[Deck] ANT (Ad Nauseam Tendrils)

Saito plays a lot of storm. He seems to have moved on from TES and something like TK's list (he's ran both) for more tranditional ANT. Check results for the ancient memory convention for more details (he lives in top8).

Hydroblast was considered in the FT thread as ananswer to a strong dragonstompy/moon/pillar meta. Those don't exist anymore in the US, but I wouldn't rule out either a good metagame decision of saito's combined skill with legacy and as a magic player to just not need the slot. Without a wishboard, you can probably get by on about 6 sideboard slots anyeay for 95% of matchups.

Also, winning one tournament doesn't mean the list is final or decisive. Piloted by a pro, even a known legacy competent pro like saito, doesn't make a list final or decisive. Statisticss versus a suspected metagame is the only the that gives you this and even that isn't good if you don't forsee the metagame well. The issue of chant vs duress vs pyroblast vs shusher vs bees vs pact isn't something that you can say 100%, 80%, or even 50% of the time will be correct for a legacy odyssey we call swiss+top8. At some point it comes down to matchups and skill at using what you have to create an advantage and get the W.

But saito does not run doomsday meditate pack. Is there any real advantage on packing it??

Besides, he runs DConfidant in side. In what cases its useful?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by emidln

Saito plays a lot of storm. He seems to have moved on from TES and something like TK's list (he's ran both) for more tranditional ANT. Check results for the ancient memory convention for more details (he lives in top8).

---

The dude you're referring to is Yuu SaitoU, who is a lvl2 japanese judge. Tomoharu Saito (or Saitou) is the well-known professional player.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GoldenCid

But saito does not run doomsday meditate pack. Is there any real advantage on packing it??

Besides, he runs DConfidant in side. In what cases its useful?

---

The cost of adding DD/Meditate to your list is rather small, but it can improve your blue matchups. Often, you won't be able to use IGG in those matches, because they have counterspells in their GY, so you're left with only 1 (or 2, depending on the list) AdN's to generate storm. DD gives you another engine, and allows you to play through hate where IGG/AdN would fail you.

Confidant was long played as a sideboardcard against pure control decks, but has fallen out of favor. Xantid Swarm is just so much better imho.

Grtz

Did you guys test the non-W lists against Merfolk? 'Cause I cannot see that list winning the matchup, where Chant is.

I am by no means a good ANT player - in fact I have never played a game with it or against it.. Jesus talking about nailing my own coffin.. With that being said here goes:

With the discard package (without Chant) I would think that you can still go off with Ill-Gotten Gains - you simply return your discard and use it again? Other than that whats the problem of "only" using AN to go off? He runs two, so its easier to find..

I actually imagine Dark Confidant and the extra Tendrils comes in against Threshold and other aggro-control decks (merfolk), perhaps boarding some of the combo out - mind you that with all the card advantage you can easily go off without AN or IGG, and its not like you are under a heavy clock - you have time to sculp a perfect hand, get Threshold and search for Tendrils..

The City of Traitors seems good cause a hand of City, mana-artifact, AN and dark ritual is all you need to go off right? I guess it makes mulliganing with the deck a bit forgiving.. It adds a bit of resillience against Daze too I guess.

Regarding Xantid Swarm I have heard that many players disagree how good it is.. Cant remember the arguments though :) Plz enlighten me

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Piceli89

"the obvious thing that a good combo player should notice with this lists, i.e. the lack of Chants really do hurt against decks playing Top to hide counterspells or multiple counters ala Tempo Threshold. Xantid would be a in-color, recursive Chant effect. I bet every player with a minimum of experience in the deck would have got it."

"He could have taken off those Dark Confidants, which are not that great in a combo sideboard."

"When you'll get sullfucked by some decks because of the weakness of the deck, maybe you'll think again about it."

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bahamuth

I know for a fact that both mainboard and sideboard of that list are bad and it doesn't mean anything that the pilot is a pro or that the list won a tournament.

---

Not I am blindly obeying pros, you are blindly flaming.

That is just concentrated stupidity, honestly. Pointless flaming at Pros just because they are Pros. You look at a list made by a Pro that is not the standard Storm list and all you manage to say "oh look at him, he is horrible because he doesn't play the standard list." "This is not standard and wrong and this too and look at this, not standard and wrong and bad.". Quote me out of context and ignore the rest of my post if you like but that is what you are essentially doing. You have fixed opinions about how ANT should look, and how an ANT SB should look, and completely dismiss that these changes were made by a great player AND that this great player has proven that the deck works in a big tournament (and has beaten Canadian with Vendillion Cliques in the Finals btw.).

