12.1 Play or draw?
12.1.1 Introduction
The first decision an MTG player faces during a game is whether to play or draw first (if, of course, she won the coin toss that preceded the match or lost the previous game). In constructed, it is customary to choose to start first almost always, and there are good reasons for this that will be mentioned later. Interestingly, even in a limited environment there is a clear tendency among MTG players to choose the option of playing first. Because of this, new players who are introduced to the game automatically adopt this line of action and the result is the perpetuation of this tendency.
Experienced players are usually more open to the possibility of drawing first. However, their decisions are often made intuitively. It is commonly thought that the decision is related to the speed of the format being played. The faster the format, the first play option should be preferred. Experienced players will present things something like this: ‘Playing first means an advantage over the opponent in terms of tempo. The faster the environment, the tempo means more, so in this case playing first should be preferred over drawing first. That’s why I will always choose playing first in constructed, most cases of draft, while in sealed I may consider sometimes drawing first’. But tempo is always important, in both slow and fast environments. However, under certain conditions, the desire to maximize the tempo should lead us to prefer the first draw over the first play. Why?
12.1.2 Potential tempo and actual tempo
Tempo, as you will remember, is the rate at which players develop their position on the battlefield. It depends on various resources available to them, such as spells and lands. More fundamentally, tempo depends on a key resource: the turn and its various phases. The player’s turn is essential in achieving tempo because: (1) Only on her turn can a player place a land in the battlefield; (2) Only on her turn can a player cast creatures and permanents; (3) Only on her turn can the player attack the opponent. However, the use of this key resource depends on the presence of cards in the player’s hand: it is only possible to lay a land if it is in the player’s hand. So too the casting of creatures. Needless to say, exploiting the attack phase is only possible using previously cast creatures.
Therefore, the turn can be viewed as a potential resource whose realization depends on holding the right cards. In other words: in order for me to achieve tempo I need not only basic conditions (the turn on its phases, I mean potential tempo) but also the cards in hand which allow me using this resource. Real tempo will only be achieved by combining the two. When I choose to play first, I get an advantage in terms of my potential tempo because my turn precedes my opponent’s turn. However, the utilization of this turn depends on the cards in my hand: do I have a land to place on the battlefield? Do I have a creature with suitable mana cost for its casting? The more cards I have in hand, the greater the likelihood that I can realize the potential tempo the turn has given me.
But here is the problem: the player who chooses to play first is actually the one with fewer cards in hand because she is denied the right to draw a card on the first turn. The actual use of my potential tempo depends on: (1) Would I be able to place a land first in the first turn, a second in my second turn, a third in the third turn, and so on. Of course, this depends on the cards I manage to draw; (2) Do I hold a spell that can be cast on the first turn? Another on my second turn? And another one on my third turn? Again, it depends on the cards I draw. If I succeed in doing so, the advantage in potential tempo will also translate into actual tempo and this will give me a serious advantage. If I don’t succeed in doing this, then the fact that I played first will not give me any advantage.
Now we turn to the player who drew first. This player has a disadvantage in potential tempo but a greater chance of achieving actual tempo. In other words: the fact that the player first drew an extra card increases the chances that she will succeed in placing a land each turn and increases the chances that she will succeed in casting spells each turn. A clear example of this principle is the dilemma known to every MTG player: what to do when she one draws two lands in the opening hand? Should you make a mulligan or leave the hand? In this case the player will be in a better position if she decided to draw first than if she decided to play first. This is because the expected lack of lands in the first turns negates the ability of the player who plays first to gain actual tempo: she will probably not be able to benefit from the potential tempo advantage. The player who draws first, by contrast, has a greater chance of gaining actual tempo despite the potential tempo disadvantage since she has a greater chance of being able to place a third land on the third turn (or a fourth land on the fourth turn) than his opponent.
