How to Stop Cheaters in MTG - Mana Weaving!
Вставка
- Опубліковано 28 сер 2024
- Follow GG Degree at:
GGDegree
The GG Degree channel is a Magic: the Gathering is a variety channel where you can watch deck techs, prerelease guides, altered art tutorials and timelapses, DIY projects, MTG product and box openings, participate in giveaways and get vlog opinions on current happenings in Magic.
There is also a focus on learning, with tips for improving play, spotting cheaters, deckbuilding, and more.
If there is something that you like in Magic: the Gathering, it’s probably here. It’s nice to have you with us!
There’s a subscribe button right above this description! It’s red and it want you to get clicky with it :)
This comments section is funny. Cheaters arguing with non-cheaters. I play this game casually, but I have to say I don't enjoy manaweaving. Getting flooded or screwed is part of the game. If you don't like it, play Yu-Gi-Oh or some shit like that, no mana required! Play hearthstone! MTG is a game where mana is a mechanic. It is a part of the rules of the game. You don't get to just edit the rules to win the game. If you want to play magic: perfect hand every time edition then play with your friends where you always do this, but if you bring this to FNM, you are no longer playing the same game as your opponent. I don't see how people can actually attempt to justify it
I never expected this video to be one of my most controversial, not gonna lie!
It's...not really part of the game. The "every X cards, add Y mana" is to prevent both manascrewing and flooding. In theory, they're still posssible to happen, but very unlikely if you shuffle your deck *actually randomly* . So weaving mana, of all things, is a silly issue to bitch about since odds are, if your opponent is an efficient shuffler, the end result will be same or very alike. I barely play magic, but this seems like a non-issue people like to bitch and moan.
"quit bitching" is a pretty common excuse for cheaters, but it's clear that we're really not saying the same thing. You think it should be a part of the game, but it isn't. Sorry. There is no other point to be made. Of course you want to win at the game, and that's okay, but modifying your deck to provide better odds for you is cheating. Arguing that it's "no big deal" or that "it sucks to get mana flooded" is a different conversation. Is it cheating? Yes. Is cheating against the rules? Yes. That is the entire conversation. It IS a part of the game. Play a different game if you don't like the rules. I know that sounds elitist as fuck, but these are the facts.
It's cheating because you're not shuffling randomly. But if your opponent is a good shuffler, or a judge shuffles (assuming judges are good shufflers) the end result is the exact same, that's random chance. But yes, it's cheating by the definition in the book. Also, if you're playing casual or with a friend, who really cares? If neither of players gets manaflooded/screwed, that's definetly a more fun battle, assuming, again, you're playing as *casual* and/or *with a friend* with previously agreed upon statement that "weaving is K in that game".
Wingus Dingus I have an all wolf token deck that pullz every land in it if the deck goes off. Is it cheating to mana weave then shuffle several times ?
"Don't worry about wasting time shuffling (opponent's deck), because you're not gonna play anyway."
Savage.
Well, even if the game played out, you would not be "playing a game" anyway. You are playing a clown fiesta with a dishonest assclown.
top1 Then, any good judge will know what the intention was, wave you on, and you keep going. Less forgiving judges would give you a time penalty. Few would actually dq you for it as most get into judging for the exact reason that they hate cheaters and know the value in being careful.
If you think their deck is mana weaved. Just give their deck a good random shuffling, and play the game. Problem solved.
the problem is that as the presenter said, it requires about 20 good shufflings to get random again. doing shuffles for that long is enough to get you a penalty for wasting time or worse.
Any deck with >52 cards can be mathematically randomized with between 7 and 10 riffle shuffles. Hand over hand or board shuffles take thousands of shuffles. Not sure why so many land on 20 as a number nessecary for randomization.
For the purpose of the video you should use different sleeves for the different type of cards. Like color code them. That way with the shuffle we see the acrobatics
just shuffle right side up for us
kids did it boi
Jokes on you this is legacy goblin charbelcher i have only 1 land xD
ok but instead of calling a judge I'd just hand the deck back to them and watch them squirm as they only ever draw mana
What if they mulligan?
@@natalie6811 Then it's you who is being the cheater and gaining an unfair advantage over your opponent by handing them a deck that you shuffled in a way that forced them to mulligan.
SIES_ssbm Why are you calling me out?
@@natalie6811 Simply answering your question truthfully.
SIES_ssbm oh whoops, somehow only read the first half of the sentence, sorry
I'd never heard of mana weaving until I saw this video. Now I do it all the time and my results have improved a lot. Thanks, GG Degree!
Of course not. This is a great tool any serious MtG player should have in his or her arsenal.
Brandon C Now you're not making any sense. Showing it to the judges would defeat the purpose.
"Others should know how to stop me from cheating, therefore it's their fault I'm a cheater."
You know who else makes statements like that? Murderers and psychopaths. Don't choose to be this person that you are.
Everyone I know that plays Magic does this openly. No one likes a game where you get mana screwed or your opponent gets mana screwed. It makes more games more interesting. However, no one is super competitive here and just want fun and good games .
oh forgot to mention, we also shuffle our decks a bit after mana weaving.
A better way instead of un-pile shuffling is to do your own pile shuffle, but instead of doing 5 piles of 12, you do 12 piles of 5. If your opponent did 2 5-pile shuffles, you do 2 12-pile shuffles. It will reverse what he did. Depending on how many he did the deck may be in reverse of its original order, but it should still show the obvious mana weaving that was attempted.
+Arkalius80 This should be rated higher.
It's a general algebraic problem, that is easily solvable for any number that is a divisor of 60.
*_*generality intensifies*_*
yup just repile shuffle his deck. then all his mana get stuck at the top or bottom, and you can bet your opponent won't mana weave again game 2
You may only pile shuffle once at the beginning of a game. If you take this tactic, you are slow-playing.
Opponent: *starts to cheat by shuffling*
Me: *reaches over and slaps their hand*
I got introduced to magic in high school we could only have enough time for 1 or 2 games of commander in the morning so we all mana weaved. I honestly thought it was part of the game until I went to a casual draft at my card store and after my first round the guy I went up against called me out for it he looked like he was gonna get all pissy for a free pack (the prize for winning a game) so I apologized deconstructed and let him shuffle the deck “properly”
Moral of the story not everyone weaves thinking they even ARE cheating best straight up say “ are you mana weaving?” Gaige from their reaction what to do next
lol, 'didn't know it was cheating' my ass
@@Chris-ci8vs yep hindsight it was pretty dumb of me but when you start out playing in highschool, everyone weaves, half the guys thought nobody noticed when they drew 2 cards instead of one or "forgot" some triggered ability that would have cost them the game, but now im into the game so much I could probably judge (casually) thanks to how well I learned the stack and so on
Yeh I agree. I do it after I’ve just built a new deck since I have all my creatures and spells in a stack and all my lands in a stack but I’ll weave it then shuffle it for a couple minutes so it feels like a decent way of getting everything mixed up. And I don’t have any motives of cheating. I just want to make sure I don’t have a pile of lands and a pile of spells and never be able to draw a good hand.
