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

This past weekend I took canadian to a weekly tournament and win with the classic list, playing 8 fetch and 6 duals, and two vendillion in the flex slots. The sideboard was:
4 Submerge
4 Spell Pierce
3 Tormod's Crypt
2 Pyroblast
2 Pyroclasm

Submerges were good all forest long, helped against aggroloam when they had calice@1 and I had a Mongoose already on the battelfield applying pressure, were Mind Harness would have done anything. Bounced some Tarmogoyf to get Spell Snared the turn after and helped against naya burn and bant loam to bounce when i wanted to play some beaters in my turn while having mana open to be able to counter some evil spells.

With Spell Pierce we no longer need Krosan Grip, Spell Pierce is amazing! Combo, Reanimator, I sided em even against Naya burn (Tarmosligh) for FoW. It's also very good against Landstill, Enchantress.... Actually I think Canadian has the best sideboard of all Decks in Legacy. On that relies the real power of Canadian Threshold.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johanessen

This past weekend I took canadian to a weekly tournament and win with the classic list, playing 8 fetch and 6 duals, and two vendillion in the flex slots. The sideboard was:
4 Submerge
4 Spell Pierce
3 Tormod's Crypt
2 Pyroblast
2 Pyroclasm

Submerges were good all forest long, helped against aggroloam when they had calice@1 and I had a Mongoose already on the battelfield applying pressure, were Mind Harness would have done anything. Bounced some Tarmogoyf to get Spell Snared the turn after and helped against naya burn and bant loam to bounce when i wanted to play some beaters in my turn while having mana open to be able to counter some evil spells.

With Spell Pierce we no longer need Krosan Grip, Spell Pierce is amazing! Combo, Reanimator, I sided em even against Naya burn (Tarmosligh) for FoW. It's also very good against Landstill, Enchantress.... Actually I think Canadian has the best sideboard of all Decks in Legacy. On that relies the real power of Canadian Threshold.

---

How were cliques working for you? How did that switch spell pierces for FoW worked for you?

They didn't really shine in that tournament because i didn't face any combo or pure control. But during my testing I liked em more than bouncers, they are the only beaters inmune to gy hate and that's huge.

Regarding the side of Fow for Spell Pierce against Naya Burn is there for two reasons:
-Fow deals one damage to you when you cast it, against a burn deck that's a drawback to be considered.
-Both Tarmogoyf and Price of Progress can be countered by Spell Snare, being Tarmogoyf Submergeable and PoP Spell-Pierceable. Apart from that, Naya Burn hasn't any real Bomb so that's why I swaped Fows for Spell Pierces.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johanessen

They didn't really shine in that tournament because i didn't face any combo or pure control. But during my testing I liked em more than bouncers, they are the only beaters inmune to gy hate and that's huge.

Regarding the side of Fow for Spell Pierce against Naya Burn is there for two reasons:
-Fow deals one damage to you when you cast it, against a burn deck that's a drawback to be considered.
-Both Tarmogoyf and Price of Progress can be countered by Spell Snare, being Tarmogoyf Submergeable and PoP Spell-Pierceable. Apart from that, Naya Burn hasn't any real Bomb so that's why I swaped Fows for Spell Pierces.

---

Makes sense. Gotta test those Cliques, haven't tested them yet but they seems to have some potential.

Cenarius, there are some major flaws with your arguments, the most glaring of which being that you're talking about a different deck!

First of all, we don't only play 8 creatures; we play 8 creatures, 4 brainstorms, 4 ponders and 6 fetchlands. It's very easy to find a creature when it's time to get down to business.

Secondly, it's not about "good" opponents and "bad" opponents. It's about submerge being incredibly synergetic with our (Tempo Threshold, not UGB non-tempo threshold) tempo-based strategy. I've never submerged a creature in response to a fetch in a tournament. Submerge has still been awesome pretty much every single time I've ever played it.

Third, Mind Harness has been tested and it's simply not very good in this deck. Maybe it's wonderful in your deck, which isn't Tempo Threshold. This doesn't seem like the appropriate place to tell everyone in the world how great it is, though.



