[Deck] Goblins

[ScatmanX]

@Gobbolord: Congratulations!
but, c'ommon man, you should had landed that Chalice @0 on the last game, and you know that. They even bring in more discard when they know you have it...
How was the game where you won against AdN? I'd like to read that.

@New card: I think it is awesome. You can Extirpate someone's Tropical on your first turn and simply win, like that.
I don't see a reason why not play that. Specially right after the release, when nobody will see it coming.

[TossUsToLions]

Yeah, i just saw that card and was in shock. I was playing Extirpate when Survival was around, but this card is so much better! Wasteland and this (forgot its name) on turn one is gg against a few decks. Also Cabal Therapy/Thoughtseize and this on t1. Seems like it could help in a lot of matchups.

[sligh16]

Congrats Gobolord on the finish!
On other topic, what do you guys think about the new card "Spawning Shell"?

Spawning Shell 3 G/P
Artifact (rare)
(G/P may be paid for with either G or 2 life.)
G/P,T , Sacrifice a creature: Search your library for a creature with converted mana cost equal to the sacrificed creature’s converted mana cost plus 1 and put it onto the battlefield. Then shuffle your library. Activate this ability only any time you could cast a sorcery.

I think it´s totally worth a shot, since you can play it on turn 3, and start ramping on better goblins. For example, trading lackeys for piledrivers, Matrons for Ringleaders or ringleaders for Kiki-Jiki or Siege-gang commander. Maybe testing 2 in maindeck? Gonna test it right now!!

[GoboLord]

@Gobbolord: Congratulations!
but, c'ommon man, you should had landed that Chalice @0 on the last game, and you know that. They even bring in more discard when they know you have it...
How was the game where you won against AdN? I'd like to read that.

@New card: I think it is awesome. You can Extirpate someone's Tropical on your first turn and simply win, like that.
I don't see a reason why not play that. Specially right after the release, when nobody will see it coming.

Setting Chalice@1 was basically gambling and it didn't work out. I just wanted to try it since I had no turn-2-play anyway.
About the ANT:

It was round 7 and we couldn't draw in the Top8 because there were many too many players with 15 points. So we had to play it out. My opponent was very nervous to begin with and I really wanted to win that - so I used every dirty trick I know. I played according to the rules but I'm quite good in setting my opponent under pressure psychologically. This is actually important because I don't think I would have won if he was more self-assured about what he did.

Game 1: We didn't know each other. I kept a hand with 6, he kept his 7. He pondered on turn 1, then DUressed me on Turn 2 and went off - too fast.

IN: 4 Chalice, 3 Mindbreak Trap, 3 Earwig Squad
OUT: 4 Vial, 3 Gempalm, 1 STinger, 1 Wort, 1 Ringleader

Game 2: We drew our hands. My first hand was unkeepable (without any colored land or hate), but I took my time to think about it (actually I was checking out my opponents reaction on that. He decided to take mulligan, so did I. My 6 cards were: 2 Lands, Lackey, Warchief, Instigator, Chieftain. Again I was thinking for a long time - this time because I was calculating how fast this hand was. Turn 4 seemed alright for me, especially when my opp was taking mulligan into Discard. All I needed to draw was either manadenial OR a Piledriver OR a Matron OR 1 of my 10 hatepieces.
So I went first with Mountain, lackey Go. He duressed me, found nothing.
On the next turn Lackey connected into Warchief. I drew a Piledriver this turn but starting mindgaming again. I was thinking for a long time, asking him about the number of cards in his hand (wanted to pretend a Chalice of the Void). Then I dropped Chieftain and passed the turn. On his turn he Duressed me again, find nothing again. Then he used Lotus Petal to play a Preordain. Preordain found a land. Land-drop for another Preordain. Pass the turn.
Now, with Piledriver and Warren Instigator on my hand I needed a land to kill him on turn 3. That's what I found.

I pretended to use my Sideboard again. Actually al I was doing is shuffling my SB and MD in one Pile then pickout those cards again that were in SB after G1.

