[Article]Slinging MUD: 2nd place at SCG Indy

[blarknob]

Here is my second place report from Indy with a description of the deck and my card choices:

http://www.quietspeculation.com/2011/02/slinging-mud-2nd-place-at-scg-indy/

[Patrick]

Congrats on your finish Michael! I was glad to see when I got home that you took 2nd.

[hyc8028]

Congrats on the finish!

[GGoober]

Nice read. Would the list work without Voltaic Keys? I know Key has good synergy with big beats and Monolith. It seems that you are bringing in Revoker quite often. Do you think cutting Keys for Revoker would work? Or do you prefer the explosiveness that Key gives you?

I'll be willing to sling this deck up for testing :) You didn't mention anything about the deck's good/bad matchups in your article, do you mind breaking down which matchups are favorable/unfavorable?

[munkie]

Sick finish. Sick Deck. ' Nuff said.

[blarknob]

I would not recommend cutting voltaic key. It is one of the big reasons the deck is so fast, grim monolith becomes quite a bit worse without key.

[Rico Suave]

I was sitting on Ancient Tomb, Great Furnace Voltaic Key, while he had Goyf in play. Though he had Thoughtsiezed away a Lodestone Golem earlier, I had a City of Traitors and a Sundering Titan in hand.

I was in a grim spot but luckily, my deck topdecked like a champion and I rip Grim Monolith. I play City, Monolith, tap it untap it with Key, make 8 mana and resolve Sundering Titan at three life. From there, I draw into Wurmcoil Engine and Revoker. I made a bit of a misplay, naming Jitte with Revoker instead of Pridemage, but it didn’t end up mattering because I was able to attack for the win.

I was watching the coverage of this.

When he Thoughtseized you he saw Lodestone Golem, Wurmcoil, and Sundering Titan. He chose to take the Golem and leave you with the Titan and the Wurmcoil. Then you played the Titan, wrecked his mana, and followed up with the Wurmcoil the turn after.

Anyway, good job on the tournament.

[SpikeyMikey]

I was the guy sitting on your left when that kid asked about Metal Worker. It was good for a laugh. Still think Forgemaster is a stroke of genius. I was surprised that you felt Brian's Junk and Taxes was a bad MU; when we were looking over your list and discussing strategies we felt the otherway around. J&T is slow out the gates, seeking incremental advantage and the MVP of the deck, Mom, is dead against you. The thought was that he'd have to shut down Metalworker and Grim Monolith immediately to have a chance, saving Plows for Welder and Worker to try and keep you off robots.

[ChiiMagic]

I'm pretty sure that if you had called a judge on your opponent fo saying "EE for 0," but then still paying 1 mana, the judge would have ruled that he announced the spell was for 0 so he'd be able to untap the land and resume play. Any time an X spell is cast and mana is tapped, it is assumed that all of the mana is going into the X spell unless it was otherwise stated, which in this case, it was.
Anyways, I really enjoyed reading your report since I couldn't find any written coverage of your deck on SCG other than the finals which wasn't very enjoyable seeing as you lost in unspectacular fashion. Your deck seems really cool and I'm glad you did well with it. After getting the list some big tourney experience, is there anything you think you would change for future tourneys?

[Broham]

Grats on your finish sir, and a very nice report there. I've been working with a MUDish deck ever since Metalworker was unbanned, so needless to say, this got me very excited.

Love your build, very hot.

[cdr]

I'm pretty sure that if you had called a judge on your opponent fo saying "EE for 0," but then still paying 1 mana, the judge would have ruled that he announced the spell was for 0 so he'd be able to untap the land and resume play. Any time an X spell is cast and mana is tapped, it is assumed that all of the mana is going into the X spell unless it was otherwise stated, which in this case, it was.

I'm not sure what you're saying here. What you said was what the tournament report seems to have said - and it was fine - so I don't get what the comment is for.

[ChiiMagic]

I'm not sure what you're saying here. What you said was what the tournament report seems to have said - and it was fine - so I don't get what the comment is for.

