Ban and Restricted on 18th May 2020

https://twitter.com/wizards_magic/status/1259997359179616256


whelp it looks like its going to happen again.


Which is sad.

Likely Lurrus is going to get banned given that it is played in many decks, despite many of this decks losing.

Despite some decks winning without Lurrus.


Vintage:
On 10th May out of 10 5-0 list, 3 had no Lurrus.
Which sounds bad, but as I said before it takes time, plus the addiction to Lotus is high in Vintage.

And even if Lurrus is as ubiquitous as it is (i.e. all decks) so is the power 9 0.o

But I don't actually believe that to be true. I think some decks actively do not want Lurrus.

Legacy:
Legacy challenge on 9th May
the only deck that 6-0, is Lurrus free. Yes all other losing decks are with Lurrus.

Modern:
9th May
out of 7 decks only one deck was without Lurrus.
Now Modern was a little strange. Initially it had less companion but then later there was greater saturation. Ad Nausem, the deck that was with ut Lurrus on 9th May, was previously losing with Lurrus earlier. For the other formats they had less Lurrus but later had more, but Legacy was beginning to have less Lurrus. While for Vintage, I think once it was established that Lotus was up for recurring, it was too irresistible. Still in a recent online unsanction Vintage tournament, thee winner was a bazaar deck that surprise surprise, did not play Lurrus.

What my obsevation so far tells me is that Lurrus can be played around. Now does its prevalence mean it should go. I don't think so, but apparently the internet thinks so. So whatever.

A thought recently cross my mind.

Are the pro/competitive players the issue? I mean WOTC has been down playing the role of pro players and I am beginning to see why. I mean, in fnms and kitchen tables. How often are the decks finely tuned and cut throat? How often is an individual dreaming of playing at a cut throat level. Thhe answer I suspect for the masses is extremely low. Yet, the cards for many are being banned for the pleasure of a few. (I am assuming tournament toting players are less than everyone else). That makes me wonder. Is competitive magic really healthy for the game. Take the very first tournament. The decks were extremely untuned but I think people had more fun. Subsequent tournaments got more and more refine, and more and more it became about beating your opponent's face to the ground metaphorically of course. But have NO DOUBT. Competitive play is about winning. And once you are winning, there is little to no so called interaction. I have always maintained the stance that the concept of interactive decks is BS. All decks try to get to the point where the opponent is no longer able to interact, whether is it a mid range that has out grinded the aggro, or the aggro that overwhelms the control, or the combo that just explodes before the opponent has time to react, or the prison deck that has locked down all resources so that winning is a formality. Magic competitively is always about getting to the point whether the opponent is unable to "interact" i.e. essentially: neutralised.

Do we really want cut throat fine tuned competitive play? I do not mind it, I actually enjoy it, but if it means cards get arbitrarily banned without allowing the meta to play out, then I prefer not to have competitive play.

I guess that is kinda what I do normally when I do play. We just mish mash a bunch of decks that probably are modern (or legacy if the cards are older). And just play. I guess what I am trying to say is competitive play is becoming less and less relevant with the bannings.