Game 3: I kept my seven cards after thinking for a long time again. Basically it was decided after 2 seconds: Mountain, Fetch, Wasteland, Lackey, Warchief, Chalice, Trap. My took mulligan to 6. On his first turn he pondered again. I drew a Matron, then played MOuntain, Lackey, Go.
He did nothing but Cantripping on his Turn. I connected with Lackey, into Warchief;, then wasted his U-Sea. Now I was one turn short from winning. Next turn my Lackey would connect into Matron (searching Earwig Squad). That'S what happened. I played Squad but didn't find a Tendrills to rip. I "only" found 2 AdN and 1 Iggy. So he had his Tendrills on hand. I did the math and came to the conclusion that we would never be able to generate storm-count 9 + Tendrills if I didn't use my Trap. So he tried to go off, would have been able to do 18 dmg, but I had a Trap anyways.

Game 3 was simply Overkill.

[Nessaja]

GoboLord; congratulations on your win, it's always impressive to get such a result in a large tournament.

On your list; I really think your sideboard needs work.

What do you use your sideboard for? To improve matchups. It doesn't really matter what matchups as long as they are improved.

You made a sideboard with very broad applications, which is great and you seem to have added an anti combo twist yet you only went 2-5 in the tournament against combo. Sure, it was 2-2 postboard, but when that doesn't lead to a match you win that's entirely useless. You need to win games not matches. A 25% chance to win a match is extremely low and in a field full with combo this deserved more attention then it got.

You don't add a singleton Tormod's Crypt in your sideboard against Dredge without any additional graveyard hate either. So lets establish the following, the minimum threshold for including a sideboard card: If a combination of cards doesn't consistently win you the match it's not worth including in your sideboard

Now you added cards that have applications elsewhere; chalice and earwig squad. My question is, would you have included these cards if you weren't trying to improve the combo matchup? If your answer is yes then you should drop your mindbreak traps, because they're not reaching the minimum threshold for a sideboard card (established above). If your answer is no then you would've been better off with other cards I'd say, there are several goblins sideboard card that deal better with your weaknesses.

I'm sure that the inclusion of these cards is the result of lots and lots of testing. What does the combo matchup postboard look like after many testgames? Because if it's any less then 70/30 it will statistically not likely win you a match; assuming game 1 is lost.

[Skeggi]

Nice job Gobolord, I like your sideboard alot. Although I'd go -1 Sharpshooter, +1 Perish, -1 Tinkerer. +1 Scrapper.

On your list; I really think your sideboard needs work.

Why?

What do you use your sideboard for? To improve matchups. It doesn't really matter what matchups as long as they are improved.

I don't agree with this. Ofcourse it matters what match-ups you improve: you need to focus on bad match-ups which are common in your meta. Combo is a bad match-up, if it is common in your meta, you need to focus on this. No-one cares about improvement on the Faerie Stompy match-up.

You made a sideboard with very broad applications, which is great and you seem to have added an anti combo twist yet you only went 2-5 in the tournament against combo. Sure, it was 2-2 postboard, but when that doesn't lead to a match you win that's entirely useless. You need to win games not matches. A 25% chance to win a match is extremely low and in a field full with combo this deserved more attention then it got.

Not only Combo, also green-creature-based aggro is a bad (and common) match-up. So you also need Perish. Next to that, you lose to Umezawa's Jitte, so you need a way to deal with that as well. But in hindsight, combo deserved more focus in the sideboard plan. But you simply don't know if you'd encounter it enough, next tournament you may encounter only 1 combo match-up.

Had bad draws and got pooped on both games. Goblins could really use a Shatter-on-a-Stick goblin to help deal with all this equipment running around these days.

Tuktuk Scrapper. You're welcome.

[Nessaja]

I don't agree with this. Ofcourse it matters what match-ups you improve: you need to focus on bad match-ups which are common in your meta.

For the sake of definition of why you need a sideboard it doesn't matter what matchups you improve. Categories include bad matchups, unwinnable matchups and even matchups. What matchups you eventually choose to improve is a metacall but that's not the point I was making.

Not only Combo, also green-creature-based aggro is a bad (and common) match-up. So you also need Perish. Next to that, you lose to Umezawa's Jitte, so you need a way to deal with that as well. But in hindsight, combo deserved more focus in the sideboard plan. But you simply don't know if you'd encounter it enough, next tournament you may encounter only 1 combo match-up.

