Website Feedback
Closed Threads
IRC Chat
irc.quakenet.org #teamliquid
IRC Web ClientTeamSpeak 3 (59 users) | |
|
| slyboogie United States. May 30 2012 08:58. Posts 2823 | Profile Blog # |
I always took it as a truism that Pile Shuffling was not truly random. I don't even have a truly legitimate source to confirm, I figured it was common knowledge. This is the closest I could come up with.
Wizards' Site |
| | " 'All that is very well,' answered Candide, 'but let us cultivate our garden.' " - Candide, Voltaire |
|
|
| Durp Canada. May 30 2012 09:17. Posts 2844 | Profile Blog # |
I've always pile shuffled if I played out well over half my lands in a game, or if I've boarded/deboarded. Or, in short, I almost never pile shuffle before game 3, and rarely do after a quick game 1 (I'll just toss my board in randomly, shuffle several times and go)
I don't mind the pile shuffle after a long game or a draw that appears horribly stacked (5 out of 6 draws are lands after keeping hand). I really, really hate people that pile shuffle when they mulligan. Almost table flipping hatred.Last edit: 2012-05-30 09:18:20 |
| | SOOOOOooooOOOOooooOOOOoo Many BANELINGS!! |
|
|
| hkf Australia. May 30 2012 10:06. Posts 322 | Profile Blog # |
On May 30 2012 08:58 slyboogie wrote:I always took it as a truism that Pile Shuffling was not truly random. I don't even have a truly legitimate source to confirm, I figured it was common knowledge. This is the closest I could come up with. Wizards' Site
You can pile shuffle once, and simply cut then present. You will NEVER ever be penalised for insufficient randomisation (and if you are penalised, appeal to HJ, if they have half a clue about penalty guidelines your penalty will be rescinded).
If you try to manipulate your deck with pile shuffles and simply cut + present you will be penalised for deck manipulation, however (if there is clear evidence of this).
My personal habit (from years ago when I actually played paper mtg semi seriously (gps and such)): 2x piles of 7 + 5 riffles.Last edit: 2012-05-30 10:07:15 |
|
|
| ParanoiaDHerO United States. May 30 2012 10:20. Posts 170 | Profile # |
Now I have to worry about how I shuffle my cards, thanks guys! :D
But really, thanks for all the extra info Judicator. |
|
|
| bumatlarge United States. May 30 2012 10:21. Posts 3844 | Profile Blog # |
A 52 card deck takes a minimum of 12 riffle shuffles to completely randomize. Pile shuffling can be manipulated and should really only be used to count your cards. Obviously, when people do it I won't care, and everyone I play with at my store I trust to a certain degree, but just pile shuffling has a set outcome regardless of how many times you do it. Even riffling a small number gives you a shot at manipulating.
Be safe and do one pile shuffle to count, and then close to 12 quick riffles. Your cards and sleeves will be fine as long as you keep the 2 piles parallel and then tilted slightly towards each other at the top corners. It;s not about the rules, it's about common sense and complaints against you won't hold any water. |
| | Together but separate, like oatmeal |
|
|
| bobbob United States. May 30 2012 10:39. Posts 256 | Profile # |
| My thoughts is that pile shuffling is better at setting up randomization for riffles, so after a long game I will pile and then riffle. When I put a 40 card draft deck together I usually go for 8 piles to count, 7 in a random way, then riffle shuffle a few times before presenting. |
|
|
| wunsun Canada. May 30 2012 11:31. Posts 587 | Profile # |
If you are pile shuffling (after setting up so that your mana is at the top of the deck), and do nothing else, then it not random. If you were to draw, tt will have a certain amount of spells, followed by a certain amount of lands, followed by a certain amount of spells, than lands, etc.
However, if you pile shuffle, and then mash a couple times or rifle, than it should be random. However, I don't rifle my cards, as I believe (whether it be true or not) that it damages the cards.
Then since sometimes, I mess up my shuffle and spot a card while I am shuffling, I cut my deck when I present it to him. |
|
|
| Judicator United States. May 30 2012 12:13. Posts 5710 | Profile Blog # |
| So again, why are you (anyone) pile shuffling again? |
| |
|
| dignity Canada. May 30 2012 12:46. Posts 709 | Profile Blog # |
| Pile shuffling will either set up your deck or clump up your deck. You mind as well just riffle shuffle a few times. |
|
|
| hkf Australia. May 30 2012 13:26. Posts 322 | Profile Blog # |
On May 30 2012 12:13 Judicator wrote:
So again, why are you (anyone) pile shuffling again?
