Thanks again for the great videos. I have a question about a line you took in Game 2 Match 3. Around the 29:00 mark, when opponent attacked with the Hollowhenge beast, why did you block with captain? My thinking was since you still had the patrician in hand and departure in the GY, you can afford to take 5 damage there. With the diregraf captain in hand, it allows you next turn to swing with the seaskite/captain/screeching skaab (without losing the skaab).

Since at that point he will either have to block or play Gnaw to the bone, you can then drop patrician that turn.

Next turn given that nothing has changed, you can departure and swing with team + patrician.

I think the result wouldn’t have changed too much given what he revealed he had, but it would’ve dealt an extra 2 damage at least.

I appreciate your arguments for W, R, and G, as well as your view of the metagame, but if you want to have an argument with me, you can’t just dismiss my views as “wrong”. For example, why is Nephalia Seakite 3rd not a blue signal? I see it in the top 2 of the blue commons with Griptide, and the Kite is the better early pick for reasons of deck composition.

Furthermore, please let me know how the draft should proceed after a first-pick Captain, independent of you disagreeing with this pick in the first place. Is your second pick Tragic Slip, and what do you pick up after that (especially pick 3)? Which white signals are you talking about?

It is easy to say that I could have drafted a red-green deck after first-picking Immerwolf, but that would have been an even more extreme case of forcing than me picking great blue-black commons after a first-picked Captain.

An introduction made before drafting wherein the drafter decides on what strategy to pursue during the draft is neither better nor worse than an introduction made after the fact; it’s simply that a post hoc introduction accomplishes a different pedagogical task, situating the viewer with respect to the sorts of things to which he or she should be attentive when watching the draft. What’s so great about Simon’s introductions, from my perspective, is that they point out a conceptual issue that Simon thought was a salient factor during the draft and subsequent games. In short, Simon’s introductions are framing devices for a viewer interested primarily in learning from the videos, not declarations of a maxim with which the drafter will be approaching the draft pre hoc. This latter type of introduction (“I’m going to try and force RG because I think it’s the best; let’s see how this experiment turns out!”) may be effective at times, but whatever data it provides are empirical and determined after the fallout of the draft (or even the matches) anyway.

Does any of this make sense?

You were rewarded in pack two with the two cards that won round one for you, Mindshrieker and curse. Had you gone another direction would have been okay with instigator gang, Champion of the Parrish and multiple human token generators to win the game before the curse comes down. I know WR is reviled by the CF crowd, but white has so many multiple token generators that rally the peasants type effects become a house.

Pack three you consistently mention the late white cards “Hmm, this is a late Chapel Geist”. That is because of the aforementioned huge white signal. At that point it is too late and you have your deck. I think that there were many better and more available decks out there that you passed on to play your Diregraf Captain. If you had a better grasp of the metagame of Innistrad Block limited, which is RG, GW > BW, RB, GUb, UB, RW, I don’t think you would have targeted the deck you drafted. In the intro you mentioned a specific creature to spell balance. At no time in your draft did it seem like you were trying to draft a specific number of creatures or spells. Oftentimes, your intros are less enlightening than tacked on. I enjoy your videos, as you do play well and offer up some insights, but you should seriously consider doing more research and adjusting the format of your videos.

@MMogg: You get to see whichever draft I happen to record and commentate. At rare instances (<5%) it happens that I am not happy with the flow of my commentary or the overall quality. In one of the first drafts I tried to record, I timed out in round 1 because playing and commentating took me too much time.

One thing I have always wondered is, do you record a few drafts and then choose one you like to use for a published video or do you just sit down and say, this one will be the article video regardless of what happens?