Tempo Threshold is not a control deck. It is an aggressive deck which happens to protect its gameplan with some spells that control decks normally use. You're probably right that submerge isn't wonderful in your deck, but your deck is not Tempo Threshold. I am confused as to why this conversation is even taking place. The following paraphrases the argument I am seeing here:

"Mind Harness is much better than Submerge! I tested it in my UGb deck and submerge is awful!"

"Submerge is much better in Tempo Threshold due to its synergy with the tempo strategy in the deck and Mind Harness' inherent disynergy with the same strategy."

"No, you're wrong. Mind Harness is better. I tested it in my UGb deck that isn't anything like Tempo Threshold from a strategic point of view."

"No, you're wrong. We tested Mind Harness and Submerge is better in Tempo Threshold."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johanessen

They didn't really shine in that tournament because i didn't face any combo or pure control. But during my testing I liked em more than bouncers, they are the only beaters inmune to gy hate and that's huge.

Regarding the side of Fow for Spell Pierce against Naya Burn is there for two reasons:
-Fow deals one damage to you when you cast it, against a burn deck that's a drawback to be considered.
-Both Tarmogoyf and Price of Progress can be countered by Spell Snare, being Tarmogoyf Submergeable and PoP Spell-Pierceable. Apart from that, Naya Burn hasn't any real Bomb so that's why I swaped Fows for Spell Pierces.

---

I don't have too much experience playing against Nayaburn, but I do have lots of experience playing against RG Goyfsligh, and I usually side out Daze for Spell Pierce if I know I'm going second in the following game. There are times when you just have to get the jump on your opponent, and using Daze to counter something if you only have one land in play can really set you back.

I do see the point of your strategy, but I think I'd rather keep FoW as it won't provide the same tempo drawback as Daze. Maybe we're supposed to be control against these decks, but I like to be able to play it aggressively if I do get a head start with Waste/Stifle.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GUnit

Cenarius, there are some major flaws with your arguments, the most glaring of which being that you're talking about a different deck!

First of all, we don't only play 8 creatures; we play 8 creatures, 4 brainstorms, 4 ponders and 6 fetchlands. It's very easy to find a creature when it's time to get down to business.

Secondly, it's not about "good" opponents and "bad" opponents. It's about submerge being incredibly synergetic with our (Tempo Threshold, not UGB non-tempo threshold) tempo-based strategy. I've never submerged a creature in response to a fetch in a tournament. Submerge has still been awesome pretty much every single time I've ever played it.

Third, Mind Harness has been tested and it's simply not very good in this deck. Maybe it's wonderful in your deck, which isn't Tempo Threshold. This doesn't seem like the appropriate place to tell everyone in the world how great it is, though.



Tempo Threshold is not a control deck. It is an aggressive deck which happens to protect its gameplan with some spells that control decks normally use. You're probably right that submerge isn't wonderful in your deck, but your deck is not Tempo Threshold. I am confused as to why this conversation is even taking place. The following paraphrases the argument I am seeing here:

"Mind Harness is much better than Submerge! I tested it in my UGb deck and submerge is awful!"

"Submerge is much better in Tempo Threshold due to its synergy with the tempo strategy in the deck and Mind Harness' inherent disynergy with the same strategy."

"No, you're wrong. Mind Harness is better. I tested it in my UGb deck that isn't anything like Tempo Threshold from a strategic point of view."

"No, you're wrong. We tested Mind Harness and Submerge is better in Tempo Threshold."

---

Hard to stay positive after such reply....

It's not my flaw. You are not correctly reading my post. I posted an UGb Tempo Threshold list, with its sideboard. The comment about Mind Harness below, then triggered a discussion about Mind Harness v. Submerge.

Btw:
1.Do you think by adding Dark Confidant the list suddenly becomes "control"? 2.Do you think by adding (real) removal to the list, making your Nimble Mongoose better, makes your TT a "control" deck?

