When I think of the term “pyramid scheme,” I normally picture some 80’s guy with a large mustache getting rich off me as I try desperately to sell a knife that can cut pennies to my mother-in-law. In the end, unless I can sell more cutlery than my car can hold, I’m going home empty-handed. Scratch that — I’m going home with a bill for the set of cutlery I was required to use when I started my training. Sweet!
To Pokémon players, the biggest “pyramid scheme” ever is the antiquated advice that Evolution lines should resemble a pyramid (okay, I know I’m reaching a little bit with this one, but humor me at least). “Run a 4-3-2 or a 3-2-1” became the name of the game, and to this day I see people refer to this so-called “rule.” Other misguided tips for players? Try the “20-20-20” pattern that became so popular, asking players to split their deck into approximately equal parts Energy cards, Trainer cards, and Pokémon cards.
Of course, those are such obvious mistakes that nobody in their right mind would make them, right?
Let’s back up a step, because players in those days made mistakes like that all the time. In fact, I made that mistake when I first started playing the game (Vileplume/Scyther/Eeveelutions, how you failed me so). When “knowledge” becomes common, it’s hard to see things working any other way. And so, you end up with players making horrendous decks because they never tried anything else out.
What’s different today? Well, for one, the ease of accessing information has mostly wiped out the chance that players compete with downright bad decks. This is not always the case, but even when players show up to a tournament with a bad deck, they rarely have 3-2-1 lines or 20 Energy cards in their list. In fact, most “bad” decks are built out of a desire to counter the format, which shows that players are knowledgeable of what others are playing.
Another thing that has changed is less obvious, and that is that players are on average spreading their playtesting time across many different decks (as opposed to just a few decks). With more information available, players can get ahold of new deck ideas and lists easier than ever before. The advent of PTCGO/online gaming has also made it easier to build more decks.
Ironically, I think these two factors have created a whole new list of “givens,” items of information that players automatically assume are true. These “truths” certainly look smarter than bad advice given out in the past, but that does not mean they are the optimal way to play.
Today, we will explore this notion – that players are making smart mistakes more and more frequently – and we will break down various decklists in an attempt to see just where those mistakes exist. I will also dedicate a part of this article to targeting just where these patterns of behavior come from, as well as what you can do about it.
Remember to click on the link in the table of contents to go directly to that part of the article.
Table of Contents
- “Smart Mistakes”
- Where Do These “Mistakes” Come From?
- An Example: Weavile PLF/Lopunny FLF
- Can You Spot the Problems?
- What You Can Do to Avoid “Smart Mistakes”
- Conclusion
“SMART MISTAKES”
My idea for this article originated when I saw players posting lists online of their Yveltal-EX/Garbodor LTR decks. This happened some time ago, during the National Championships that were taking place all around the world. Over and over again, I saw lists that included four copies of Yveltal-EX, and it just didn’t make any sense to me. These were decks that were performing well too, mind you, and yet I could not wrap my head around this odd pattern of play.
Where was the argument for four Yveltal-EX? Three could get the job done, right? If your opponent managed to KO three Yveltal-EX, then you would lose anyway, right? And with the rising popularity of Raichu XY, players should have been motivated to attack with Darkrai-EX in addition to Yveltal-EX – this was an even greater argument to run three Yveltal-EX.
I struggled to see the reason, and so I even tested with four Yveltal-EX. In all honesty, there seemed to be no difference between three and four Yveltal-EX. None. At Nationals this year, I ended up playing two Yveltal-EX with a Super Rod as insurance. I basically played with an extra card over all those players who used four Yveltal-EX.
Was the four Yveltal-EX thing a mistake? I believe so.
When the World Championships concluded, the first thing I noticed about Andrew Estrada’s winning list was the four Genesect-EX. The other Virizion/Genesect decks in the top 4 only featured three Genesect-EX (interestingly enough, they had only three Virizion-EX as well). In my opinion, three Genesect-EX feels better than four, but there are reasons to play four. In certain matchups, being able to abandon a Genesect-EX can be a really smart play. If you run only three, however, making this play becomes more difficult.
Another popular example of the “smart mistake” used to occur all the time before Raichu XY became such a popular card. Players would often outfit their decks with four Ultra Ball, even when they were using a deck that featured only Basic Pokémon. The difference between three and four Ultra Ball is huge in an Evolution deck, but in a Basic-centered deck three is usually all you need. Still, players would often up the count to four, just because… well, consistency, right?
WHERE DO THESE “MISTAKES” COME FROM?