What is it? Tell me. Why does he not play the standard list? Do you really think he is too stupid to copy paste lists from recent tournaments if he wasn't interested in the format? Doesn't it come to your mind that he (or maybe his teammate and if so he is certainly a good Japanese Legacy and not a random scrub) have thought about this and that they had their reasons? Maybe he weighed mana consistency and speed higher than Chant effects. Maybe he did not want to get his Xantid Swarms StoPed and Bolted every time. So Saito made diviations to a deck, then went to a big tournament, won that tournament and you still claim that it is just a bad list by someone who does not know the format. That is just so incredibly stupid, I don't get it.

I really like dark confidant postside. I think that although the probability of revealing a "dangerous card" is low (AN, IGG or ToA) i believe that we have to go off via DD or IGG instead of AN.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lillelassie

I am by no means a good ANT player - in fact I have never played a game with it or against it.. Jesus talking about nailing my own coffin.. With that being said here goes:

With the discard package (without Chant) I would think that you can still go off with Ill-Gotten Gains - you simply return your discard and use it again? Other than that whats the problem of "only" using AN to go off? He runs two, so its easier to find..

I actually imagine Dark Confidant and the extra Tendrils comes in against Threshold and other aggro-control decks (merfolk), perhaps boarding some of the combo out - mind you that with all the card advantage you can easily go off without AN or IGG, and its not like you are under a heavy clock - you have time to sculp a perfect hand, get Threshold and search for Tendrils..

The City of Traitors seems good cause a hand of City, mana-artifact, AN and dark ritual is all you need to go off right? I guess it makes mulliganing with the deck a bit forgiving.. It adds a bit of resillience against Daze too I guess.

Regarding Xantid Swarm I have heard that many players disagree how good it is.. Cant remember the arguments though :) Plz enlighten me

---

@IGG

Most of the time you will need all three cards you get back to combo off, or you won't have extra mana to cast a Duress. Also, what if they get back more than one counterspell?

@AdN

Running two also means you are more liable to flip one over while going off with Ad Nauseam, costing you a hefty 5 life. The deck runs enough tutoring power that you only need one to consistently go off. Only variants without the DD package should ever consider running more than one.

@Dark Confidant

He's alright. I don't think he gets the credit he deserves, but then again there are too many people on both ends of the spectrum - he definitely isn't the amazing creature others are claiming he is. In my testing, Xantid Swarm has proven to be a much larger threat against U-based decks.

@City of Traitors

Only if you're going balls to the wall. I think Crystal Vein is better if you're going to do that.

@Xantid Swarm

They only disagree because Carpet of Flowers might be better in more matchups, as Swarm can still get burnt out against TT and other aggro-control matchups. If you resolve one against Merfolk, you are more than most likely going to win.

@Saitou's List

Everyone just relax. That list looks just like any other standard ANT list. 6 hand disruption spells, 2 Tops over Ponder #3-4, and a green splash post-board for the CB matchup. He runs City of Traitors instead of Crystal Vein. I don't get what all the fuss is about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tao

Not I am blindly obeying pros, you are blindly flaming.

That is just concentrated stupidity, honestly. Pointless flaming at Pros just because they are Pros. You look at a list made by a Pro that is not the standard Storm list and all you manage to say "oh look at him, he is horrible because he doesn't play the standard list." "This is not standard and wrong and this too and look at this, not standard and wrong and bad.". Quote me out of context and ignore the rest of my post if you like but that is what you are essentially doing. You have fixed opinions about how ANT should look, and how an ANT SB should look, and completely dismiss that these changes were made by a great player AND that this great player has proven that the deck works in a big tournament (and has beaten Canadian with Vendillion Cliques in the Finals btw.).

What is it? Tell me. Why does he not play the standard list? Do you really think he is too stupid to copy paste lists from recent tournaments if he wasn't interested in the format? Doesn't it come to your mind that he (or maybe his teammate and if so he is certainly a good Japanese Legacy and not a random scrub) have thought about this and that they had their reasons? Maybe he weighed mana consistency and speed higher than Chant effects. Maybe he did not want to get his Xantid Swarms StoPed and Bolted every time. So Saito made diviations to a deck, then went to a big tournament, won that tournament and you still claim that it is just a bad list by someone who does not know the format. That is just so incredibly stupid, I don't get it.

---

Not to be an asshole, but you're telling me to quote your posts out of context and that's the exact thing you just did above with my previous post.
I'm not saying things without a reason. Tell me, did you ever play ANT? Did you ever got fucked because the other hid a spell on the top with SDT? Did you ever played against stuff like Spellstutter Sprite or Cursecatcher which you can't take with Duresses? Did you ever Duress the opponent finding Snares and Stifles and not being able to go around all of them?
Did you ever realize how Thoughtseize is bad paired with 2 Ad Nauseams?

