The Seviper and the Sandaconda – A Commentary on Play Style

Hey guys, It’s Charlie and I’m excited to be back with another article! I’ve still been taking a nice break from playing recently, which means I didn’t compete in the Players Cup this past weekend. I really enjoyed watching the streams, however, and I learned a lot more about the current format we’re competing in! I’m super excited to make my return to official play as soon as Premier tournaments come back.

Recently, my writing has been focused on improvement and how a player can unlock their full potential. For years, I struggled with improving from a generally strong player into a player that could compete at the highest level; and until recently, I didn’t understand that transformation very well. I just thought playing enough Pokemon immediately did it, but as I’ve read a lot about learning and performance at elite levels recently (quick plug: The Art of Learning by Josh Waitzkin is an amazing book, especially for Pokemon players!). I’ve learned that much of this transformation is deeply rooted in some psychological adjustments I embraced as I matured as a player. These psychological quirks that everyone has manifests in your play style, which defines the conditions and strategic ideas that you most resonate with. In this article, I’ll go in depth on this idea of play style, draw parallels to chess (mostly because there’s no luck involved and there’s enough history), and discuss how some of Pokemon’s all-time greats manifest these ideas to become better (and in some cases worse) players.

Play Style: What Is It?

For a very long time, I didn’t believe in the idea of play style in Pokemon. I originally only thought it could pertain to what decks a player gravitated towards, say control decks, highly aggressive Big Basic decks, mid-range Evolution decks, or anything else. My definition of play style was basically just examples such as: Tord plays [card name=”Zoroark-GX” set=”Shining Legends” no=”53″ c=”name”][/card] decks, so his play style is defined by Zoroark. Rahul Reddy likes [card name=”Vespiquen” set=”Ancient Origins” no=”10″ c=”name”][/card], so I guess his play style is defined by Revenge-type attacks. This view was incredibly close-minded; there is much more behind these deck choices to uncover and a better definition has much less to do with a player’s deck choices.

[cardimg name=”Zoroark-GX” set=”Shining Legends” no=”53″ align=”right” c=”none”][/cardimg]

My new definition of play style stems from one’s natural inclination towards certain ideas and how that manifests on the Pokemon table. Much of this can be seen in one’s personality; the best players let their personality manifest itself in their play. The best high-energy Pokemon players play high-energy games, while the most calm and collected players play more laid-back marathons. Play style is simply how one’s personality shows in their games of Pokemon.

Unlike chess, Pokemon has two different mediums through which you can express your play style: your deck choice and your play itself. The game’s very best players strike a fine balance between these and know how to recreate the conditions under which their play style flourishes consistently. While there is an endless spectrum of different play styles, I’ve defined a few general archetypes and how they manifest in a player’s deck choices, their play, and even their emotions away from the table.

The Viper and the Anaconda: A Chess Parallel

[premium]

In The Art of Learning, the author discusses the two most common stylistic archetypes in chess: the Viper and the Anaconda. A Viper on the chess board is incredibly aggressive, often on the attack, and loves to rack up large advantages by overwhelming their opponent. Vipers love action; long, boring marathon games can often cause them to break down and blunder, but they’re incredibly creative players who love to innovate. Chess greats like Garry Kasparov fit in this group best. Just like a Viper, when going after their prey (their opponent), they want to strike.

In contrast, the Anaconda prefers to slowly choke every ounce of life out of their opponent by dominating in long, grueling marathons and capitalizing on every single tiny advantage they can find. Anacondas will ever-so-slowly tighten their grip on opponents until their mistakes become larger and their win conditions vanish. Anatoly Karpov, one of the best chess players of all time, fits squarely into this class. Anacondas are cool, calm, collected, and will kill you one tiny advantage at a time.

To some extent, these player archetypes can be applied to Pokemon in both one’s play and their deck choices. A Viper in Pokemon tends to think, deckbuild, and play big: you may see them make riskier plays with higher payoffs, stay away from long, calculative games, and build their decks to dominate at the table. In general, Vipers tend to play faster than average and are more prone to making errors from thinking too fast, but they also tend to play intuitively. I consider myself to fit in this category; many of Pokemon’s all-time greats, like Shintaro Ito, Gustavo Wada, Igor Costa, and Danny Altavilla also tend to play more in line with the Viper mentality. Younger players overwhelmingly fit this description; the Senior and Junior Divisions are almost entirely made up of Vipers.

