There are blowout cards in both formats. If you were lucky enough to win the Pack Rat lottery things went well for you.
Yes, but the difference is that everyone in constructed has those cards, which tends to make constructed more matchup based and less skill intensive. Legacy is something of an exception to this.
Both formats are similar. The only major difference is that the creatures are going to be better on average in Standard, plus the deck building aspect is different between formats.
As you noted, those are "major" differences.
You still have to figure out when to attack, block, how many to attack and block with, play around tricks and removal, anticipate additional creatures in opponents' hands, and work out a game plan several turns ahead. And yes, there are no net decks, but with a draft guide or common sense 99% of players are going to pick the same commons and uncommons first in their decks' colors.
Laughably false in my experience
You will see the same small subsets of creatures in most of your limited games if you are playing with anyone with a minimum of skill.
I'm not going to explain the basics of Magic to you, but if you think even something as simple as Grizzly Bears takes no skill to play, you are sorely mistaken. The card itself may be simple, but its value will vary wildly based on tons of factors and smart players will absolutely get more value out of their 1G 2/2 than less experienced players. Better players will play Thragtusk at the correct time more often, will protect it better, will know when to attack or block with it, will know when to blink it, and will remember its triggers.
I could say that your cantrip artifacts from Eggs are simple to use, but I'll refrain from stirring any more tensions on that point.
I was the one saying Grizzly Bears is hard to play. Maybe you should reread my earlier post?
In 2011 there were two Extended GPs: Atlanta (1213 players) and Kobe (711 players.) Modern's smallest GP beat Kobe by 5 players, and has beaten or come within 200 players of the Atlanta GP 6 out of 9 times.
What percentage do you want me to adjust the Extended numbers by to project for increased overall player numbers? 10%? 20%? Modern beat Extended on average by 27.7%. Even accounting for a 20% increase in attendance Modern is STILL going to beat Extended at attendance.
Why can't you accept that a format is growing? Do you want Magic to fail? I want all forms of Magic to continue to grow. There's nothing wrong with playing a different format if you don't like this one, but a lot of you are coming very close to breaking this thread's rules. Re-read the OP before continuing to bash Modern. This is NOT a "hate on Modern" thread.
There is no real way for us to adjust the numbers, we would need to have access to Wizards' data and we will never have it. Your entire project was doomed to failure before it even started.
Play against better people. Its only laughably false if all of your opponents are terrible. The best players will pick the best cards for their decks, period. Every card in the set can't be the best.
This thread has nothing to do about comparing formats, and format bashing is against the rules for this thread. Lets get back on topic.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You can't always win, and just because you lose doesn't mean you played badly.
Even if you lose, it is important to remain confident in your ability to make good plays and decisions. Lose that and you are truly lost.
Testing is great, and the better the testing is, the better off you'll be.
It is impossible to tilt and play well.
It is possible to make no mistakes and still lose.
There is no real way for us to adjust the numbers, we would need to have access to Wizards' data and we will never have it. Your entire project was doomed to failure before it even started.
Like I said above, even if there was a 20% increase in attendance Modern GPs would still beat Extended in GP numbers. I highly doubt Magic grew at the GP level by more than 20%, and in fact if you look at all of the GP numbers you will see a peak in 2010, followed by a drop off across all formats.
GP DC 2010 - 1932... No Standard GP has beat that number since.
GP Madrid 2010 - 2228... No Legacy GP has topped this.
There was growth in Extended from 2009 to 2010, and Modern's average still beats those numbers. Even the largest Extended GP in 2011 is only 150 higher than the average for all Modern GPs.
Counting just 2010 and 2011, Extended's average becomes 896 players... still less than Modern's 1065 player average.
No matter how you slice the numbers, Modern is beating Extended and is on par with Standard. You can stop attacking me now.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You can't always win, and just because you lose doesn't mean you played badly.
Even if you lose, it is important to remain confident in your ability to make good plays and decisions. Lose that and you are truly lost.
Testing is great, and the better the testing is, the better off you'll be.
It is impossible to tilt and play well.
It is possible to make no mistakes and still lose.
OK, here's a list of all Returning PTQs and the difference in attendance. Population size 41 across the entirety of all Modern PTQs ever.
....
That's a lot of negative marks there.
Can't make any conclusions without your dataset. Can you link to where you found all the PTQ attendance numbers?
Do we have PTQ attendance number compiled somewhere? I could run that against the GP numbers to see how many people were playing in PTQs for Modern year-over-year and compared to Extended PTQs.
Using TCdecks I compiled a list of all Modern PTQs and their "known" attendence (a few were missing), The Chart looks like garbage.
Here's a list of all Modern data, you look like you want to sperg out on your own. It doesn't sort well, and I had to change the cities names to something that sorted better, and it's a myriad of typos and Amerocentrism. (also, holes in the data show up as blanks which means it may not parse correctly when you copy/paste)
Sorry.