I'm not sure what your point here is but you're not reacting on what I say.

The same applies to Jitte and Green creature hate as applies to combo. Against green creature decks, would you add 1 Perish to your sideboard? Even though it realistically won't improve your matchup against green decks when you only add one? Ofcourse you wouldn't, common sense tells you that it's a bad idea to fight a bad matchup with only 1 extra card that you can't tutor for. You need to add cards untill you can make the matchup significantly better otherwise you wasted sideboard slots on a match you won't win anyway.

GoboLord went 2-5 and spent at least 3 spots on a matchup he wasn't going to consistently win anyway. If you're going to devote sideboard slots to a very bad matchup atleast make sure you haven't wasted those spots. In the end; it worked out for him and even though he should've won 1 in 4 matches against combo he won 1 in 3 matches. But that doesn't make his sideboard optimal.

[GoboLord]

GoboLord; congratulations on your win, it's always impressive to get such a result in a large tournament.

Thanks.

On your list; I really think your sideboard needs work.
What do you use your sideboard for? To improve matchups.

Agreed.

It doesn't really matter what matchups as long as they are improved.

Disagreed. You need to improve MUs that YOU PERSONALLY have problems with. You should not (as Skeggi said) try to improve the Faerie Stompy MU if you can already beat that deck and if it isn't a part of the meta.

You made a sideboard with very broad applications, which is great and you seem to have added an anti combo twist yet you only went 2-5 in the tournament against combo. Sure, it was 2-2 postboard, but when that doesn't lead to a match you win that's entirely useless. You need to win games not matches. A 25% chance to win a match is extremely low and in a field full with combo this deserved more attention then it got.

I partly agree. A field with such a high number of combo decks needs more attention, that's right in my eyes. The Problem about large tourneys is that you may have EVERY competitive or established deck in the field. That'S why I'm trying to keep my SB flexible with cards like Goblin Tinkerer, Perish, Earwig Squad and Chalice of the Void. Thus, I have only 4 slots in SB that are suited for very specific MUs.
As I said before, I decided last minute between either 4 Leylines of the Void or 3 Mindbreak Trap + 1 Sharpshooter to fill these slots. When I learned that Dutch tournaments are likely to be flooded with combo I decided to pick Mindbreak Trap, because it's more effective against combo than Leyline of the Void (which doesn't do a shit against Belcher and Springtide and Solidarity).
Thus: I did not expect to face only combo decks. If that were so I'd have probably picked up a Threshold or ANT myself.

You don't add a singleton Tormod's Crypt in your sideboard against Dredge without any additional graveyard hate either. So lets establish the following, the minimum threshold for including a sideboard card: If a combination of cards doesn't consistently win you the match it's not worth including in your sideboard

Disagreed. It's not black-and-white as you picture it. A combination of cards is never suited to defeat only one deck. Most cards should help out in many MUs.

Now you added cards that have applications elsewhere; chalice and earwig squad. My question is, would you have included these cards if you weren't trying to improve the combo matchup? If your answer is yes then you should drop your mindbreak traps, because they're not reaching the minimum threshold for a sideboard card (established above). If your answer is no then you would've been better off with other cards I'd say, there are several goblins sideboard card that deal better with your weaknesses.

My answer is: Yes, Mindbreak Trap was there to improve the Combo MU. Although I don't agree with your "minimum threshold" I can explain myself.
From all Combodecks I expected (Belcher, ANT, TES, Solidarity, Springtide) I had only the chance to play against ANT and TES. Those 3 matches revealed the following: I won every match when I had Mindbreak Trap on my hand. Next, I assume that Mindbreak Trap is better against the other 3 decks, which I didn't face (Solidarity, Springtide and Belcher).
When I was pondering about the last 4 SB slots I wanted a card that is good in all of those 5 Combo-MUs. And that's what Mindbreak Trap is.

I'm sure that the inclusion of these cards is the result of lots and lots of testing. What does the combo matchup postboard look like after many testgames? Because if it's any less then 70/30 it will statistically not likely win you a match; assuming game 1 is lost.