Oh, I'm sorry I misread the report. I stroked off for a moment and thought the Landstill player wanted to cast the EE for 0 and the poster was going to make him live with paying 1 mana for it thusly making the sunburst 1 when he wanted it to be 0.

[Rune]

Congrats. Cool to finally see someone come up with a good brown deck in Legacy. The Forgemaster tech is absurd.

[ivanpei]

This deck has major, major style points. I'm tempted to convert my dragon stompy into this deck, but I'm missing so many cards! Sigh, will wait for my bonus -_-. Hopefully this deck is this rocking in the next few months and not a one hit wonder. All the best and congrats on the amazing finish with the deck! Top props for the balls to play something totally rogue!

[Crysthorn]

Hopefully this deck is this rocking in the next few months and not a one hit wonder.
If this decks starts rocking the tournaments, people will simply start sideboarding Katakis, Hurkyls, Energy Fluxes and most importantly Null Rods. It's like Dredge: potentially very explosive and unfair, but just folds to dedicated hate.

[hi-val]

If you have questions about the deck, feel free to post here and Mike and I will compile some answers in next week's article!

[say no to scurvy]

I'm still kind of confused over the landstill's players intentions and what actually happened. What was he trying to kill and what went wrong? I assumed he wanted to kill the welders but it doesn't make sense to say x for 0.

[3eowulf]

I'm still kind of confused over the landstill's players intentions and what actually happened. What was he trying to kill and what went wrong? I assumed he wanted to kill the welders but it doesn't make sense to say x for 0.

The sunburst on EE takes in account mana spent for cost increases, so under a sphere effect, like Sphere of Resistance, declaring x=0 and paying 1 colored for the Sphere results in an EE with 1 counter. Unfortunately for him Lodestone increases only non-artifact spells cost.

[SpikeyMikey]

The sunburst on EE takes in account mana spent for cost increases, so under a sphere effect, like Sphere of Resistance, declaring x=0 and paying 1 colored for the Sphere results in an EE with 1 counter. Unfortunately for him Lodestone increases only non-artifact spells cost.

Yes but if he taps one and announces 0, then he has 1 mana in his pool.

[Sims]

Yes but if he taps one and announces 0, then he has 1 mana in his pool.

In this situation, yes, as Lodestone Golem only makes non-artifacts cost an additional one. If Lodestone did affect all spells similar to Sphere of Resistance, announcing X=0 and then paying 1 colored mana for the 'tax' effect off the Golem would net an EE with 1 charge counter... I'm guessing this was his intention so he could leave up as much mana as possible, but he confused Golem's effect.

So net result- he misplayed his way into EE with zero counters and 1 mana in his pool.

[cdr]

I'm not 100% sure, since it gets into one of those unwritten corners of the rules, but I'm about 90% sure that he should've had to untap his land. The rest of what's been posted about sunburst etc is accurate. Announcement of X is one of the first things you do when casting a spell, and calculation of cost increases and payment the last thing.

[Sims]

I'm not 100% sure, since it gets into one of those unwritten corners of the rules, but I'm about 90% sure that he should've had to untap his land. The rest of what's been posted about sunburst etc is accurate.

Just for clarification, would untapping the land be due to an illegal action? Attempting to pay a cost that doesn't exist in the game state?

[cdr]

There's two arguments you can make. The first is that adding a non-existant cost was a game rule violation, and the game should be backed up to the point that happened.

The second, and the one that I'm not sure about, is that the rules only allow you to add mana while resolving a spell if "the total cost includes a mana payment". I'm not 100% sure, but I don't think 0 counts as a mana payment - therefore no activating lands.

[Rico Suave]

I'm still kind of confused over the landstill's players intentions and what actually happened. What was he trying to kill and what went wrong? I assumed he wanted to kill the welders but it doesn't make sense to say x for 0.

He wanted to kill the Welder before it untapped.

[Sims]

There's two arguments you can make. The first is that adding a non-existant cost was a game rule violation, and the game should be backed up to the point that happened.

The second, and the one that I'm not sure about, is that the rules only allow you to add mana while resolving a spell if "the total cost includes a mana payment". I'm not 100% sure, but I don't think 0 counts as a mana payment - therefore no activating lands.

