Cactus Game Design Message Boards

T1 easily has more players.

The which is better question is subjective, and it depends on an individual's preferences.

I play both.

However, if they are matched up against each other in tournaments, then I naturally lean towards T1. 
It favors my noobish skills. 

T2>T1.

You could build a 154 card Type 1 deck and have the best of both worlds... 

sealed..  by far the best category.  Now if I could just recycle a previous starter deck it would be perfect.

In my opinion, T1 generally requires more skill in deck building, while T2 requires more skill to play. Because T1 is singleton and decks need to be as small as possible, the little decisions in T1 matter far more. Choosing Darius' Decree or Rain Becomes Dust, using Zadok Anoints Solomon or Gideon's Call, playing Emperor Tiberius instead of Emperor Vitellius; these are the kinds of hard decisions that a T1 deck builder has to make (I know a lot of people are going to claim these choices are all easy, but I'm just trying to make a point). T2 definitely requires a lot of skill in deck building and a lot of hard choices have to be made, but in my opinion, making those hard decisions in T1 is far more impactful in a deck's performance, and thus, I believe T1 requires more skill in deck building. For instance, at Nats last year, I chose to play Ehud rather than Daniel, which cost me at least one game (against Connor Magras), resulting in me not making top cut. Alternatively though, I think T1 decks often pilot themselves, especially in the current meta, whereas T2 requires a lot more critical thinking and weighing every option, especially because T2 is slightly more diverse in the types of decks that are viable in high level tournaments.

Edit: Just a reminder that regardless of how much skill either category takes, Westy is not a national champion in either.

Alternatively though, I think T1 decks often pilot themselves, especially in the current meta, whereas T2 requires a lot more critical thinking and weighing every option, especially because T2 is slightly more diverse in the types of decks that are viable in high level tournaments.

Edit: Just a reminder that regardless of how much skill either category takes, Westy is not a national champion in either.

Although I agree with this as a very general statement, I am an exception to the T2 player skill vs. deck build rule. In 2010 at NE Regionals I agreed to fill out the T2 2p field with a borrowed deck which was very well constructed (Reggie's, I think?) because the player wanted to play T1. Without even taking time to really examine the deck, I won the T2 2p regional championship. It was entirely due to the excellent deck construction and a little bit of luck on the draw, because no one who knows me or has played me will say I'm a top strategist (or even a mediocre one, for that matter).

I used to avoid T2 due to the rules lawyering that went on (I don't think it's as bad now, but I don't play in MN  ), but now I've completely quit T1 due to the limited meta. (To be brutally honest, I generally skip both unless needed to make a field, and focus on Sealed and Booster instead, which I personally find way more fun and interesting due to the unusual combos and extended battles you can find in the closed deck categories.) I think it really boils down to personal taste, however.

I like the small decks in T1

Or Teams

(Mainly the Alsteads)

Of the top 6 places in MN state tournament, I believe that 5 of them were the Alstads (or related, or engaged to one), and they are mainly type two players.

I don't like timed games.