Would you like to see True-Name Nemesis gone?

[Esper3k]

The last time a blue-based SFM deck was a thing was GP Denver. After that, it fell off the face of the planet (although Deathblade was cute for a week I suppose). Once TNN is printed, it's not surprising that SFM saw a tremendous uptick as TNN + Equipment = GGPO (as evidenced by tourney results + stream coverage).

Same with UWR Delver. Pre-TNN, it played stuff like Geist of Saint Traft, but that wasn't effective as it died to a blocking 4/5 Goyf and it could be Rough/Tumble, Pyroclasm, etc. So it remained firmly entrenched in tier 2 status. TNN is released and voila!, tier 1 status and it wins a GP.

This is what you said in the post that started all this discussion about the performance of "blue-based SFM" post GP Denver.

Other than the months of July (where we still had a blue-based SFM deck - Deathblade, performing well) and August, a blue-based SFM deck (be it Blade Control, Patriot, or Deathblade per TCDecks' categories) has always been Tier 1 according to the TCDeck data.

From Feb-April 2013, Blade Control enjoyed tier 1 status, but once you hit May 2013, you see a very steep decline in Blade Control (I believe this was due to the rising of Jund, could be wrong though). The data backs up what I said; post GP Denver, blue-based SFM decks went from tier 1 to tier 2, then once TNN was released, BOOM, back to tier 1 again overnight.

May 2013 - Position: 4
June 2013 - Position: 11 (tier 2)
July 2013 - Position: 14, tier 2 (as I acknowledged, Deathblade had a nice moment in the sun at position #3 and Patriot is still tier 2, imo at #9)
August 2013 - Position: 18, tier 2 (Patriot #14, Deathblade #17)... sounds firmly tier 2 to me
September 2013 - Position: 24, tier 2 (Patriot is tier 1 this month at #4, Deathblade is tier 2 at #15)
October 2013 - Position: 18, tier 2 (Patriot stays in tier 1 again at #4, Deathblade is tier 2 at #23)
November 2013 (TNN release) - Position: 4 (Patriot is entrenched at #2, Deathblade sees a nominal jump to #17)

So to recap, there's a downward trend for Blade Control of #4 - #11 - #14 - #18 - #24 - #18 - TNN is released and it's #4 again. Patriot is tier 2 in July, then tier 1 around Sept. Deathblade is tier 1 for one month (July), then it's relegated to tier 2 and hasn't left.

No, the data shows that blue based SFM decks have pretty much always (with the exception of August) had a deck close to the top, according to TCDeck data.

Second, it also shows that UWR Delver (aka Patriot) was Tier 1 before the printing of TNN. TNN certainly makes these decks stronger, but it isn't the cause of blue based SFM decks going from "fell off the face of the planet" to Tier 1 all of the sudden. You can argue that TNN has brought back Blade Control, certainly, but not the entire blue-based SFM class of decks.

Also a separate point - as HSCK brings up, even if your assertion was true that TNN all of the sudden made these types of decks tier 1, why is that a bad thing?

Also, I may have been too harsh when stating that "I don't care". I do care and note what's happening in tier 2 (and even tier 3 if my SB cards can do some splash damage), but my main concern is how to beat the tier 1 decks. If tier 1 is RUG Delver, Elves, Storm combo and Sneak Attack, I'm going to make my maindeck and SB decisions largely based off that. I'm not going to devote 2 SB cards solely for Imperial Painter when I could use those slots to beef up my Sneak Attack matchup; if my SB card hates both decks, great!, but I'm making my decision based off what I expect to see.

Back in April 2013, I attended SCG Milwaukee. I was on Vidi's GP Denver EsperBlade list and I anticiplated seeing RUG Delver (tier 1), Reanimator/TinFins (DTB at the time), Blade Control (tier 1 at the time), and Sneak and Show (tier 1 at the time). I was aware that other tier 1 and tier 2 decks existed, but thought my maindeck was solid enough for whatever, but those matchups I wanted to focus on, so I SBed accordingly.

I played against Esperblade, TinFins, Maverick, RUG Delver, Goblins, Eggs (yep), Burn, Belcher, Dredge. I metagamed correctly for tier 1 and saw 3/4 of the tier 1 decks in my rounds. The other decks I played due to losing (lost to RUG Delver and I deserve to play against Burn I suppose). My maindeck was solid enough to wreck Maverick, Burn, Eggs, Belcher, Esperblade.

EDIT: Great article about TNN, format diversity (perhaps a natual ebb and flow, perhaps not), etc. http://www.channelfireball.com/artic...game-analysis/

Also, as I stated in the other thread, TNN mirrors are just plain unfun for me. If others enjoy having TNN races, great, but I don't. I play with TNN (UW Stoneblade) and against it all of the time and it's far less enjoyable when I win on the back of TNN.

You may have seen 3/4 of the decks you were metagaming against, but that also only made up of 3/8 of the decks you played against. I think moreso than any other format, Legacy is one where you need to pay attention to non-Tier 1 decks.

Again, while what you're saying is fine, it doesn't have anything to do with the discussion of streaming coverage not being representative of a tournament's metagame.