Anacondas in Pokemon reverse this paradigm and often rely on their skills in technical dogfights to carry them through. Their lists are extremely consistent and often free of extensive tech cards, but leave them with ample options to out-maneuver their opponents in long matches. They tend to play slower and calculate more, making sure every minute decision gives them a slight edge in a close matchup they need to win. The more technical subtleties an Anaconda can incorporate into the game, the more likely they are to dominate. Players like Tord Reklev, Michael Pramawat, Justin Bokhari, and Ross Cawthon embody this mentality very well. In younger divisions, Anacondas are few and far between, but the few that exist tend to be extremely elite players that consistently dominate events.

Snakes in Deck Building – Is it Venomous?

When it comes to decks, the fine line blurs much more. While decks like Wall Stall are clearly Anacondas and decks like Donk and Hand Lock are clearly Vipers, Tier 1 archetypes like [card name=”Pikachu and Zekrom-GX” set=”Team Up” no=”33″ c=”name”][/card], [card name=”Dragapult VMAX” set=”Rebel Clash” no=”93″ c=”name”][/card] , and [card name=”Zacian V” set=”Sword and Shield” no=”138″ c=”name”][/card] don’t immediately fit into one basket. Below I’ll examine the two biggest benchmarks I use to define a deck: consistency and threat level.

Consistency is a deck’s ability to execute its strategy more reliably than other decks. Everyone wants their deck to be consistent, but not everyone is willing to sacrifice their super-cool techs to pull this off. Some decks are inherently more consistent; [card name=”Zoroark-GX” set=”Shining Legends” no=”53″ c=”name”][/card] decks had a built in draw engine, decks focusing on Basic Pokemon have less moving parts to worry about, and low-Energy cost attackers are always easier to set up. However, some decks are built to be even more consistent by including extra copies of consistency Trainers (draw Supporters, search Items, etc), extra copies of key Pokemon, and sometimes extra Energy cards. Just look at this Dragapult VMAX list that Tord Reklev won the Players Cup Kickoff Invitational with:

[decklist name=”Tord’s Dragapult VMAX” amt=”60″ caption=”” cname=”Dedenne-GX” set=”Unbroken Bonds” no=”57″][pokemon amt=”16″]4x [card name=”Dragapult VMAX” set=”Rebel Clash” no=”93″ c=”deck2″ amt=”4″][/card]4x [card name=”Dragapult V” set=”Rebel Clash” no=”92″ c=”deck2″ amt=”4″][/card]4x [card name=”Jirachi” set=”Team Up” no=”99″ c=”deck2″ amt=”4″][/card]2x [card name=”Galarian Zigzagoon” set=”Sword and Shield” no=”117″ c=”deck2″ amt=”2″][/card]1x [card name=”Giratina” set=”Unified Minds” no=”86″ c=”deck2″ amt=”1″][/card]1x [card name=”Dedenne-GX” set=”Unbroken Bonds” no=”57″ c=”deck2″ amt=”1″][/card][/pokemon][trainers amt=”35″]4x [card name=”Professor’s Research” set=”Sword and Shield” no=”178″ c=”deck2″ amt=”4″][/card]4x [card name=”Marnie” set=”Sword and Shield” no=”169″ c=”deck2″ amt=”4″][/card]3x [card name=”Boss’s Orders” set=”Rebel Clash” no=”154″ c=”deck2″ divide=”yes” amt=”3″][/card]4x [card name=”Quick Ball” set=”Sword and Shield” no=”179″ c=”deck2″ amt=”4″][/card]4x [card name=”Mysterious Treasure” set=”Forbidden Light” no=”113″ c=”deck2″ amt=”4″][/card]4x [card name=”Scoop Up Net” set=”Rebel Clash” no=”165″ c=”deck2″ amt=”4″][/card]3x [card name=”Acro Bike” set=”Primal Clash” no=”122″ c=”deck2″ amt=”3″][/card]3x [card name=”Escape Board” set=”Ultra Prism” no=”122″ c=”deck2″ amt=”3″][/card]2x [card name=”Energy Spinner” set=”Unbroken Bonds” no=”170″ c=”deck2″ amt=”2″][/card]2x [card name=”Reset Stamp” set=”Unified Minds” no=”206″ c=”deck2″ divide=”yes” amt=”2″][/card]2x [card name=”Shrine of Punishment” set=”Celestial Storm” no=”143″ c=”deck2″ amt=”2″][/card][/trainers][energy amt=”9″]5x [card name=”Psychic Energy” set=”HeartGold and SoulSilver” no=”119″ c=”deck2″ amt=”5″][/card]4x [card name=”Horror P Energy” set=”Rebel Clash” no=”172″ c=”deck2″ amt=”4″][/card][/energy][/decklist] 