Before actually saying that my list plays "controllish", test it. You'll be suprised. I know you'll probably won't test it. So....

Moving onward, I just wanted to test black removal to actually have a chance against Rock and Dreadstill. I find these matchups very hard to win. They are. I know that Dark Confidant is pretty berserk, improving Countertop and Landstill and improving every deck when it stays on the table. I, personally, haven't missed burn during testing yet. The raw power of stronger removal and Dark Confidant seem great. The only things I miss are my Pyroclasms.

UGr Tempo Threshold plays 8 creatures.......
This is not changed by cantrips. Playing 8 cantrips and a suboptimal manabase (6 fetch...) makes it easier to find your 8 creatures.

Do you really think everyone tested Mind Harness? I don't think so. Did you? Don't lie. I also thought that Submerge was the most ideal card for UGr Tempo ******** sideboard. However, I just wanted to make people aware of different Sideboard cards, that's all. I believe Mind Harness SHOULD be tested.

Maybe things are clear now.....

With creature you're refering to Beater or utility creature? Because your Ugb list plays 8 beaters while half of tempo thresholds runs 10 (2xVendillion Clique) . Sure, Confidant is a creature, but I think we are now referring in terms of beaters.

And yes, Confidant is control, not tempo.

This is coming from a counter-top & Zoo player who is starting to dabble with Thresh.

Why not even a singleton Phyrexian Dreadnought? In fact could see Fire // Ice getting booted for 3 trinket mages and a Dreadnoght.... am I missing something obvious?

Also while inferior to Pyroclasm in the Dredge match-up wouldn't Firespout be better in virtually all other match-ups?

Thanks!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Houseofgames

This is coming from a counter-top & Zoo player who is starting to dabble with Thresh.

Why not even a singleton Phyrexian Dreadnought? In fact could see Fire // Ice getting booted for 3 trinket mages and a Dreadnoght.... am I missing something obvious?

---

The Stifles are used (mainly) for the mana-denial plan together with Wasteland. Also, even getting to three mana to cast the Mage would be tough in some match-ups.

Quote:

---

Also while inferior to Pyroclasm in the Dredge match-up wouldn't Firespout be better in virtually all other match-ups?

Thanks!

---

No, Firespout can kill Mongoose post-threshold, Pyroclasm does not. I wouldn't side it in against Zoo or other decks with 3+ toughness creatures in it anyway.

I was talking about creatures in general. Since he referred to creatures in general, aswell. Btw, you will be suprised when you test Dark Confidant. Dark Confidant actually beats more than you might think. Playing black gives you the option of playing real removal instead of burn. Making it easier to clear the board.

Have to mention it again. Test Dark Confidant. It isn't a control card. Trust me. It goes absolutely berserk in this deck. Drawing more:
Creatures
Counters
Removal
Cantrips
etc.

is kinda good. Or if it doesn't stick, it makes the way free for you Tarmogoyf.

If you want to see Ugb thresh as simply an altered Tempo Thresh list- which I think is a poor way to view it based on the different approaches the two decks take- then my question becomes the following:

Why would you alter the main deck to improve matchups that you're already more than capable of winning at the expense of many other matchups?

In a diverse metagame, which legacy consistently seems to provide, it makes much more sense to play a well-rounded deck. This is yet another reason that Tempo Threshold has had the success that it has had so far, and why it has become the favoured version of the archetype formerly known as "thresh," of which your black deck is a member.


I don't think discussion of your deck belongs in this thread, but if you think that it does you could at least attempt to acknowledge what the overall gameplan of this archetype is (I'll give you a hint: it has nothing to do with card advantage or non-land board control). Thus far you have failed to do so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GUnit

Tempo Threshold is not a control deck. It is an aggressive deck which happens to protect its gameplan with some spells that control decks normally use. You're probably right that submerge isn't wonderful in your deck, but your deck is not Tempo Threshold. I am confused as to why this conversation is even taking place. The following paraphrases the argument I am seeing here:

---

I'm sorry, but straight to the head: You're talking 100% pure bullshit.

