Expanded Data Dive Part 2: Toronto

By: Rukan Shao · Posted Posted onMar 13, 2019 at 1:21 PM · 0 Comments

Welcome back to the second part to my Expanded Data Dive series. In the last article, we discussed the day two results from Dallas. This time, we get to look at the results of Toronto just after it happened. I ultimately want to learn as much as I can about the metagame and try to make some predictions for Greensboro. To do that, I want to first examine Toronto’s matchup statistics. Then, I want to take a quick retrospective of Dallas. Then finally I’ll close the article with some Greensboro predictions based on past data.

Toronto Meta Share

When I spoke to other players going to Toronto, they told me they expected a more concentrated meta than Dallas. They believed a smaller tournament outside of the United States would result in them seeing a higher concentration of meta decks like Zoroark-GX / Garbodor or Pikachu and Zekrom-GX and fewer rogues. Based on RK9 Labs data: Toronto saw 346 Masters. Of those, we saw the following seven decks saw the most play:

  • Pikachu and Zekrom-GX – 43 Masters, 1 of which made day two
  • Archiestoise – 38 Masters, 1 of which made day two
  • Lucario-GX – 30 Masters, 2 of which made day two
  • Zoroark-GX / Garbodor – 29 Masters, 4 of which made day two
  • Hitmonchan – 22 Masters, 3 of which made day two
  • Night March – 21 Masters, 4 of which made day two
  • Trevenant – 16 Masters, 10 of which made day two

In comparison, Dallas saw 802 Masters. And of those, the following eight decks saw the most play:

  • Zoroark / Garbodor – 94 Masters, 14 of which made day two
  • Archiestoise – 79 Masters, 19 of which made day two
  • Zoroark / Golisopod-GX – 48 Masters, 4 of which made day two
  • Vespiquen – 45 Masters, 4 of which made day two
  • Rayquaza-GX – 42 Masters, 3 of which made day two
  • Buzzwole / Carbink BREAK – 33 Masters, 4 of which made day two
  • Zoroark / Control – 31 Masters, 7 of which made day two
  • Zoroark / Exodia – 31 Masters, 2 of which made day two

The RK9 Labs data above subdivides some of the larger archetypes. But I also want to look at some larger trends, namely the total number of Zoroark and Fighting variants. Those two types tend to take up a big chunk of day one meta share and tend to influence the format via their typing.

Zoroark Variants

At Dallas, a whopping 226 Masters brought some sort of Zoroark variant, making up 28% of the day one field. At Toronto, only 42 Masters brought Zoroark variants making up 12% of the day one field.

Buzzwole, Lucario, and Hitmonchan Variants

At Dallas, 119 Masters brought said Fighting variants, making up 15% of the day one Field. At Toronto, 76 Masters brought said variants, making up 22% of the day one Field

Comparing Dallas and Toronto

So, when people said to expect a more concentrated meta at Toronto due to the size of the Regional, did that actually come true? Most popular archetypes took roughly 10% of the day one field each. If anything, the overarching “Zoroark” archetype plummeted in play and got replaced by an overarching “Fighting Stuff” archetype. But we did see the meta concentrate drastically going into day two. Trevenant in particular converted very well into day two while archetypes like Pikachu & Zekrom-GX quickly got weeded out. The only Pikachu & Zekrom in day two took five straight losses in a row. I think this really shows how much metagaming pays off for smaller Regionals compared to larger Regionals, and how a meta can feel more concentrated for smaller Regionals even if the day one meta share remains comparable.

This concludes the public portion of this article.

If you'd like to continue reading, consider purchasing a PokeBeach premium membership! If you're not completely satisfied with your membership, you can request a full refund within 30 days.

Each week we post high-quality content from some of the game's top players. Our article program isn't a corporate operation, advertising front, or for-profit business. We set our prices so that we can pay the game's top players to write the best content for our subscribers. Each article topic is carefully selected, goes through multiple drafts, and is touched up by our editors. We take great pride in our program!