@@zd5587 yep thats about were i am now too although some other comments here saying "mana flooded/ drought is part of the game git gud ect i play casual and we all love not being able to play because we don't have mana" and so on and i just want to tell everyone of them that no! they don't play casual, they play tournament level at home. casual isn't playing magic at home its playing magic with lower tier decks and/or RELAXED RULES ie running nephalim/non legendary commanders alowing urza's head and other silver border ect and the group realizing that the ezuri token deck is stuck at 2 lands maybe let him pull one or two to hand so he isn't out of the game
and hey we only have time for 3 games or 1 if the blue player hits his first 7 land drops and everyone else didn't so lets weave and lightly shuffle
also try teaching a new player how to play when half the time they are boxed out cause bad draws
@@thatoneguy2886 yep causal players can have bad ass decks but it’s the mentality and the social contracts that seperate them. For example a few of the guys I play with like to draw 10 to start with and if they mulligan they just draw another 10 until they can find 7 that they can have a good start with and put 3 back on the bottom. Then if one of us gets down to only like 3 life and they want to keep the game going they will see if there’s a way to let him get his lifeline in real quick to bump him back up. It’s like a semi competitive/semi let’s hang out and make this last a while and when we get ready to go then we will all go hard for a turn or 2 and see who wins. I don’t mind it at all.
There is a legit reason to mana weave; but it needs to be followed by a series of legit shuffles for it to remain legal.
Over the course of games, lands are the most touched card sleeves. The spend the most time on the table, they get tapped and moved more often than any other card. What happens is the card sleeves with land in them can get oil residue from your fingers and/or static build up from the tables.
And when you pick up your cards from the table, most people tend to pick up the lands in one swoop. What does this create? Clumps of lands; and because of oil and/or static they are more likely to stick together while shuffling, keeping it in clumps.
When you mana weave you are breaking these static connections and you should also be making an effort to check for dirt and oil build up. I look at it as preparing the deck to be shuffled. You now have the cards as unsticky and unclumped as you can get them in a short period of time.
Now for that to be a usable deck it needs to be shuffled, for real. I typically do at least 12 actual shuffles to achieve randomness and of course my opponent can shuffle it all he wants as well.
So for me, I'm going to continue mana weaving, and I don't care if other people do it either. So long as it's actually followed by real shuffling.
Yeah everyone in my friend group mana-weaves and then shuffles a whole bunch- and also courtesy shuffle again right before drawing. But its just because we are constantly deconstructing our decks so if we dont mana weave before shuffling we will get like a million mana and no creatures or the oposite
haven't played in a long while, but agreed; mana-weaving is just a part of de-clumping in-between games. If it's followed by a thorough shuffled, it should be fine.
if anything is followed by a thorough shuffle, it will be fine.
Mana weaving before a thorough shuffle is being superstitious. Either that, or you don't believe you're shuffling well.
Just shuffle more, and you won't get clumps. A deck of 52 playing cards needs 7 riffle shuffles to be suitably random, 60 MTG cards might take more like 10 or 12 but it's still doable, and you'll get really fast at it too :)
You're an idiot Vincent. If you can shuffle CORRECTLY, which the deck results completely random, there is no need to mana weave, because if you correctly shuffle after mana weaving, the deck would be just as random.
You are missing the point, you've obviously never played long enough to experience static or oil buildup on card sleeves. They become stuck together, they stay together even during shuffling.
You mana weave to break the static and the oil bonds and to check for damage on the sleeves.
If you have ever tried to shuffle with clumps that are static bonded you would know that they stay in clumps, you can watch it happen.
It's not superstition, it's about physically making sure the sleeves aren't sticking.
If I can physically pick up 1 card and have 2 or 3 actually stuck to it, they need to get pulled apart.
The only chance you have of breaking a static bond in shuffling would require bending the cards to the point where you risk damaging them. I'd rather ensure they aren't stuck prior to doing the shuffle to minimize bending.
There's a world of difference between shuffling poker cards that you don't care about and gently shuffling magic cards that have actual value. If you aren't bending the cards much you need to make sure they aren't sticking prior to doing it so that they fall apart from each other easily to ensure a good shuffle.
I win mtg Friday nights by bribing the judges. Don't need no mana weave.
You smart
Haha, that's good.
What's the name of these judges, and this place you play at?
#moneyweave
vjm3 oh lol silent voice be like
So wait... If a double nickel mana weave takes twenty shuffles to sufficiently re-randomize...
Why wouldn't someone double nickel before they even set foot in the building, then properly shuffle twice at the march start?
this will only be possible on the first match, cause after a match you will have a mixed graveyard, a mixed field, a mixed hand and a mixed grimoire to deal with
@@lukaspequenomatos1681 maybe not because if you play similar each time, an example I have is a kid with sliver deck would play the same couple of cards mana weaved which they'd have indestructible and shroud by I think turn 5 so it would be about the same and then he'd put the cards on the field the same way and then double nickle and get the same result every time if not off by only one or two cards
Lukas Pequeno Matos weave what was played place on bottom you should have enough duplicity to have the same deck you started with statistically speaking
Ive never been to a tourney before. Couldn’t you just redo the mana weave between each new match before they start? Or do you start a new match like immediately
103.1. At the start of a game, each player shuffles their deck so that the cards are in a random order. Each player may then shuffle or cut their opponents’ decks. The players’ decks become their libraries.
This meeting could have been an E-mail
Just getting back into MTG. Haven't played since Invasion so I'm appreciative of seeing this video. I'm not as worried about being able to randomize my opponents cards as I am being able to spot cheaters. (because I've spent over 25 years in poker as a player, instructor and dealer) Thanks and keep them coming.
I'll make a little effort in continuing the series for ya, Nathan :)
Pile shuffling is only legal for one thing, counting. you always have to shuffle after a pile shuffle.
+Andras Petersen yes, and that is a infraction for not shuffling a deck if someone tries to hand it off to you.
+Andras Petersen Yeah, I always pile shuffle six piles to double check confirm 60 card count, then overhand shuffle and cut at least 3 or 4 times each after.
+Andras Petersen i pile shuffle but i do it at random. so the piles get made in a random order each cycle and nearly always end up with substantial differences in numbers. if i have 5 piles i put cards down in this kinda order (at randome) 2314533242152342435534223253
+Andras Petersen As someone who does some slight of hand card tricks, I can tell you that you can do a LOT of different shuffling techniques in this situation...without ACTUALLY shuffling at all.
In this case...if someone has a pile of lands and a pile of spells? Well, I can split each of these piles in two, riffle and/or bridge shuffle them half a dozen time each, making an act of switching up the various piles (when I actually didn't), and other actions that LOOK like they do something when they actually don't. Then, I could put them back together before stacking the on top of each other and going to do a pile shuffle. It will LOOK like I just shuffled the hell out of them...because people looking won't know that I started with my deck completely divided up between lands and spells. The are numerous ways to make it LOOK like things have been randomized without actually changing anything.
As long as someone can end with a pile shuffle without raising suspicion, then the technique can still work. Even if the rules say a non-pile shuffle has to be done after a pile shuffle, it can be incredibly easy to be disarmed just by the process. Which is to say nothing for slight of hand tricks that can simulate shuffles without actually doing them.
+John Keller There are ways to make your opponent do this to himself too, and yeah, there's nothing people can do about cheaters in this system, even allowing the judges to do all the shuffling isn't a good countermeasure for card cheats.
mana weaving prior to shuffling is not cheating as per the official tournament infraction guide 3.4 . Any
manipulation, weaving, or stacking prior to randomization is acceptable. if you opponent wants to distribute his land before shuffling that's fine so long as the deck is then shuffled. this should be pointed out as i have actually seen a player receive warnings Unsporting Conduct - Minor for calling a judge of a pre-shuffle weave
Thank you this guy is full of salt for losing matches so he came up with a formula to validate he was "cheated"
I think what this is specifically pointing out is pile shuffle then hand to your opponent. A lot of newer players wouldn't know the rules in place stating that a pile shuffle cannot be your final shuffle due to it not randomizing the cards in any way.
