PDA

View Full Version : [Article] Blue/Green Threshold versus Cephalid Breakfast: Matchup Analysis



Bardo
09-14-2007, 11:24 AM
*** News Flash: Threshold Beats Combo. Story at 11! ***

"Blue/Green Threshold versus Cephalid Breakfast: Matchup Analysis (http://www.starcitygames.com/php/news/article/14743.html), by Hi-Val


Seriously, I thought this was a fine article. I would have liked to see more detailed tactical maneuvers, other than the strategic broad-strokes (i.e. counters + mana denial trump a fragile mana base and combo pieces), but it was otherwise fine--even if I didn't learn anything new.

And calamari is indeed extremely yummy when prepared right--but tasted like rubber bands when done wrong.

Nice article.

Nightmare
09-14-2007, 11:54 AM
This had an adequate amount of my name in it. I approve. See the SCG thread for my comments.

hi-val
09-14-2007, 11:55 AM
I realized halfway through the testing that this is a REALLY boring matchup to test-- a lot like monoblue versus something! I tried to put in as much tactical stuff as I could but there was little creature-on-creature combat and I didn't want to bore the reader with endless "land, spell, spell gets countered, go" stuff : )

That said, there was a really neat part where Nomads En-Kor bought me a turn be legitimately using their damage reassignment ability. I ended up holding onto five more life after an attack when the En-Kors made Narcomoeba really, really dead after blocking.

Phantom
09-14-2007, 12:38 PM
I really like this sort of hard core, in depth, no nonsense reporting. It really helped me get a feel for the matchup (although a few more games would have helped me decide if you were just drawing bad or what). Two thoughts:

-"In this one, Rian plays out an early Counterbalance. I test it with Aether Vial. Seeing only a Wasteland on top, I play out a Shaman En-Kor, which runs into Spell Snare."

Is that the right play here, or should you wait to Vial it out? I know it didn't matter since he Grip-ed your Vial, but I was wondering your thoughts (or anyones) here.

-I think I could have used a little more speculation at the end. How are the matchups against Splash Threshold (no mana denial, but more creature removal) and what would change in your play style and boarding? What cards should you play around Daze and when? What do you think of the sideboard man plan some Breakfast decks have been running? Why was the deck mulliganing so much, and is there a solution? The article was just a tad short and I think a few more paragraphs and you would have hit the perfect length.

Anyway, nice work.

kirdape3
09-14-2007, 12:40 PM
What happens at any point is this: Can I stop him from going off and doing what he would like to me? If yes, then I just make d00ds and bash him with them. If not, I need to get into such a position very quickly or die.

None of the games were particularly difficult either way, and I was seriously less than impressed with Breakfast in the matchup; it ended up wanting to be a worse version of the deck I was playing too often.

Nightmare
09-14-2007, 12:46 PM
What happens at any point is this: Can I stop him from going off and doing what he would like to me? If yes, then I just make d00ds and bash him with them. If not, I need to get into such a position very quickly or die.

None of the games were particularly difficult either way, and I was seriously less than impressed with Breakfast in the matchup; it ended up wanting to be a worse version of the deck I was playing too often.It sucks that you guys tested this matchup out of all possible ones for Breakfast. It's a pain right in the ass for Breakfast to do anything other than limp through this match - mostly due to all the cards UG plays that the other versions don't: Spell Snare, Stifle (MD), Wasteland, etc. It's by far the worst thresh matchup you have.

Happy Gilmore
09-14-2007, 12:54 PM
I realized halfway through the testing that this is a REALLY boring matchup to test-- a lot like monoblue versus something! I tried to put in as much tactical stuff as I could but there was little creature-on-creature combat and I didn't want to bore the reader with endless "land, spell, spell gets countered, go" stuff : )

That said, there was a really neat part where Nomads En-Kor bought me a turn be legitimately using their damage reassignment ability. I ended up holding onto five more life after an attack when the En-Kors made Narcomoeba really, really dead after blocking.

I see that you were trying to write something reflecting what was discussed in the other thread and I commend you for that. However, I think you kind of missed what we were saying.


I'd still like to see an article that explains the basic strategies of a few of the top tier decks (preferably an aggro/control deck like threshold, a combo deck like TES or Belcher, and a control deck like landstill for starters) and their Achilles heels.
That way if someone actually wants to be original and make their own deck they can at least be rewarded somewhat for predicting a given meta-game by actually knowing how to beat the decks they expect to face. Maybe an overview of a couple of "tier 2" decks in the same article would be interesting (like an aggro-loam variant or survival) complete with the archetypes they do well against and why.
Also if someone is new to this format it also helps to put in the spotlight some staple cards along with an explanation of why they are the most efficient; remember not everyone knows about cards that have long since rotated out like humility, portent, etc. Write something to an audience that you expect doesn't read the source.

If you could somehow incorporate this in your next article that would be great. Also, why UG thresh, a deck that to my knowlege has only won one tournament? UGR or UGW are much more valid and play alot differently in this matchup. And if you feel UG is better than other versions I would like you to plz state why.