You are convinced by the fact that he is Saitou and he won the tournament, so his list is pretty good. This is the real fact. If he would have been a normal player, you would have despised his list, i bet it.
In my last post I also said that his list isn't bad at all, but it has some visible weaknesses against Matchups that matter. I'm not trying to bring it on the standard list, which FYI I don't consider to be the ultimate ANT. But the fact that the list with Chants puts up way more results than the ones without discard (go on Deckcheck) to me is slightly more significative than the fact that the pilot of this tournament was Saitou.

And also, don't you think that he may have not met any blue-based deck during the Swiss, or have met some with light disruption? As ElfAscetic said, try this list against Merfolk and you'll play in a position of notable disadvantage. In judging the deck, I always refer myself to a general situation, in referrement to the Tiers1 and the most difficult MUs.
But.. may have that list been perfect for that meta? Perhaps. He beated Canadian Threshold in the finals? Ok, I'd like to know how things have gone, because g2 and g3 if the Thresh player brings in Spell Pierces, ANT without Chants is in a bad shape.
Could this list perform in a general metagame? I don't think so.

And what does it mean that he has won against Tempo Threshold? Is it one game enough to acknowledge the list as a good one? There's always the possibility that the ultra-favourite for winning deck loses to the crappy one, like Elves winning on Ichorid and such. It's a game of luck after all. But if we base on a "typical" match, I think you can't not agree that Chants are more strong against Tempo decks, and , in general , against multi-counter blue decks, which are ANT's real Achille's heel for definition (with Counterbalance).
Swarms burned or STPed? While I can agree with Bolt or Fire/ice, who keeps a card that's basically useless, because it can't evn pitch to FoW? It's also difficult to foresee that an ANT will bring in Swarms g2 and g3, if one does not see green. While Confidant is a very probable move from the combo player.
And doesn't Confidant die out of the same things Xantid would? But the bonus of Dark Confidant is that it costs 2, making AdN worse; and it also goes under Spell Snare, quite played by Blue decks.
I would like to make you see that I'm reasoning using strategical logics, not talking for rage.

If he'll put on steady results, or this list will begin to be played, I promise I'll eat my words and respect that list. But holy fuck, please STOP saying that I'm bashing him for the fact that he's a Pro without reason, because you haven't still understood that what I'm bashing is the list and not the person. And about 4 people told this thing after me, too.

It's useless to discuss. You are set up on the list being piloted by Saitou and so being good, while I'm focused on the list lacking good protection for blue matchups. Better to stay with our respective beliefs and not to spam the topic anymore.

By the way, why does he play City of Traitors? Colorless mana isn't good for the deck, besides paying for SDT T1 and being able to actiavte it immediately.

I mean, it dies to our own lands, can't be fetched and dies to Wasteland, just like a Dual which can be fetched and with which we can play our spells which actually cost quite a bit of colored mana.

The 2 colorless mana it gives is a big thing to get to 3BB. It most likely is played as the laast land you drop before you go off. Think of it as a Petal for 2 colorless.

That said, I think Crystal Vein would be a better choice if you want such an effect.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nidd

By the way, why does he play City of Traitors? Colorless mana isn't good for the deck, besides paying for SDT T1 and being able to actiavte it immediately.

I mean, it dies to our own lands, can't be fetched and dies to Wasteland, just like a Dual which can be fetched and with which we can play our spells which actually cost quite a bit of colored mana.

---

I personally dislike CoT, but i think that i has a well purpose to be in.

And by the way...is there place for both Xantind or Orim's chant and Confidant in side??
My question on OC is considering other storm combos.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Piceli89

I would remember that there's a possibility that Pro players have their lists borrowed by other friends who happen to be deckbuilders, and I think this is the case sine Saitou probably doesn't know Legacy as well as he knows Standard or Extended.
And even if he was, I would still trust more people like the expert ones on this thread, who test costantly all the possible configurations, pro-cons, consequences, bad MUs balancing-power of the cards they choose. Emidln, Bahamuth, Citanul, PF and others play Storm Combo from much, much time, more than the 1-time quickie Saitou probably had with this deck. And all of them won tournaments, despites not doing it for work.

So please stop with that trolling argument.

---

And how the hell do you know anything about Saito and his experience in Legacy?

Saito is a better deck builder than anybody in this entire forum, let alone just this thread. To imply that Saito didn't test the deck or format much is simply ignorant.

Some points:

Being a good player does not mean being a good deck builder.

Being a good deck builder does not mean matching a collective hundreads of heads strong.

Good players can win tournaments with subpar lists.