Tournament Name Date Players "+/-"
frosinoe 1
torino 2
burlington 3 90
fukuoka 4 69
toronto 5 147
burnsville 6 170
erie 7 107
lublock 8 54
missolua 9 69
hartford 10 188
mannheim 11 94
rochester 13 119
garden city JAPAN? 14 116
boisie 15 56
glen burnie 16 136
medford 17 89
oakmont 18 129
qubec 19 77
tokyo 20 116
evolution store 21 161
hollywood (FLORIDA?) 22 113
concord 23 151
kyoto 24 103
san diego 25 118
manchester 26
roanoke 27 94
Bolonga 28
paris 29 153
Finland 30 130
spokane 31 80
montreal 32 86
legends 33 131
moscow 34 98
sofia 35 46
torrel, spain 36 66
calgary 37 144
lindhurst 38 187
philly 39 159
springfield mo 40 115
toronto 41 181 34
porto 42 128
denver 43 108
windsor heights 44 181
brno 45 137
napoli 46
verona 47
seattle 48 147
startford 49 98
maimo 50 82
green bay 51 170
santa clara 52 165
seattle 53 249 102
dublin 54 82
albequerky 55 80
omaha 56 82
west valley 57 82
brooklyn 58 163
roma 59
milan 60 299
ashevelle 61 82
ishikawa 62 55
tampa 63 117
nagoya 64 92
dusseldorf 65 76
tienda 66 175
berkley 67 142
garden city 68 196
glendale 69 108
portland 70 163
fairbanks 71 45
memphis 72 68
overland park 73 163
louisville 74 94
pogg italy 75 220
lecco 76
mitton k 77
oslo 78 48
northglenn 79
lincoln 80 118
providence 81 164
rockville 82 121
vestal 83 112
mestre 84 176
catania 85 132
atlantis 86 74
ingenio, Barcelona 87 84
winnipeg 88 32
spielraum 89 117
EQINOX, France 90 74
regglo 91 272
bari 92 97
selden 93 141
hopewell 94 103
hanau 95 177
philly 96 189 30
chesham 97 141
okc 98 125
knoxville 99 72
hartford 100 169 -19
jacksonville 101 102
rockville 102 99 -22
niles 103 165
syacruse 104 132
EQINOX, France 105 82 8
berlin 106 77
zagreb 107 78
sacramento 108 104
tampa 109 84 -33
springfield mo 110 85 -30
lincoln 111 69 -49
austin 112 125
west jordan 113 55
denver 114 113 5
lafayette 115 72
pohar 116 120
frosinoe 117
verona 118 196
brooklyn 119 105 -58
torrel, spain 120 65 -1
topdeck 121 160
cedar rapids 122 122
pheonix 123 103
allentown 124 108
seattle 125 162 -87
winnipeg 126 70 38
osaka 127
nanagno 128 67
topdeck 129 160 0
denton 130 89
milford 131 146
riccione 132
roanoke 133 47 -20
budapest 134 61
sao paulo 135 172
south atterbro 136 135
oslo 137 50 -2
roanoke 138 56 9
berkley 139 122 -20
somerville 140 93
honolulu 141 32
henderson 142 81
costa mensa 143 107
montreal 144 102 16
rockville 145 88 -11
mantova 146 249
tienda 147 125 -50
bari 148 130 33
saddlebrook 149 103
katy 150 110
standish 151 93
benos aeres 152 173
lilburn 153 55
garden city 154 108 -88
omaha 155 78 -4
philly 156 120 -69
columbus 157 89
rochester 158 87 -32
niles 159
worthingto 160 102
boisie 161 77 22
san diego 162 86 -32
lenexa 163 96
st charles 164 59
plano 165 86
copenhagen 166 93
milano 167 283
zwollie 168 65
ottershall 169 83
tooloose 170
hamburg 171 73
louisville 172 72 -22
hattiesburg 173 70
portland 174 96 -67
orlando 175 97
albequerky 176 37 -43
odivels 177 138
roma 178
torino 179
moscow 180 53 -45
garden city 181 119 11
burnsville 182 169 -1
brooklyn 183 97 -8
lublock 184 84 30
manchester 185
Bolonga 186 340
tabula 187 80
portland 188 100 4
montreal 189 89 -13
denver 190 123 10
seattle 191 146 -16
ocoee 192 57
nuremburg 193
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
What's the big deal? You could have played multiple Righteous Avengers for years now.
Yopu keep pounding the same misinformation, which is irrelevant because you are missing data.
I guess the other chart of shrinking modern attendance in similar cities is also useless because I didn't cross apply it to the phases of the moon in relation to what players ate gyros over tacos.
Every time actual data is posted, you always respond with your gut feeling. Your gut, and the gut of the people you play with isn't a fact. Bans hurt modern, and data agrees!
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
What's the big deal? You could have played multiple Righteous Avengers for years now.