It happened to me around 6 years ago where the guy seemed to have the perfect hand twice. He had prestacked his deck like this and was called out his next match and DQ'd.
@broran
If you do it during a match then you can get a warning for slow play.
@@VirtualGnome This video massively oversimplifies. As he said himself, theoretically it would take 20 shuffles to fully randomise a weaved deck. So any player trying to cheat will weave, then shuffle 2 or 3 times. Completely undetectable and unprovable, as the deck will be pseudorandomised, yet still guarantees a better distribution.
If you're playing competitively, always shuffle your opponent's deck as much as possible. If your game isn't serious enough to be worth 20 shuffles, the a deck with land just added to the top will not be shuffled sufficiently. You end up cheating yourself through mana flooding or screw.
@@adamrobinson6951 I'm not sure what kind of shuffles he's talking about, but a well performed poker shuffle can randomize a deck in 7 shuffles. If you're well practiced this can be done extremely quickly.
I feel like a lot of judges would not sit there patiently and watch you deconstruct the double-nickel. Until you prove that cheating occurred, you're running down the round timer, and the judge's time is valuable as well.
Why not? What do you think judges should do with their time? Roll their thumbs? Aren't judges supposed to judge?
If you think somebody is cheating, call a judge over and let the judge do their job - to judge.
If you think somebody is cheating, shouldn't you be allowed to explain _why_ you think so, so that the judge can actually _judge_ ? So what if it takes time? Judges frequently make *time extensions* . I see no problem here.
@@Pineapple_Thief the only problem here is that the OP is a fuckin moron lmfaooo
@@Pineapple_Thief Large sanctioned events will have a few dozen of pairs of players in the first couple of rounds, so the attending judge(s) has to be accurate and brief with their supervision in order to attend to so many players.
Why not just shuffle it when they hand it to you?? Also when you are deck building most people sort their cards then “weave them” together before shuffling.
If your gonna cheat do it the old fashion way and learn how to do card tricks
"It's only cheating if you get caught"
"D - A - R - B - Y. Apostrophe after the D."
@@indi1769 Your turn, Mr. JOeStiRR
Honestly I would let my opponent cheat if he could do some acrobatic card trick cheat
The heart of the cards.
3.9. Tournament Error - Insufficient Shuffling Warning
Definition
A player unintentionally fails to sufficiently shuffle their deck or a portion of their deck before
presenting it to their opponent, or fails to present it to their opponent for further randomization.
A deck is not shuffled if the judge believes a player could know the position or distribution of
one or more cards in their deck.
Examples
A. A player forgets to shuffle their library after searching for a card.
B. A player searches for a card, then gives the library a single riffle-shuffle before
presenting the library to their opponent.
C. A player fails to shuffle the portion of their library revealed during the resolution of a
cascade ability.
Philosophy
Players are expected to shuffle their deck thoroughly when it is required and are expected to have
the skill and understanding of randomization to do so. However, as the opponent has the
opportunity to shuffle after the player does, the potential for advantage is lowered if tournament
policy is followed.
Any time cards in a deck could be seen, including during shuffling, it is no longer shuffled, even
if the player only knows the position of one or two cards. Players are expected to take care in
shuffling not to reveal cards to themselves, their teammates, or their opponents.
A player should shuffle their deck using multiple methods. Patterned pile-shuffling is only
allowed at the start of a game. Any manipulation, weaving, or stacking prior to randomization is
acceptable, as long as the deck is thoroughly shuffled afterwards.
Additional Remedy
Shuffle the appropriate portion of the deck thoroughly.
"It took me a while to figure out how to deconstruct the double nickle" (does double nickel backwards) lol. Good vid.
"How to stop opponents from mana weaving."
You shuffle their deck.
You want little shits DQed
How to get stabbed grab a strangers cards with no context.
How about a video on how to properly clean up your board when the game ends, and properly randomize your deck before your next game? My problem is if I fetch up 3/4 of my lands and the cleanup I don't know how to best randomize afterword.
+Adam Mercier I've wondered this many times, I would love a video like that.
+Adam Mercier I've heard if you mash shuffle your deck 7 times, it is sufficient for it to be called "random". Usually after fetching or tutoring I mash shuffle 5-7 times, but before a new game I'll mash shuffle around 10 or more.
As for cleaning up your lands, what I usually do is just scoop up the boardstate and mash it into my library instead of putting them on top and then shuffling.
+Adam Mercier what i personally do is kinda make sure i ain't got more than 2 lands/3spells togehter, then give a good 5-10 shuffles gets random enough
+Adam Mercier Easiest way to clean up after a game: shuffle all the used cards together well then mash that into the library and shuffle everything.
+Adam Mercier "I don't know how to best randomize"
You just shuffle a lot.
I see some people suggesting to mash the lands in the library instead of putting it on top, but that should not matter. If you think it might matter, then you should shuffle more. Because that's the point of shuffling, the initial order should have no incidence on the final random result.
Also, a random deck doesn't guarantee even distribution of lands, quite the contrary. It's not like when you mix you pasta with sauce and it get homogeneous. Random distribution have a very high chance of creating clumps when you consider 7 cards out of 60. Check this, a serie of random 1 and 0. Notice how many consecutive 1 and 0 there are. www.random.org/integers/?num=60&min=0&max=1&col=1&base=10&format=html&rnd=new
A number of people in the comments seem upset by this video but it's important to remember that this is in the context of a competitive environment where manaweaving gives one player a much larger advantage over other players. Also, you can weave much more than just mana. There are three turn combo wins that you can set up by weaving the right cards together (during Kamigawa there was an infamous 1 turn win) and that's not including eternal formats. A game shouldn't be decided on who is able to weave cards into their hand the best. It should be decided on who does the most with the cards they draw. In a tournament scenario raw weaves mean that the better player loses to an underhanded 'strategy'.
Now, *in a casual setting* this is obviously very different. You want a fun interactive game so, as long as everyone knows what you're doing and they can likewise do the same, there isn't a big deal to mana weaving. It stops manaflood and manascrew and if your opponent is cool with that then there isn't really a problem. The difference here is you aren't breaking official rules and you aren't lying to your opponent nor is there anything at stake. I do this all the time with my group and it's grand.
In our casual games a 8-10 pile manaweave was required before every deck's first match. A win due to mana flood/ mana drought is not a real win, all it does is get people pissed off and possibly ruin the night.
thats totally cheating, but setting up your mana randomly and just spaced out, then giving it a shuffle, isnt cheating. But if you do it in a way where you can predict which cards are coming up or their association with other cards, thats clearly cheating. Stacking your deck vs spreading the cards out.
And after you play a long game, say with Eldrazi, you're pretty full up on all your lands on your field, so when you go to put your cards up to play another game you have a good 6-18 lands in one spot in your deck, so I would mana weave to re-distribute my lands throughout my deck, and then shuffle them normally for as long as the other person would carry on a conversation for. I played in a Card Club though, nothing competitive.
+Uden One-Eye
Not every deck is as susceptible to mana-flood/mana-starve, that's why it creates an unfair disadvantage.
And no, it is not acceptable by the rules. Mana weaving is not a shuffle.
