[Premium Article] The Road to Chicago

[Smmenen]

This article is basically a primer on the "4c Counterbalance Goy", 4c Threshold, NLU, whatever you want to call it deck. It was written last week, and is almost card for card the deck I played at the GP.

http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/legacy/17187_So_Many_Insane_Plays_The_Road_to_Chicago_with_Next_Level_Blue.html

Editor's Blurb:


Monday, March 9th - Grand Prix: Chicago is now in the books, with attendance figures higher than anyone imagined. Despite failing to make Day 2, Stephen Menendian prepared well for the event, and today’s So Many Insane Plays chronicles this preparation. He outlines his final build, and shares his thoughts on the format in general.

[kabal]

It was written last week, and is almost card for card the deck I played at the GP.


Can you post the deck list?

[bowvamp]

I believe it's already posted by the name of "Baseruption". At least that's what I believe (I don't have premium, but if this articles good enough I might have to stop being such a scrooge with my savings)

[Smmenen]

Nice Flame.

The deck I ran is the same archetype as the tournament winning decklist, with a few key differences. Nassif ran 20 lands and only 2 ponders to my 18 lands and a full set Ponders. I ran 2 Vendllion Clique instead of 2 Sowers. And I ran 4 Thoughtseize and 4th Daze maindeck where he ran 1 K. Grip, 4th Counterbalance, 4th Top, and 2 Shackles.

So, far as I can tell, I've been closer than anyone else to calling this 4c whateveryouwantocall it as the deck to play, no? And I've been writing tournament reports for the deck since December.

[URABAHN]

Nice Flame.

The deck I ran is the same archetype as the tournament winning decklist, with a few key differences. Nassif ran 20 lands and only 2 ponders to my 18 lands and a full set Ponders. I ran 2 Vendllion Clique instead of 2 Sowers. And I ran 4 Thoughtseize and 4th Daze maindeck where he ran 1 K. Grip, 4th Counterbalance, 4th Top, and 2 Shackles.

So, far as I can tell, I've been closer than anyone else to calling this 4c whateveryouwantocall it as the deck to play, no? And I've been writing tournament reports for the deck since December.

I'd say there's a pretty big difference in your deck and his deck.

[Smmenen]

Well, the maindeck was 85% the same, and we were playing the same archetype, 4c Threshold. We had 4 Bob, 4 Goyf, 4 STP, etc.

I ran 4 Thoughtsieze and he ran none. I ran 2 Clique and he ran 2 Sowers. I felt that Thoughtseize and Clique were both better in the mirror than Shackles or Sower. Aside from those 6 cards, the remaining differences were minor, imo. 4th Daze, 4th Counterbalance, 4th Top.

My point is that I've been writing about 4c Thresh, for what, 3 months now, and LSV and Nassif both ran the archetype sharing 85% of my maindeck, with differences at the margins, and disagreements over a few card choices.

As for my performance, I only had 2 losses on day 2, but I ended up drawing against a Japanese player at the end of the day. My deck was amazing, but I was not, making at least two blunders (not simply errors) and costing myself day two.

[SMR0079]

You are correct in your general assessment of where the countertop strategy was headed.

I took the same design branch as you did following Chapins list last year, but I'm surprised you never got to running the full set of Tops and Counterbalance. It was well established by the end of last years extended season that you wanted the full set, and even with the additional fixing in Brainstorm and Ponder you want the soft lock as quickly as possible against the majority of the field.

I was also running Clique, but no Predator. I even had Sower for awhile, but let the masses dissuade me from it in the end. Which is a reminder that forums like the Source are a great basis for establishing a gauntlet, but tend to get stuck in established patterns.

Looking back at your process, can you think of what inhibited you from seeing what LSV or Probasco saw in terms of design?

[Nightmare]

Well, the maindeck was 85% the same, and we were playing the same archetype, 4c Threshold. We had 4 Bob, 4 Goyf, 4 STP, etc.

I ran 4 Thoughtsieze and he ran none. I ran 2 Clique and he ran 2 Sowers. I felt that Thoughtseize and Clique were both better in the mirror than Shackles or Sower. Aside from those 6 cards, the remaining differences were minor, imo. 4th Daze, 4th Counterbalance, 4th Top.

My point is that I've been writing about 4c Thresh, for what, 3 months now, and LSV and Nassif both ran the archetype sharing 85% of my maindeck, with differences at the margins, and disagreements over a few card choices.

As for my performance, I only had 2 losses on day 2, but I ended up drawing against a Japanese player at the end of the day. My deck was amazing, but I was not, making at least two blunders (not simply errors) and costing myself day two.Steve, I agree that your deck is in the same general vein, but I can find a list of mine dating back to 2006 that has the same basic set of cards in it. 4c thresh is nothing new - it's been a staple of the format for a long time. Still, I think the idea of "steal your opponents dudes" was the real winner for Brassy and Gabe. It appears to be the part your deck lacked.