The thing is, players often make choices not because they have tested an idea out and stand behind their decisions, but because they’ve seen the idea elsewhere. We all learn very well from modeled behavior, and so when I see another player run four Ultra Ball, I take his or her lead. When everyone seems to be playing four Ultra Ball, I would be a fool to only play three. Here’s what I think happens for mistakes like these to surface:
1. Players value consistency. Consistency is a great thing that comes in the form of Item and Supporter cards to allow a player to get set up. In the past, players would use Item and Supporter cards to get “support Pokémon” in play that allowed a player to draw more cards. Without these types of Pokémon, players feel the need to focus A LOT on cards that allow a player to draw more cards.
2. Players want to gain experience with many decks. As I mentioned before, the Pokémon TCG is going digital in a way that allows players to create and test decks in no time flat. Before online gaming, players had to get a hold of cards, construct a decklist, sleeve the cards, and so on – meaning that players back then normally had only a deck or two with them. When players have five times as many decks with the same amount of playtesting time, attention to the details gets axed.
3. Players find archetypes online with items 1 and 2 in mind. If I’m looking for a good place to start with a Virizion/Genesect deck, I want something that is trustworthy, something consistent. Since I might not actually compete with this deck, I just need something to get me started. This is where many players begin, but since their playtesting time is compromised — they have at least five or six other decks to try out, you see — they often don’t go much further than this.
Of course, websites like SixPrizes will often give you something more than just a start when it comes to decks. In many cases, though, “skeleton lists” are provided to allow you, the player, to make some choices on your own. Also, it’s important to note that players who write for SixPrizes are not always going to give you a perfect list. Simply put, they are people just like you, and when a new set gets released it is often hard to figure out what the optimal list looks like.
4. Once a list is established, it tends to change very little. There are numerous reasons for this, but it all goes back to my point about players spreading their playtesting time across numerous decks. When a player does start to focus in on one or two decks, they may go back to the internet to determine if there are better lists available — they do a little bit of comparing. At this point, though, they might be comparing their fairly standard list to other standard lists, and things might not change much at all.
5. Many decks come to us from Japan/elsewhere, and they are far from perfect. In an effort to “fix” bad lists, there’s the tendency to make another mistake. If I look at a list from Japan that is running three N, I might bump it up to four without doing any testing or thinking things through at all. Where I believe I have improved on the list, there might a good reason the list is like it is.
It’s for these reasons — and maybe a handful of smaller ones — that I think players make these types of mistakes. While running four of something might look more consistent, it could very well be the wrong play. Yet things like this happen quite a bit, with players passing on those problematic lists over and over.
AN EXAMPLE: WEAVILE PLF/LOPUNNY PLF
At the Worlds Championship this year, a friend of mine (Jonathan Arias) managed to get through the Last Chance Qualifier undefeated with Weavile PLF/Lopunny FLF. His list drew heavily from the list that David Jensen used to get top 8 at the Norwegian National Championship. I knew this deck had massive potential, and so I got in on the game myself and tested Weavile/Lopunny out. I used Jensen’s list as a starting point as well.
Quick! Using your knowledge of the game and your deck building skill, see if you can construct an Extended format Weavile PLF/Lopunny FLF deck yourself. Let’s look at what is already ingrained in you as a player (which is not necessarily a bad thing, of course). I will walk you through what I think the average player would do as though they had never played with or seen a Weavile/Lopunny deck. This might be hard since I have a lot of experience with the deck, but I will try my best.
Step 1: Determine the Pokémon in your deck.
Weavile PLF is the main attacker and there are not any other good Weavile to use, so it warrants a 4-4 (go with the 70 HP Sneasel). Exeggcute PLF complements Weavile PLF’s attack wonderfully, so I’ll max it out at four. Lopunny FLF is not an attacker at all, and it seems a 4-4 would be overkill, so I’ll include a 3-3. Since this will more than likely use a lot of Poké Balls to get the job done (Ultra Ball, Level Ball), a Jirachi-EX would fit wonderfully here. And finally, I’ll put in a Sableye DEX or two since I’m essentially running a Dark deck.
So far, this is what I have:
Pokémon – 21 |
Trainers – 0
|
Energy – 0
|
Step 2: Determine the Energy cards in your deck.
I don’t know about you, but I always go in this order, saving Trainers until the end so I know exactly how many card spots I have to work with. Looking at what I’m running – and with the knowledge that I’ll play Dark Patch and maybe a Professor’s Letter – I will put down nine D Energy.
Pokémon – 21 |
Trainers – 0
|
Energy – 9 9 D |
Step 3: Determine the Supporter line.