Mana weaving is an insufficient shuffle, what is your point?
Also, why did you just outright ignore the first part of my comment?
"What IS 'random'?! ...a miserable pile of secrets!"
I was completely unaware of this, I've done this a couple times not knowing it was a thing. I just got sick of mana pockets or lack of mana. Figured it would make the deck run better, didn't know it was cheating.
+R Backus In casual, it might not be so much a problem but in competitive, it is unfair to do so.
for casual play it is ok. IF and ONLY IF, you and your opponent are both doing it. That way you can both have a good game, with ample manna etc.
BUT, for competitive play it is NEVER ALLOWED. it encourages people to build decks around the pattern of manna, they know they are going to get.
DOING this will make your decks worse in the long run. FOR eg, you might know your going to end up sitting on 4 manna for a long time, and build your deck around that.
So you deck wont be optimized for, true, random play and you will be used to patterns that don't happen in TRUE magic.
R Backus It's not cheating. Not even close.
How can you possibly not know that deliberately stacking your deck is inappropriate?
It's not cheating at all unless you are a little bitch with a weak deck
Make a vid that shows how you shuffle your deck the right way (^_^)y think this would clear-out lots for many players.
I agree a video on how to shuffle the deck properly would be great, especially when you have over ten lands that were previously in play
When I first started playing I was taught to "mana weave " every few games to break up clumps of land and spells
Every one is taught this if you say you were not you are a fucking liar
I remember I tried this in my first draft when I was like 12. Sorting the cards right in front of my opponent. That did not go over well.
@@niccosaur7778 actually, i wasn't when i heard the term "mana weaving" just today, i had to click the video just to find out what it was. BUT i do feel like i would have had a more fun time playing casually with friends if we did try this (my friend who played the most had the best deck so obviously we all gang up on him alot) if we did mana weaving it might have been a more fair and FUN time against him
yeh i had no idea this would be illegal. if there arent clumps of mana that would mean it IS well shuffled
@Alexander Nock exactly. If you don't do this after a game, it is unfair in the other direction. Huge clumps of mana. That would not be random at all.
I once knew someone who was so bad, they still couldn't win after stacking.
You absolutely *DO NOT* need extra shuffles to randomize a deck that has been double nickled. That's not how randomization works.
At most, you need 1.5×logb2(N) shuffles to fully randomize a deck with N cards. In practice that should be lower (around 1.25×logb2(N)). That means a 60 card deck can be completely randomized in 7 or 8 shuffles. Fully random means each possible order of the deck is equally possible no matter what the starting order was.
For more info, google "Bayer and Diaconis 1992"
yeah, when he said "about 20 times" i just knew he was full of crap
Just out of curiosity: What counts as a single shuffle?
Take a deck, divide it in roughly half, mash it together. Thats a shuffle(well, these calculations usually rely on it being a riffle, but still)
I figured it would be that easy, but nothing wrong with asking :P
Eduardo Seifert The "mash shuffle" is directly equivalent to a riffle. The result is not different in terms of the mathematics.
>mind if i mana weave
>mana what?
>you know ordering my mana between my cards before i shuffle so i dont get mana screwed
>isnt that cheating
>no, its okay as long as i shuffle my deck afterward
>.....why are you mana weaving?
>so i dont get mana screwed
>but thats cheating!
>no its not im shuffling my deck after that
>*then why are you mana weaving*
unironically its not cheating....its a mind game
And just remember, everyone: pile shuffling isn't a sufficient shuffling method by any measure, hence deck-stacking cheaters use it. Some people pile shuffle and aren't cheating because they think it actually does randomize, and as soon as you bust out the math for them on why it isn't, they don't do it anymore.
It’s good at separating things after a game where you have a bunch of lands in play. Is it mana weaving? No.
Cheating makes me sick, ruins all the fun in the game... If your a cheat, and you read this, don't comment please, I don't want to hear your excuses. Games are about playing and having fun, when you use a method to manaweave, your not playing the same game as your opponent, and you shouldn't feel good about winning that way. Thanks for the heads up bro, really appreciate this, being a non-pro I did not know this stuff.
I have a degree in mathematics, and I was delighted to see this video. Probability is among the easiest subtopics for literally anyone to screw up, and a global democratization is good news, thank you.
Also, wouldn't the double nickle resist deconstruction if they just do one or two regular shuffles before you start pile shuffling it? If you're right that it needs 20 shuffles to actually randomize it again, than they should still be effectively "woven" but without giving you an easy means of demonstrating it.
This was awesome. I started playing in Amonkhet, and now thinking back to some tournaments, i can remember 1 person doing the double nickle.
I've taken to use the first strategy before shuffling as a way to make my lands unstick from each other, avoid big clumps of lands that can happen because I often use older sleeves. Of course I always do proper shuffles afterward, it's only meant to separate the lands from each other, I would never use it to actually cheat. It doesn't really work too well, and I also only really do it during draft when the deck and lands start out separated because of the deck building
I think we should call that technique "The Nickleback"
That's great, haha.
I prefer to call it the "Nirvana" because people that do it should put a gun in their mouth.
How did this not get more traction!?
Dude that’s honestly great
Mana Weaving sounds like an actual card name :D
It does sound cool
When they present, you call a judge and say it looks like your opponent presented a stacked deck. Probably get a game loss or DQ, and there you go.
This was really fantastic. I'd love to see more like this, though my comment is woefully late compared to the posting date!
The #1 advice is CALL A JUDGE! Always call a judge, counter cheating is not the answer. Great video for explaining a few basic cheats. Thanks.
+Brian Rowe He says to call a judge and then use his techniques to demonstrate to the judge that the opponent is cheating. He repeatedly says to call a judge so that they actually get a DQ for cheating.
@duSundavar Call a judge BEFORE using the techniques not after. The idea is right the oder of operations is flawed. Please let's get a some level 2 or level 3 judges to weigh in here. Stacking the deck yourself with math to show they are cheating is not the right idea unless the judge is already at the table.
mythicmtgtech Yes, that is what I, and he, both said. You demonstrate the un-weaving to the judge in order to prove that the opponent cheated, because otherwise it is hard to tell. In order to demonstrate to the judge, the judge must be present. Call for a judge, say, "I suspect my opponent is cheating and would like to show you proof of it." Use the techinique, without ever looking at the faces of the cards (then you eould be cheating). Then, after you have done the process before the judge hand him the deck and ask him to look at it. You can explain the entire thing while doing the technique.
That advice can get you DQed. Your opponent can call a judge while you are "un weaving the deck" and get you DQed instead. I think that this happened at the Japanese Nationals event. I am looking for the reference now. at 3:15 he says judge or not judge. It is essential to not "before showing" but instead before manipulating the deck.
The order here matters a hell of a lot.
I personally call it distributing my mana after a long game. I do 2 spells, 1 land, 2 spells, 1 land, etc. After distributing, if you shuffle enough it's not cheating. I will normally shuffle 5-10 times atleast before asking for a cut or w/e after distributing my mana. I don't view it as cheating as long as you have sufficient randomization during the shuffling. I've been doing this for 15 years with no complaints.
I also will do 8 stacks instead of 4 if I ever do that kind of shuffling. And I pick a random order to pick up the 8 stacks.
+chronic291 It's not cheating as long as you sufficiently shuffle afterwards, as officially stated and detailed here: archive.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=judge/article/20060707a
+Dustin Wiseman Thanks for the info! This is all great help.