Gotcha. Thanks for the info... any chance to learn something I didn't know about the rules before is a bonus to me.

[Patrick]

I am the Landstill player in question. I remember this quite clearly, as this was my second loss in the tournament and put me out of top 8 contention.

Here is what happened:

There is a Goblin Welder with Lightning Greaves on it welding Sundering Titan in and out, which is eating my lands and going to stop me from paying for Peacekeeper in my upkeep, which Micheal cannot beat. I had been a little sloppy with my spells under Lodestone Golem all match, due to tiredness and not usually playing against Lodestone Golems. I know tricks with EE involving dodging Counterbalance, and dealing with extra mana required by Trinisphere. My auto-pilot made a mistake and I announced the spell for zero, then tapped my Island and put a charge counter on the Explosives. I tap two more lands and sacrifice my EE, Micheal grabs his Welder and then reminds me that the Explosives did not cost an extra mana. My pause was mostly to reflect on my mistake and figure out a new way to deal with this Welder. I untapped the Island, sacrificed the Explosives anyway and we shortly went to game 3.

I ended up making Top 16, which I was fine with. I congratulated Micheal on his top 8 finish, told him his deck was not good, and started the drive home.

The comment I made about pile shuffling is a comment I make to most of my opponents, regardless of the deck I am playing. Sorting your deck into little piles one card at a time does nothing but waste time. It cannot mathematically shuffle your deck any "more randomly" because random is random. If you are shuffling your deck correctly you should have absolutely no idea of the configuration of the cards, including weather or not there are mana clumps in your deck. If you are shuffling your deck in a way that ensures you don't have mana clumps you are cheating.

While we did have a few confrontational moments in the match I enjoyed playing against Micheal a great deal. He was a good sport, and I wish more players adopted his attitude towards the game. Also, I have since learned that he invented Iggy-Pop. I would have hugged him had I known that.

[Rock Lee]

The comment I made about pile shuffling is a comment I make to most of my opponents, regardless of the deck I am playing. Sorting your deck into little piles one card at a time does nothing but waste time. It cannot mathematically shuffle your deck any "more randomly" because random is random. If you are shuffling your deck correctly you should have absolutely no idea of the configuration of the cards, including weather or not there are mana clumps in your deck. If you are shuffling your deck in a way that ensures you don't have mana clumps you are cheating.

A fully randomized deck does not receive any more benefit from a pile shuffle than a riffle shuffle. However, most decks are not fully randomized, especially after a game of magic, where most people scoop up their lands and graveyards, which are often sorted by type or at least role, and mash them in their deck. I do 3 pile shuffles, and then 3-4 riffles before presenting after every game, I only riffle after searches. You have 3 minutes to shuffle, and I take advantage of every moment I can to fully randomize my deck. Do not do so is the same as asking to start the game at 15 life, you're sacrificing commodities available to you. Granted time is also a commodity so this isn't always the case, but to say that pile shuffling is always a waste is simply ignorant of statistics.

[easyrider]

Pile shuffling does not randomize your deck in any way. You should still do it before the first game of every round, though. It lets you confirm that you still have the correct number of cards in your deck (unless you do this in between rounds). It may sound stupid, but maybe you dropped a card or left one on a table, etc, etc. You should also pile shuffle your opponent's deck for the same reason. Free game wins are always nice. Afterwords, just riffling should be more than sufficient for any starting configuration for a deck. The accepted norm for the number of perfect riffles required for randomization is seven. I don't know anyone that actually splits their deck into two 30 card piles and then does a perfect shuffle, so you just need to increase the number of shuffles.

[vercadium]

Pile shuffling does not randomize your deck in any way.

That is quite simply the most idiotic thing I've read all day. I have nothing else to add to refute this that Rock Lee has not already mentioned 2 posts above.

I agree however that an important benefit of pile shuffling is helping to determine if there has been a change of card numbers within the deck.

[Rock Lee]

Pile shuffling does not randomize your deck in any way.