---

With that said, i'm not skilled enough by far to judge whether Saito's list is the best direction for the deck or not; but the arguments against it apparently overwhelms the arguments for it (since the only argument for it is that Saito piloted it, Finkel Burn-syndrome anyone?).

The problem is the metagame.

There is no one single build of AdN that's definite, or good on any metagame. I play DDANT with 4 Chants and 4 Duress, it gives me a weaker and slower deck when compared to straight ADN decks but I feel like I have decent a shot against most decks. Chants are good against Stifle and Spell Snare and Duress is good against deck with few counters or permanent based disruption. On the SB I use Xantid Swarms, Krosan Grips and some assorted amount of bounce spells. My metagame is filled with Merfolk, so Xantid Swarm is the best hate around. I chose to build a more generic version with DD and Chant/Duress split because my metagame is somewhat random and that allows me to play around a lot of things.

In a metagame with decks that pack few counterspells and a lot of Stax/Dragon Stompy a deck with only discard spell could be ok, the added speed granted by City of Traitors complements that.

In my opinion, we should stray away from discussing whole decklists and start discussing single cards. The reason why to play a card instead of another, what to play in certain metagames, etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alderon666

The problem is the metagame.

There is no one single build of AdN that's definite, or good on any metagame. I play DDANT with 4 Chants and 4 Duress, it gives me a weaker and slower deck when compared to straight ADN decks but I feel like I have decent a shot against most decks.

---

I agree. I though on a 4/4 Split of Duress/Chant for smililar reasons.

Here is my list for disscussion:

// Lands
2 [US] Swamp (4)
1 [TE] Island (4)
2 [ZEN] Scalding Tarn
3 [ON] Polluted Delta
2 [U] Volcanic Island
2 [ON] Flooded Strand
2 [R] Tundra
1 [U] Underground Sea

// Spells
1 [WL] Doomsday
3 [DIS] Infernal Tutor
1 [US] Ill-Gotten Gains
1 [SC] Tendrils of Agony
1 [TE] Meditate
4 [TE] Lotus Petal
4 [MM] Dark Ritual
4 [MI] Mystical Tutor
1 [ALA] Ad Nauseam
3 [CHK] Sensei's Divining Top
4 [FNM] Brainstorm
4 [MI] Lion's Eye Diamond
2 [MR] Chrome Mox
2 [TO] Cabal Ritual
2 [JU] Burning Wish
4 [M10] Duress
4 [PS] Orim's Chant

// Sideboard
SB: 1 [WL] Doomsday
SB: 1 [DIS] Infernal Tutor
SB: 1 [US] Ill-Gotten Gains
SB: 1 [SC] Tendrils of Agony
SB: 2 [DS] Echoing Truth
SB: 1 [TSP] Empty the Warrens
SB: 1 [A] Tropical Island
SB: 2 [TSP] Krosan Grip
SB: 1 [AP] Vindicate
SB: 2 [SC] Xantid Swarm
SB: 1 [PC] Extirpate
SB: 1 [R] Hurkyl's Recall

I'm not sure if sideboard is quite fine but i gives me results.

Quote:

---

Here is my list for disscussion:

---

- Why do you run two Basic Swamps one not just one?
- Also, if you do run a Basic Swamp it is probably better to run 4 Polluted Delta before thinking of other fetch.
- 2 Volcanic Islands seems to much to support 2 Burning Wish as the only red cards in the deck. Have you run into an abundance of situations where you didn't have the extra red for Burning Wish -> Empty the Warrens?
- I would advice running a Deathmark in your sideboard that you can bring in against Zoo etc for hatebears.
- By cutting Ponders for extra hate you will be more relliant on openingshands or drawing the cards. I haven't tested this so can't really comment on it but it's something to watch for during testing.
- You have less shuffle effects than most lists (8 fetch instead of 9 and 0 Ponder instead of 2). Another thing to check for during testing.

Questions:
- How has the Vindicate turned out to be? Do you only use it as a Wish target or do you side it in?
- What is the Extirpate for?