Consistency! This is where most players know automatically what to do. Even before you read it, your brain is probably going through the mantra already… four Juniper, four N, two of something else, maybe some Bicycle…
My approach would be standard: four Professor Juniper, four N, two or three Colress, two spots for something else (maybe Bicycle, perhaps a Pal Pad since I run Jirachi-EX), and a single Lysandre. Are there any Supporters that complement the strategy of this deck really well? Not really, so here’s what we have:
Pokémon – 21 |
Trainers – 15 4 Professor Juniper |
Energy – 9 9 D |
Step 4: Determine Items and Stadiums.
There are no Stadium cards worth running in this deck, so that’s easy to determine. The rest is identifying what absolutely needs to be in here and working from there. Four Dark Patch seems a given, as does four each of Level Ball and Ultra Ball. Two recovery cards need to be here, either Super Rod or Sacred Ash. For our ACE SPEC, I really like Dowsing Machine, as it lets me double up on much-needed Trainer cards mid to late game. To counter Garbodor LTR, we need at least two Startling Megaphone. I would probably go with three. At this point, we have the following:
Pokémon – 21 |
Trainers – 33 4 Professor Juniper 1 Pal Pad 2 Bicycle
4 Level Ball 4 Dark Patch |
Energy – 9 9 D |
Step 5: Fix things up as needed.
At this point, we have three cards too many. I feel comfortable cutting a Sableye DEX, a Lopunny FLF, and a Colress. Sableye DEX will more than likely only find use once in a game, the Lopunny FLF is secondary to my strategy and can be worked around, and I run Jirachi-EX, making a heavy Supporter count less imperative. This puts our final list at the following:
Pokémon – 19 |
Trainers – 32 4 Professor Juniper 1 Pal Pad 2 Bicycle
4 Level Ball 4 Dark Patch |
Energy – 9 9 D |
Okay, that was a lot of work to make a point, but trust me on this. While you, the reader, might have followed along with my logic every step of the way, you might be surprised to learn that we made a ton of errors along the way. How could that be?
When building decks, players are not just building a single deck in a vacuum. They are combining all their previous deck building knowledge to reflect what they think is effective, efficient, and consistent. While this often works out just fine, recognize that “just fine” won’t produce the best list possible. Moreover, “just fine” can actually reduce the effectiveness of a deck to the point that it won’t win tournaments. With that in mind, where did I go wrong in my logic? Here are, I believe, the biggest mistakes I made while building this deck just now:
Running a 4-4 Weavile PLF.
Since I know I’m going to run some heavy recovery in this deck along with a stellar Ball engine, I can get away with a 4-3 Weavile PLF. Most players feel inclined to go with a 4-4 line of their Stage 1 attacking Pokémon, but depending on your deck you might be able to drop one of the Stage 1s and include a second recovery card. Note that in my testing with Weavile/Lopunny, I have had no issues with a 4-3 line of Weavile PLF (provided, of course, that I run two recovery cards).
Running the 70 HP Sneasel PLF.
Yes, I know that 10 HP can make all the difference at times, but honestly, I did not realize the true power of the 60 HP Sneasel from Next Destinies until I actually played with it in a recent League Challenge. I only included a single copy of Sneasel NXD in my list, but in two games it provided me a last-ditch attempt to win the game (by using Corner until my opponent decked out). It failed to work in one game, but in the other game it’s the reason I won.
When you think about it, having all Sneasel NXD can be a brilliant play, especially if you decide to play more than just one Lysandre. By using Corner on a non-attacker, you can effectively give yourself time to set up all you need to do 180+ damage every turn. Weavile/Lopunny is a fragile deck, and it often loses because of tempo issues. In fact, one of the biggest hurdles to jump is out of your control: going second is often a huge issue for this deck. Being able to Corner your way out of this problem might be huge.
Here’s the big question for you, the reader: Did you even argue with my quick assertion to use the 70 HP Sneasel? See, that is the epitome of a “smart mistake,” moving along with what you think is right based on prior knowledge, even when it’s not in your best interest to do so.
Running only one Jirachi-EX.

If this was the first thing you noted as being off, it’s probably because you’ve seen Weavile/Lopunny decklists online. Try and erase – for a moment – that knowledge, and a single Jirachi-EX seems to make sense. Two copies of this card is definitely the play. It gives you the explosive start this deck needs, and it serves to divert an opponent’s attention. When an opponent targets the Jirachi-EX, they aren’t going after the Weavile PLF, meaning that you often have a 1HKO on the way.