2012 2013
2012 Arizona 103 2013 Alaska 45
2012 California 86 2013 Alberta 144
2012 California 122 2013 Arizona 108
2012 California 107 2013 British Colombia 142
2012 California 104 2013 California 142
2012 Colorado 123 2013 California 165
2012 Colorado 113 2013 California 118
2012 Connecticut 183 2013 Colorado 108
2012 Florida 57 2013 Connecticut 98
2012 Florida 84 2013 Connecticut 188
2012 Florida 102 2013 Florida 117
2012 georgia 55 2013 Florida 113
2012 Hawaii 32 2013 Idaho 56
2012 Idaho 77 2013 illinois 187
2012 illinois 165 2013 illinois 221
2012 Iowa 122 2013 Iowa 181
2012 Kansas 96 2013 Japan 55
2012 Kentucky 72 2013 Japan 92
2012 Louisiana 72 2013 Japan 103
2012 Manitoba 70 2013 Japan 116
2012 Maryland 88 2013 Japan 69
2012 Maryland 99 2013 Kansas 163
2012 Massachusetts 135 2013 Kentucky 94
2012 Massachusetts 146 2013 Manitoba 32
2012 Michigan 119 2013 Maryland 121
2012 Michigan 108 2013 Maryland 136
2012 Minnesota 169 2013 Michigan 196
2012 Mississippi 70 2013 Minnesota 170
2012 Missouri 59 2013 Missouri 115
2012 Missouri 85 2013 Montana 69
2012 Nebraska 78 2013 Nebraska 118
2012 Nebraska 69 2013 Nebraska 82
2012 Nevada 81 2013 New Hampshire 151
2012 New Jersey 103 2013 New mexico 80
2012 New Jersey 93 2013 New York 141
2012 New mexico 37 2013 New York 112
2012 New York 97 2013 New York 163
2012 New York 87 2013 New York 119
2012 New York 105 2013 North Carolina 82
2012 New York 132 2013 Ontario 181
2012 Ohio 102 2013 Ontario 147
2012 Ohio 89 2013 Oregon 158
2012 Oklahoma 125 2013 Oregon 89
2012 Oregon 100 2013 Pennsylvania 189
2012 Oregon 96 2013 Pennsylvania 159
2012 Pennsylvania 120 2013 Pennsylvania 129
2012 Pennsylvania 108 2013 Pennsylvania 107
2012 Quebec 89 2013 Quebec 86
2012 Quebec 102 2013 Quebec 77
2012 Tennessee 72 2013 Rhode Island 164
2012 Texas 84 2013 Tennessee 68
2012 Texas 86 2013 Texas 54
2012 Texas 110 2013 Utah 82
2012 Texas 89 2013 Vermont 90
2012 Texas 125 2013 Virginia 103
2012 Utah 55 2013 Virginia 94
2012 Virginia 56 2013 Washington 249
2012 Virginia 47 2013 Washington 147
2012 Washington 146 2013 Washington 80
2012 Washington 162 97.8 2013 Wisconsin 170 122.25
Average PTQ attendance in 2012: 98 players
Average PTQ attendance in 2013: 122 players
That's roughly a 33% increase in Modern PTQ attendance, and I highly doubt the game overall grew by 33% year over year. From the GP data, we had a growth spurt in 2010, but then the numbers leveled off.
Chart:
Notice the trend lines for 2013 over 2012 (2013 in orange.)
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You can't always win, and just because you lose doesn't mean you played badly.
Even if you lose, it is important to remain confident in your ability to make good plays and decisions. Lose that and you are truly lost.
Testing is great, and the better the testing is, the better off you'll be.
It is impossible to tilt and play well.
It is possible to make no mistakes and still lose.
I'm not going to argue that modern is worse than old double standard/extended because it's better. Its very difficult for a format to be worse than extended the only pro tour format ever explicitly killed by wizards. That's like saying modern is doing better than the house we set ablaze and dared people to play in a burning building.
Being better than old double standard is a fact, but it's not a fact to be proud of.
Notice the trend lines for 2013 over 2012 (2013 in orange.)
Linear regression?
Also you're not accounting for Geography.
As for the size of the game, I don't know BUT Hasbro IS worth about 25% more now than it was a year ago... (according to Google, Nasdaq HAS)
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
What's the big deal? You could have played multiple Righteous Avengers for years now.
Linear regression?
Also you're not accounting for Geography.
As for the size of the game, I don't know BUT Hasbro IS worth about 25% more now than it was a year ago... (according to Google, Nasdaq HAS)
I could go state by state and show you that in 2012 Iowa had 122 players, and in 2013 Iowa had 181. That's almost a 50% increase. Those trends continue in varying levels across most locations. You can point to Idaho dropping from 77 to 56, but for every one of those the data has a California increasing by 20 players or a Kentucky increasing by 22.
Look at Missouri. In 2011 it had two events with 59 and 85 players. In 2012 they had one event with 115 players! New Mexico went from 37 to 80 players! That's more than double!