Here is mine:

// Lands
1 [ZEN] Swamp (4)
1 [ZEN] Island (4)
1 [ZEN] Plains (4)
4 [ON] Polluted Delta
4 [ON] Flooded Strand
1 [R] Tropical Island
1 [R] Scrubland
1 [R] Tundra
2 [R] Underground Sea

// Spells
1 [US] Ill-Gotten Gains
1 [SC] Tendrils of Agony
1 [TE] Meditate
1 [WL] Doomsday
1 [ALA] Ad Nauseam

1 [TSP] Krosan Grip

4 [TE] Lotus Petal
4 [MM] Dark Ritual
4 [MI] Mystical Tutor

1 [M10] Duress
4 [PS] Orim's Chant
3 [M10] Silence

2 [DIS] Infernal Tutor

4 [CHK] Sensei's Divining Top
4 [FNM] Brainstorm
4 [MI] Lion's Eye Diamond
2 [MR] Chrome Mox
2 [TO] Cabal Ritual

// Sideboard
SB: 1 [10E] Deathmark
SB: 2 [WL] Doomsday
SB: 1 [] Helm of Awakening
SB: 1 [] Brainfreeze
SB: 1 [A] Bayou
SB: 2 [TSP] Krosan Grip
SB: 4 [SC] Xantid Swarm
SB: 1 [DS] Echoing Truth
SB: 1 [R] Hurkyl's Recall
SB: 1 [] Rushing River

- Yes, Chant effects are that good!
- Xantid Swarms > Merfolk, which is abundant in my metagame.
- Bayou is there so I can have an option to fetch a black source when I fetch a forest to play my Swarms, the Tropical is fetched by any dual and is normally the first target.
- I don't like the Krosan Grip MD, but it's so much better against Counterbalance... but sometimes I just wish it was a Rushing River.
- Mox are there to smooth the AdN, they're a necessary evil.
- Brainfreeze is there to beat crap, like Life.dec.

Open to suggestions.

I'm rather curious to the singleton Plains. You run 7 Chants, I run 6 in my list and am quite happy with 2 Tundra instead of 1 Tundra, 1 Plains.
Also, the Scrubland. I can understand that you might want to generate black one turn and white the other but I just don't see how. You tap it during your own turn for either W for a chant or B for acceleration but none of your cards for setup are Black or White. It'll barely ever happen that you need the black the turn before you want it for white for Chant (except the one of Duress).

I notice you are running the transformational sideboard for triple Doomsday and triple group in the CB matchup. How has this been working out for you? As well as the Brainfreeze over a Grapeshot with the Helm Combo. Is this because you think you can't generate the R needed with LED or petal for your combo?

You run 8 shuffle effects (8 fetch, not counting Mystical or the likes) with 4 SDT and 4 Brainstorm. Has this caused any problems so far?

I can say that I love to just cast Chant effects even when I can´t go off to bait a Force or other shit and therfor I also like some additional white sources. Sometimes you have to cast double chant which needs more duals too, and Plains is just imba if you´re facing a lot of Merrows/CT (as he stated, it´s folk for him).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eksem

Some points:

Being a good player does not mean being a good deck builder.

Being a good deck builder does not mean matching a collective hundreads of heads strong.

Good players can win tournaments with subpar lists.

---

With that said, i'm not skilled enough by far to judge whether Saito's list is the best direction for the deck or not; but the arguments against it apparently overwhelms the arguments for it (since the only argument for it is that Saito piloted it, Finkel Burn-syndrome anyone?).

---

While your points are certainly true in the abstract, Saito happens to be an excellent deck builder as well.

Keep in mind he is not alone either. Members of his team won Player of the Year in two consecutive years before Saito earned his. In this light, it's not hard at all to imagine Saito built his list and tested it with the help of Player of the Year caliber players.

While I am not saying his list is definitive, I am saying it should not be dismissed so lightly. I know a lot of us think we're good, and if we're given enough time and testing we can come up with the best possible decks, but sometimes it takes being humbled in a tournament by a truly great player to realize not just that they are better, but how much better they are.

Saito piloting it is a pretty damn good reason why it should be given heavy consideration.

Quote:

---

I can say that I love to just cast Chant effects even when I can´t go off to bait a Force or other shit and therfor I also like some additional white sources. Sometimes you have to cast double chant which needs more duals too, and Plains is just imba if you´re facing a lot of Merrows/CT (as he stated, it´s folk for him).

---

That would explain the Plains but what about the Scrubland? Why not run a Tundra here?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rico Suave

While your points are certainly true in the abstract, Saito happens to be an excellent deck builder as well.

Keep in mind he is not alone either. Members of his team won Player of the Year in two consecutive years before Saito earned his. In this light, it's not hard at all to imagine Saito built his list and tested it with the help of Player of the Year caliber players.

While I am not saying his list is definitive, I am saying it should not be dismissed so lightly. I know a lot of us think we're good, and if we're given enough time and testing we can come up with the best possible decks, but sometimes it takes being humbled in a tournament by a truly great player to realize not just that they are better, but how much better they are.

Saito piloting it is a pretty damn good reason why it should be given heavy consideration.

---

"Damn good" and "heavy" consideration is stretching it a bit I think, a "fair" reason and "some" consideration seems more adequate. Certainly the card choices that are new should be considered, but parts of that list rather look like old AnT-lists that the deck has evolved away from (though perhaps wrongly, I'm way too terrible a player to tell).