It's a pain right in the ass for Breakfast to do anything other than limp through this match - mostly due to all the cards UG plays that the other versions don't: Spell Snare, Stifle (MD), Wasteland, etc. It's by far the worst thresh matchup you have.

If Breakfast resolves an Aether Vial Stifle, Spell Snare and Wasteland become irrelevant. It is worth mentioning as well that Predict is fantastic in this matchup.

hi-val
09-14-2007, 12:59 PM
I chose UG because it won Worlds and writing about it would give it a little more exposure and be somewhat different than the same ol' threshold decks we talk about all the time. I also selected it because it has far more relevant cards than the Red splash has, and to a lesser extent, the White one. I wanted to give Breakfast the hardest time I could : )

I wanted to address people's questions about how the deck plays out tactically and how to sideboard, and I like going really into just one match to see if we can learn anything more generally about it. I'll definitely think about what you quoted for my next article; the only problem I forsee is that talking about a bunch of decks makes a lot of those decks' defenders come out of the woodwork and defend their stuff till the end of time in the face of logic : (

Nightmare
09-14-2007, 01:01 PM
If Breakfast resolves an Aether Vial Stifle, Spell Snare and Wasteland become irrelevant. It is worth mentioning as well that Predict is fantastic in this matchup.Not irrelevant, but less of a pain in the ass, for sure. Still, making Vial stick is tough in its own right.

I'll call dibbs on the article you and NiteWolf9 suggested. I had planned to do a bit on the same topic Doug did this week, but since that's out, I could cover the field with no problem. Also, I have no problem calling a turd a turd, whether it be a deck or its advocates.

Hoojo
09-14-2007, 01:16 PM
I liked the article. How does the Kiki-Hussar version of Breakfast stack up in the same match? Do you think it would be worse?

kirdape3
09-14-2007, 01:57 PM
He comboed only once in ten games played. Three of the four games he won he just made a Tarmogoyf and turned it sideways an arbitrary number of times until I died. Without Tarmogoyf, those matches last two games and are overwhelmingly in my favor.

Ewokslayer
09-14-2007, 02:14 PM
I liked the article the first time through but the second time through I found the tone of the article to be rather bad.
The entire article makes the matchup seem unwinnable when it was a 60-40 breakout even with the Breakfast deck mulliganing alot more than is usual, (I don't recall seening anything about the number of Mulligans Threshold took so I can't commit on whether that was normal for the deck or not)


He comboed only once in ten games played. Three of the four games he won he just made a Tarmogoyf and turned it sideways an arbitrary number of times until I died. Without Tarmogoyf, those matches last two games and are overwhelmingly in my favor.
So what you are saying is that without the card specifically in the MD to help the deck's matchups against aggro control and hate, Breakfast doesn't do as good against it.

hi-val
09-14-2007, 02:45 PM
Well the testing all shook out to more like 75/25. The sample match I won there was in part because Rian was totally manascrewed on one of the games. I think things have to go poorly for Threshold in order for Breakfast to have a chance.

I didn't know it would be so lop-sided going into the article, because I wanted a very heuristic, exploratory article that produced evidence and then drew conclusions (like how all articles should be!).

AnwarA101
09-14-2007, 03:57 PM
Cephalid Breakfast: My thoughts

Who is the beatdown? Now this is a sticky question. I would assume that since I'm comboing, I'm the one going to be applying pressure. Threshold has an amazing ability to press threats through while maintaining a lot of control As Adam Barnello says, this is a very rough match for Cephalid Breakfast, so I'm not expecting shining results.

Threshold: Rian's thoughts

Who is the beatdown? The Threshold player is liable to be the beatdown. With my permission, I can stop the combo pretty easily, so I force Breakfast into being a bad aggro deck.


I was a bit confused here. Do you guys both think the other one is the beatdown? It seems to me that Breakfast is the beatdown as its game isn't likely to improve over time and it has no card advantage to speak of. Threshold is also likely to draw more and more relevant disruption as the game goes later.

The only thing I could think about during the game explanation was how good Pithing Needle is in Threshold. Some of those games would have been tougher if the Threshold list was playing Pithing Needle.

I have to agree with Ewokslayer as it turns out that you seem to say its so bad for Breakfast, but overall it seemed to do very well in the games you did talk about. The presentation seems to be in contradiction with the way you describe the matchup.

Ewokslayer
09-14-2007, 04:20 PM
Well the testing all shook out to more like 75/25. The sample match I won there was in part because Rian was totally manascrewed on one of the games.

The game he was horribly mana screwed was also the game he double wasted you. I don't think that is just a coincidence.


I think things have to go poorly for Threshold in order for Breakfast to have a chance.

As opposed to Breakfast mulliganing to 5 twice in a ten game set?

Mad Zur
09-14-2007, 04:31 PM
If you chose the Threshold list because it did well at the Championship, can I ask why you chose that Breakfast list?

