First up, thank you everyone who sent me translation for the vending machine Mewtwo. You may stop now.  Okay, in Single Card Strategies I continuously see the lamest comparisons of cards. If there are 2 cards that are alike in any way imaginable, there's someone that's gonna be comparing them. I also see people comparing cards using rating systems, where they attach numbers to cards and compare the results. And of course we can't forget the guys who go on about holo cards and how they suck. Don't you just love those guys? Now recently, people have written articles stating their disapproval for this, showing that some people have a grain of sanity in this world. But what I really hate is how people continue to use those stupid comparisons. I'm sick and tired of seeing this garbage posted on the Pojo, but I'm even more bored because I get the impression that everyone who says that these articles are garbage are not being listened to. Since you all like Mewtwo, I decided to have him do this. Maybe you all will listen to him more than me.
 
Mewtwo: Okay, for one thing, why exactly are you comparing Ninetales and Victreebel? That is so lame, I don't even know where to start. Chansey and Charizard? Dewgong and Blastoise? The big three debate? Umm... Yeah... Oh wow, that's a load of stupidity right there. I bet some people wish more people knew about Pokemon so they could laugh at you guys over national television. Hey, I'd watch it... Let's face it, when you start comparing Chansey to Charizard you know there's something wrong.
        You know, whoever changed the rule about no more Venusaur vs. Blastoise articles and the like should reconcider. What I don't get is why you'd compare Chansey and Charizard anyway. Now, try this. How about actually comparing cards that have the same stage, theme (quick attacking, stalling, cleaner, etc.), and type? Oh, and by the way, typing up well written article that isn't immature is not a crime! Now, if you compare two cards that have little, but have the same theme behind them and you write it well, I have no problems with it. But when people start comparing a pokemon to a trainer and write about how a stage two has a better stats than a basic and is therefore better, you've got problems.   
        Next, rarity. Why do people say a card's better because it's common? Do you know why some deck mechanics don't take limited card stock as an excuse? It's because this game requires you to spend a little. There's no way around it. There are ways other than booster packs to get cards, and they are cheaper than most might think. And in the game, rarity doesn't matter. It doesn't make or break a card. It only matters to a collecter.
        Another thing that I never got was this fanatic obsession with the point system. Okay, as people have said before, you can't attach numbers to cards. Plus, many of the topics are either based on personal opinion, or stacked so that one of the cards is in an unfair posision. I mean, Alakazam VS. Scyther. When I conducted this test, Scyther won because he had better attacks. But wasn't Alakazam made to stall? This is the entire reason why the Chansey/Charizard debate was worthless. I'm not going to go on and on about this topic, mainly because it's already been said before about 10 times, but I will give you this example I made:
                                 
                                                            Alakazam VS. Cloyster
                                                            (This should be good :-)
 
HP: Alakzam has 80 HP, and Cloyster has 50. Alakazam has higher HP by 30, so he gets a point. 
STAGE: Alakazam is a stage 2. Cloyster is a stage 1. Cloyster wins. 
ENVIRONMENT: Psychic is usually resisted, while water never is. Cloyster wins.
P. POWER: Alakazam has a very good one. Cloyster doesn't. 'Zam wins.                                                            
# OF ATTACKS: Alakazam has 1, but Cloyster has 2. Cloyster wins.
ATTACKS: Alakazam can only do 30 damage for 3 psy. Cloyster has the same attack for 2 water so he wins.
MAX DAMAGE: Alakazam can only do up to 60 damage. Cloyster can do up to 120 damage so he wins.
(Do you notice a problem? It goes on and on about attacks, but Alakazam's not an attacker. This error has happened many times.)
ABILITY TO CARRY OUT A THEME: Alakazam wins hands down for ultimate staller.  
WEAKNESS: Alakazam wins. There are too many Electabuzz out there.
RESISTANCE: Neither has one, so it's a tie.
RETREAT COST: Alakazam has 1 more for retreat cost, so Cloyster gets another point.
RARITY: Cloyster is uncommon. Alakazam is rare-holo. Cloyster wins.
LEVEL: (You might as well...)  I'm assuming than 42 is a bigger number than 25. Alakazam wins.
                    TOTAL: Alakazam=5 (4 if not for level, which I only did as a joke.)
                                   Cloyster=6
        If this doesn't say why the point system is bad I don't know what does. Learn from other people's mistakes and correct your own. It spares you embaressment, for one thing. 
        Whether Man: And now, the Traphic Report...
                                                              
                                                                  -The Whether Man
                                                        Send all e-mail to saxton3@attglobal.net