[Deck] Canadian Thresh (a.k.a. RUG Tempo, Tempo Thresh)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DarkConfidant

Against TES and UBr storm decks, do you believe there is a rational for keeping in burn to cut those decks off from Ad Nauseam? I ask because in my experience (both playing Storm and RUG), burning out your opponent seems possible given the low life totals that can those decks run into when digging with Ad Nauseam.

---

If you read down a little further, I talk about this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Water_Wizard

The only time I bring in Surgical vs. non-graveyard decks is when I want to take my burn out vs. creatureless combo. Examples of the decks that I would do this against include High Tide, OmniTell, Sneak and Show, and possibly Storm (ANT/TES if I knew they were not running Xantid Swarm or Dark Confidant). The reason I will bring in Surgical is because your burn is worthless, other than a shot to the dome. This can help you close out games more quickly, especially after an Ad Nauseam or a Time Spiral or a Diminishing Returns (when they fill your hand with fresh Bolts and they are at low life). However, Surgical can also provide good information (both on their current hand and their sideboard configuration for game 3 or future matches), remove relevant cards from the game (aka Show and Tell, Burning Wish, Infernal Tutor, or High Tide), act as pseudo discard (assuming they have a card in their hand and their graveyard), . . .

---

A good Ad Nauseam player will stop when he/she knows he/she can combo off, and no lower. Bolts can, and have won games vs. Ad Naus. It depends on play or draw. Play, I'm more likely to leave in my Goyfs or Sylvan Library. Draw, I'm probably going to cut Library and some number of Goyfs. It also depends on if I am running Thought Scour. If I have 2 Though Scours in my build, I am more likely to rely upon Mongooses. If not, I may cut Mongooses for Goyfs. Depending upon how many cards I'm cutting I'm more likely to leave in burn.

My ideal post-deck contains 2-3 Bolts, unless I am expecting Xantid Swarm or Dark Confidant, in that case, I'm leaving more. How many cards are cut or added depends upon the specific build I'm running at the time and my specific sideboard, but I'm usually looking to bring in the full number of REB/PB I'm running plus any Spell Pierces or Envelops I may have in the board. If I have an extra slot, I may bring in 1 Surgical Extraction. The only way I would bring in more than 1 is if I knew my opponent was heavily dependent upon Past in Flames or Ill-Gotten Gains as a win condition.

Surgical is essentially free, which is a plus. I also think it has broader applications. For example, if your opponent Ad Nauses's down to 5, a Bolt is not going to win you the game, where a Surgical Extraction may. Another benefit is that off of Ad Nauseam, you know exactly what you opponent has in his or her hand, so you can Surgical selectively, perhaps exiling a win condition or needed mana accelerant.

Thanks water wizard... Sorry Sturzilla - was making false assumptions because of the "do you want to win" reply.

No worries.

Thoughts on a 1-of Life from the Loam in the sideboard? When the RUG mirror was more common, most decks were running 1 LftL in the side (some even ran it main for a while). When Miracles (and their 6 basics) and Omni-Tell kind of took over, the LftL was dropped for better efficiency with that slot. Now that BUG (with 4 Wastelands and all non-basics) is back, should we bring a 1-of LftL back to the sideboard?

This is what my sideboard looks like:
4 Submerge
1 Blue Elemental Blast
2 Red Elemental Blast
1 Ancient Grudge
1 Sulfuric Vortex
1 Life from the Loam
2 Rough // Tumble
3 Tormod's Crypt

My main is the base 18 lands, 12 creatures, 4 FoW, 4 Daze, 2 Spell Pierce, 2 Spell Snare, 4 Stifle, 4 Ponder, 4 Brainstorm, 1 Forked Bolt, 4 Lightning Bolt, 1 Sylvan Library that everyone else runs, give or take a few cards.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Water_Wizard

Before we waste anymore time discussing this Surgical in the mirror business, let's look at Sturtzilla's original comment:

[...]

He's not saying 'bring it in every game' or 'it's the stone-cold nuts.' He's saying "now and then" he will bring it in "on the off-chance" that he can use one of the "rather narrow applications." "There are more straightforward and impactful cards out there." As I understand, Sturtz plays in a smaller weekly tournament. When you are playing the same players week in and week out, it can be good to mix it up.