Ewokslayer
09-14-2007, 04:55 PM
If you chose the Threshold list because it did well at the Championship, can I ask why you chose that Breakfast list?

Because he hates you and any Hatfield creation.

hi-val
09-14-2007, 05:13 PM
If you chose the Threshold list because it did well at the Championship, can I ask why you chose that Breakfast list?

Because Adam did a nice writeup of that list last week, and I could link to it and point questions that way instead of fielding "why did you run THIS" questions. Laziness played a factor, as did showing some love for other SCG writers, being able to name-drop Adam a LOT and working with a list that I felt was solid.

Hope I answered your question : )

Ewokslayer
09-14-2007, 05:24 PM
Because Adam did a nice writeup of that list last week, and I could link to it and point questions that way instead of fielding "why did you run THIS" questions. Laziness played a factor, as did showing some love for other SCG writers, being able to name-drop Adam a LOT and working with a list that I felt was solid.

Hope I answered your question : )

Oh, my mistake, I guess it only Gearhart that hates everything Hatfield.

Bane of the Living
09-14-2007, 06:10 PM
Ive found through alot of playtesting that Breakfast is a pretty overhyped deck. I think it only did well out of no where.

URABAHN
09-14-2007, 06:43 PM
Ive found through alot of playtesting that Breakfast is a pretty overhyped deck. I think it only did well out of no where.

Really? I think you should write an article or a small report of your testing and post it in the Breakfast thread. I'd be very interested to hear how your testing against Ceph. Breakfast went.

Bane of the Living
09-14-2007, 07:10 PM
Really? I think you should write an article or a small report of your testing and post it in the Breakfast thread. I'd be very interested to hear how your testing against Ceph. Breakfast went.

Im still beating it with Goblins pretty consistantly. Sideboarding in Tormods Crypt and Pyrokinesis seems really good compared to the 2-4 Abeyances that come in to fight it. Dont get me wrong you still have Tarmagoyf to beat down but Goblins tears CB's manabase apart. To cast Abeyance and combo off before dying you usually need Aether Vial and it doesnt stay around long thanks to Tin Street.

Testing agaisnt White Thresh is close to the notes in this article but we're doing testing against White Thresh with maindeck Counterbalance Top. I think this is optimal and find it very had to win through the lock. Vial is the only saving grace but maindeck EE takes care of it.

Against Eternal Garden and Columbus Confinement the deck has huge issues with a single resolved Crop Rotation. Even a Tabernacle can keep the decks goyf beats in check if theres no Vial around. Maze of Ith > Sutered Ghoul. Glacial Chasm > Ghoul + Goyfs.

Ichorid is just as fast and has Cabal Therapy to combat your Force of Wills. After sbing Leyline of the Void and Platinum Angel wipe away all hope CB has since you cant tutor for Leyline removal and essemble to combo before being swarmed by the undead. If you get a bounce spell for Leyline chances are you wont have one for Platinum Angel.

Thats all that's running though my gauntlet aside from Landstill but I havent played many games against it. It seems like its favorable for CB though.

kirdape3
09-15-2007, 01:02 AM
The double Wasteland hand were my only lands. That was a straight mulligan error on my part, and when I did draw a land it was an Island and not a Tropical or a fetchland to allow me to do SOMETHING. Every game that I lost I either threw away or he had AEther Vial to invalidate half my deck.

Breakfast has a lot of cards that you simply don't want in the opening hand (or in the hand at all, in the case of Dragon Breath, Sutured Ghoul, Narcomeoba, or extra combination creatures). It was not uncommon for Doug to simply start out with functionally a four or five card hand anyways, so why not ship it back.

SpatulaOfTheAges
09-15-2007, 08:42 AM
This reminded me of Kiki's Delivery Service. The story kind of cuts of suddenly and lacks closure.

I thought it was pretty good, although I agree that the attitude of self-defeat for Breakfast was inappropriate. Even if it's true, if you're doing an objective experiment, it's going to skew your results.

hi-val
09-16-2007, 05:58 PM
Spatula, you made me go through a really interesting thought process right now involving the scientific method. Since it's essentially guess & check, is it worth making a hypothesis about how a match will turn out if you're then going to test the matchup? You've got a salient point about attitudes influencing results. For example, thinking that Breakfast has a hard time may influence results because you may subconsciously want Breakfast to lose, especially if you are testing a deck you like against it in a gauntlet.

I'm concerned that I haven't phrased this clearly enough, but I'm hoping it makes sense. Opinions on pregame hypotheses and their worth while testing?

SpatulaOfTheAges
09-20-2007, 08:10 AM
I'm pretty sure I've read articles about this that I now can't seem to find, so I'll stick to speculation.

I think it influences how much you're willing to make the winning play. The more likely you think defeat is, the more likely you are to throw in the towel when you get into a difficult situation.

Someone who really wants the win, when facing a board position that only leaves them one out, is willing to plan in advance to get themselves to that out. Someone who doesn't have a real desire for the win will just let it slip by.