You're confused. pile shuffling separates clumps. Normally you shouldn't know any clumps in a randomized deck. Picking up your sorted "by role and type" cards at the end of a game results in such clumps. A riffle would only yield a small division of those clumps, a pile shuffle starts you out with a more homogenous split, after which you can then riffle to your hearts content for a more desired randomization. I thought I explained that in my post.

[Hopo]

That is quite simply the most idiotic thing I've read all day. I have nothing else to add to refute this that Rock Lee has not already mentioned 2 posts above.

I agree however that an important benefit of pile shuffling is helping to determine if there has been a change of card numbers within the deck.

Pile shuffle does not put the cards in random order. You'd better upate your views on that. It isn't even an accepted way to shuffle in sanctioned tournaments. You always need some other form of shuffling besides that.

[vercadium]

Pile shuffle does not put the cards in random order. You'd better upate your views on that. It isn't even an accepted way to shuffle in sanctioned tournaments. You always need some other form of shuffling besides that.

You misunderstand me. I never said they would be in random order. I was merely replying to a comment indicating it does not randomise at all which is false. Pile shuffling solely is a poor form of randomisation mainly because people do each 'circuit' in a clockwork fashion (or some other repeated pattern) - adding cards to a pile in a different order each time increases the level of randomisation (note that I do not say that this makes it random).

Is it good enough to use on it's own? No. But I don't recall ever stating that.

It is a great way to start your shuffling as it helps separate and distribute your cards and identify any possible change in deck size.

[Patrick]

The people who are all pro-pile shuffling keep using the word random wrong. You can't have a "good" or "bad" form of randomization. Either you make your deck random or you don't. Seperating clumps of like cards knowingly is not random, because you still have an idea of how the cards in your deck are divided, weather it's evenly spread or unevenly spread.

"It is a great way to start your shuffling as it helps separate and distribute your cards and identify any possible change in deck size."

If you are seperating and distributing your cards knowingly while shuffling you are cheating. You are supposed to have absolutely no idea how your cards are distributed. That's why you shuffle your deck.

As for the people who advocate pile shuffling as a form of counting your deck, you can count a sixty card deck in about 10 seconds, or pile shuffle it in 30. If you want to know how many cards are in a deck just count them.

[bruizar]

Riffle shuffling is not only a good way to randomize a deck, it's also a good way to get punched in the face by me. Stupid standard players need to respect 16 year old card board before they pick up legacy.

[sclabman]

If you don't like pile shuffling, don't do it. I take my allotted time for shuffling and during that time I can do whatever the hell I want with my cards as long as they're randomized by the end of it. Don't like it, don't do it. Go cry to a judge.

[kkoie]

If I am not mistaken, the official rules does not state what method of shuffling should be used, only that the deck be resonably randomized. So with that point in mind, I can understand a player possibly calling a judge if their opponent used only pile shuffling to shuffle their deck. But if that individual used multiple techniques, that include, but are not limited too, pile shuffling, then the individual is fine.

Granted their opponent is free to call a judge and question their opponents deck, but in the end the rules state the judge evaluates whether or not the deck has been effectively randomized, not if they used an appropriate shuffling method.

[Arsenal]

Riffle shuffling is not only a good way to randomize a deck, it's also a good way to get punched in the face by me. Stupid standard players need to respect 16 year old card board before they pick up legacy.

Yes, I too dislike when people riffle shuffle my deck. I've even asked my opponent to not riffle shuffle my deck, but they do it anyway; my cards get warped due to this nonsense. Do a side-shuffle, pile-shuffle, etc. Just stop riffle shuffling my cards.

EDIT: I suppose this is going off on a tangent, but I simply do not like it when others touch my cards. Like when I Fateseal with Jace 2.0, I'll always ask my opponent to show me the top card of his library as opposed to me reaching over and grabbing the card off his deck. I know that this seems trivial, but I try to keep my physical contact with my opponent's cards to a minimum, and I hope that others would do the same for me. I actually had a card bent (like, there was an actual crease in the middle of the card) from my opponent riffle shuffling, and his hand slipped, causing the card to get caught and bent in an unnatural manner. It wasn't an expensive card, but it just illustrated why I dislike riffle shuffling.