+chronic291 The problem is that if you do that and don't sufficiently shuffle then you are cheating. If you do that and then shuffle to the point that is sufficient by the rules the mana distribution did nothing but give the appearance of possible cheating.
+Joel Turley Go ahead and call a judge on me lol. I know I shuffle enough, once he checks you'll realize you wasted a ton of time over thinking things in a card game.
Okay... I know I'm extremely "late to the game", as far as the comments go, but this does explain a lot of how I had so much trouble years ago. This actually cleared up a lot of my confusion from past incidents, so Thank you for that.
My only real complaint is the inaccuracy of "shuffle 20 times to achieve random" 7 riffle shuffles achieve a statistically random pattern in a deck of 52 cards, a near random order I believe is sufficient. So a couple overhand shuffles and 5 riffle shuffles should be sufficient regardless of the state the deck you are presented is in.
Go ahead, riffle at a tournament and see how badly you get your ass beat.
MTG needs a shuffling machine for tournaments.
How are they going to do that with sleeves on?
People will _not_ put their cards in that, too dangerous.
or people could just shuffle reasonably
@@untitled6087 wotc/dci could compel you to do so under threat of permanent suspension. If the choice is between doing as told or not playing, 99% of players will listen to the authority.
If it is legacy or vintage no they wouldn't. Are the tournament organizers or Wizards going to have an insurance policy in the event their machine malfunctions and destroys $20k?
4:12 half and half? who plays a 30 land deck just to cheat?
+Jakharr Vinta someone that wants to make a video to help solve an "imaginary problem".
my biggest problem with this video is that all those "new" players he says he wants to help by showing this stuff are going to be the guys accusing others of stacking their deck in between rounds bc they saw someone mana weave after a 20 turn long game where they played 15 lands. MANA WEAVING is only cheating as a final form of shuffling. The only rule this dude needs to teach kids is 3.9 about only accepting properly shuffled decks in the first place.
+Jakharr Vinta I'm curious to know why the guy who posted the video never responded to your question. That's the first thing I wondered also: Half and half!? He doesn't even address this in the video, not even for a brief second. The ratio will never be 1:1. Lands take up anywhere from 17 to 27 slots in a 60 card deck, and those are the extreme ends of the spectrum. No deck has 30 lands, which completely messes up the entire premise that the video maker gave us. I think this is very disingenuous on his part and I find it suspicious that he never answered you.
+juicykarkass decks only contain spells and lands. he is not referring to an actual 50% 50%. rather one stack all spells the other all lands
+youdamnoob ummm, no, watch the video again. he's suggesting that a deck is 50% spells and 50% land. which is never the case.
He obviously plays, and even comments that the deck he is using as an example is light on lands. I think you're just nit picking. Anyone who understands what he is saying and plays magic would know no one plays 5050
I will sometimes do this once to my deck after putting everything together neatly to make randomizing it easier, but I always shuffle well before games.
Thanks, MTG Degree for the video.
If I've separated my deck to rebalance it or something, I'll kind of "mana weave" my lands in so they aren't clumped, but also will do a, semi random, 3 pile split then combine them randomly and do around 4-5 shuffles... All before a game to which I'll not just take my deck out and play, I'll shuffle at least 3 times (more if we're chatting or they are still preparing) and obviously let my opponent cut however they wish.
Like I said, that is if I had separated my deck, normally I'll shuffle 4-6 times, and sometimes throw in my 3 pile split in between shuffles.
I'm not particularly fast at shuffling, especially with sleeves, and my cards clump when I shuffle. (about 5 cards in a row from each side, but usually more)
NitrousDragon 3 mass shuffles is not enough. Pile shuffling is not a shuffle. You are cheating.
@@bezzo8848
(just wanna say in the few days since commenting, I've added more shuffles and am taking more steps to make it more random)
"at least 3", usually it's a casual game anyway, and they have been ready and waiting for me for about four minutes. Sometimes I'll lose count of how many times I've actually shuffled so I'll do 3-4 on top of what I forgot (I'd guess around 7-10 in total since I took out my deck to play), also remember I've done at least 6 different since I last adjusted my deck. I still have to take Mulligans, and will take risks on hands that don't look very good, that I hope pan out, sometimes they do, but I never know.
But you know what, let's say you're right, my win rate is only like 55-60% of the time, which makes me a pretty bad "cheater".
NitrousDragon You are stacking your deck to gain an advantage. That is cheating.
I just wanna say thx for all your videos .
You are very well spoken and east to understand(I'm a new player)
Thx. Keep it up.
+Suniermo Gomez Hey, glad you're enjoying them! :D
+MTG Degree I to would like to thank you, a person I play with shuffles this way...
Ignore this video. It isnt cheating if you follow weaving with randomized shuffling
Wait, what if u purposely made it look like you where cheating so your opponent would deconstruct your shuffling back into an instant win hand that you started with. trippy.
That’s also cheating
It's one of those things you "learn" as a new player. When we were kids, we "learned" to play 20 lands in our 60-card decks. And then, we "learned" to mix them up "2 cards, 1 land" before shuffling, to "prevent" getting all lands, or no lands. And we felt clever about it, too. All our kitchen table games (mind you, we were about 12 years old at the time) started with this little ritual of mana weaving our decks to make sure our lands weren't all clumped together after a game.
Many years later, I still ran into new players (kids, all of them), who would do this, without even being aware that this was cheating, until I demonstrated it by doing a 3-pile shuffle, and handing him back the deck, with a reminder that the rules say, he's only allowed to cut the deck, not shuffle it again before playing. To his credit, he understood that this wasn't a good way of randomizing your deck.
Everybody just LOVES to have this guy across the table.
Better him than a cheater.
That seems painfully obvious
Interesting question: what if someone shuffles this way WITHOUT mana-sorting first - I use a similar technique (minus sorting beforehand) and like you said it results in very keep-able hands?
Or, you know, you could just shuffle your opponents deck like you are allowed to do and enjoy a game of Magic.
MiniRegamono perfect!
That would be too much work and why play a game you might lose when you can guarantee your win via DQ. The solution I would argue isnt to DQ and suspend stack shuffling, but maybe a judge shuffle or three and then play... No free win and No stacked deck
@@jz5980 If I were a judge and a player called me over to watch him deconstruct his opponent's deck over 5-10 minutes, and at the end of that the deck had no easily discernable pattern, I'd give the player that called me over a loss for wasting mine and his opponent's time.
Maybe it's a good thing I'm not a judge.
I would argue that having both players do that second trick will just make the game better. It is no fun for either player when one of them is land blocked or flooded.
I personally do the mana/land separate from the rest, then do a stacked kind of spread, just because I tend to play longer games (or with a new deck). Short games doesn't matter.
BUT if I do end up doing that, it's just to break up the block of mana quicker, and then proceed to shuffle it a few times (like 10ish) afterwards and let my opponent shuffle as well if they wish.
Mana weaving a deck after assembly is perfectly legal and encouraged as long as you shuffle for a good 2 minutes prior to a match, mana weaving before a match and not shuffling is unfair to your opponents
You don't need to mana weave after deck assembly, after 15 mash shuffles the deck is randomized no matter what order it was in when you started.
That's funny, I always did this years back when I played and pretty much anyone I know does this and shuffles the fuck outta it, and lets their opponent shuffle. Even at tournaments this was not a problem, never thought of it as cheating. Interesting video, wouldn't have seen that otherwise!