If Hasbro grew by 25%, and Hasbro's growth could ONLY be attributed to WOTC (which it isn't, but lets pretend) then Modern's PTQ attendance growth matched or exceeded Hasbro's overall growth between 2012 and 2013.
The point is: Modern is growing. I've shown you the data across multiple vectors. You can believe what you want to, but the fact is that the format has grown, regardless of bans. I think a national corporation knows better than we do about their intellectual property anyway
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You can't always win, and just because you lose doesn't mean you played badly.
Even if you lose, it is important to remain confident in your ability to make good plays and decisions. Lose that and you are truly lost.
Testing is great, and the better the testing is, the better off you'll be.
It is impossible to tilt and play well.
It is possible to make no mistakes and still lose.
I guess the other chart of shrinking modern attendance in similar cities is also useless because I didn't cross apply it to the phases of the moon in relation to what players ate gyros over tacos.
Every time actual data is posted, you always respond with your gut feeling. Your gut, and the gut of the people you play with isn't a fact. Bans hurt modern, and data agrees!
It is not my gut feeling. The weekend of the last GP on the west coast there was at least 2 PTQs in the midwest, plus a SCG event. Not all players flock to GPs.
If you are going to compile data, use all players of a given format on a given weekend.
Linear regression?
Also you're not accounting for Geography.
As for the size of the game, I don't know BUT Hasbro IS worth about 25% more now than it was a year ago... (according to Google, Nasdaq HAS)
If you're arguing that geography is responsible for a linear regression growth of Modern, is your argument therefore that the average of every city picked by WotC this year has 33% more Magic players than the average of every city from the year before?
And Hasbro's stock growth has ultimately very little to do with the growth of Magic. Magic may be arguably the most important product of Wizards, but Wizards makes a miniscule showing in Hasbro's overall collection of "subcompanies" (sorry for my poor business wording).
Additionally, even if the size of the game grew by 33% YoY (which I still doubt), I would doubt even more that a representative percentage of new players pick up Modern (even for the PTQ season) as compared to long-term players. I think it's a very difficult argument that a 33% YoY growth in Modern PTQ attendance isn't representative of a growth in Modern.
Additionally, the increased fluctuation of card prices based almost solely on their use and popularity in Modern (see: Paradise Mantle, Karn Liberated, others) also seems very representative of increased player interest.
I feel it is worth pointing out that a fair amount of PTQs aren't listed there. I know the PTQ I went to for Avacyn Restored isn't listed there...ditto with Dragon's Maze.
It is not my gut feeling. The weekend of the last GP on the west coast there was at least 2 PTQs in the midwest, plus a SCG event. Not all players flock to GPs.
If you are going to compile data, use all players of a given format on a given weekend.
GPs on the west coast draw people from the midwest?
Is this fact or your gut? I would like to see the person whose deciding factor to avoid the GP 2,000 miles away was the PTQ down the street
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
What's the big deal? You could have played multiple Righteous Avengers for years now.
If you're arguing that geography is responsible for a linear regression growth of Modern
I am doing no such thing.
I'll restate
"Linear regession? :rolleyes:"
I hope this alleviates any confusion, as those numbers put the "Scatter" in "Scatter plot"
I feel it is worth pointing out that a fair amount of PTQs aren't listed there. I know the PTQ I went to for Avacyn Restored isn't listed there...ditto with Dragon's Maze.
How aggravating.
Anyone know another source of numbers to do battle with?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
What's the big deal? You could have played multiple Righteous Avengers for years now.
GPs on the west coast draw people from the midwest?
Is this fact or your gut? I would like to see the person whose deciding factor to avoid the GP 2,000 miles away was the PTQ down the street
I did not say GPs on the west coast draw people from the mid west. What I said is there was more then just the GP going on. You can not use only GP numbers when Modern players had other options then just the GP. I dont understand why this is so hard to comprehend. There are multiple Modern tournaments on a weekend and you are using the numbers from 1 tournament.
The set is incomplete. My Atlanta PTQ results also were never added. I know last year that event was 55 players, and this year was seven rounds, so at least 64.
Posted from MTGsalvation.com App for Android
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You can't always win, and just because you lose doesn't mean you played badly.
Even if you lose, it is important to remain confident in your ability to make good plays and decisions. Lose that and you are truly lost.
Testing is great, and the better the testing is, the better off you'll be.
It is impossible to tilt and play well.
It is possible to make no mistakes and still lose.
Like I said above, even if there was a 20% increase in attendance Modern GPs would still beat Extended in GP numbers. I highly doubt Magic grew at the GP level by more than 20%, and in fact if you look at all of the GP numbers you will see a peak in 2010, followed by a drop off across all formats.
The magic player base grew by more than 20% during that period, actually. Magic started to lose players starting in Mirrodin and never recovered until Mirrodin and Innistrad. Those sets were insanely popular and massively grew MTG as a brand.
GP DC 2010 - 1932... No Standard GP has beat that number since.