It should be noted that bumping the Jirachi-EX count up to two inevitably means that Scoop Up Cyclone will be a consideration. Dowsing Machine is still a great card, but to prevent having an opponent winning because they KO’d two Jirachi-EX, you might look into Scoop Up Cyclone (or even Super Scoop Up).
Running four N.
I am a big fan of N, but not in this deck. A late-game N can absolutely devastate this deck. When I started testing Weavile/Lopunny, this was the first thing I noticed. Also, the deck has to get an explosive start, and Professor Juniper does this much better than N. In a sense, there is not really a good time at all during the game to play an N, but with a lack of better Supporters, one or two Ns has to stay.
Not running an Electrode PLF line.
Yeah, I realize that David Jensen and Jonathan Arias both did not run Electrode PLF, but I really feel they should consider it. As I mentioned before, a late-game N is brutal, especially after Lopunny FLF has done its job. Having something to fall back on mid to late-game is crucial in reaching those much-needed 1HKOs. This was the first change I made when I started testing this deck before Nationals.
Also, why run two Bicycle when you can run a 1-1 Electrode, essentially giving you multiple Bicycle throughout the game? Most decks that run Bicycle do not have four Level Ball and four Ultra Ball, but here we have a way to get it in play consistently. Also, I want to note that Electrode PLF is not terribly effective throughout the game, since you normally have big hands until you dump Pokémon from your hand. After you do this, though, you’re normally nabbing one or 2 Prize cards, so Electrode PLF is truly only insurance against a mid- to late-game N.
Keeping the Sableye DEX.
This might just be more preference than anything, but I just haven’t leaned on this card at all in testing. I initially saw it as the perfect play mid game, but with the inclusion of Electrode PLF it seemed pointless. Either I was drawing into the cards I needed to thanks to Electrode PLF or my opponent was trying to KO Electrode PLF. Either way, it helped my Weavile PLFs do what they needed to do – attack!
As you can see, there was a lot of room for improvement. When players put together decks, they often do so with a wealth of knowledge that can truly be beneficial. In doing so, however, they may overlook alternatives that can be the difference between a good deck and a truly great one. For reference, here’s the list I felt somewhat comfortable with before Nationals. Note that I had not yet included four Sneasel NXD:
Pokémon – 21 |
Trainers – 28 4 Professor Juniper 1 Pal Pad
4 Ultra Ball |
Energy – 8 8 D |
Open Spots – 3
This list left me with three open spots to do whatever I wanted. At the League Challenge I attended recently, I actually dropped one more Lopunny FLF for another Startling Megaphone and ran three Great Ball. Yes, I played Great Ball — it worked like a charm! If I could do it over again, I would have switched to all Sneasel NXD and run one more Lysandre and two Pokémon Catcher to assist with my Corner trick.
CAN YOU SPOT THE PROBLEMS?
Check out the following decklists and see if you can spot the issues. Bear in mind, I haven’t tested each of these specifically, but I will try my best to point out what I think might be issues.
Deck 1
Pokémon – 14 2 Garbodor LTR |
Trainers – 35 4 Professor Juniper 1 Random Receiver
3 Muscle Band
|
Energy – 11 |
Perhaps the biggest mistake with this deck isn’t apparent at all unless you’re aware of the other cards released from Furious Fists. Simply put: where is Seismitoad-EX? While this deck might work if we believe that everyone else will abandon Evolution decks, being able to quickly power up a Seismitoad-EX to shut out Evolution decks just seems too strong not to play. For this reason, I would quickly change things up and get the ‘Toad in the list.
Four Korrina seems like overkill, especially since this deck isn’t running Machamp FFI. The rest of the Supporter line seems okay, but I would really like to see another Colress.
Many readers might see the single copies of Bicycle, Random Receiver, and Roller Skates as a mistake, but it seems to make at least some sense with the high Korrina count. Before discounting it entirely, I would at least try it out to see where it leads.
Deck 2
Pokémon – 17 4 Landorus-EX 2 Milotic FLF |
Trainers – 32 4 Professor Juniper 1 Random Receiver
4 Ultra Ball
|
Energy – 11 |
This list is pretty unconventional, so I would suggest testing it before anything else. Right away, though, we see the same “trick” as in the last list, with a high Korrina count and various Items to boost draw power a little. This should be tested.
Ultra Ball is up to four in this one, which makes sense. Honestly, though, Level Ball would be in here if it weren’t for the format being Standard. I see this as being an issue.