When I learned to play, I was told that you put 1 land and 2 spells and repeat to make your deck. Then you shuffle normally. So you can get mana-flooded or mana-screwed, but it's less likely. It took over 15 years before I learned that you're not supposed to sort your cards before shuffling.
The only issue I see with the last method is, like you mentioned, that the player could do the mana weaving/pile shuffle and then just riffle shuffle 7 times or so and the deck would randomized, but still in that player's favor, and because it's technically random now there's no way to prove that he was cheating. It's kind of like someone using magic dice that only works 70% of the time while 7's will come up more often the fact that you not ONLY rolling 7's dissuades a lot of suspicion.
cheats like these make one really realize that lands are the worst thing about MTG. People are cheating just to be able to cast their spells on time. Cheating to be able to play cards. This isn't some Humphry shit, this is just cheating to be able to play the game. kinda sad : (
+Code Provider you play mtg i see you one price videos
+Code Provider I agree. Personally, I wish MTG would follow some other games solutions. The game Force of Will keeps the mana deck and spells deck completely separate. Then your leader can put the top card of your mana deck into play as a mana for turn.
I don't really care for FoW, but I do wish MtG implemented something similar to this.
+Code Provider The thing is that a cost system is one of the core reasons Magic ends up being the great game it is. Look at Yugioh: There's no cost system for anything (paying life or sacrificing doesn't count IMO), and instead of a cost system, they just limit your plays. Magic has no limits to the number of creatures on the field or spells you can cast, the only limit is how much mana you have to pay for all that.
I'm not saying lands are perfect, far from it, but I'm saying that having this as a cost system is better than not having a cost system at all.
+cocoachrispies no... that would be horible
+cocoachrispies you do realize, the reason other CCG's do not have the exact same rules as magic or any other ccg is it would be a blatant copyright infringement. There are different ccg's to appeal to a wide variety of different people. if you really hate the land cost system of Magic the Gathering, there are a ton of ccg's that do not have it you can play instead. But to basically say MTG is the best ccg game because of its complexity or whatever but you want to land cost system removed instead of playing a different ccg then you do not realize a huge part of magic is that land cost system, sure sometimes everyone gets unlucky, and if you are getting land screwed or flooded the majority of your games you are building decks wrong or not shuffling well to begin with, or refuse to mulligan. I honestly can not think of every getting land screwed or flooded more then 5% of my games, and most of the LGS I go to tourny's I do not get either one once in the 4 or 5 rounds, all it takes is putting in the proper ratio of land to non lands and a decent curve of low mid and high cost spells, and sufficient shuffling, think what you see on twitch during gp's and pro tours, riffle or mash shuffling a lot not the 5-10 times many feel is enough at fnm and such. 20+ times should completely randomize your deck from your previous match no matter how deep you got. no its not slow play its sufficiently randomizing your deck. do this I would be willing to bet you rarely get land screwed or flooded, learn to properly mulligan and it will happen even less.
Wanting MTG to implement FOW rules to change the game from its land system is basically making MTG FOW, which if as you said you do not really care for FOW if MTG had very similar rules it would have very similar game play to a game you do not care for, why would you want that? If you truly hate the land system of MTG play one of the many games without it, FOW, Hearthstone, Yu-gi-oh etc etc...
ALWAYS shuffle your opponent's deck.
ALWAYS.
Not enough to counter a Mana weave.
Weaving solution: Shuffle your deck at the start of the game like a normal person. Hell, even comply with requests that your opponent has as far as your method. Let them shuffle for you. Weaving does one important thing that normal shuffling does not- it stops each game from being a partial repeat of the last. I think it says a lot that in preconstructed deck games my younger sister and I play (where no weaving occurs,) I always manage to get Llanowar Elves and Chandra: Bold Pyromancer lumped awfully close together, and she always gets Niambi: Faith Healer and Teferi's Sentinel out as early as they can be played. Shuffling the field straight into your deck keeps those cards together, and can often lead to situations where you're playing the same opening few turns over and over again, even though you think you're shuffling properly. A proper weave usually sees those individual parts randomized more thoroughly, as there is not as much of a time crunch, so you're willing to separate them further out. While it's certainly true that leaving the deck unshuffled is outright cheating, weaving as a way to keep each game unique ought to be encouraged.
....Besides, if your opponent really shows up, asking to play without shuffling, are you really going to trust that? By all means, get them DQ'ed.
recently started getting back into magic and was looking into good ways to shuffle when you came through the second pile shuffle and talked about deconstructing I had an OOOHHHHH moment that was amazing lol this is great dude good job on this one.
this dude tried this on me at fnm. I saw it and quickly did what you said and called over a judge and the judge just sighed and pointed at the door and kicked the guy out. he's allowed back but I showed everyone there this video. Thanks!
+ak dk Yay! I'm glad this video was useful to you and your community :D
+GG Degree I do have a question though, When playing a game of magic is there a way to catch your opponent cheating by using more than the allowed play set of cards. A person I play against uses a "Playset" of snapcaster mage yet he gets one every hand.
+ak dk Maybe ask to see their deck afterwards for a fake reason? I don't have a good answer :p
+GG Degree thanks so much! I'll let you know how it goes if I do! By the way, I sincerely think that you should be shown to all new mtg players. you're so helpful
ak dk
If that's what you think should happen, I won't stop you from spreading the word :D
As a new player, I’d just like to say, I’ve always 5 pile shuffled and had no idea it could be used in a negative way until watching this video. For me it’s just how my friends taught me to shuffle because I’m super OCD and bending the cards shuffling normally hurts my soul
I have been cheated against more than once with that 5-pile method, and never knew it until now. Thank you for this.
Hey MTG Degree! Been a huge fan of your videos and this one is a very sneaky method to hose your opponent who you weren't going to play anyway. Thank you for this new found education.
one of the first rules of magic is that you get to shuffle your opponents deck to your satisfaction after they already shuffled so as to assure you of its random quality.
Another big issue this doesn't address is foil cards they can be manipulated in your and your opponents deck to create situations to your advantage another tactic is to watch shuffling I personally try to obscure my opponent vision of the entirety of the shuffle so it can't be tracked as a card game player for 16 years I can track a deck pretty accurately just being able to see the entirety of the shuffle.
For solving the Double Nickle, the easiest solution is to stare the other guy in the eye, split his deck into 3 separate stacks of 20/30 whatever you're playing, and then riffle.
Riffle stacks 1 and 2 together. Split them apart.
Riffle stacks 2 and 3 together. Split.
Riffle stacks 1 and 2 together. Split.
Riffle stacks 1 and 3 together. Split.
Riffle stacks 2 and 3 together. Split.
Combine all three, split in half, and riffle twice. Then split the deck in half, and put the top half on the bottom half. It's fast, very annoying to see happen when you're trying to cheat, and introduces a lot of chaos because you're no longer dealing with a single highly ordered system: You're introducing 3 separate ordered systems into one another, but the number of randomizations goes up exponentially each time you riffle the cards. If you want to introduce chaos, you might as well tilt your opponent as well. If he gets mad, then you just call him out and say if he doesn't like it he can concede.
So wait is it still cheating if you do the first one (I usually take my lands out and mix them in like that, two spells, one land, repeat) and then shuffle the deck? I was taught that when I first started playing 11 years ago (I don't do tournaments or anything like that, just casual play)
I was taught to do the same, and no I don't think our manner of "manaweaving" is cheating, bc we still ultimately shuffle up/randomize the deck ourselves, and then hand it to the opponent for them to do with it what they choose.