Let's just leave it at that.

---

Now take a look at my comments again and please point out where I accused him of saying anything like that or where I rule out the cards potential. Take your time. ;)

Wizard was referring to my comment Hellspawn.

Coming back to the "adapt to decay" discussion. Did anyone ever try Plaxmanta? Sounds like GU: "counter target swords/decay" put a 2/2 body into play. Compared to divert: Divert has applications in counter wars and vs. discard (not inquisition though), but when in comes to protecting delver Divert is pretty narrow. Paying "g" more for a spell pierce proof counterspell that attacks for 2 is fair. This 2 for 1 seems worth evaluating.

He quoted me too. :eyebrow:

Yesterday I've been running through CMC2 creatures and shortly stopped at Plaxmanta (as well as Grimoire Thief and some other narrow cards, all inferior to Goyf), but wasn't that convinced. It's like a living version of Mizzium skin, if you have green up. Not that exciting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by catmint

Wizard was referring to my comment Hellspawn.

Coming back to the "adapt to decay" discussion. Did anyone ever try Plaxmanta? Sounds like GU: "counter target swords/decay" put a 2/2 body into play. Compared to divert: Divert has applications in counter wars and vs. discard (not inquisition though), but when in comes to protecting delver Divert is pretty narrow. Paying "g" more for a spell pierce proof counterspell that attacks for 2 is fair. This 2 for 1 seems worth evaluating.

---

I will test this out tonight for my weekly legacy event. Last week we had 19 players but I played Cheerios. I took third 3rd :)
I've been having so much trouble with UW that I haven't been picking up the deck. I'm going to try it tonight. Plaxmanta seems like it could be a great tempo swing.

Of course not to replace Goyf. Maybe 1-2 in the sideboard... Yes "living version" means hit the face and "2 for 1". At worst a 2/2 flash increasing threat density. Mizzium Skin or Divert has a higher risk of doing nothing, wheras I feel a 2/2 flash does always something against the decks you bring him in and has the potential to win the game or at least make things significantly more favourable for you. Don't forget not answerable my Spell Pierce, which is counterspell #1 (after FoW of course).

[QUOTE=Mark Sun although I am down to 2 Tarmogoyf in my list now.[/QUOTE]
Care to share your list? I've been toying with the 4 Goyf slots. I'm running a Trygon Predator, Ooze, 2 Goyf currently. Not sure if that's right but in my local meta I need the main deck removal the predator offers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by catmint

Thanks water wizard... Sorry Sturzilla - was making false assumptions because of the "do you want to win" reply.

---

Hey no worries. I don't think that it is the nuts, but if you can manuever to one of a few different game states, it allows for plays that pretty much single-handedly win you the game. I know some pros have gone on the record saying that you should use it if you feel outclassed by an opponent in the mirror, but I think that is poor thinking. It is rarely dead and can be a blowout. Don't get me wrong, I would rather have my Submerges and REB/Pyroblasts but if I was going to cut another card, Surgical could (and sometimes does) find its way into my post boarded mirror match games.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Water_Wizard

Thoughts on a 1-of Life from the Loam in the sideboard?

---

I wasn't ever really that impressed with LftL when I had it as a one-of in my board. You rarely ever find it. You have to have two mana to cast it, which against some of the decks we would be bringing it in against, can be tough. Between Stifle and Wastelands you probably can just win these matchups anyway. Honestly I usually find my mana so tight that I don't what to pay two mana to get lands back from my graveyard. Additionally, Wastelocking an opponent just seems like it is win-more to me. Just kill them instead.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by catmint

Coming back to the "adapt to decay" discussion. Did anyone ever try Plaxmanta? Sounds like GU: "counter target swords/decay" put a 2/2 body into play.

---

At locals I don't really have much of a problem with Abrupt Decay at the moment. However this might not be bad tech for the mirror and any of the UW decks. As stated, it straight up counters any targeted removal. So we are spending a card to counter a card; that is already what this deck does. In addition we get a 2/2 beater. Sounds like it is worth trying to me. In the mirror the extra body can block non-threashed geese, unflipped delvers, and help in Goyf on goyf show-downs. Sounds like it could be worth a shot to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by catmint

Wizard was referring to my comment Hellspawn.

