<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Anything But: Gates of Change</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.mtgoacademy.com/anything-but-gates-of-change/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.mtgoacademy.com/anything-but-gates-of-change/</link>
	<description>The prime source for Magic the Gathering strategy</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 Feb 2017 22:21:54 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.8.8</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dabil</title>
		<link>http://www.mtgoacademy.com/anything-but-gates-of-change/comment-page-1/#comment-11398</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dabil]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Dec 2012 22:21:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mtgoacademy.com/?p=18761#comment-11398</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Yes my data was also from the DE listings. Kinda stinks that Wizards all but killed it.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes my data was also from the DE listings. Kinda stinks that Wizards all but killed it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JustSin</title>
		<link>http://www.mtgoacademy.com/anything-but-gates-of-change/comment-page-1/#comment-10898</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[JustSin]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 04 Nov 2012 05:32:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mtgoacademy.com/?p=18761#comment-10898</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[thanks for the comments guys

@Dabil: yep I actually did all the meta work by hand as taken from the DE listings as I&#039;ve been doing for almost a year now lol, which now means nothing thanks to the change in DE listing policy.... do I assume your info is also affected by the decrease in DE listings? most &quot;stat&quot; sites I know rely entirely on the DE postings and since they are gone it leaves us all in the same boat... I don&#039;t have the time/energy/patience/motivation to sit down in client and actually look at all the DE personally to grab that same data that was provided once by Wizards so that just leads to being SoL]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>thanks for the comments guys</p>
<p>@Dabil: yep I actually did all the meta work by hand as taken from the DE listings as I&#8217;ve been doing for almost a year now lol, which now means nothing thanks to the change in DE listing policy&#8230;. do I assume your info is also affected by the decrease in DE listings? most &#8220;stat&#8221; sites I know rely entirely on the DE postings and since they are gone it leaves us all in the same boat&#8230; I don&#8217;t have the time/energy/patience/motivation to sit down in client and actually look at all the DE personally to grab that same data that was provided once by Wizards so that just leads to being SoL</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: deluxeicoff</title>
		<link>http://www.mtgoacademy.com/anything-but-gates-of-change/comment-page-1/#comment-10890</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[deluxeicoff]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 Nov 2012 13:55:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mtgoacademy.com/?p=18761#comment-10890</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Excellent effort - I hope this site keeps it up and starts to show puremtgo how it&#039;s done.  More quality, less quanity please!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Excellent effort &#8211; I hope this site keeps it up and starts to show puremtgo how it&#8217;s done.  More quality, less quanity please!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Albert</title>
		<link>http://www.mtgoacademy.com/anything-but-gates-of-change/comment-page-1/#comment-10886</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Albert]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 Nov 2012 06:44:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mtgoacademy.com/?p=18761#comment-10886</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Great Article]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great Article</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dabil</title>
		<link>http://www.mtgoacademy.com/anything-but-gates-of-change/comment-page-1/#comment-10885</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dabil]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 Nov 2012 05:32:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mtgoacademy.com/?p=18761#comment-10885</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hey Justin, just wondering how you perform your Daily Pauper Metagame analysis? Seems like you put a lot of work into it. Hopefully you have a program or something to help you. But, if you don&#039;t, I wanted to let you know that I created a bot that analyses the Daily Pauper Metagame.

I call it DAV Bot (for Daily Average Bot). Basically it collects all the decks that went 3-1 or 4-0 and groups them together by card similarity. If two decks have at least 50 of 75 cards in common (60 maindeck cards and 15 sideboard), then it groups them together. Once the groupings are all completed, it averages all the same decks together. Finally it outputs a report that shows how many decks made each group, and the frequency of each card in the deck average. 

This bot has been running since February 2011. You can view reports both weekly and monthly for anytime since this date. Just thought it would be useful to someone like you or some of your readers to go check out. I find it an invaluable resource while I am deck building and trying to understand the meta. 

Anyway, let me know if that is at all useful to you. As well, anyone who is interested in understanding and using this type of analysis, Frank Karsten wrote a great article  on it back in 2009 which can be found here: http://www.wizards.com/Magic/magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/feature/65]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey Justin, just wondering how you perform your Daily Pauper Metagame analysis? Seems like you put a lot of work into it. Hopefully you have a program or something to help you. But, if you don&#8217;t, I wanted to let you know that I created a bot that analyses the Daily Pauper Metagame.</p>
<p>I call it DAV Bot (for Daily Average Bot). Basically it collects all the decks that went 3-1 or 4-0 and groups them together by card similarity. If two decks have at least 50 of 75 cards in common (60 maindeck cards and 15 sideboard), then it groups them together. Once the groupings are all completed, it averages all the same decks together. Finally it outputs a report that shows how many decks made each group, and the frequency of each card in the deck average. </p>
<p>This bot has been running since February 2011. You can view reports both weekly and monthly for anytime since this date. Just thought it would be useful to someone like you or some of your readers to go check out. I find it an invaluable resource while I am deck building and trying to understand the meta. </p>
<p>Anyway, let me know if that is at all useful to you. As well, anyone who is interested in understanding and using this type of analysis, Frank Karsten wrote a great article  on it back in 2009 which can be found here: <a href="http://www.wizards.com/Magic/magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/feature/65" rel="nofollow">http://www.wizards.com/Magic/magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/feature/65</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: PB</title>
		<link>http://www.mtgoacademy.com/anything-but-gates-of-change/comment-page-1/#comment-10882</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[PB]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Nov 2012 22:01:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mtgoacademy.com/?p=18761#comment-10882</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[afaik, as recently as two months ago most lists were relying almost purely on ETW for the kill, maybe running 1-2 grapeshot as backup. I think storm would still exist if grapeshot would banned, it would just be the more interractive ETW version. They might need to run some transmute spells for redundancy, but grapeshot grixis gets away with running only 4 kill conditions main deck so I&#039;m sure they could work it out.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>afaik, as recently as two months ago most lists were relying almost purely on ETW for the kill, maybe running 1-2 grapeshot as backup. I think storm would still exist if grapeshot would banned, it would just be the more interractive ETW version. They might need to run some transmute spells for redundancy, but grapeshot grixis gets away with running only 4 kill conditions main deck so I&#8217;m sure they could work it out.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JustSin</title>
		<link>http://www.mtgoacademy.com/anything-but-gates-of-change/comment-page-1/#comment-10872</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[JustSin]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Nov 2012 15:27:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mtgoacademy.com/?p=18761#comment-10872</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[so I&#039;ve always said removing grapeshot might be the way to handle that, but that can lead to the deck being completely eliminated if it has to rely only on warrens, what would you do about it? restrict grapeshot? ban it?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>so I&#8217;ve always said removing grapeshot might be the way to handle that, but that can lead to the deck being completely eliminated if it has to rely only on warrens, what would you do about it? restrict grapeshot? ban it?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