First of all, the black TempoThresh Cenarius is referring to plays the same manadenial-shell (which is Stifle-Waste) as well as the same countermagic shell (which is 4 Force, 4 Daze, 4 Spell Snare).

Both decks are able to make a high amount of 1-for-1 trades though these cards which make them both tempo and depending on the situation, you can play it like pure control (and that happens a lot of times!).

The slight difference between these 2 decks is the splash which also defines which role they can play better: Burn provides reach, therefore the deck CAN be more aggressive, but it lacks the ability to generate CA whereas black is able to do so via Dark Confidant. Additionally, black can play the control role better because it doesn't need to play Submerge. It has Smother to wreck every (EVERY) relevant creature that is played in Legacy.

Only Tombstalker then remains to be an issue, but you can play Diabolic Edicts to solve that. I also use to play 2 Engineered Explosives maindeck in UGb Tempo Thresh which also add to the control-plan whereas red plays bounce to apply pressure.

Both decks are Tempo Threshold, one is better at being aggressive and the other can play a way better control-role.

This doesn't mean that the black Threshold isn't capable to bash faces in, mind that Dark Confidant is a creature himself, who is extremely dangerous when he's not answered as he can beatdown while providing a constant flow of disruption.

I actually liked red better because of the REBs in the SB, simply because they were better than Thoughtseize, but now every other Threshold variant has got Spell Pierce as a on-color equivalent to REB.

However, these quotes:

Quote:

---

"Mind Harness is much better than Submerge! I tested it in my UGb deck and submerge is awful!"

"Submerge is much better in Tempo Threshold due to its synergy with the tempo strategy in the deck and Mind Harness' inherent disynergy with the same strategy."

"No, you're wrong. Mind Harness is better. I tested it in my UGb deck that isn't anything like Tempo Threshold from a strategic point of view."

"No, you're wrong. We tested Mind Harness and Submerge is better in Tempo Threshold."

---

prove that you absolutely failed at analyzing the deck's concept. This circumstance is amplified by the fact that you boil down the discussion to Submerge vs. Mind Harness.
Black plays REAL removal, it doesn't need any of these 2 cards and preserves it's ability to be aggro since it has got less problems to keep it's way clear.
Basically both decks do the same and it wasn't played quite frequently in the past. however, it has got very nice tools to beat controldecks and graveyard-based strategies which are uprising.

A trick that permit me to win with Choke or Back to Basics on table (don't remember) : He was at 6, Lightning Bolt, Daze on it returning Volcanic Island, Put the Volcanic in game again, second Bolt GG.
Daze can still be usefull in late game. ^^

My comments that you quoted may have been a bit reductive, but I think only a bit.
The two decks are quite different and the participants in the argument were arguing from the perspectives that accompany those decks, while predominantly focusing on Mind Harness vs. Submerge. I agree entirely that the black version requires neither.

I understand that the black deck still plays all of the "tempo elements" of the red deck, but at the same time I also understand that the tempo gameplan of the red deck is stronger. This is because the cards in the red deck have better synergy with the tempo gameplan than the black cards. The black cards are all good, but they signify a change in focus and priorities on behalf of the pilot. While they do make your long game a bit stronger (especially if your bob actually survives), they reduce (though don't eliminate) the amount of opportunity you have to avoid a long game altogether via tempo plays. From my experiences with the red deck (as you mentioned) it does a fine enough job of assuming the control role when it is required, while it is better suited to switch gears at the appropriate time and close out the game during the provided window of opportunity. That being said, I would never go as far as to say that the red deck is strictly better than the black deck. In fact, I think it's pretty clear that it's not. As far as tempo is concerned, however, I see red as the clear choice, as it is more focused and has more synergy with that particular game plan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GUnit

I understand that the black deck still plays all of the "tempo elements" of the red deck, but at the same time I also understand that the tempo gameplan of the red deck is stronger. This is because the cards in the red deck have better synergy with the tempo gameplan than the black cards.