GP Madrid 2010 - 2228... No Legacy GP has topped this.
There was growth in Extended from 2009 to 2010, and Modern's average still beats those numbers. Even the largest Extended GP in 2011 is only 150 higher than the average for all Modern GPs.
Counting just 2010 and 2011, Extended's average becomes 896 players... still less than Modern's 1065 player average.
No matter how you slice the numbers, Modern is beating Extended and is on par with Standard. You can stop attacking me now.
I was attacking your use of statistics because it did not make sense. It still doesn't make sense, sorry. You don't have access to precise statistics about Magic's growing popularity or data from individual stories. Trying to pretend that your analysis proves anything about the popularity of modern is absurd.
Attendance is going up, but that's not good enough?
How many players would have to show up to a GP to make you happy?
Prices are also up from drastically increased demand for modern cards.
It is very telling how much some of the posters here want the numbers to look bad for modern. Growing numbers are a good thing. It feels like all of this bickering about attendance is thinly veiled modern bashing, which is not allowed in this thread.
Wizards making more $ is a good thing. You're not anti capitalist, right? Do you appreciate success?
Posted from MTGsalvation.com App for Android
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You can't always win, and just because you lose doesn't mean you played badly.
Even if you lose, it is important to remain confident in your ability to make good plays and decisions. Lose that and you are truly lost.
Testing is great, and the better the testing is, the better off you'll be.
It is impossible to tilt and play well.
It is possible to make no mistakes and still lose.
I was attacking your use of statistics because it did not make sense. It still doesn't make sense, sorry. You don't have access to precise statistics about Magic's growing popularity or data from individual stories. Trying to pretend that your analysis proves anything about the popularity of modern is absurd.
To be fair, this argument truly does go both ways; incomplete data can't prove that there is a lack of popularity in Modern. And this argument largely evolved from a graph comparing Legacy attendance rates to Modern attendance, making the claim that "Modern wasn't expanding".
You are confusing Magic growth with Format growth. Again. All magic is expanding, but guess what? Modern isn't.
I for one would gladly prefer if we could leave all these agenda-based statistics, and get back to discussing the Modern Banned List, as is the purpose of this thread (or at least the health of the format from a non-statistics perspective).
To kickstart this discussion, I'll reiterate one of my former points: Why are Modern cards seeing such rapid increases in price if the format, as others are arguing, isn't popular?
Or to get back on the banlist discussion: A lot of people are very much in favor of Wizards announcing "unbannings". What is the best card at the moment to be unbanned?
It could ve speculation, but I bet it has to do with demand. you can't exactly sell cards that no one wants to buy.
On the banned list: I predict no changes for a while. The new elves combo looks to be a fair turn four deck. The extra mana and color will put a hamper on that deck compared to its eternal counterpart. I'm looking forward to testing it out since I have a bunch of that engine in foil already
Posted from MTGsalvation.com App for Android
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You can't always win, and just because you lose doesn't mean you played badly.
Even if you lose, it is important to remain confident in your ability to make good plays and decisions. Lose that and you are truly lost.
Testing is great, and the better the testing is, the better off you'll be.
It is impossible to tilt and play well.
It is possible to make no mistakes and still lose.
On the banned list: I predict no changes for a while. The new elves combo looks to be a fair turn four deck. The extra mana and color will put a hamper on that deck compared to its eternal counterpart. I'm looking forward to testing it out since I have a bunch of that engine in foil already
I don't deal much in speculation (waiting for the cards to come out), but is Combo Elves looking to take the format by storm?
If so, this could be a great example of a "slow enough" (aka T4) "engine combo" deck, to satisfy all the combo-in-Modern nay-sayers.
Yes, but the difference is that everyone in constructed has those cards, which tends to make constructed more matchup based and less skill intensive. Legacy is something of an exception to this.
As you noted, those are "major" differences.
Laughably false in my experience
I was the one saying Grizzly Bears is hard to play. Maybe you should reread my earlier post?
There is no real way for us to adjust the numbers, we would need to have access to Wizards' data and we will never have it. Your entire project was doomed to failure before it even started.
Play against better people. Its only laughably false if all of your opponents are terrible. The best players will pick the best cards for their decks, period. Every card in the set can't be the best.
This thread has nothing to do about comparing formats, and format bashing is against the rules for this thread. Lets get back on topic.
~ Brian DeMars
OK, here's a list of all Returning PTQs and the difference in attendance. Population size 41 across the entirety of all Modern PTQs ever.
That's a lot of negative marks there.
Like I said above, even if there was a 20% increase in attendance Modern GPs would still beat Extended in GP numbers. I highly doubt Magic grew at the GP level by more than 20%, and in fact if you look at all of the GP numbers you will see a peak in 2010, followed by a drop off across all formats.
GP DC 2010 - 1932... No Standard GP has beat that number since.
GP Madrid 2010 - 2228... No Legacy GP has topped this.