I don't see how that can be considered cheating if both we ourselves AND out opponents both end up shuffling the deck, ya know?
It depends on what manner you use to shuffle your deck afterwards. The vast majority of players either use an ineffective method of shuffling or don't repeat enough times for it to be truly randomized.
The very most effective method is riffle shuffling, because you *only* need to do it *seven* times to achieve randomness in your deck.
Lol based on the answers here, I can gather that the only people who think this is cheating are the people who take the game too seriously to have fun. Got it 🤣😂
Now we need a deck list of that mill deck you play :)
+Dino “PloyBoy” Ploj The reason I haven't posted it yet is because its price is way higher than justified by it's power level :p But I guess I can make a video about it since I've heard so many comments wanting it. In the next five videos, I promise :)
Was listening to a mathematician who said the standard shuffle requires only 7 times for optimal randomness.
This is for Riffle Shuffles. But you don't riffle shuffle an expensive deck.
Haha clown
For rifle shuffles with particular mathematical qualities. If you are a human, the estimate is quite a bit higher. If you don't rifle, probably higher, though I am not sure. 60 cards instead of 52, probably also higher.
And now I have to change my shuffle! Didn't realize I was using a cheat.
What I tend to do is pile shuffle once to break up clumps. especially if my night is extremely south (Basically not summoning my standard 5 to 6 creatures a game) But after I break up the clumps I will shuffle it in a standard fashion. And after each match I tend to stick the deck right into the box and wait for the next round. Pile shuffling is only useful to me as a break up/ reset. And tends to be done after I have already buried the played cards into the deck randomly.
It is either useless or cheating.
and, also, mathematically speaking, you need only bridge shuffle a deck 7 times to achieve true randomness. NOT 20.
That is not the case here. Because the deck is not random or simply ordered, but put into a pattern of distribution you have to shuffle until you have sufficiently undone the distribution pattern which would actually require far more shuffles than usual.
it's math. a brand new deck of playing cards will be completely randomized after 7 bridges.
Crimson Vulpes This is a 60 card deck, not a 52 card deck. While the difference seems small, mathematically it is enormous.
DuSundavarFreohr
alright then, i just tested it. WOW! i got mana screwed. Sufficient randomization in just 7 bridges! BOOM! argument destroyed!
MrTetris88
what?
Well, two people I play with have cheated for about 3 years and I haven't noticed until I saw this video.
So alternating mana and spells pre-shuffle is considered cheating? I started playing this game like 10-15 years ago and didn't know. I feel like you have to do that to make it playable. I actually stopped playing cuz I thought the mana system was outdated and I like some other card games better.
Try out Keyforge! It has a cool "mana" system.
@@mrvfino I love keyforge! I still see the appeal of mtg as it has a wide range of cards, large following, and deck building... but keyforge has a much better game system. The house mechanic is brilliant
It takes roughly a minimum of 7 riffles to give every card in a 60-card deck an almost equal chance of being in any position, at least in theory. In practice, 5 riffles tends to be adequate.
However, it takes 10 overhands, with optimal form, to get the same result as one riffle. Therefore, it takes approximately 50-70 overhand shuffles to produce a fair shuffle. For that reason, I am wary of anyone who does not riffle. Someone who only does a small even number of overhands has a significantly higher than 7/60 chance of drawing the cards that were at the top the deck before shuffle began. Even if they appear to use an odd number of overhands, it is very easy to use a pre-separated packet to move select cards to the top of the deck at the end of the first overhand, which are then poorly shuffled by the remaining (even number of) overhands.
Most cheats only use number tricks, but a good magician can put any card he wants at the top of his deck. Studying card magic helps see through deceptions that statistics and number theory are too innocent to catch.
worth noting that your 20 shuffle rule is BS. 7 shuffles. thats how many you need, that's not guesswork, Vegas has hired the experts and done the math. 7 will maximally randomize any deck. that's for "random" shuffles btw, that is where you don't for example perfectly weave 1/1/1/1/ if your riffle shuffling for example. that's simply because it's hard to generate chaos out of something so orderly, you will eventually actually return to the unshuffled state fairly quickly that way. But given some imperfect shuffling (an issue actually because vegas dealers and card handlers are often really good at a shuffle) 7 is the perfect amount to ensure chaos in ANY ordered or unordered set of cards.
7 shuffles is for a 52 card playing deck. Magic decks are a minimum of 60, probably require 8 or 9. 20 is overkill, though.
Regarding the 7 shuffle rule, I’m not buying it, especially in regards to magic the gathering. I understand that they’ve crunched the numbers, but my hands are really good at cutting to the middle of the deck and weaving one-left, one-right. If I assign a 52 card deck of playing cards values from 1-52, I don’t see cards 1 & 2 getting a large enough gap between them to be considered randomized. I can also picture card #1 staying at the top if I only riffle the deck. Which is part of the reason you’re supposed to “strip” the deck as well.
The big variable is how random vs ordered the cards are to begin with. Lands in MTG get clumped together, as do lower mana cost cards in the graveyard, thus aren’t very random to begin with. There’s the factor of a mana curve (as in 4 of this card, 3 of that one...) in MTG. There might be 8 one drops, but only 2 seven drops. A well constructed deck involves the appropriate number of lands versus mana costs versus card draws and speed of a deck.
I mention mana costs/curves in regards to “slugs” of cards. I saw a story about one of the Blackjack teams that added a % or two to their expected results by paying attention to cards around aces when single deck blackjack used to be a thing.
MTG has slugs of cards- the high mana cards stuck in your hand in a game that ends fast, for example.
The math of shuffling might give one result, but real world applications give a different result. If you lose a game with two high cost cards in hand and shuffle with those two cards on top of each other, they can end up next to each other the next game.
I play a lot of limited/sealed which gives a lot of “one-of” cards, and it’s amazing how often you draw the same two unique cards from a 40 card deck, game after game despite adequate shuffling
Okay no need to call it BS, that's his own method. You knowing a better way isn't BS, he's not trying to mislead. You can be informative without putting other people down.
it depends on the shuffling technique. Doing any bending merge may damage the cards and prob will damage your face from the punch from the opponent. So if you are doing sub-optimal shuffling, you may need way more than 7, potentially getting close to 20
Me and allot of my group did this just to level the playing field when we where playing. Had no idea it was considered cheating.
If you’re all aware of it, it’s fine. (And not competitive)
Newbie here. After I play a game or build a deck, I almost always do the mana weaving thing because I would always end up with stuff clumped next to each other and I assumed that was a bad shuffle or something, especially after I finish a game, set up for the next one, and find all the cards I had previously played back in order in my deck. Great video, though now I have to figure out what constitutes a good shuffle, so the ending game thing doesn't happen again.
Thank you for posting this, this was incredibly helpful and hilarious.
I play Legacy and Modern, if my opponent's deck is 50% land I'll happily mana weave it for them 😂
The thing a lot of people who are arguing in favor of the cheaters (probably cheaters themselves tbh) is that MTG is a game and therefore is governed by a set of arbitrary rules you only follow because they are rules. That's what a game is. The rules of the game state that your deck is supposed to be randomized. If someone can do a calculated method of deconstructing it without looking at your cards and it works then your deck wasn't random. You broke the rules. You can call it 'strategy' or whatever you want to justify it but the fact is if your deck isn't random at the start of the game then your deck wasn't legal. You deserve the DQ you're going to get.
this is why when i pile shuffle i put the cards into random piles instead of in an order. If you place them differently every time you place one on each, it is random, and when you put the piles into the deck together you can also put the newest on top or bottom randomly.