Coming back to the "adapt to decay" discussion. Did anyone ever try Plaxmanta? Sounds like GU: "counter target swords/decay" put a 2/2 body into play. Compared to divert: Divert has applications in counter wars and vs. discard (not inquisition though), but when in comes to protecting delver Divert is pretty narrow. Paying "g" more for a spell pierce proof counterspell that attacks for 2 is fair. This 2 for 1 seems worth evaluating.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by H3llsp4wn

He quoted me too. :eyebrow:

Yesterday I've been running through CMC2 creatures and shortly stopped at Plaxmanta (as well as Grimoire Thief and some other narrow cards, all inferior to Goyf), but wasn't that convinced. It's like a living version of Mizzium skin, if you have green up. Not that exciting.

---

Seems too narrow to need G1 up. It's nice in the right situation and could really swing games, but would probably be win-more. If BUG really becomes an issue, we could always run Compost. I ran one in Maverick with an E. Tutor sideboard. It either sucks up an Abrupt Decay or draws you a bunch of cards. Or, better yet, Stifle and Wasteland them and keep them off BG.

just a minor point, but why does this deck always seem to run 4 Tarn and 4 Rainforest as its fetches? it seems to me that a 2/2/2/2 split between Tarn/Rainforest/Delta/Strand would provide a little more resilience against Pithing Needle, Surgical Extraction, and so on, at no cost. the advantage would be very minor, but I can't see how it would possibly be a disadvantage

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by catmint

Coming back to the "adapt to decay" discussion. Did anyone ever try Plaxmanta? Sounds like GU: "counter target swords/decay" put a 2/2 body into play. Compared to divert: Divert has applications in counter wars and vs. discard (not inquisition though), but when in comes to protecting delver Divert is pretty narrow. Paying "g" more for a spell pierce proof counterspell that attacks for 2 is fair. This 2 for 1 seems worth evaluating.

---

I've been considering Reality Ripple to protect Nivmagus Elemental / Death's Shadow / Delver of Secrets in my U/B tempo deck. The cool thing with phasing, is that Nivmagus keeps its counters, and Delver stays flipped. You can phase out a creature in response to targeted removal, but it
also works against Terminus and Supreme Verdict.

It's also great against Batterskull. If you Reality Ripple the germ token, Batterskull will remain phased out until the game ends:

702.24k Phased-out tokens cease to exist as a state-based action. See rule 704.5d.
702.24f When a permanent phases out, any Auras, Equipment, or Fortifications attached to that permanent phase out at the same time. This alternate way of phasing out is known as phasing out "indirectly." An Aura, Equipment, or Fortification that phased out indirectly won't phase in by itself, but instead phases in along with the permanent it's attached to.


This works for any equipped token, such as a Lingering Souls token equipped with a Jitte :)

You can also use it to remove a blocker during an alpha strike :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Purple_Shrimp

just a minor point, but why does this deck always seem to run 4 Tarn and 4 Rainforest as its fetches? it seems to me that a 2/2/2/2 split between Tarn/Rainforest/Delta/Strand would provide a little more resilience against Pithing Needle, Surgical Extraction, and so on, at no cost. the advantage would be very minor, but I can't see how it would possibly be a disadvantage

---

I like playing T1 Flooded Strand, go. When my opponent thinks I'm on some kind of U/W Miracles / Blade Control deck, he won't play around Daze as much
:)

No one expects a Stifle out of Wooded Foothills either :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Purple_Shrimp

just a minor point, but why does this deck always seem to run 4 Tarn and 4 Rainforest as its fetches? it seems to me that a 2/2/2/2 split between Tarn/Rainforest/Delta/Strand would provide a little more resilience against Pithing Needle, Surgical Extraction, and so on, at no cost. the advantage would be very minor, but I can't see how it would possibly be a disadvantage

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ziveeman

No one expects a Stifle out of Wooded Foothills either :)

---

You are correct - the deck always should run a 2/2/2/2 split (except back when it was running Taiga or a basic Island - don't do this!). The only reason I've heard players say that they run the 4/4 is due to card availability - it's easier to get the newer fetches.