I didn't take records and it is hard to tell from testing games if combo hate works out or not. There are 2 important factors that a testing game can never cover (at least when you are testing with the same person over and over, like I did):
(1) My oppents on tourneys most likely do not know what hatecards I run. Thus, it can be that they boarded Chain of Vapor because Chalice/Thorn is the most likely choice in Goblins. When they lose to Mindbreak Trap or Earwig Squad however they will probably side out Bounce because it's just ineffective against those two hatepieces. Then in Game 3 they may lose to Chalice @0 because they can't answer it properly.
That'S something you cannot simulate in testing-sessions
(2) WHile testing you'll probably smoke your weed, drink some beer, listen to music...in short: you are relaxed. On tourneys you have some pressure because you want to perfom well, you are exited, have high bloodpressure, are mentally output from Round 1-6...That's a factor which is much moe important for Combo than for Goblins (at least for me). In round 7 I'm still able to perfom on my max. level, do mindgaming, take my time to think about every possibilty and so on. Combo players will probably not have had an easy time until round 7.

In short: While testing this SB configuration I won about 50% of the matches, although my opponent knew what hatepieces I have and although we were in a relaxed environment. My testing-opponent knows how to play those decks well (he's the other guywho went to T4 wth ANT on the very same event).

[Nessaja]

Disagreed. You need to improve MUs that YOU PERSONALLY have problems with. You should not (as Skeggi said) try to improve the Faerie Stompy MU if you can already beat that deck and if it isn't a part of the meta.

Sure you do, if the entire meta is Faery Stompy then it can even be correct to improve a highly positive matchup. Even when you got a 70/30 matchup against a deck (pre and postboard) you will still lose 1 in 10 games against it. For the sake of definition of why you need a sideboard this doesn't matter, though. Which is what you are currently referring too.

I decided to pick Mindbreak Trap, because it's more effective against combo than Leyline of the Void (which doesn't do a shit against Belcher and Springtide and Solidarity).

Disagreed. It's not black-and-white as you picture it. A combination of cards is never suited to defeat only one deck. Most cards should help out in many MUs.

And here's the fundamental disagreement we have. In the case of Goblins, there are several weak spots in the deck that the opponent can exploit. In categories; combo, greencreatures, control/enchantments and dredge (an example - not strictly correct)

In the scenario where you need 14 cards to get a 60/40 matchup against the first 3 categories, do you use 1 card to deal with the 4th category or do you use the last card to improve the 4th category matchup?

In my eyes this is a really easy question but apparently you disagree, but lets just analyse:
-Adding 1 card to improve a negative matchup does not make the matchup significantly positive - adding a singleton tormod's crypt to deal with dredge means you effectively wasted that spot, quite simply because it won't win you a match.
-Adding the card to a matchup you're already dealing with steal loses you the dredge matchup - no difference there - but will win you one of the other 3 categories more effectively. You go from a 60/40 matchup to a 65/35 matchup for instance which is very significant when you lost game 1.
- Best case scenario is when you add a card that adds 2% to each matchup.

Note above is all theory, but it does apply to making a sideboard.

You expect that you have a 50/50 win chance post board. I tend to agree, but when you lose preboard that only makes you win 1 out of 4 matches and that just isn't enough to warrant 3 sideboard spots for me, especially when you consider that adding a few more gives you a significantly higher chance to get a hate card either in your opening 7 or after a mulligan.

Currently the sideboard in respect to combo is a little bit of nothing. Even though you added cards like chalice and squad for a broad approach I'm very certain that combo is a relevant factor in that decision and for that purpose it just doesn't work out.

I didn't take records and it is hard to tell from testing games if combo hate works out or not. There are 2 important factors that a testing game can never cover (at least when you are testing with the same person over and over, like I did):

I'm quite aware that diversified hate is difficult to answer, you even quoted me on that one. I've also been testing anti combo sideboards for tribals decks ever since Mystical Tutor got banned (because before that, it just wasn't worth it), but I don't see your sideboard reaching higher then 50/50 and it certainly won't make it a positive match. And as I said, as long as you consistently lose a matchup it's practically wasted sideboard space.

edit: just one last thing:

Those 3 matches revealed the following: I won every match when I had Mindbreak Trap on my hand.

