Lets say you're deck is compose of 5-5-5-5 basic lands.
By turn 4, you would either get 10 or 11 cards depending if you've started snd you didnt mulligan. Will use 10 in this case.
Then it becomes 5 chances out of 60 multiplied by 10 to get land A mutipkied by the chances of getting land B then C then D
5/60*10 * 5/60*10 * 5/60*10 * 5/60*10
With you're dual land, you'll have to calculate the odds of different lands combination and add those odds together
If you have 3-3-5-5 and 4 dual lands covering the 3s
Then you woud have to assume that if you have land A then land B can either be of the chosen color or dual
Calculate the odds of
3-7-5-5 land A
7-3-5-5 land B just calculate first possibility and multiply by 2 because same odds as previous
4-(3)-5-5 Dual lands
Thats how i would do it....
But these are the perfect odds....if your cards are equal distance of each other.....mostly never happen's....
I dont do probability though....the curve etc...
But for someone who does, i beleive it starts by isolating every odds possible....
Although being advise 5 days in advance that your deck cannot be played because it has a ban card in it is fairly unacceptable.
Why?
- if the metagame is broken because of one or few cards, its not the player's fault, it is R&D
- saying that a player who doesnt have that soon to be ban card will need to purchase it for the tournament to later be ban is a wrong argument as if that player 5 days before a tournament doesnt have that card in their deck is because they are not playing with that card...
- testing a deck takes time and you don't build a deck for a tournament 5 days prior to the tournament. So if they are playing with an OP card, yeah sure it may feel unfair for other players, but that card was avaible for deck creation and most likely, everyone knew about it so deal with it
It is unfair to the entire playerbase to hold the format hostage waiting for a ban to take effect for a minority of players who can't adapt as quickly as the entire rest of the playerbase.
First, it cant be unfair as you didnt know the card was to be ban until it was ban, therefor when you created your deck, you made it knowing that soon to be ban card was available for the tournament.
Quickly as who? You sound like a frustrated kid. Are you refering to the entire playerbase who decided not to use that soon to be ban card when it was available for the taking? Then quickly as nobody because they didnt had the card...
Prior to the ban, that card was available for everybody's deck preparation for upcomings tournaments. so that is call being fair.
MTG needs to be fair amongs all players, not unfair to the one who decided to use an OP card to 5 days before the tournament being told that they can no longer use that. To be fair would be to determine how much time usual tournament players takes to make a new deck, meaning testing it....to my knowledge of MTG, it would mean 2 full weekend even knowing some takes way more
I think it is completely fair to give as much or as little notice as they like for a ban to take effect, but shorter times lead to better tournaments overall since you instantly fix the problem and move on rather than wallow in your mistakes for any longer than necessary.
You instantly fix the problem by penalizing a certain ammount of players who took the time to buy, build and test their deck prior to the tournament to suceed over there by asking them to basically forfeit their tournament seat.
Instead of giving your opinion, which is kind of the topic at hand you're differing to saying they do what they want and you're ok with it.
To me i say, they should give a reazonable ammount of time noticed before banning taking effect for player to build a new deck. People work, have families, go to school etc... so to me it is 2 full weekend lenght that seem fair...
1
Lets say you're deck is compose of 5-5-5-5 basic lands.
By turn 4, you would either get 10 or 11 cards depending if you've started snd you didnt mulligan. Will use 10 in this case.
Then it becomes 5 chances out of 60 multiplied by 10 to get land A mutipkied by the chances of getting land B then C then D
5/60*10 * 5/60*10 * 5/60*10 * 5/60*10
With you're dual land, you'll have to calculate the odds of different lands combination and add those odds together
If you have 3-3-5-5 and 4 dual lands covering the 3s
Then you woud have to assume that if you have land A then land B can either be of the chosen color or dual
Calculate the odds of
3-7-5-5 land A
7-3-5-5 land B just calculate first possibility and multiply by 2 because same odds as previous
4-(3)-5-5 Dual lands
Thats how i would do it....
But these are the perfect odds....if your cards are equal distance of each other.....mostly never happen's....
I dont do probability though....the curve etc...
But for someone who does, i beleive it starts by isolating every odds possible....
1
You instantly fix the problem by penalizing a certain ammount of players who took the time to buy, build and test their deck prior to the tournament to suceed over there by asking them to basically forfeit their tournament seat.
Instead of giving your opinion, which is kind of the topic at hand you're differing to saying they do what they want and you're ok with it.
To me i say, they should give a reazonable ammount of time noticed before banning taking effect for player to build a new deck. People work, have families, go to school etc... so to me it is 2 full weekend lenght that seem fair...