However, I always run a 2/2/2/1/1 split. 2 WF, 2 PD, 2 FS, 1 ST, 1 MR - might as well throw those Wooded Foothills in the mix!

I also consciously run Misties and Tarns in my other decks, like Omni-Tell, to make it look like RUG.

I like the Foothills/Strand split, actually. People are definitely more wary of a Tarn/Rainforest/Delta on turn 1. They see the former and they don't immediately put you on RUG. I've gotten to live the dream with Foothills into Stifle, and it's nice. A friend playing UWb Tempo got to do something similar with Marsh Flats, but that's another story...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HulkFindItThisWay

Care to share your list? I've been toying with the 4 Goyf slots. I'm running a Trygon Predator, Ooze, 2 Goyf currently. Not sure if that's right but in my local meta I need the main deck removal the predator offers.

---

I hate to say it, but I'm falling into the BUG camp as of now. I took Deathrite TA to my locals last night and left feeling pretty good. Not sure if I'm going to stick with RUG or not going forward. My last list that I planned to play at Baltimore but everyone bailed on me last minute:

4 Nimble Mongoose
4 Delver of Secrets
2 Tarmogoyf
1 Snapcaster Mage

4 Brainstorm
4 Ponder
4 Force of Will
4 Daze
4 Stifle
4 Spell Snare
4 Lightning Bolt
2 Chain Lightning
1 Dismember

4 Wooded Foothills
3 Flooded Strand
4 Tropical Island
3 Volcanic Island
4 Wasteland

SB:
3 Submerge
3 Spell Pierce
1 Envelop
1 Pyroblast
2 Red Elemental Blast
2 Sulfur Elemental
2 Rough//Tumble
1 Krosan Grip


Deck felt super good when I was tuning it. I went back to the basics instead of all the cutesy stuff that I had been playing. Major changes from my Gen Con list which I usually considered as my base when I tweaked for an upcoming tournament. This time, I just gutted it. Some notes on the list:

- It might just be personal preference, but I hate casting Tarmogoyf, for a couple of reasons. (1) Nimble Mongoose having Shroud shifts the equilibrium of spot removal to other things. While we can protect Delver early when both sides' resources are light, tapping out to play Tarmogoyf leaves us fairly exposed. That said... (2) I hate having to play this guy early. I find it very similar to last Standard where it was risky tapping out to play Geist on t3. Sure, you got your finisher, but you are also incredibly exposed. If you do tap out, you also turn off conditional things like Spell Snare, or Spell Pierce in my previous lists, which can be brutal. With only 18 lands, you can't afford to just hold it either. The great paradox. 2 seems like the correct number for my playstyle.

- I cut Spell Pierce for Spell Snare. The former is a great utility card but not as impressive as the latter has been for me. The format is shifting towards 2cc again and moving directly up to 4 a couple of weeks ago was definitely the correct read. It does force you to play tighter and prioritize your mana denial, but hey -- that's why we play this deck.

- I moved from Forked Bolt to Chain Lightning. And Fire//Ice to Dismember. Maverick is no longer as crazy popular as it has been, and there are more mirrors, Deathrite Shamans, and Merfolk running around. People also get smarter and realize that they shouldn't walk into a Forked Bolt as well. Besides Goblins, I rarely want to have the card anyways, so I felt comfortable cutting it. To answer Tarmogoyf in the mirror and other niche cards like Tombstalker (and Knight if people are still playing it), I cut the Fire//Ice for Dismemeber. I've always hated the card but I also realize necessity over preference. As a result, I brought Sulfur Elemental back into the sideboard to deal with Lingering Souls.

- The Snapcaster Mage replaced the Sylvan Library slot. I realized that although Sylvan Library is a house, if you want to rely on it to win (which I was not doing) versus relying on it to be cantrip-ish-slot-number-9 (which I was doing), you need more than the single copy I was running. Since I already put a non-blue card in Dismember in, I wanted another value card that was blue which I could play. Initially it was a Vendilion Clique, but as good as that card was sometimes I missed that ninth cantrip. So I settled on something with Flash that could rebuy.