Since the benefit in playing or drawing first depends on the starting hand, does this mean that the decision is arbitrary anyway? The answer is no. A player can estimate the chances that in an opening hand she will find the tools to translate the potential tempo into actual tempo. The faster and more consistent his deck, the greater the chances that choosing to play first will reward her. Yet, a relatively expensive or complicated deck in terms of mana composition tends to prefer drawing first. However, the player must also consider his opponent’s deck. When the opponent enjoys a cheap and consistent deck, she should choose to play first regardless of the deck she is playing, if only to prevent his opponent from enjoying an advantage. This is why in constructed the players always choose to play first, at least until they learn what deck the opponent is playing. In a limited environment, however, the situation is more balanced. In an experiment I conducted in Israel, it became clear that in the sealed format there is almost complete equality in the achievements of players who chose to play or draw first. The experiment was conducted during 5 non-consecutive pre-released between the years 2003 and 2005. Of the 568 games analyzed, 254 were won by the first player, 233 by the first drawer and 71 ended in a draw. These statistics are reinforced by the data collected from Arena MTG.[1] However, it seems that the London mulligan convention gives a consistent advantage to the player who plays first. Nevertheless, a player can try to evaluate the rewarding strategy by analyzing his deck: is his deck relatively cheap or expensive? Is his mana more or less consistent (does she play a third color, for example)? Is her opponent playing a deck that might gain a big advantage if she plays first?
12.2 Should I mulligan? Analyzing your opening hand
The second question a player has to deal with in every game of MTG is whether to keep the opening hand (7 cards) or risk replacing it with a smaller hand. In order for a player to make an informed decision on this matter, she must know how to analyze her hand. This issue is complex and requires a systematic discussion. There are many ways in which a hand can be evaluated. Here I will present one relatively simple method that I developed especially for those who are not very experienced in the game.
12.2.1 A 7-card hand
When analyze the hand, we must count the ratio between the lands and the spells in the 7 cards we drew. A hand of 3/4 or 4/3 will be considered a balanced hand. A hand of 2/5 or 5/2 is a borderline hand. A hand of 1/6, 6/1, 0/7 or 7/0 is a weak hand.
- Stable hand: The analysis of the hand is conducted by counting the number of stable spells in our hand. A hand to keep here is a hand that includes at least two ‘safe’ spells. A safe spell would be a spell costing up to 4 mana, which we have a real chance of exchanging for an opponent’s card. In other words, spells that do not hurt our card balance with the opponent. The importance of limiting the cost of the spell to 4 mana stems from the need to build an effective defense in case the opponent has a relatively fast opening.
Safe spells:
*Creatures costing up to 4 mana and having at least 2 power.
*Removals at a cost of up to 4 mana.
*Combat tricks that can be exchanged for an opponent’s creature (that is, keeping your creature alive). However, this CT will be considered a safe spell for hand estimation only under certain conditions that will be detailed later.
*Spells that allow you to draw at least 2 cards costing up to 4 mana.
Unsafe spells:
*Mana boosters.
*Finishers.
*Life gainers.
*Creatures and removals that cost 5 mana or more.
*Creatures with a power of 1 that do not benefit from an ability capable of neutralizing an opponent’s creature.
*Spells whose cost includes mana in the color of the ‘splash’ and the opening hand does not have the means to produce this mana.
- Borderline hand: If we opened a hand with 5 lands and 2 spells, it is important that both spells are safe. Since there is a relatively large chance that such a hand will create a problem of mana floodness, it is desirable that these spells be of relatively high quality and not ones that we would estimate as borderline in terms of their stability.
If we open a hand with 2 lands and 5 spells, we should deviate slightly from the rule stated above. In order for us to want to keep the hand it must include at least two stable spells costing up to 3 mana and at least one more stable spell costing up to 4 mana. This is because we must take into account that we will not be able to draw more than one land in the next few turns and we must ensure that we can hold up the opponent until we can cast the more expensive spells.
III. Weak hand: A weak hand will always be replaced unless there is a special reason to keep it. For example, in the case of a hand with 6 spells and 1 land, extremely cheap spells and one or more cheap mana boosters with low mana (2 mana), we may want to gamble and keep the hand. But these cases are rare.
12.2.2 A 6-card hand
If we have decided to replace the hand, the new 6-card hand should be evaluated more permissively. We want to avoid another mulligan as much as possible since a 5-card opening hand will lose in the vast majority of cases. Therefore, we will settle for a hand that includes between 2 and 5 lands and has at least 1 stable card at a cost of up to 4 mana. If the hand includes 4 spells and only 2 lands, we would like the stable spell to cost up to 3 mana.
12.2.3 A 5-card hand or less
The hand must be left in any case if we drew at least one land or one spell.