More important, however, is the take away. So a very good player won a very big tournament with a list that to many seem a bit subpar. Nothing strange in that. It happens a lot. But let's say that his list was the best possible for that tournament, and that he knew that before hand. Nothing strange there either. It happens a lot. But if bad players (like me) are to learn anything from those card choices, the arguments for them do have to be a bit deeper than "Saito piloted it". Of course one could rip his list right off, play with it and hopefully finding out that way if and in that case why it works, but there is no point in writing on boards unless you do at least some theorycrafting, right? :)

Certainly the arguments against are pretty strong, it seems.

I'm just a bit skeptic about "good players play good decks"-arguments, since they have a tendency to not go anywhere.

@citanul: adding to the point made by NQN about multiple chanting, there is also the Chantwalk factor. Sometimes you need W in their turns to chant and later B to go off. I find myself fetching Scrubland a lot against aggro or CotV decks for this reason.

The plains is good for being a basic, thus allowing you to develop resources while under nonbasic hate, mainly in the form of Wastelock, but could be out of place in a list with only 4 Chants. Also, Chrome Mox kinda helps this need for safe mana sources. It's very meta dependant.

It has happened to me fetching Plains as the only way to achieve kicked-chant against goblins in the following turn or even to grant being able to chant multiple turns until it resolves, but it's less usual that things turn out like that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yesmilord

@Saitou's List

Everyone just relax. That list looks just like any other standard ANT list. 6 hand disruption spells, 2 Tops over Ponder #3-4, and a green splash post-board for the CB matchup. He runs City of Traitors instead of Crystal Vein. I don't get what all the fuss is about.

---

I'll quote myself again for emphasis.

EDIT:
Also, any seasoned tendrils player here should know and realize that there are a ton of meta and preference slots available. This list is no exception. The Japanese have been running TES-ANT lists since the dawn of time as well (all of which have managed to get pushed aside), so something as mild as this ANT list with minor differences should not be a shocker to anyone. Play whatever you're comfortable with and whatever your results are showing and stop squabbling about the validity of placing lists. It's all relative.

@RicoSuave: I am more than happy that at least someone in this thread seems to be open to changes.

The thing that ticked me off and made me flame picelli so hard was that he didn't even spend a single second thinking about the list. At 1:03 lillelassie posted the the list and at 1:06 Picelli89 had already quoted lillelassie's post with the list and dismissed all diviations to the standard SB as bad. He didn't even have time to think about what he posts. I hate this attitude. Even worse was Bahamuth who stated that he knew for a fact that both MD and SB are bad. Then about 40 million lines were written about how it doesn't matter if someone is Pro or not and the list was pretty much ignored.

I just think that this is wrong. It is good to see a list made by a player as great as Saito and instead of flaming it or changing it without putting much thought into it you should test the list a couple of times and try to understand what the person who made this deck was thinking before he went to the tournament and won it.

I won't say the list good/bad, because I wonder what makes this list so exceptional? Is it the 2 maindeck Ad nauseams, the sideboard? Or maybe it's the fact that a pro doesn't play a "standard" list.
2 ad nauseums does grant a higher chance of drawing one and a sideboard with alot of one-offs does create a kind of flexibility. (just like G. nassif did in fact)
The fact pro's win alot is due to their understanding of the game and understanding of different situations and how to deal with it.
I think people should stop searching for a "perfect" list because there is no such thing. Test with a list you are confortable with and play alot with it, this will make you win games of magic, not the fact you play "the best" list.
but hey, that's just my humble opinion :wink:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by citanul

I'm rather curious to the singleton Plains. You run 7 Chants, I run 6 in my list and am quite happy with 2 Tundra instead of 1 Tundra, 1 Plains.
Also, the Scrubland. I can understand that you might want to generate black one turn and white the other but I just don't see how. You tap it during your own turn for either W for a chant or B for acceleration but none of your cards for setup are Black or White. It'll barely ever happen that you need the black the turn before you want it for white for Chant (except the one of Duress).

I notice you are running the transformational sideboard for triple Doomsday and triple group in the CB matchup. How has this been working out for you? As well as the Brainfreeze over a Grapeshot with the Helm Combo. Is this because you think you can't generate the R needed with LED or petal for your combo?

You run 8 shuffle effects (8 fetch, not counting Mystical or the likes) with 4 SDT and 4 Brainstorm. Has this caused any problems so far?

---

The B also is more important than the U, in this case, since a very common play is fetch for Island and play top. And the time comes in every man's life when he has to top 3 lands for BBB to cast a Doomsday. That becomes more important when you side in the 2 DD from the board.