---

How do you define tempo? As I mentioned, the speedadvantage is generated via the huge amount of 1for1 trades. And in view of that, both variants are definitely on par, except that the red variant has got 2 more spells than the black variants, however, EE can generate a ridicolous CA against Zoo.

Quote:

---

The black cards are all good, but they signify a change in focus and priorities on behalf of the pilot. While they do make your long game a bit stronger (especially if your bob actually survives), they reduce (though don't eliminate) the amount of opportunity you have to avoid a long game altogether via tempo plays.

---

This is not true, if you stick a Dark Confidant early, the game won't last long because you will basically have way more resources and at the same time you are able to keep your opponent low on resources. There's no way the red variant can generate such a gradient.

Quote:

---

From my experiences with the red deck (as you mentioned) it does a fine enough job of assuming the control role when it is required, while it is better suited to switch gears at the appropriate time and close out the game during the provided window of opportunity. That being said, I would never go as far as to say that the red deck is strictly better than the black deck. In fact, I think it's pretty clear that it's not. As far as tempo is concerned, however, I see red as the clear choice, as it is more focused and has more synergy with that particular game plan.

---

If you define "tempo" as "killing your opponent as fast as you can", then you might be right, but I guess our point of view differs here.

Hi everyone.

The UGb threshold is quite an intersting proposition to play. My only guess is if it will have a better position vs the mirror you're going to face on Canadian all day long.

Adan, could you please provide a sample list? (or link to it)

I'll guess it has some duress/tseize maindeck, and provided the coming of Combo-Winter on the legacy meta (thanks Dream Halls), it could make some real differences when bolts md are not enought to deal with combo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adan

if you stick a Dark Confidant early ...

---

I don't think anyone is disagreeing about the spear power of Confidant, just whether or not it makes sense in this (TT) type of deck.

Dark Confidant basically says, play me ASAP possible (as you have stated). If you are playing Confidant on turn two, you now can't Spell Snare/Stifle/Brainstorm. The heart of this this deck is the early game. Not to mention you have just added 4 permanents to your deck, making it that much harder for you to get Threshold.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kabal

I don't think anyone is disagreeing about the spear power of Confidant, just whether or not it makes sense in this (TT) type of deck.

Dark Confidant basically says, play me ASAP possible (as you have stated). If you are playing Confidant on turn two, you now can't Spell Snare/Stifle/Brainstorm. The heart of this this deck is the early game. Not to mention you have just added 4 permanents to your deck, making it that much harder for you to get Threshold.

---

First you disrupt, then you play dark confidant. It isn't that hard. It doesn't matter when you play Dark Confidant. When it sticks, you'll win. If you have stifle/spell snare/brainstorm, just wait. Get your third land out and play it next turn.
You cán play Dark Confidant when you have 2 lands, only when you have Force (+ Daze) backup without Stifle/spell snare. During testing this occurred several times.
The heart of the deck remains early game. You only play 4 Dark Confidant. Just first disrupt and after play Dark Confidant to regain an hand. Pretty strong gameplan to be honest.

Not to mention you have just added 4 permanents to your deck, making it that much harder for you to get Threshold.

To cut the crap. This is nonsense. A "normal" Tempo Threshold build plays either 4 or 2 spells more than this list. Getting Threshold is no problem, or you're playing the deck wrong. When Dark Confidant sticks, he's the man of getting mass spells in your graveyard, making you less vulnerable to Relic.

I'm thinking about making a new thread for it. The people here seem to dislike talking about the "same" deck. This will take time, since I'll need to back it up with good (test) results. I'll need some people who can actually help me on that.

About the list. Look about 2 pages back. Adan plays with 2 Engineered Explosives instead of 2 Smother. I've found out that I'd prefer "better" removal than EE.

Well...at the end I think that what you mean is playing a deck called "Eva Green", so if we're trying to merge the two strategies...what are the skeleton to go with and what are the cards that must go out? Why would you not use the discard pakage that Black gives MD?