There was growth in Extended from 2009 to 2010, and Modern's average still beats those numbers. Even the largest Extended GP in 2011 is only 150 higher than the average for all Modern GPs.
Counting just 2010 and 2011, Extended's average becomes 896 players... still less than Modern's 1065 player average.
No matter how you slice the numbers, Modern is beating Extended and is on par with Standard. You can stop attacking me now.
~ Brian DeMars
What's the source of your data?
~ Brian DeMars
Can't make any conclusions without your dataset. Can you link to where you found all the PTQ attendance numbers?
Using TCdecks I compiled a list of all Modern PTQs and their "known" attendence (a few were missing), The Chart looks like garbage.
Sorry.
Tournament Name Date Players "+/-"
frosinoe 1
torino 2
burlington 3 90
fukuoka 4 69
toronto 5 147
burnsville 6 170
erie 7 107
lublock 8 54
missolua 9 69
hartford 10 188
mannheim 11 94
rochester 13 119
garden city JAPAN? 14 116
boisie 15 56
glen burnie 16 136
medford 17 89
oakmont 18 129
qubec 19 77
tokyo 20 116
evolution store 21 161
hollywood (FLORIDA?) 22 113
concord 23 151
kyoto 24 103
san diego 25 118
manchester 26
roanoke 27 94
Bolonga 28
paris 29 153
Finland 30 130
spokane 31 80
montreal 32 86
legends 33 131
moscow 34 98
sofia 35 46
torrel, spain 36 66
calgary 37 144
lindhurst 38 187
philly 39 159
springfield mo 40 115
toronto 41 181 34
porto 42 128
denver 43 108
windsor heights 44 181
brno 45 137
napoli 46
verona 47
seattle 48 147
startford 49 98
maimo 50 82
green bay 51 170
santa clara 52 165
seattle 53 249 102
dublin 54 82
albequerky 55 80
omaha 56 82
west valley 57 82
brooklyn 58 163
roma 59
milan 60 299
ashevelle 61 82
ishikawa 62 55
tampa 63 117
nagoya 64 92
dusseldorf 65 76
tienda 66 175
berkley 67 142
garden city 68 196
glendale 69 108
portland 70 163
fairbanks 71 45
memphis 72 68
overland park 73 163
louisville 74 94
pogg italy 75 220
lecco 76
mitton k 77
oslo 78 48
northglenn 79
lincoln 80 118
providence 81 164
rockville 82 121
vestal 83 112
mestre 84 176
catania 85 132
atlantis 86 74
ingenio, Barcelona 87 84
winnipeg 88 32
spielraum 89 117
EQINOX, France 90 74
regglo 91 272
bari 92 97
selden 93 141
hopewell 94 103
hanau 95 177
philly 96 189 30
chesham 97 141
okc 98 125
knoxville 99 72
hartford 100 169 -19
jacksonville 101 102
rockville 102 99 -22
niles 103 165
syacruse 104 132
EQINOX, France 105 82 8
berlin 106 77
zagreb 107 78
sacramento 108 104
tampa 109 84 -33
springfield mo 110 85 -30
lincoln 111 69 -49
austin 112 125
west jordan 113 55
denver 114 113 5
lafayette 115 72
pohar 116 120
frosinoe 117
verona 118 196
brooklyn 119 105 -58
torrel, spain 120 65 -1
topdeck 121 160
cedar rapids 122 122
pheonix 123 103
allentown 124 108
seattle 125 162 -87
winnipeg 126 70 38
osaka 127
nanagno 128 67
topdeck 129 160 0
denton 130 89
milford 131 146
riccione 132
roanoke 133 47 -20
budapest 134 61
sao paulo 135 172
south atterbro 136 135
oslo 137 50 -2
roanoke 138 56 9
berkley 139 122 -20
somerville 140 93
honolulu 141 32
henderson 142 81
costa mensa 143 107
montreal 144 102 16
rockville 145 88 -11
mantova 146 249
tienda 147 125 -50
bari 148 130 33
saddlebrook 149 103
katy 150 110
standish 151 93
benos aeres 152 173
lilburn 153 55
garden city 154 108 -88
omaha 155 78 -4
philly 156 120 -69
columbus 157 89
rochester 158 87 -32
niles 159
worthingto 160 102
boisie 161 77 22
san diego 162 86 -32
lenexa 163 96
st charles 164 59
plano 165 86
copenhagen 166 93
milano 167 283
zwollie 168 65
ottershall 169 83
tooloose 170
hamburg 171 73
louisville 172 72 -22
hattiesburg 173 70
portland 174 96 -67
orlando 175 97
albequerky 176 37 -43
odivels 177 138
roma 178
torino 179
moscow 180 53 -45
garden city 181 119 11
burnsville 182 169 -1
brooklyn 183 97 -8
lublock 184 84 30
manchester 185
Bolonga 186 340
tabula 187 80
portland 188 100 4
montreal 189 89 -13
denver 190 123 10
seattle 191 146 -16
ocoee 192 57
nuremburg 193
I guess the other chart of shrinking modern attendance in similar cities is also useless because I didn't cross apply it to the phases of the moon in relation to what players ate gyros over tacos.