This list is the epitome of consistency. A full 4-4 Dragapult VMAX line, maxed out draw Supporters and a beefed-up 3 Boss’s Orders, full counts of crucial Items, 3 [card name=”Acro Bike” set=”Primal Clash” no=”122″ c=”name”][/card] for bonus consistency, 2 [card name=”Energy Spinner” set=”Unbroken Bonds” no=”170″ c=”name”][/card] to make Energies searchable through Jirachi, and pretty much one extra copy of every crucial card. Tord’s goal with this deck was to minimize the luck factor and make sure all the options he wanted to include were readily available whenever he needed them. Instead of adding a bunch of tech cards and other options to take advantage of, Tord chose to focus on his core strategy and let his skill carry him the rest of the way. This is how an Anaconda can tailor a meta deck to their strengths.

In contrast, here is Michael Catron’s Dragapult VMAX list from the Limitless Invitational:

[decklist name=”Catron’s Dragapult” amt=”60″ caption=”” cname=”Dragapult VMAX” set=”Rebel Clash” no=”93″][pokemon amt=”17″]4x [card name=”Jirachi” set=”Team Up” no=”99″ c=”deck2″ amt=”4″][/card]3x [card name=”Dragapult VMAX” set=”Rebel Clash” no=”93″ c=”deck2″ amt=”3″][/card]3x [card name=”Dragapult V” set=”Rebel Clash” no=”92″ c=”deck2″ amt=”3″][/card]1x [card name=”Galarian Zigzagoon” set=”Sword and Shield” no=”117″ c=”deck2″ amt=”1″][/card]1x [card name=”Dedenne-GX” set=”Unbroken Bonds” no=”57″ c=”deck2″ amt=”1″][/card]1x [card name=”Giratina” set=”Unified Minds” no=”86″ c=”deck2″ amt=”1″][/card]1x [card name=”Mew” set=”Unbroken Bonds” no=”76″ c=”deck2″ amt=”1″][/card]1x [card name=”Mewtwo” set=”Unbroken Bonds” no=”75″ c=”deck2″ amt=”1″][/card]1x [card name=”Phione” set=”Cosmic Eclipse” no=”57″ c=”deck2″ amt=”1″][/card]1x [card name=”Gengar and Mimikyu-GX” set=”Team Up” no=”53″ c=”deck2″ amt=”1″][/card][/pokemon][trainers amt=”35″]4x [card name=”Cynthia” set=”Ultra Prism” no=”119″ c=”deck2″ amt=”4″][/card]3x [card name=”Professor’s Research” set=”Sword and Shield” no=”178″ c=”deck2″ amt=”3″][/card]1x [card name=”Boss’s Orders” set=”Rebel Clash” no=”154″ c=”deck2″ divide=”yes” amt=”1″][/card]4x [card name=”Quick Ball” set=”Sword and Shield” no=”179″ c=”deck2″ amt=”4″][/card]4x [card name=”Mysterious Treasure” set=”Forbidden Light” no=”113″ c=”deck2″ amt=”4″][/card]4x [card name=”Scoop Up Net” set=”Rebel Clash” no=”165″ c=”deck2″ amt=”4″][/card]4x [card name=”Switch” set=”Sword and Shield” no=”183″ c=”deck2″ amt=”4″][/card]3x [card name=”Energy Spinner” set=”Unbroken Bonds” no=”170″ c=”deck2″ amt=”3″][/card]3x [card name=”Reset Stamp” set=”Unified Minds” no=”206″ c=”deck2″ amt=”3″][/card]1x [card name=”Great Catcher” set=”Cosmic Eclipse” no=”192″ c=”deck2″ amt=”1″][/card]1x [card name=”Escape Board” set=”Ultra Prism” no=”122″ c=”deck2″ divide=”yes” amt=”1″][/card]3x [card name=”Power Plant” set=”Unbroken Bonds” no=”183″ c=”deck2″ amt=”3″][/card][/trainers][energy amt=”8″]4x [card name=”Psychic Energy” set=”HeartGold and SoulSilver” no=”119″ c=”deck2″ amt=”4″][/card]4x [card name=”Horror P Energy” set=”Rebel Clash” no=”172″ c=”deck2″ amt=”4″][/card][/energy][/decklist] 

