away very good prizes.

Travis, Chris, and Pat, I'm fine with your stance and I realize that you agreed with parts of my post but ultimately want to go a different direction when it comes to playtesting. I respect your opinion, but I disagree with it. Like I said before, I'm fine with explaining WHY I disagree, although I'd rather just do it in person if possible because too much gets misconstrued on forums (as we've seen from the Modclan ones).

Just as an aside, I have a few brief comments-

- Chris, I don't agree with how you approach collecting cards to prepare for tournaments. While it'd be great to have a playset of everything, that's not how the majority of pro players play the game. Most proxy decks until it gets close to tourney time, and then they trade off their draft materials for the cards they need in a deck or borrow. Some will have playsets, but for most people and most pros this is unrealistic. Again, it's not a bad approach, it's just not the only approach nor necessarily the best one. Others choose to just dump for singles when it's time and try to ride a deck part way through a season. That approach is fine IMO too, as long as your deck doesn't become too dated and you're learning from your tournaments.

- I never meant in my original post to say that if you prepared all that time and then didn't do well in the single PTQ you were gunning for that you would up and quit or just abandon all hope. Certainly the mulligans, luck, and other factors of magic may hurt you in a tournament, but that's by no means an indicator that playtesting heavily for a month won't help you have a very strong chance of doing well. And no one here can afford to playtest as heavy as I was talking about on a regular basis. Even for the month or so that I recommended "going hardcore", I understood that there would be a lot of obligations to work around. But I meant in a manner of " Ok it's monday, Chris is busy, Pat is busy, but Karl and Travis are free, lets get together and test. Ok it's tuesday, person x and person y are free, lets get together and test, ok it's wednesday, etc etc etc". Basically so that amongst the team, there's always 2-4 people testing on a given night so that overall we can for the most part get in 2-3 testing sessions a week. This is still a LOT, but if it's done as a trial run for a month it's not nearly as taxing as if it became a life habit. And that's what it mostly is, a test, to see if it helps improve the game and the synergy of a magic "team".

- There's nothing wrong with playing in a lot of tournaments and learning from them, but you should be able to glean a great deal from playtesting amongst a large group. The information is available on the web, and if there are questions on how to play a deck there are plenty of people in Madison who are great resources. You don't have to play in 10 PTQs to win one let alone do anything half decent. Tournament experience helps, but honestly playtesting is much more beneficial IMO, especially if you devote 50-100 games on a given matchup. This is stuff you should flesh out before a tourney, so that when going into one you know that match in and out and are ready to crush it and also have a sense for the matchups that you didn't expect or were unaware of.

- There's something to be said for taking risks. This is the biggest difference between how I view magic (and life in general) then some of the others on this forum. I don't mind putting in hard work, patience, testing, and open-mindedness, but at the same time I am the type of person who believes that sometimes you need to go for it and take some gambles or have some lack of preparation or your just not giving yourself enough opportunities. If your spending too much time dottling around with practicing and playing in the occasional tournament where your ONLY trying to learn from it, then to me that's a waste of an opportunity. Like you guys said, Adrian, John T, and Jasper all test a lot and they still struggle to win PTQs, so practice does not make perfect, it just helps. You still have to take shots, and you still have to try to earn your way while learning the game. You're never going to be a master of the rules (although studying helps) and you're never going to playtest to the point where your a perfect magic player. It's a combination for both and my original post never meant to construe that in a different way. I know some of you may disagree with my statements, especially in this last paragraph, but again that's why I cite our "opinions" as differences. You can post your opinion until the cows come home, it's still not going to change my mind or think that your opinion is anymore right. I respect yours, all I ask is respect for mine and if you agree then hop on board and if not keep doin what ya doin.

- Lastly, in trying to end positive here, I want to say thank you to all you guys who have played a lot of magic on here and got back into it. When I bought that first set of packs of Shadowmoor a couple years back I never expected to draw our old high school crowd back into this game let alone try to make a competitive run. I think the play over the last few years has preached to me that I need to take more respect for this silly little hobby because not only have I invested time and money, but it's clearly something that I enjoy. I have plenty of friends in the "non-magic" or even "anti-magic" world, but I don't think it'd be easy to stop hanging out with the people at the shops who are always fun to be around (set aside Adrian, Jasper, and John T, lol).

- Also, with the whole PTQ thing, it wasn't just an individual goal, I wanted to elevate us as a team. If we all went "hardcore", I don't care if I mulligan a bunch of times in the actual tourney or get bad luck, I just want to see someone do well. Seeing myself just barely miss top 8 after 5-0'ing at states was hard to experience, but at the same time I was really happy that Matt got there. That showed that not only did we all benefit from heavy practice, but that someone broke through because it was only a matter of the odds. You stick 10 people who all prepared well for a tournament in a field of 200, and it's highly likely that someone will bust it.