The one Tool Retriever also seems like it can be replaced with Startling Megaphone, since Megaphone can disable an opponent’s Garbodor LTR while Tool Retriever could only disable your own (presumably to activate Milotic FLF’s Ability).
And once more, I have to question the lack of Seismitoad-EX, especially since this list actually runs W Energy.
I’m going to include some more lists for discussion in the Underground discussion, so be on the lookout for that!
WHAT YOU CAN DO TO AVOID “SMART MISTAKES”
So, now that we have thoroughly looked into this pattern of poor play, what can you do about it? The new season is upon us, and with brand new formats (Standard and Extended), it’s best to stay on top of things.
Here are my suggestions for making sure you don’t make any of these mistakes:
1. Question every card.
When I try to find just the right tech to help leverage a matchup, I literally look at every card in the format. I want to find just the right card that will give me an advantage. This level of precision should be applied to every card in every decklist you make — seriously. Look at every card in your deck and ask “Do I need this?” You might be surprised at how many cards you don’t actually need. And if you’re on the fence, test it out. When I played Darkrai-EX so much in the past, I made the mistake of playing four Ultra Ball in my list when three would do just fine. I was reluctant to change, but a bit of testing convinced me it was the right move.
2. Stop “theory’moning.”
This term is used to describe the practice of using logic to arrive at certain conclusions without doing any playtesting. As simple as the Pokémon TCG can seem at times, there are still lots of hidden interactions between cards that players are so quick to glance over. I recently suggested the possibility of choosing to go second when playing a Landorus-EX deck for the new season, and many blasted the idea. Nobody had tested it, and even though I gave some pretty sound logic myself, I was surprised at how resistant players were to try something out. Of course, I was “theory’moning” myself, so maybe we should all just shut up and get back to testing.
3. Actively force yourself to test out weird ideas.
Look, I know this might take some time, but the payoff can be huge. When you consider an idea — whether it be for a rogue deck or for an archetype — resist the urge to dismiss it so quickly. Then, actually try it out. In the process, you might figure out something really cool (like how Corner can totally bust up an opponent’s strategy), or it might push you in a different direction.
4. Go back in time a bit.
Yes, I know it’s convenient to have a full arsenal of decks ready to go at any moment online, and I know it’s also easy to just pull up decklists online and copy them card for card, but let’s think about the benefits to cutting technology out a bit. In the past — before lists and information was so readily available — players were left to their own devices and testing. They were also left to only a few physical decks. What this meant was that players built what they could and focus all of their attention on just that.
Without all that “prior knowledge” in the way, I truly feel players back then tapped into strengths of a deck that would never be realized currently. Many “old school” players today continue to build influential decks, and I think it’s because of the skill set required to create a treasure out of some junk. Heck, even the Ninetales DRX/Pyroar FLF deck that showed up at Nationals this year was brilliant and so simple a concept.
Consider this: if you only had three decks built, with one of them being Flygon BCR/Dusknoir BCR, don’t you think you’d eventually tap into a killer list for that deck? Today, players are more likely to find a list, play with it a few times, then move on to something else.
CONCLUSION
One of my main concerns as a writer here at SixPrizes is to give the readers the tools necessary to perform well at a tournament. At times, my advice might be unconventional, and this is one of those times. I might actively encourage players to test out weird ideas, but haven’t we seen “weird” ideas perform very well in tournaments before? I also might ask people to abandon technology a bit, but it goes with the observation that players lean on it a bit too much.
All in all, competitive players need to be able to look through the fog and see decks for what they are: compilations of 60 individual cards designed to perform a strategy as best as possible. If a 4-3 line does the job, I’m happy with my extra card. If N isn’t the right card for the situation, I need to find a way around it. Hopefully, this article provided you with a different approach to deck building. Just in writing it I feel I have a clearer perspective.
One last thing to note! I’m trying out something entirely new this season, partly out of my adventurous spirit and partly out of necessity. This year, I plan on playing without any cards of my own. That is, every deck I play at a tournament will be one loaned to me from a friend. In all honestly, I’m looking forward to it, even if I fail miserably at each and every tournament. I’ll try and document some of this in my articles, especially if it can shed some light on the nature of skill in the Pokémon TCG.
Remember to “Like” this if you found it helpful, and find me on the forums!
…and that will conclude this Unlocked Underground article.
After 45 days, we unlock each Underground (UG/★) article for public viewing. New articles are reserved for Underground members.
Underground Members: Thank you for making this article possible!
Other Readers: Check out the FAQ if you are interested in joining Underground and gaining full access to our latest content.
Leave a Reply