While this list is clearly still consistent, with 4 copies of [card name=”Jirachi” set=”Team Up” no=”99″ c=”name”][/card], maxed out staple Items, and plenty of draw Supporters, consistency is not this deck’s first priority. Instead of focusing on executing his core strategy perfectly in every single match, Michael chose to diversify a bit and include plenty of tech cards for various situations. Inclusions like [card name=”Gengar and Mimikyu-GX” set=”Team Up” no=”53″ c=”name”][/card] ,[card name=”Phione” set=”Cosmic Eclipse” no=”57″ c=”name”][/card], and even the three copies of [card name=”Power Plant” set=”Unbroken Bonds” no=”183″ c=”name”][/card] are designed to be game-breaking inclusions that can turn the tides of a match in an instant or consistently assist Michael in executing variants of his strategy. Michael sacrificed “buffer” counts like the extra Dragapult V and VMAX, second [card name=”Galarian Zigzagoon” set=”Sword and Shield” no=”117″ c=”name”][/card], and fourth [card name=”Professor’s Research” set=”Sword and Shield” no=”178″ c=”name”][/card] in order to fit these cards. Michael built this deck in the image of a Viper; he tries to utilize these cards as his “venom” to gain an advantage in the matchup while Tord’s deck is designed to stick to its core strategy and let the player’s skills slowly choke out the opponent.

Difference in a Viper’s Techs and an Anaconda’s Techs

While Vipers do tend to include more techs in their decks, I actually think this is a byproduct of the way each player archetype likes to utilize their tech cards. Vipers focus more on game-breaking techs that can swing a matchup by itself, exploit an opponent’s mistake, or somehow gain a massive advantage when used properly; this is their venom. Anacondas incorporate techs just like extra coils in a constriction; they use tech cards to gain marginal advantages in small places that can make the difference between winning and losing. In short, “venom” techs usually do much more in less situations, but “coils” techs do less in more situations.

As a good example, I played a copy of [card name=”Tapu Fini-GX” set=”Burning Shadows” no=”39″ c=”name”][/card] in my [card name=”Drampa-GX” set=”Guardians Rising” no=”115″ c=”name”][/card] / [card name=”Garbodor” set=”BREAKpoint” no=”57″ c=”name”][/card] deck at the 2017 World Championships. While Tapu Fini-GX was applicable in a remarkably large number of matchups, it was included to swing the tides of battle heavily. A use of Tapu Storm GX was a snakebite in the opponent’s game plan; I had a few opponents almost immediately concede after I used it in a pivotal moment. This is a “venom” tech, something players like me love to incorporate into our decks. More recent examples would be stuff like [card name=”Naganadel-GX” set=”Forbidden Light” no=”56″ c=”name”][/card] in Stephane Ivanoff’s 2019 NAIC winning list and the inclusion of [card name=”Cyrus Prism Star” set=”Ultra Prism” no=”120″ c=”name”][/card] in some [card name=”Pikachu and Zekrom-GX” set=”Team Up” no=”33″ c=”name”][/card] lists at the 2019 World Championships.