Every time actual data is posted, you always respond with your gut feeling. Your gut, and the gut of the people you play with isn't a fact. Bans hurt modern, and data agrees!
2012 Season: http://www.wizards.com/magic/magazine/events.aspx?x=mtg/daily/eventcoverage/barcelona12ptq/welcome
2013 Season: https://www.wizards.com/magic/magazine/events.aspx?x=mtg/daily/eventcoverage/dragonsmaze13ptq/welcome
Raw Data:
2012 2013
2012 Arizona 103 2013 Alaska 45
2012 California 86 2013 Alberta 144
2012 California 122 2013 Arizona 108
2012 California 107 2013 British Colombia 142
2012 California 104 2013 California 142
2012 Colorado 123 2013 California 165
2012 Colorado 113 2013 California 118
2012 Connecticut 183 2013 Colorado 108
2012 Florida 57 2013 Connecticut 98
2012 Florida 84 2013 Connecticut 188
2012 Florida 102 2013 Florida 117
2012 georgia 55 2013 Florida 113
2012 Hawaii 32 2013 Idaho 56
2012 Idaho 77 2013 illinois 187
2012 illinois 165 2013 illinois 221
2012 Iowa 122 2013 Iowa 181
2012 Kansas 96 2013 Japan 55
2012 Kentucky 72 2013 Japan 92
2012 Louisiana 72 2013 Japan 103
2012 Manitoba 70 2013 Japan 116
2012 Maryland 88 2013 Japan 69
2012 Maryland 99 2013 Kansas 163
2012 Massachusetts 135 2013 Kentucky 94
2012 Massachusetts 146 2013 Manitoba 32
2012 Michigan 119 2013 Maryland 121
2012 Michigan 108 2013 Maryland 136
2012 Minnesota 169 2013 Michigan 196
2012 Mississippi 70 2013 Minnesota 170
2012 Missouri 59 2013 Missouri 115
2012 Missouri 85 2013 Montana 69
2012 Nebraska 78 2013 Nebraska 118
2012 Nebraska 69 2013 Nebraska 82
2012 Nevada 81 2013 New Hampshire 151
2012 New Jersey 103 2013 New mexico 80
2012 New Jersey 93 2013 New York 141
2012 New mexico 37 2013 New York 112
2012 New York 97 2013 New York 163
2012 New York 87 2013 New York 119
2012 New York 105 2013 North Carolina 82
2012 New York 132 2013 Ontario 181
2012 Ohio 102 2013 Ontario 147
2012 Ohio 89 2013 Oregon 158
2012 Oklahoma 125 2013 Oregon 89
2012 Oregon 100 2013 Pennsylvania 189
2012 Oregon 96 2013 Pennsylvania 159
2012 Pennsylvania 120 2013 Pennsylvania 129
2012 Pennsylvania 108 2013 Pennsylvania 107
2012 Quebec 89 2013 Quebec 86
2012 Quebec 102 2013 Quebec 77
2012 Tennessee 72 2013 Rhode Island 164
2012 Texas 84 2013 Tennessee 68
2012 Texas 86 2013 Texas 54
2012 Texas 110 2013 Utah 82
2012 Texas 89 2013 Vermont 90
2012 Texas 125 2013 Virginia 103
2012 Utah 55 2013 Virginia 94
2012 Virginia 56 2013 Washington 249
2012 Virginia 47 2013 Washington 147
2012 Washington 146 2013 Washington 80
2012 Washington 162 97.8 2013 Wisconsin 170 122.25
Average PTQ attendance in 2012: 98 players
Average PTQ attendance in 2013: 122 players
That's roughly a 33% increase in Modern PTQ attendance, and I highly doubt the game overall grew by 33% year over year. From the GP data, we had a growth spurt in 2010, but then the numbers leveled off.
Chart:
Notice the trend lines for 2013 over 2012 (2013 in orange.)
~ Brian DeMars
Being better than old double standard is a fact, but it's not a fact to be proud of.
Wizards in relation to modern.
"The bannings will continue until attendance improves."
Not sure if trolling or just very stupid.:fry:
Linear regression?
Also you're not accounting for Geography.
As for the size of the game, I don't know BUT Hasbro IS worth about 25% more now than it was a year ago... (according to Google, Nasdaq HAS)
I could go state by state and show you that in 2012 Iowa had 122 players, and in 2013 Iowa had 181. That's almost a 50% increase. Those trends continue in varying levels across most locations. You can point to Idaho dropping from 77 to 56, but for every one of those the data has a California increasing by 20 players or a Kentucky increasing by 22.
Look at Missouri. In 2011 it had two events with 59 and 85 players. In 2012 they had one event with 115 players! New Mexico went from 37 to 80 players! That's more than double!
