Deck Database

Tribe: Vampire
80 Maindeck cards and 0 Sideboard
Pioneer Tribal Wars · Vampire Midrange
Played by Bandit Keith in Tribal Apocalypse 10.19 (2-1)
MAINDECK (80 Cards)
31 Creatures
4 Blood Baron of Vizkopa

4 Champion of Dusk

4 Dusk Legion Zealot

4 Gifted Aetherborn

4 Kalitas, Traitor of Ghet

4 Knight of the Ebon Legion

4 Murderous Rider

3 Vampire of the Dire Moon

17 Spells
4 Fatal Push

4 Heartless Act

4 Sorin, Imperious Bloodlord

3 Declaration in Stone

2 Thoughtseize

32 Lands
10 Swamp

4 Caves of Koilos

4 Godless Shrine

4 Isolated Chapel

4 Mutavault

3 Castle Locthwain

2 Concealed Courtyard

1 Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth

R1:  Loss 1 - 2vs.  Yokai_  Queima Jeová #TeamBeijoGrego 
R2:  Win 2 - 0vs.  _Kumagoro_  Shake 'n Break 
R3:  Win 2 - 0vs.  jackslagel  Pioneer Zombie 
Total:  52
  x 13
  x 15
  x 8
  x 4
  x 8
Avg CMC: 2.56
1 Yorion, Sky Nomad as my Companion


But the truth is, I have another companion. But fret not - one that doesn't advantage me, but rather disadvantages me. Last week, the final match - where if I win, I'd have had a hat-trick of 3 undefeated weeks in a row, I had a total of 5 lands in three consecutive games. I ran 23 lands in that aggro deck.

The companion is a pervasive and deeply debilitating curse of having severe mana issues. No, that is not fun, and yes, I will complain about being on the receiving end of probably the most unlucky match of Magic ever played. I suffered to watch my win-streak end in the most ignominious of ways. Is this what is needed to stop me?

Is it hyperbole? Is it exaggeration? I know what you are thinking - the usual skepticism and invidious acrimony placed upon the #1 player. But how about I give you statistical facts, and let you - the wise, fair, and unbiased audience of Tribal Apocalypse - come to your own conclusions? Is that fair?

Keep in mind, I run 23 lands, and I had a total of 5 lands for THREE consecutive games in the match. That is on average 1.66 lands per game. By comparison, an opening hand of 7, by itself, immediately, in the start of one game, should have a higher land count.

Having an opening hand of 2 or more land is approximately 83%. In all three games, my openers failed to hit that 83% mark. Additionally, each time I mulliganed the 0 or 1 land opener, I received yet another hand with fewer than 2 land. This is 0.17 squared, so something like a 3 percent occurrence, in 3 consecutive games, back to back.

Oh, but there's more. Game 1, which I managed to win through sheer magic I guess, I had 2 lands in something like the top 10 or 11 cards; for the entirety of the game. This is not probable, but since I pulled it out, I didn't calculate the precise odds, nor felt too bad. Game 2, after the 3 percenter opening fiasco, I got stuck on 1 land in the top 10 cards - which has a probability of about 5 percent (23 lands). So that's a 3 percenter mana screw in opening hands into a 5 percenter for the entirety of Game 2.

But I still had one more game to play. I shouldn't let one miserably unlucky game 2 get me down, right? Onto Game 3! Things will be better! Be optimistic!

Ah, game 3. The one that seals the deal. Again, after two miserable and unlucky openers (3 percent), I suffered to see two lands in the top 22 cards. That's right, TWO lands in the top 22 cards. In case you were wondering what the odds of that are, it is 0.03%. That's right - in other words, the odds of that NOT happening are 99.97%. I kid you not. Again, this happened after another 3 percenter opener of having two unplayable hands with 1 or less land.

Fine, want another tidbit? Still not convinced at what
I must endure? All my achievement despite trials and tribulations? Okay. In that same Game 3, as I was having a lot of fun bricking on two lands, I drew 4 out of 4 of my uncastable 3-drops Rotting Regisaur in the top 11 cards or so. Not just any 4 out of 4 card, but specifically one I couldn't cast. I was discarding this card to hand size. I forget the exact number, but that also has a probability of something like 0.05%. So, that's right - while I was getting 0.03% mana screwed, in the third mana screw game in a row, I was also encountering a separate 0.05% probability of drawing the same uncastable spell repeatedly, and all this after the same 3 percenter of having two unplayable openers.

Of course to any inquisitive person in good faith, I'd be more than happy to go back to my replay and share details for full verification to satisfy anyone's morbid curiosity. Some might even ask for a recording - and I don't blame them. It'd be like asking for a recording of Sasquatch or the Loch Ness monster; something so horribly rare that it is not even believable. I have never recorded a replay before, nor do I know how, but perhaps I should learn it in order to demonstrate the full extent of my bad luck. For reference, Frank Karsten posted a mathematical analysis of good luck / bad luck in notable matches, and my sort of bad luck ranks as good (or should I say bad?) as the best (or should I say worst?) among them. I was, in short, fucked. Fucked, so hard. Fucked truly, irreparably, and absolutely.

I have 0 expectations in this tournament now after being so brutally and utterly maimed and traumatized in RNG: the Gathering. When is the fun supposed to start? Even after having the equivalent of being struck by lightning 5 times? I assume complaining about a 0.03% mana screw, when I am playing for another historic hat-trick, is gratuitous, right?

TL;DR 23 land aggro, 3 mana screw games in a row, third game I couldn't win a 99.97% probability. Such bullshit eclipses everything else, from creative deck innovations to play-skill

P.S. 0.03% is 3 in 10,000, or 1 in 3,333 games, and I can tell you that the last time such a thing happened to me (though it happened last time in one game of a match, not all 3 games of a match) was A LOT more recent than 3,333 games ago. God bless WoTC, and god bless their expert level of programming on MTGO. I am sure the shuffler, like everything else on that sleek and modern program, works completely optimally and without errors!