# Reflection Template For Oops All Spells

For each loss, name one primary cause and one secondary cause.
For each win, name the card, package, or tactical policy that most contributed to the win.
Classify each result as a card quantity problem, card selection problem, mana problem, tempo problem, matchup problem, sideboard problem, pilot sequencing problem, or closing-power problem.
Report mana performance, sideboard impact, stranded cards, overperforming cards, underperforming cards, and whether the Deck Strategy or Tactical Policy guidance was followed.

- Deciding factor: Record whether the game was won or lost by engine access, mana production, protection, graveyard access, sideboard hate, or payoff resolution. Name the exact card that mattered most, such as `Balustrade Spy`, `Undercity Informer`, `Summoner's Pact`, `Dark Ritual`, `Unmask`, `Pact of Negation`, `Dread Return`, or `Thassa's Oracle`.

- Mulligan quality: Check whether the opening hand had a complete route to a same-turn or next-turn engine. Track hands kept for mana only, protection only, payoff-only cards like `Bridge from Below`, `Dread Return`, `Memory's Journey`, `Jack-o'-Lantern`, `Thassa's Oracle`, `Narcomoeba`, or `Poxwalkers`, and whether those keeps actually produced legal progress.

- Mana execution: Review whether `Black Lotus`, `Lotus Petal`, `Mox Jet`, `Mox Emerald`, `Dark Ritual`, `Elvish Spirit Guide`, and `Wild Cantor` were spent on the decisive line or consumed before the rules engine exposed the required action. Flag any game where `Force of Vigor` needed a green pitch but `Elvish Spirit Guide` or another green card had already been spent.

- Velocity: Count turns from opening hand to first legal `Balustrade Spy`, `Undercity Informer`, or `Summoner's Pact` engine access. A slower game should identify whether delay came from missing mana, missing engine, waiting for protection, answering hate, or Veles not recognizing a legal commitment window.

- Protection use: Audit every `Unmask`, `Grief`, `Cabal Therapy`, `Mental Misstep`, `Pact of Negation`, and post-board `Chancellor of the Annex` decision. Mark whether the chosen action protected the actual combo line, fought a visible stop sign, or spent disruption on a card that did not matter before the game ended.

- Engine resolution: Confirm whether self-mill produced the expected legal follow-up involving `Bridge from Below`, `Narcomoeba`, `Poxwalkers`, `Dread Return`, and `Thassa's Oracle`. If a link failed, record the exact visible zone state and legal action list rather than assuming the combo should have worked.

- Removal and hate answers: Record whether `Force of Vigor` and `Sickening Shoal` answered a permanent or creature that actually blocked the combo or changed the lethal clock. Do not score them highly for removing low-impact objects while an engine action was already legal.

- Sideboard performance: Compare each post-board game to the selected plan and ask whether `Chancellor of the Annex`, `Force of Vigor`, `Leyline of the Void`, or `Sickening Shoal` bought the needed turn without reducing engine density too much. Track games where sideboard cards were stranded or where the unboarded core would likely have been faster.

- Closing reliability: Check whether `Thassa's Oracle` ended the game only after Veles showed the legal path. Flag games where `Dread Return`, `Thassa's Oracle`, `Memory's Journey`, or `Jack-o'-Lantern` was drawn, discarded, exiled, or stranded in a way that changed the required line.

- Role accuracy: Ask whether the deck correctly stayed all-in combo, became protected combo against stack interaction, became answer-first combo against hate, or accidentally played a slow reactive role. Record any mismatch between matchup guidance and visible opponent pressure.

- Mistake review: Identify one pilot decision and one opponent decision that most changed the result. Focus on mulligans, mana timing, discard target choice, `Pact of Negation` timing, `Summoner's Pact` search timing, sideboard selection, and commitment into visible disruption.

- Overperformers and underperformers: Name cards that materially improved win probability and cards that repeatedly sat unusable. Separate true underperformance from cards that were stranded because Veles chose the wrong line or because the rules engine did not expose an expected legal action.

## Existing User Requests
No additional user reflection requests were supplied.