[kkoie]

If I asked my opponent not to riffle shuffle my deck and they did so anyway, I'd call a judge over.

[conboy31]

If someone can pile shuffle as fast as Saitou, I don't have a problem with it. But sometimes I get irked when a player slowly pile shuffles their deck and I count to myself what I accomplish in the meantime: 1 pile shuffle vs. mash, mash, mash, overhead, mash, overhead, mash, mash, mash, mash, overhead, mash, mash.

[firstshot]

One real good reason to do a pile shuffle somepoint before you present is to make sure you deck equals 60 cards. Pileshuffling has saved me from presenting a deck that had 59 or 61 because I failed desideboard or sideboarded to many.

[Patrick]

One real good reason to do a pile shuffle somepoint before you present is to make sure you deck equals 60 cards. Pileshuffling has saved me from presenting a deck that had 59 or 61 because I failed desideboard or sideboarded to many.

This is easily remedied by counting your sideboard before you present your deck to your opponent. If your sideboard doesn't equal 15 cards something is wrong.

[firstshot]

This is easily remedied by counting your sideboard before you present your deck to your opponent. If your sideboard doesn't equal 15 cards something is wrong.

And sometimes you didn't put a Swords creature back in your deck so you have 15 in your side but 59 in your main. Or in STD you spreading sea's someone and didn't get it back. Counting your SB isn't going to fix that problem

[Namida]

Patrick, how do you shuffle?

In the tournament rules, randomization is defined as bringing the deck to a state where no player can have any information regarding the order or position of cards in any portion of the deck. I have found that I am incapable of performing this action with any other type of shuffle other than a pile shuffle. No other shuffle that I have tried has caused me to feel as though I have no information about any sequence that my deck was in prior to my shuffle, while also not damaging my cards or sending them all over the table. Riffle shuffles cause me to fold my cards into neat little V's that are not neat when it comes to the value of my cards, and mash shuffles do not randomize my deck as much as they seem to split my sleeves when I do them seriously. For me, a pile shuffle sufficiently randomizes my cards, and after they become sufficiently randomized I can do one of the aforementioned mash shuffles lightly, given that pile shuffling alone is not accepted under the tournament rules. At this point, I am doing the mash shuffle for show, because I am incapable of doing such a shuffle in a way that would change the order of the cards in any meaningful way to a deck that was not previously made sufficiently random.

Since you seem to dislike pile shuffling, what you would suggest someone does to randomize their deck in this situation?

[warallthetimne]

why has this thread turned into a discussion about shuffling?

[Patrick]

Here is Mike Flores explaining about pile shuffling and it's applications towards cheating:

http://fivewithflores.com/tag/cheating/

I wrote a long post talking about a lot of personal experiences that got lost because I took to long to post and had to re-log in. Here are the basics:

I have seen my friends lose matches and stop having fun at tournaments because they let their opponent get away with some shady behavior and win because of it.

The biggest mistake players make is assuming their opponents aren't cheaters when they are forced to make that judgment.

The arguments for pile shuffling are:

I can shuffle my deck however I want.
Pile shuffling lets my count mine/my opponents deck.
Riffle shuffling damages cards.

1. Until the DCI disallows pile shuffling this is true. I feel that the potential pile shuffling has for cheating outweighs any benefits it has.
2. It took me 21.7 seconds to count my 60 card deck, and 34.1 seconds to pile shuffle it in six ten card piles and then put it back together (without shuffling the individual piles together, which people often do). This time can shave minutes off the clock, and nobody here should be a stranger to how many games are won in extra turns, or how many could have been won if their had been an extra minute on the clock.
3. Riffle shuffling does damage cards. However, a slide shuffle is functionally the same as a riffle shuffle and does not damage cards. This is how I shuffle mine and my opponents cards.


Here is how I suggest anybody concerned with the number of cards in the decks shuffle up before games:

Unbox your deck, count your sideboard and make sure only sideboard cards are in it.

Cut you deck in half, and slide one half into the other. Do this 4 times.