But your point is valid, Scrubland doesn't allow you to play Chant and black spells at the same time. I just think most of the times you're set with one blue source, while B/W sources might be needed in multiples.

The Brainfreeze issue is up in the air, I have to sit down and figure out some piles that allow me to play Grapeshot with a Petal or LED mana. I don't have one figured out, hence the Brainfreeze. But the Grapeshot is strictly superior other than that. Adding red lands is out of the question.

While I love drawing fetchlands and Top, if you draw too much of them the damage can end up stacking up quickly. The best use for them is opening a non-fetch land in your starting hand with Top/BS and some fetches. Opening a grip full of fetchlands is just a waste of 1 hit point. Yeah I know, it's marginal but it's there.

Well, the thing that annoyed me at that list was the absence of Chant effetcs, which IS bad against U decks if you have to go the IGG route and the CoT, which seemed to have worked out for him.

Gah, I play a list with 14 lands and 4 Ponder, I shouldn't complain about other people's lists.

I've recently acquired the cards to build Tendrils and as a new player to combo, want some opinions on where to start.

1. Should I start without Doomsday and get to grips with straight ANT first, and then add Doomsday later (if at all).
2. Looking on deckcheck, I notice alot of lists are running 4 Chant + 4 Duress rather than 4 Chant and 2 Silence... thoughts?
3. Is running multiples of Ad Nauseam and Tendrils a good idea? A number of decks seem to be running 2, but being an all or nothing deck is it really worthwhile?
4. Is it worth running top, if you're not running Doomsday or should you replace top with Ponder.

(Assume I have access to all the cards incl. sideboard options)

Playing Doomsday is optional. I believe it adds power and consistency to the deck, but it has a very steep learning curve and until you know how to play it very well, it's often more of a hindrance than help. That said, play Sensei's Divining Top in addition to Ponder. If I didn't play Doomsday, my list would almost certainly be this:

4 Flooded Strand
2 Polluted Delta
2 Misty Rainforest
1 Scalding Tarn
2 Underground Sea
2 Tundra
1 Tropical Island
1 Island
4 Lotus Petal
2 Chrome Mox
4 Lion's Eye Diamond
4 Dark Ritual
2 Cabal Ritual
4 Brainstorm
4 Ponder
4 Sensei's Divining Top
4 Orim's Chant
2 Silence
1 Krosan Grip
4 Mystical Tutor
3 Infernal Tutor
1 Ad Nauseam
1 Ill-Gotten Gains
1 Tendrils of Agony

SB: 2 Krosan Grip
SB: 1 Wipe Away
SB: 2 Chain of Vapor
SB: 1 Echoing Truth
SB: 1 Slaughter Pact
SB: 1 Hurkyll's Recall
SB: 1 Angel's Grace
SB: 4 Xantid Swarm
SB: 1 Tropical Island
SB: 1 Plains

I "play" (have yet to take it to a tournament) a list similar to the one above, but -1 Ponder, -2 Top, -1 Grip, +2 Cabal Rit, +1 Chain of Vapor, +1 Mox Diamond and a slightly different land configuration.

Tops are great. I don't think I would run 4, having more than 1 just sucks so much.

There are the odd occasions where I wish I had another AdN, if it get's stolen by discard or countered in a situation I had not anticipated; but this does not happen often and should be occuring less often the better I learn the deck. The downsides in life loss and drawing multiples does not seem to overweigh the upside.

The very few times that a second Tendrils of Agony would have been nice (like, I could go off now if I could just imprint this Tendrils to the Mox) does definitely not motivate having two in the deck. Running Chants does mean that you should never, ever have to fear Stifle or Mindbreak Trap, imho. After AdN resolves you should have a Chant in hand and mana for it if you haven't already resolved one before going off.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tao

@RicoSuave: I am more than happy that at least someone in this thread seems to be open to changes.

The thing that ticked me off and made me flame picelli so hard was that he didn't even spend a single second thinking about the list. At 1:03 lillelassie posted the the list and at 1:06 Picelli89 had already quoted lillelassie's post with the list and dismissed all diviations to the standard SB as bad. He didn't even have time to think about what he posts. I hate this attitude. Even worse was Bahamuth who stated that he knew for a fact that both MD and SB are bad. Then about 40 million lines were written about how it doesn't matter if someone is Pro or not and the list was pretty much ignored.

I just think that this is wrong. It is good to see a list made by a player as great as Saito and instead of flaming it or changing it without putting much thought into it you should test the list a couple of times and try to understand what the person who made this deck was thinking before he went to the tournament and won it.