Stalling
Anti-stacking (I generally pile villain's decks if time permits (quick sb decisions, game3, etc))
Because it's fun
Force of habit
any of the above I suppose. |
|
|
| Falconblade United States. May 30 2012 13:32. Posts 1024 | Profile # |
| I love Magic! I co-founded a club for it at college. I mostly only do limited though, I don't have the time or money for standard. |
|
|
| DEN1ED United States. May 30 2012 14:54. Posts 761 | Profile # |
| I always pile shuffle when playing seriously. Mostly it's to count my deck though. I do piles of 6 so I know my deck is 60 cards and I didn't drop one by accident or SB in/out 1 too many cards. |
|
|
| Cixah United States. May 30 2012 17:06. Posts 938 | Profile # |
I always riffle 6 after sideboard, pile, then riffle again. You have 3 minutes to randomize. Use them. For whatever reason pile shuffling lets me collect my thoughts for the next game, things I need to remember, what is he bringing in, what did he play, what did he do wrong and can I get him to do it again.
I pile in 8s. You know you're at 60 when the top 4 piles end up with the last 4 cards. |
| |
|
| hkf Australia. May 30 2012 18:58. Posts 322 | Profile Blog # |
On May 30 2012 17:06 Cixah wrote: You have 3 minutes to randomize..
False, you have 3 minutes to complete all post/pregame procedures including sideboarding. |
|
|
| wunsun Canada. May 30 2012 22:25. Posts 587 | Profile # |
I'm not sure why I pile shuffle. I found that pile shuffling makes it less likely for me to have land pockets. Now, I'm not sure, but it seems like I hit less pockets of only land for a couple turns, or spells. I used to not pile shuffle, and only did the.... not sure what it's called, but I always hit land pockets.
Someone told me to pile shuffle, which I did, and hit less pockets. I think what happened, is that now I just overall spend more time shuffling and randomizing my cards. |
|
|
| Judicator United States. May 30 2012 23:21. Posts 5710 | Profile Blog # |
On May 30 2012 22:25 wunsun wrote:
I'm not sure why I pile shuffle. I found that pile shuffling makes it less likely for me to have land pockets. Now, I'm not sure, but it seems like I hit less pockets of only land for a couple turns, or spells. I used to not pile shuffle, and only did the.... not sure what it's called, but I always hit land pockets.
Someone told me to pile shuffle, which I did, and hit less pockets. I think what happened, is that now I just overall spend more time shuffling and randomizing my cards.
Confirmation bias is fun. Again, there's very little merit to pile shuffling that normal shuffling can't already do (nobody in this thread has provided anything but anecdotal evidence) provided you do enough iterations, considering how quickly you can do the latter versus the former, so what is the point?
I use to pile too, I got mana-screwed/flooded. I stopped piling, still get mana-screwed/flooded. <= I have never seen anyone state this regarding this debate, it's hilarious because anything to the contrary implies you are stacking your deck one way or the other. Yet people say that their draws have gotten better when switching styles, usually with some conviction suggesting a (statisically) significant difference. Cool, you are now a cheater by your own admission.
Also, the whole piling to count cards to me is a sign showing a lapse in concentration; I perfectly understand why people do it, but you're already admitting to yourself that you don't have a grasp on the situation imo. I have taken game loses at T8s for PTQs for the stupidest shit, like having wrong numbers of cards than what is registered, like having extra non-deck cards in the deck box used for the PTQ deck. Pile shuffling treats the symptoms not the cause which is a pretty shitty way to approach the game if you take MTG (semi-)seriously (anything above the FMN level).
Mike Flores wrote an article on card shuffling (and cheating) a long time ago on his blog here.
Edit:
I will say this though, I have consciously tried to pile shuffle (enough to get a warning) to tilt certain players in games 2 and 3. Especially if they know they lost a game due to their own misplay.
Edit 2:
Next deck building goal will be trying to find space to stuff Restoration Angel into the Esper builds.Last edit: 2012-05-30 23:31:22 |
| |
|
| DEN1ED United States. May 31 2012 02:43. Posts 761 | Profile # |
On May 30 2012 23:21 Judicator wrote:
Show nested quote +On May 30 2012 22:25 wunsun wrote:
I'm not sure why I pile shuffle. I found that pile shuffling makes it less likely for me to have land pockets. Now, I'm not sure, but it seems like I hit less pockets of only land for a couple turns, or spells. I used to not pile shuffle, and only did the.... not sure what it's called, but I always hit land pockets.
Someone told me to pile shuffle, which I did, and hit less pockets. I think what happened, is that now I just overall spend more time shuffling and randomizing my cards.
Also, the whole piling to count cards to me is a sign showing a lapse in concentration; I perfectly understand why people do it, but you're already admitting to yourself that you don't have a grasp on the situation imo. I have taken game loses at T8s for PTQs for the stupidest shit, like having wrong numbers of cards than what is registered, like having extra non-deck cards in the deck box used for the PTQ deck. Pile shuffling treats the symptoms not the cause which is a pretty shitty way to approach the game if you take MTG (semi-)seriously (anything above the FMN level). .
This is completely wrong. How is pile shuffling a sign of lack of concentration. Not pile shuffling and not checking your deck count would be silly and a lack of concentration to me. Do you not check your decklist before events to make sure it is correct? It is the same thing. I check my list over 3 times at least and then usually have a friend look it over to make sure it is correct before handing it in. I also count my sideboard multiple times after SBing to make sure it is 15 and then pile shuffle to make sure my deck is 60 since I could have dropped a card on the floor or something. As a result I have never lost a game to stupid shit like you say you have.
note: this is when playing at a PTQ or higher level events. I don't do this at FNMs since it is usually very casual and I am just playing for fun.