A “coils” tech that adds dimension to your strategy in many situations would be something like a 1-1 line of [card name=”Lycanroc-GX” set=”Guardians Rising” no=”74″ c=”name”][/card] in a Zoroark-GX deck. While other cards in the format like [card name=”Guzma” set=”Burning Shadows” no=”115″ c=”name”][/card] were able to provide pretty much the exact same effect, the addition of the Lycanroc-GX line allows you to access the same effect through a search Item like [card name=”Ultra Ball” set=”Dark Explorers” no=”102″ c=”name”][/card] or even after you’ve used your Supporter for the turn. This tech simply adds depth to the principle strategy of a deck. These types of techs were much more common in the Diamond and Pearl era; complex Evolution decks would add thin lines of Pokemon like [card name=”Dusknoir” set=”Diamond and Pearl” no=”2″ c=”name”][/card] , [card name=”Nidoqueen” set=”Rising Rivals” no=”30″ c=”name”][/card] , and [card name=”Machamp” set=”Stormfront” no=”20″ c=”name”][/card] in order to add a small wrinkle to an already potent strategy. Applicable in many situations, these powerful inclusions allowed skilled players to use them to their fullest potential and win more often.

Bridging the Gap – Balancing Your Play Style

Both major player archetypes have their own stereotypical weaknesses that need to be balanced cautiously in order to become better. The best players are able to mitigate these weaknesses in times of need to pull out a crucial win.

The biggest difference is pace of play. Aggressive Vipers tend to play faster than average while Anacondas play slower than average. Sometimes, these weaknesses can lose one the game: I remember that in a Regional Championship, I had a 1-0 lead playing [card name=”Wailord-EX” set=”Primal Clash” no=”38″ c=”name”][/card] , an incredibly slow, Anaconda-mentality deck that slowly chokes wins out of its opponents. Instead of playing at a very average pace (note: not playing slowly, but just playing normally!), I continued to rush through all of my actions, take shortcuts, and play like I was catching up. I barely lost that game before time was called. I’ve seen the same happen in reverse; notoriously slow players are sometimes unable to close out games that they needed to play only a little bit faster. This is one of the biggest things every player needs to work on. The notorious “Turbo Tord” moment in which he began playing extremely fast near the end of time in a streamed match is exactly what everyone needs to learn to do. As an Anaconda, Tord is normally comfortable playing at a slower pace, but he was plenty capable of speeding it up when he needed to. This may be one of the greatest differences between great players and elite players.[cardimg name=”Wailord-EX” set=”Primal Clash” no=”38″ align=”right” c=”none”][/cardimg]

Other stylistic differences may include a Viper’s tendency to overextend for a big play or an Anaconda’s tendency to play it safe when risking it all is the only chance at winning. If one can learn to recognize these differences and improve on their weaknesses, they can improve incredibly fast.

Stylistic Infinity

I only touched on two major classes of players, but many of the game’s best mix it up to create their own unique flavor of game play. Jose Marrero is a great example here; he always chooses fast, aggressive, and consistent decks and relies on his skill to dominate. Like many Anacondas, his deck choices are focused on consistency and reliability, but as a player, he’s naturally aggressive and plays like a Viper. This strategy may not be the one you or I chooses to use, but it has undoubtedly worked very well for him over the years.

I encourage you to dig deep and try to figure out where you fit on this spectrum. Do you love to tech out your deck and dominate your opponents with the element of surprise? Do you just want to set up every game and let your skills carry you the rest of the way? Figuring out where you fit is the first step to improvement; then you can focus on your inherent weaknesses and tailor your deck choices to your play style in order to bring out the best version of yourself.

Conclusion

I really hope you enjoyed my article! As always, feel free to hit me up on my Twitter (@C4_TCG) or on Facebook anytime. I’m excited to get back to Pokemon soon and hope to see you again in my next article!

–Charlie

[/premium]