I don't go to events, but I mana weave what was played last game loosely; I'll space lands roughly equally between non-lands. I then shuffle that into the deck, then proceed to continue shuffling. If I feel the deck is more stacked than that, such as after a major deck build or long game, I'll pile in a few different ways (one simple way is similar to solitaire), then keep shuffling as I start a pass of when I pick up a pile to start condensing. Also shuffled and presented after I pick up the entire deck.
Any cheater who actually knows what they're doing will weave beforehand and faro shuffle during the game. Just get in the habit of always shuffling your opponent's deck.
"In 1992, Bayer and Diaconis showed that after seven random riffle shuffles of a deck of 52 cards every configuration is nearly equally likely "
I understand Magic decks have 60+ cards and that not every card is represented in quadruplicate, but where did you come up with the idea that it would take 20 shuffles to randomize any deck?
No one is going to let you rifle shuffle their deck without flipping the table on you. Most people have hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars invested in their decks. No sane player would even consider doing that to someone elses deck let alone allowing someone to do it to theirs.
@@jamham69 Lol loser
I believe the author of that paper later stated that the number was significantly higher if you shuffled the way most humans do. The original shuffle required that you make two randomly sized piles, and rifle shuffle without maintaining a constant rate. Most humans will use two nearly even piles (How would you pick a randomly sized pile anyway?), and the rates that you allow each pile to enter the combined pile will vary, but probably not very much. I think controlling for how a typical human shuffles made the number quite a bit higher. There is a Numberphile video on it. However, you then also have to realize rifle shuffling can get...expensive in some formats.
@@jeffdawson7841 What's the matter, scrub? your desperate lack of pimp tech got you down?
I had no idea :0 I had shuffled like this in the past not realizing it was inefficient or even CHEATING. I just suck at shuffling like a normal person and am afraid at bending my cards up lol. This is really useful to know!! No one told me
I will admit I do a mild form of mana-weaving: I break the deck into two piles of land and three piles of everything else; I will then I will make smaller piles out of those piles and combine the smaller piles together staggeredly and lump them together, then give it a good shuffle after it.
That way there will be a bit of evenness and a bit of randomness. Although this is something I've only done with friends and it is with a deck with alot of average-to-high costing cards as to keep myself from being mana-screwed too hard.
I have a question: if you want to destabilize their deck while counting to see if they have a deck of 60 cards, could you not make five piles, pile 1 gets one card, pile 2 gets two, 3 gets three, 4 gets four, & 5 gets five, then repeat that pattern?
Cause if you do that right, pile 1 will have 4 cards, 2 will have 8, 3 has 12, 4 has 16, & 5 has 20. 4+16=20, 8+12=20, then you have the other pile of 20 so that makes 60.
Then you should place pile 2 or 3 on the top, and the other piles in some order, in theory that should randomize their deck enough to mess up the order by either blending it a bit or to turn their deck into chunks of mana famine/feast.
I actually often do the 2nd version and then shuffel the deck about 10 times, and no one ever anything against it. 20 years back everybody used the 2 spells one land method and it was state of the art. I dont want my opponents to be manaflooded or manascrewed either. I dont enjoy winning against a manascrewed opponent.
I don't play tournaments but the rules do officially say that mana weaving * two cards then land* is perfectly fine as long as you throughly shuffle afterwards. If you'd rather get your opponent dqd then beat them then you don't deserve to play tournaments. My only issue is people that think it's OK to mana weave and then not shuffle. Turning the cards over so you can't see them doesn't count
The point isn't getting people DQ's because you don't want to play, it's to get the cheaters out so they don't ruin it for anyone else.
If someone actually is cheating then that is one thing but mana weaving in itself isn't cheating as long as the person shuffles after doing so. Now if someone is trying to get specific cards together like trying to put a swap beside a dark rit that's a different story
@@joshuahurdle239 this video is literally taking about people who do just that
My mana weave is as follows, I tend to play generally the following land/spell ratio for most decks is
2 spells, 1 mana.
3/1/2/1/1/1 (spell/land alternating) then 2/2/1/1/2/1. (spell/land/spell/land/spell/land).
Single shuffle for slight randomization. If ratio is not perfect, then insert lands/spells randomly. If you do any of those shuffles, you'll help me out ultimately, as it increases my odds of a good distribution, regardless of the stack.
I found this video SO interesting, because when I was younger I loved experimenting with shuffling and seeing how it effected card outcomes, funny enough however, I was never looking for 'perfect run' shuffles, but what REALLY randomized my deck, because I have never been the type of player to buy singles just to build a 'super deck', I'm just a casual player, so having an actual mix of spells, creatures, artifacts, NB land, and lands that wasn't CRUCIAL for victory was key for me, because what fun is it waiting for 1 card or a combo situation for an endgame, when instead making a 'surprise victory' from a few 'unwanted' and 'valueless' cards all because THEY were waiting for their super combo or 1 card win in their 'bought and paid for, run the numbers' deck...
I don't mana-weave or cheat, but sometimes I do wish there was a new format that played with 2 decks. One with spells and one with mana. Then each time you draw, you decide which one you want to draw from. There's some kinks that would need to be worked out and playtested, but it could a popular format. Commander radically changed the way the game was played it was wildly popular. Nobody enjoys sitting and waiting to die all game.
I know it's not the same thing, but have you seen the new Bakugan TCG? Any card you draw can be used as mana, and there isn't color specific mana nor cards that are specifically mana only cards.
This! My friend and i tried seperate libraries, one spells and the other land. we had some great games
Comrade Duel Masters used to have any card be able to be a resource i believe but there were colors
This reminds me of a smaller and less popular TCG called Force of Will. You have two decks, one with your spells, and another that are spell stones. You get one spell stone per turn, and thus slowly build up your mana. It does follow the five colors, though some decks work around this. The game itself is fun, and some of my friends and I have theorized whether or not it'd be viable in MtG.
I do mana weaving occasionally to counter the fact that I keep all my lands together when I play, because of this when I scoop my cards the lands get clumped together. I always shuffle after this though so that the deck is infact randomized. I think that this is fair and actually helps the clumping of cards not impact my future games.
I was a new player and I saw a lot of people pile shuffling with 5 piles so I did the same, but my deck never seemed that well shuffled. It makes sense why some people shuffled my deck excessively now. After I lost a bunch of matches I started to do 5 piles and shuffle each one together. Now I do 3 piles shuffle right and middle, left and middle, right and left. Then I mash shuffle for a bit.
I know this is old but the problem is not pile shuffling. It's stacking the deck with the cards in a certain order, which you describe as a "pattern". If I have a deck and I randomly places cards in piles in a random order, then indeed it is being shuffled. Even if I do it in order, as long as they pick up the piles in random order it's mathematically the equivalent of cutting the deck 7 times. The problem is what you highlighted at the start where the cards are put in a specific order of like 30 lands and 30 instants. The judge needs to inspect the deck to see if a player has put cards in a specific order BEFORE play commences. If there is no judge then get a third party to do so. I know this video is old but if magic judges don't inspect decks before play that is a MASSIVE oversight by them. That's like a casino allowing players to bring in their own decks and use them to play blackjack with each other. There's a VERY good reason casinos don't allow that lol