EDIT: Still trying to figure out what to play for the WMCQ coming up. I'm probably going to end up playing my RUG delver list but I might try naya pod too. I hate UW delver.Last edit: 2012-05-31 06:46:36 |
|
|
| bobbob United States. May 31 2012 04:33. Posts 256 | Profile # |
| It's like saying that you lack concentration when you don't memorize what they have when you Gitaxian Probe. Yeah, I can probably manage it, but I might as well write it down if it's serious. There's almost no downside aside from time, right? |
|
|
| Durp Canada. May 31 2012 06:57. Posts 2844 | Profile Blog # |
On May 30 2012 23:21 Judicator wrote:
Next deck building goal will be trying to find space to stuff Restoration Angel into the Esper builds.
I run two in my venser blink deck. It seems like it has such potential (blinking blade splicer or stonehorn dignitary) seems so strong.
I'm not sure how you'd get it into any other esper deck or any non-blink deck for that matter, though I'd love to see it get some love there |
| | SOOOOOooooOOOOooooOOOOoo Many BANELINGS!! |
|
|
| Judicator United States. May 31 2012 06:59. Posts 5710 | Profile Blog # |
On May 31 2012 02:43 DEN1ED wrote:
Show nested quote +On May 30 2012 23:21 Judicator wrote:
On May 30 2012 22:25 wunsun wrote:
I'm not sure why I pile shuffle. I found that pile shuffling makes it less likely for me to have land pockets. Now, I'm not sure, but it seems like I hit less pockets of only land for a couple turns, or spells. I used to not pile shuffle, and only did the.... not sure what it's called, but I always hit land pockets.
Someone told me to pile shuffle, which I did, and hit less pockets. I think what happened, is that now I just overall spend more time shuffling and randomizing my cards.
Also, the whole piling to count cards to me is a sign showing a lapse in concentration; I perfectly understand why people do it, but you're already admitting to yourself that you don't have a grasp on the situation imo. I have taken game loses at T8s for PTQs for the stupidest shit, like having wrong numbers of cards than what is registered, like having extra non-deck cards in the deck box used for the PTQ deck. Pile shuffling treats the symptoms not the cause which is a pretty shitty way to approach the game if you take MTG (semi-)seriously (anything above the FMN level). .
This is completely wrong. How is pile shuffling a sign of lack of concentration. Not pile shuffling and not checking your deck count would be silly and a lack of concentration to me. Do you not check your decklist before events to make sure it is correct? It is the same thing. I check my list over 3 times at least and then usually have a friend look it over to make sure it is correct before handing it in. I also count my sideboard multiple times after SBing to make sure it is 15 and then pile shuffle to make sure my deck is 60 since I could have dropped a card on the floor or something. As a result I have never lost a game to stupid shit like you say you have. note: this is when playing at a PTQ or higher level events. I don't do this at FNMs since it is usually very casual and I am just playing for fun. EDIT: Still trying to figure out what to play for the WMCQ coming up. I'm probably going to end up playing my RUG delver list but I might try naya pod too. I hate UW delver.
If you are pile shuffling because you lost track of the number of cards you boarded in and out, and want to count your cards by pile shuffling, that is a lapse in concentration. My point is that you are depending on other people in a tournament to make sure you didn't do dumb things is a bad way of working out these kinks. You losing a card and failing to present the original 60 in between rounds is still your problem, you fix it by being diligent. Trying to fix these issues after the fact is completely pointless because it hardly discourages you from rectifying the situation/problems until it happens at which point the problem could be very well unresolvable. More often than not, you are thinking, its ok I'll catch any mistakes I made because of these things I do which is utterly pointless.
I agree with you about checking the lists before the actual tournament start. Once the matches start though, you really shouldn't be worried about what you might have forgotten and if you already had good play habits, you wouldn't be at risk anyways. The problem with people using piling for counting and other "fail safes" to maintain the integrity of their decks is the very notion that the problem already happened, you have done 0 things to prevent said things from happening again since every measure you take is after-the-fact. Right now, when I play in PTQs and what not, I have 0 worries about my deck and sideboarding simply because of good habits.
Edit:
This is not the same as writing down cards in an opponent's hand. Sideboarding should be a 1 to 1 trade and there should not be any confusion regardless of the methods you used to board; if you are confused, you aren't paying any attention.
Edit:
I want to fit Fettergeist and Restoration Angel in, I don't think it'll be in a true Esper build as there are 0 cards in black that makes me want to play Esper if I decide on the Restoration Angel line. Basically the idea is that a 3/4 is impossible to beat for Ramp decks which is now UW's worst match up (Delver can't actually beat you comfortably). I take a look sometime this week to figure out if UW-Angel is worth it.Last edit: 2012-05-31 07:06:25 |
| |
|
| Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 100 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 200 300 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 Next | |
|
|
|
| |
|
Sidebar Settings...
|
Store
