Thanks for the reply! I agree with your points. I have much more experience with constructed metagames than I do limited, and would often rely on matchup knowledge as a crutch to take me deep into tournaments. It wasn’t until I started playing limited more frequently that I realized it was a big hole in my game.
I do have color combinations that I try to play if possible in limited, but I agree that going with the flow is much better than forcing yourself into a deck that is getting a very shallow draft pool. I’m starting to pay more attention to signaling as well, though I realized that I have a tendency to tunnel vision on colors relating to my early picks in pack 1.
When it comes to speculation, I feel like I am getting better at this as well, and part of that comes with just knowing what playables are in the set. I’ve been drafting DOM and M19 heavily and I feel like I have a good grasp of the different synergies in those sets, what are the cards that help me out at common, and how likely those cards are to make their way around the table to me depending on the signals being sent.
I’ve been making a habit of asking all of my opponents what they thought of my play during the match and if they noticed any misplays. Some people have had pretty valuable input, whereas others just say that they thought I played correctly considering how I drew. Considering the feedback I’ve received (that I am playing correctly/to my outs in most cases) I think deckbuilding is an area that I need to focus on. I find that I tend to draft a bunch of creatures that smooth out my curve even if they don’t meaningfully impact the board state. I understand that it’s extremely nuanced depending on the meta, what else is in my deck, etc, I am just not sure if how I’ve been approaching drafts is correct or not.
I'm curious what skill sets you feel separate the "great" limited players from the "good" ones. I've been playing limited for years, but I wouldn't consider myself to be a great player with a win % somewhere around 50%.
In regards to card evaluation, I watch a bunch of drafts at the pro tour and Grand Prix level and I generally pick what top tier players would in their pools. I am typically able to put together a draft deck that has synergies and a game plan. Sometimes, however, I think that I might poorly evaluate which strategies are best in a particular format.
What do you guys think truly separates the players of higher caliber?
I do have color combinations that I try to play if possible in limited, but I agree that going with the flow is much better than forcing yourself into a deck that is getting a very shallow draft pool. I’m starting to pay more attention to signaling as well, though I realized that I have a tendency to tunnel vision on colors relating to my early picks in pack 1.
When it comes to speculation, I feel like I am getting better at this as well, and part of that comes with just knowing what playables are in the set. I’ve been drafting DOM and M19 heavily and I feel like I have a good grasp of the different synergies in those sets, what are the cards that help me out at common, and how likely those cards are to make their way around the table to me depending on the signals being sent.
I’ve been making a habit of asking all of my opponents what they thought of my play during the match and if they noticed any misplays. Some people have had pretty valuable input, whereas others just say that they thought I played correctly considering how I drew. Considering the feedback I’ve received (that I am playing correctly/to my outs in most cases) I think deckbuilding is an area that I need to focus on. I find that I tend to draft a bunch of creatures that smooth out my curve even if they don’t meaningfully impact the board state. I understand that it’s extremely nuanced depending on the meta, what else is in my deck, etc, I am just not sure if how I’ve been approaching drafts is correct or not.
I'm curious what skill sets you feel separate the "great" limited players from the "good" ones. I've been playing limited for years, but I wouldn't consider myself to be a great player with a win % somewhere around 50%.
In regards to card evaluation, I watch a bunch of drafts at the pro tour and Grand Prix level and I generally pick what top tier players would in their pools. I am typically able to put together a draft deck that has synergies and a game plan. Sometimes, however, I think that I might poorly evaluate which strategies are best in a particular format.
What do you guys think truly separates the players of higher caliber?