Also, beatcha. :wink:

[Smmenen]

You are correct in your general assessment of where the countertop strategy was headed.

I took the same design branch as you did following Chapins list last year, but I'm surprised you never got to running the full set of Tops and Counterbalance. It was well established by the end of last years extended season that you wanted the full set, and even with the additional fixing in Brainstorm and Ponder you want the soft lock as quickly as possible against the majority of the field.

I was also running Clique, but no Predator. I even had Sower for awhile, but let the masses dissuade me from it in the end. Which is a reminder that forums like the Source are a great basis for establishing a gauntlet, but tend to get stuck in established patterns.

Looking back at your process, can you think of what inhibited you from seeing what LSV or Probasco saw in terms of design?

I will talk more about this in an upcoming article, but I took a totally different route. Rather than go for the creature stealing suite (Sower/Shackles) which is what Gabriel, LSV, and Brassman all used, my experience suggested that the Duress effects (Thoughtseize/Clique) were better. Hence, I ended up running 4 Thoughtseize and 2 Cliques.

I will answer the question in more detail next Monday, but the basic gist is that I felt that I was giving myself a better chance when my opponent is very good and my opponent is luckier. Thoughtseize and Clique are faster and more proactive and can help you win situations you otherwise can't win. They also take Sower/Shackles, so they can trump those cards earlier as well.

I think if I can point to one difference, it's probably because I was testing more against decks that are difficult for my deck: Enchantress, Goblins, and slower control decks, where I felt Thoughtsieze and Clique were just better.

This is also why I eschewed the 4 Counterbalance/4Top configuration, because I was assuming that everyone was prepared to beat them. I talk alot about them in this article, but the essence of my argument is that I don't think this deck should rely on them too much because prepared opponents will beat you. I view counterbalance/top not as an early lock, but as a mid-ganme source of card advantage that puts you over the top, and moves you beyond your opponent. Setting Counterbalance/Top up as an early game combo is awful against too many decks like Landstill to Goblins to Enchantress (Goblins will eat you alive). I tested 4/4 and my opponents that were smart were designing decks to beat it.


Steve, I agree that your deck is in the same general vein, but I can find a list of mine dating back to 2006 that has the same basic set of cards in it. 4c thresh is nothing new - it's been a staple of the format for a long time. Still, I think the idea of "steal your opponents dudes" was the real winner for Brassy and Gabe. It appears to be the part your deck lacked.

Also, beatcha. :wink:

You mean in standings?

4c thresh is nothing new. I even stole Chapin's decklist from Worlds 2007 to begin my work, but in January I started running Predator and then ran the combo of Clique and Predator that i felt was just the best combination in lieu of Geese. I think that the "steal your opponent's' dudes plan is predicated on assuming your opponents are worse/unluckier than you rather than better than you.

I will explore these questions in more detail in my article on Monday, as they are good questions (even if I am wrong).

[Anusien]

Can you post your thoughts on Vendilion Clique and Trygon Predator especially? I liked Predator a year ago and started to eschew it recently in favor of Shackles. I know PV said most of the time it was a generic flyer that got hit by StP. I really am enamored with V. Clique because of Flash and Flying, but I'd love to hear from someone who actually cast it.

[Smmenen]

Can you post your thoughts on Vendilion Clique and Trygon Predator especially? I liked Predator a year ago and started to eschew it recently in favor of Shackles. I know PV said most of the time it was a generic flyer that got hit by StP. I really am enamored with V. Clique because of Flash and Flying, but I'd love to hear from someone who actually cast it.

I believe my January tournament report discussed Predator in some depth. I also discussed Clique in this article, but I have an even longer discussion in my article that goes live on Monday.

[Smmenen]

I believe it's already posted by the name of "Baseruption". At least that's what I believe (I don't have premium, but if this articles good enough I might have to stop being such a scrooge with my savings)

The article is now free.

I re-read it and the analysis remains as insightful today as it did in March.

This is a complete primer on the deck I ran, with metagame predictions, full card explanations, and matchup analysis.

Let me know what you think.

[DrJones]

Thank you for pointing it out! After the reading, I see that you chose to run the best cards in the format, and the best deck for a random meta. I don't think decks that can win/lose against any deck are the best choice for tournaments with so many people as GP:Columbus, as you lose to statistics unless you have 3 byes or so.

So, the deck was good enough to win the tournament, but was not a safe bet to put you on Top 8.

I'm not the best one to give an opinion, though, as I rarely play sanctioned Tournaments because I got burnt of having to protect my bag from thieves.