---

I'm not sure how you could possibly know if me of Pecelli have thought about this list at all. I may have exaggerated saying the main- and sideboard are bad (although I belive they are). I do know for a fact that the sideboard is bad. Rebuild, Hydroblast and a 2nd Tendrills of Agony are all poor slots. I'm quite sure the mainboard is bad, but I can't prove this to you.
What's irritating me, was this post of yours.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tao

Come ON, it is Saito, he is a better deckbuilder than you, and he won a 178 man tourney. Stop critizising his list.

---

This is absolutely insane, and I hope you realise by now why it is.

Emidln, do you agree speed is quite important game 1 against random decks with lists that don't play Doomsday? I've been playing 2 Top sideboard, what do you think about that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bahamuth

I'm not sure how you could possibly know if me of Pecelli have thought about this list at all. I may have exaggerated saying the main- and sideboard are bad (although I belive they are). I do know for a fact that the sideboard is bad. Rebuild, Hydroblast and a 2nd Tendrills of Agony are all poor slots. I'm quite sure the mainboard is bad, but I can't prove this to you.

---

While I am not a big fan of Rebuild, and Hydroblast is useful but may not be worth the space, a 2nd Tendrils isn't a poor slot in this case.

The inclusion of 4 Dark Confidant in the SB brings a lot of extra value to a 2nd Tendrils. Bob makes the Tendrils better in two ways: 1) he draws extra spells to make the Tendrils bigger, and 2) he reduces the lethal storm count by 1 with each attack. Bob brings a legitimate avenue of victory to the deck: swing a couple times, Tendrils for a bunch. Even if it's not lethal, the tremendous life-gain will buy several turns against a heavy aggressive rush, during which Bob will refuel the deck for a second go-round. In these situations, having access to a 2nd Tendrils and manually drawing it is quite useful.

EDIT - On a sidenote, a match against a G/B deck reminded me of two things:
1) It is useful to have a land that can tap underneath a Choke. A basic Swamp served me very well, so keep that in mind when constructing a mana base.
2) The 2nd Tendrils proved to be quite useful when my first was hit with Duress then hit with Tormod's Crypt. He assumed I was only running 1, but thankfully I guess I'm a bad player. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rico Suave

2) The 2nd Tendrils proved to be quite useful when my first was hit with Duress then hit with Tormod's Crypt. He assumed I was only running 1, but thankfully I guess I'm a bad player. ;)

---

I can see how it would be useful in that very narrow situation, but really, who boards Crypt vs AnT to begin with? And takes Tendrils with Duress? I mean, you actually having Tendrils in hand, he having Duress AND Crypt? That doesn't even happen! Even with the exact same matchup it's still like, once in a 100 games or something.

Wow, so your second ToA made you win 1 game. I bet you don't count the times when you wish it were another spell, do you?

Also, I dunno, but I think that playing Bob against aggressive decks is something you shouldn't do.

So much anger. Why do people treat a side benefit of it as if it were my main point?

No, the main point of the Bob -> Tendrils plan is to win games against CB decks. And it does win a large number of my games.

It also happens to be good in other ways.

Quote:

---

Also, I dunno, but I think that playing Bob against aggressive decks is something you shouldn't do.

---

I wouldn't exactly call CB an aggressive deck, but it does have some aggressive plays.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rico Suave

So much anger. Why do people treat a side benefit of it as if it were my main point?

No, the main point of the Bob -> Tendrils plan is to win games against CB decks. And it does win a large number of my games.

It also happens to be good in other ways.



I wouldn't exactly call CB an aggressive deck, but it does have some aggressive plays.

---

I don't mean it in an offensive way, but people tend to keep their StoPs in against me and playing creatures of their own. This seems to make Bob a lackluster plan. How do you manage to keep it around?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rico Suave

I wouldn't exactly call CB an aggressive deck, but it does have some aggressive plays.

---

I was refering to this part of your post:

Quote:

---

2) he reduces the lethal storm count by 1 with each attack. Bob brings a legitimate avenue of victory to the deck: swing a couple times, Tendrils for a bunch. Even if it's not lethal, the tremendous life-gain will buy several turns against a heavy aggressive rush, during which Bob will refuel the deck for a second go-round. In these situations, having access to a 2nd Tendrils and manually drawing it is quite useful.

---

You are speaking of an aggressive rush, but you don't specify which deck you mean. When speaking of "aggressive decks", I don't think many think of Counterbalance. Zoo, Goblins and GoyfSligh would come to mind. And playing Bob against these 3 decks seems to be a bad plan, regarding the fact that they deal a lot of damage and that Bob can get a real liability. If you have a SDT in play, then it of course looks different, but I suppose dropping both SDT and Bob happens far less than Zoo playing an aggressive game.