- I went from a 8 Fetch, 6 Dual split to a 7 Fetch, 7 Dual split. I never really wanted the 19th Land (and I've tried a lot of stuff to make sure I getting value out of that land, including playing Cephalid Coliseum at some point) but I wanted more duals that I could use. This was a fairly elegant solution, and is actually pretty decent against the Mirror, since you have the extra dual and are exposing your fetchlands just a hair less.

- I cut Sylvan (previous logic above) and Life from the Loam (same logic as Library) and streamlined the board. Krosan Grip became necessary, but besides that, I simplified things a lot. And no, I'm still not playing GY hate. Contrary to what people may think I actually have an immense respect for GY based decks, enough that I believe the 1-2 slots I'm going to open up in the board wouldn't even be enough to swing those matchups. Hence, I'd rather board for something else.


That was lengthier than I wanted it to be, but... yeah.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark Sun

And no, I'm still not playing GY hate. Contrary to what people may think I actually have an immense respect for GY based decks, enough that I believe the 1-2 slots I'm going to open up in the board wouldn't even be enough to swing those matchups. Hence, I'd rather board for something else.

---

Mark, thanks for the solid analysis. Regarding the GY hate, I'm wondering if we can piggy-back off of Deathrite. If I were a mage reling upon the graveyard to win me games, I would probably be aware of the growth of Deathrite and second-guess my choice. Therefore, I think we are good removing graveyard hate.

Also, if you consider RiP is one of the best ways to beat RUG and BUG, I can only see the play of RiP rising.

Graveyard based decks just get caught in the cross-fire.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Water_Wizard

Mark, thanks for the solid analysis. Regarding the GY hate, I'm wondering if we can piggy-back off of Deathrite. If I were a mage reling upon the graveyard to win me games, I would probably be aware of the growth of Deathrite and second-guess my choice. Therefore, I think we are good removing graveyard hate.

Also, if you consider RiP is one of the best ways to beat RUG and BUG, I can only see the play of RiP rising.

Graveyard based decks just get caught in the cross-fire.

---

It's possible. Dredge did wind up winning its quarterfinals match against BUG at Baltimore, so it's not completely dead. That said, I'm a little disappointed because I was going to be a Budget Legacy article series with Manaless Dredge, and maindeck Rest in Peace definitely cramps my style in that department. It is fine logic though to cut our own GY hate, though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Water_Wizard

No worries.

Thoughts on a 1-of Life from the Loam in the sideboard? When the RUG mirror was more common, most decks were running 1 LftL in the side (some even ran it main for a while). When Miracles (and their 6 basics) and Omni-Tell kind of took over, the LftL was dropped for better efficiency with that slot. Now that BUG (with 4 Wastelands and all non-basics) is back, should we bring a 1-of LftL back to the sideboard?

This is what my sideboard looks like:
4 Submerge
1 Blue Elemental Blast
2 Red Elemental Blast
1 Ancient Grudge
1 Sulfuric Vortex
1 Life from the Loam
2 Rough // Tumble
3 Tormod's Crypt

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sturtzilla

I wasn't ever really that impressed with LftL when I had it as a one-of in my board. You rarely ever find it. You have to have two mana to cast it, which against some of the decks we would be bringing it in against, can be tough. Between Stifle and Wastelands you probably can just win these matchups anyway. Honestly I usually find my mana so tight that I don't what to pay two mana to get lands back from my graveyard. Additionally, Wastelocking an opponent just seems like it is win-more to me. Just kill them instead.

---

I play tested and came to the conclusion that Life from the Loam is not good in an environment with Deathrite Shaman.

They either eat your Wasteland or they eat your Life from the Loam, so it is not a good sideboard card in this meta.

I'm basically confirming what Sturtz said above.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SirTylerGalt

It's also great against Batterskull. If you Reality Ripple the germ token, Batterskull will remain phased out until the game ends:

702.24k Phased-out tokens cease to exist as a state-based action. See rule 704.5d.
702.24f When a permanent phases out, any Auras, Equipment, or Fortifications attached to that permanent phase out at the same time. This alternate way of phasing out is known as phasing out "indirectly." An Aura, Equipment, or Fortification that phased out indirectly won't phase in by itself, but instead phases in along with the permanent it's attached to.

---

How exactly does Reality Ripple exile a Batterskull for the rest of the game? Could you explain the mechanics, I'm not quite sure how that would work.