If Hasbro grew by 25%, and Hasbro's growth could ONLY be attributed to WOTC (which it isn't, but lets pretend) then Modern's PTQ attendance growth matched or exceeded Hasbro's overall growth between 2012 and 2013.
The point is: Modern is growing. I've shown you the data across multiple vectors. You can believe what you want to, but the fact is that the format has grown, regardless of bans. I think a national corporation knows better than we do about their intellectual property anyway
~ Brian DeMars
It is not my gut feeling. The weekend of the last GP on the west coast there was at least 2 PTQs in the midwest, plus a SCG event. Not all players flock to GPs.
If you are going to compile data, use all players of a given format on a given weekend.
If you're arguing that geography is responsible for a linear regression growth of Modern, is your argument therefore that the average of every city picked by WotC this year has 33% more Magic players than the average of every city from the year before?
And Hasbro's stock growth has ultimately very little to do with the growth of Magic. Magic may be arguably the most important product of Wizards, but Wizards makes a miniscule showing in Hasbro's overall collection of "subcompanies" (sorry for my poor business wording).
Additionally, even if the size of the game grew by 33% YoY (which I still doubt), I would doubt even more that a representative percentage of new players pick up Modern (even for the PTQ season) as compared to long-term players. I think it's a very difficult argument that a 33% YoY growth in Modern PTQ attendance isn't representative of a growth in Modern.
Additionally, the increased fluctuation of card prices based almost solely on their use and popularity in Modern (see: Paradise Mantle, Karn Liberated, others) also seems very representative of increased player interest.
GX Tron XG
UR Phoenix RU
GG Freyalise High Tide GG
UR Parun Counterspells RU
BB Yawgmoth Token Storm BB
WB Pestilence BW
GPs on the west coast draw people from the midwest?
Is this fact or your gut? I would like to see the person whose deciding factor to avoid the GP 2,000 miles away was the PTQ down the street
I am doing no such thing.
I'll restate
"Linear regession? :rolleyes:"
I hope this alleviates any confusion, as those numbers put the "Scatter" in "Scatter plot"
How aggravating.
Anyone know another source of numbers to do battle with?
I did not say GPs on the west coast draw people from the mid west. What I said is there was more then just the GP going on. You can not use only GP numbers when Modern players had other options then just the GP. I dont understand why this is so hard to comprehend. There are multiple Modern tournaments on a weekend and you are using the numbers from 1 tournament.
Posted from MTGsalvation.com App for Android
~ Brian DeMars
The magic player base grew by more than 20% during that period, actually. Magic started to lose players starting in Mirrodin and never recovered until Mirrodin and Innistrad. Those sets were insanely popular and massively grew MTG as a brand.
I was attacking your use of statistics because it did not make sense. It still doesn't make sense, sorry. You don't have access to precise statistics about Magic's growing popularity or data from individual stories. Trying to pretend that your analysis proves anything about the popularity of modern is absurd.
How many players would have to show up to a GP to make you happy?
Prices are also up from drastically increased demand for modern cards.
It is very telling how much some of the posters here want the numbers to look bad for modern. Growing numbers are a good thing. It feels like all of this bickering about attendance is thinly veiled modern bashing, which is not allowed in this thread.
Wizards making more $ is a good thing. You're not anti capitalist, right? Do you appreciate success?
Posted from MTGsalvation.com App for Android
~ Brian DeMars
To be fair, this argument truly does go both ways; incomplete data can't prove that there is a lack of popularity in Modern. And this argument largely evolved from a graph comparing Legacy attendance rates to Modern attendance, making the claim that "Modern wasn't expanding".
I for one would gladly prefer if we could leave all these agenda-based statistics, and get back to discussing the Modern Banned List, as is the purpose of this thread (or at least the health of the format from a non-statistics perspective).
To kickstart this discussion, I'll reiterate one of my former points: Why are Modern cards seeing such rapid increases in price if the format, as others are arguing, isn't popular?
Or to get back on the banlist discussion: A lot of people are very much in favor of Wizards announcing "unbannings". What is the best card at the moment to be unbanned?
GX Tron XG
UR Phoenix RU
GG Freyalise High Tide GG
UR Parun Counterspells RU
BB Yawgmoth Token Storm BB
WB Pestilence BW
On the banned list: I predict no changes for a while. The new elves combo looks to be a fair turn four deck. The extra mana and color will put a hamper on that deck compared to its eternal counterpart. I'm looking forward to testing it out since I have a bunch of that engine in foil already
Posted from MTGsalvation.com App for Android
~ Brian DeMars
I don't deal much in speculation (waiting for the cards to come out), but is Combo Elves looking to take the format by storm?
If so, this could be a great example of a "slow enough" (aka T4) "engine combo" deck, to satisfy all the combo-in-Modern nay-sayers.
GX Tron XG
UR Phoenix RU
GG Freyalise High Tide GG
UR Parun Counterspells RU
BB Yawgmoth Token Storm BB
WB Pestilence BW