Grab about the bottom 50 cards of your deck. Take the large stack and throw several small stacks onto what was the top of your deck. This is hard to explain, but you should recognize this form of shuffling. Do this 3-4 times.

Do 4-5 more slide shuffles.

I cut my deck once, then present it to my opponent.

I repeat this same process with my opponents deck, wish them good luck, and draw my 7.


I have been doing this since the GPT's for Columbus and I have not since been concerned my opponent cheated with his shuffling or that my deck was poorly shuffled. I still mulligan, and my opponents still blow me out, but I am 100% sure that this is the variance of Magic and not because of library manipulation.

My arguments against pile shuffling are based on potential for cheating. These cheats are library manipulation and clock manipulation. Pile shuffling has no benefits that cannot be enjoyed in other, more time effective ways.

[Patrick]

Patrick, how do you shuffle?

In the tournament rules, randomization is defined as bringing the deck to a state where no player can have any information regarding the order or position of cards in any portion of the deck. I have found that I am incapable of performing this action with any other type of shuffle other than a pile shuffle. No other shuffle that I have tried has caused me to feel as though I have no information about any sequence that my deck was in prior to my shuffle, while also not damaging my cards or sending them all over the table. Riffle shuffles cause me to fold my cards into neat little V's that are not neat when it comes to the value of my cards, and mash shuffles do not randomize my deck as much as they seem to split my sleeves when I do them seriously. For me, a pile shuffle sufficiently randomizes my cards, and after they become sufficiently randomized I can do one of the aforementioned mash shuffles lightly, given that pile shuffling alone is not accepted under the tournament rules. At this point, I am doing the mash shuffle for show, because I am incapable of doing such a shuffle in a way that would change the order of the cards in any meaningful way to a deck that was not previously made sufficiently random.

Since you seem to dislike pile shuffling, what you would suggest someone does to randomize their deck in this situation?

I understand your dislike of riffle shuffling, and with side shuffling splitting sleeves. Investing in durable sleeves will decrease the number of sleeves your break during a tournament. I also recommend shuffling as carefully as you can. There is no reason to mash cards together during a slide shuffle. If you do this with as little pressure as possible you should not split any sleeves that weren't split already.

I look forward to your reply.

[Neuad]

Why bother trying Pat.

It's like arguing with Ben, these people are the best in the world at what they do.

[Magicsk8ngenius]

I wanted to add my 2 cents here as I am an advocate of pile shuffling.

It doesn't really randomize your deck. It does seperate land clumps, and yes you can call this cheating. If you do other sorts of shuffling afterwards, the more you do, the less you can call it cheating/deck manipulation.

It certainly is time intensive and does take up completely unecessary amounts of time. You have 3 minutes to shuffle and present your deck, I will make the most of these 3 minutes unless I am the sap playing the slow deck. If I was playing a deck that I know may go to time, I'd probably skip the pile and try to get the match going. Against an opponent that you know is playing a slow deck this can start to be considered Saito-esque cheating. Saito is cool.



p.s. I can't believe you're wasting your time here repeating yourself anyways Pat, Neuad is right. If you can smelllllll-l-l-l-l-la what the Rock IS cooking!

[FieryBalrog]

It's easy to pile shuffle in a way that helps randomize your deck. For example I randomly distribute the cards among piles, and then I mash and riffle the piles together when combining them. This is a lot more thorough than just mashing and cutting. Simply mashing and cutting will leave many existing sequences of cards intact, especially pairs.

Since when I pile shuffle I have no idea which card is going where, it's ludicrous to pretend it isn't randomizing the deck. Only if I know the exact existing sequence of cards, and then follow them all as I randomly distribute among piles, will I have that information. What pile shuffling does is greatly break up existing clumps of cards, thus lessening your information about the deck's order. (usually you will have some idea of what cards are clumped together, but not necessarily where those clumps are). Of course you should mash and riffle afterwards to help things along.


It does seperate land clumps, and yes you can call this cheating.

Knowing that your lands are in clumps gives you significant information that you shouldn't have. Shuffling SHOULD break up existing clumps, and possibly create new clumps in the process.