This is - partly true, it's one of the more effective hate cards for sure. I believe the correct call though, with the sideboard investments you already made in regards to combo, is to play 4 mindbreak trap and less "general" hate that doesn't improve your combo matchup by quite as much.

[GoboLord]

I think then we can just agree on the fact that we have a fundamental disagreement.

[Nameless Two]

I suppose it also depends on the size of the tournament. If there are only 5 rounds I guess it is wiser to go with an all in sideboard against the archetypes you expect the most. If the tournament is 7+ rounds, it could be better to have a more widespread sideboard.

Another thing to take in account is how many cards you can actually board out. If your combo matchup is pure hell, and you expect to see quite a few of them, you'll have to make a good sideboard plan. But if you have no goblins left after boarding, you can't use the fact that you can slow down your opponents attacks. Typically combo decks have answers for just about anything you bring somewhere in their deck. If you can't put down enough pressure, your anti-combo pieces are wasted. If you have both Mindbreak Trap and Chalice of the Void in hand and play, and your only attackers are Warchief + Piledriver, your opponent will find an answer before dying. An opening hand with Chalice, Piledriver, Lackey, Ringleader, Mountain, Mountain, Rishadan Port might be pretty good. An opening hand with Chalice, Torn of Amethyst, Mindbreak Trap, Lackey, Mountain, Mountain, Rishadan Port is not quite as good.

So if you can only take out say, 10 cards, there is no real use in putting in more hate against one type of deck in your sideboard. In which case you can spread the remainder of your cards for other matchups.

In this case 3 Perish, which work in several matchups. And they can make matchups that are already doable into more favorable ones. Plus, a change of only 3 cards means the goblin deck won't be watered down too much.

The Sharpshooter and the (what should in my opinion be) Scrapper are ofcourse not the random 1 offs, but between Matron and Ringleader quite easily found sideboard pieces that allow you to have a significant increase in answers to problematic situation through minimal goblin-performance loss.

What Nessaja seems to be trying to say is that it is not rewarding to run sideboard cards for certain matchups if the gain is not high. If you run cards against combo, run the best against combo, don't run cards that are slightly better than your main deck cards in most matchups, run cards that are much better than your main deck cards in a single matchup.

Gobolord appears to tell us: When making a sideboard, take cards that are good in multiple matchups, if you expect combo, make an anti-combo sideboard, but run the sideboard cards that can also find use in other matchups. That way theres a bigger chance you can increase your decks performance after boarding.

What my logic tells me (my logic isn't failproof though...) is that Nessaja's approach increases our chances against a couple of decks in the field by a HIGH percentage (gaining a LOT by knowing what kind of decks will be played a lot).
Gobolords approach increases our chances against a wide range of decks by a NOT QUITE AS HIGH percentage.

Now I think Nessaja has a better chance on winning a tournament if facing the expected decks, and not much else.
Gobolords approach will probably have a better win-percentage, the more decks it faces.

I think Nessaja needs more luck in the matchups, and Gobolord needs more luck during the game. It's just about what you are after. Do you want a fair chance any game your play? Go with Gobolord. Do you want to be sure you can wreck those three top decks most of the time? Go with Nessaja.

(note that Gobolord did anticipate lots of combo, but has a sideboard against a wide array of combo, whereas Nessaja would bring:???... I'm curious)

[Lejay]

In a field full of combos I would go with the option of playing another deck frankly.

[J.V.]

I've been testing Mono Red Goblins as of late with a decent amount of success. Magus of the Moon has been the absolute balls, he just single-handily wins games.
Lands:24
4 Wasteland
4 Rishadan Port
16 Mountain

Creatures:32
4 Goblin Lackey
4 Goblin Ringleader
4 Goblin Matron
4 Goblin Piledriver
4 Goblin Warchief
4 Gempalm Incinerator
3 Seige Gang Commander
3 Magus of The Moon
1 Stingscourger
1 Goblin Chieftain

Noncreature Spells:4
4 Aether Vial

Sideboard:15
4 Pyrokenesis
4 Chalice of The Void
3 Mindbreak Trap
2 Pithing Needle
1 Umezawa's Jitte

[Nessaja]

What Nessaja seems to be trying to say is that it is not rewarding to run sideboard cards for certain matchups if the gain is not high. If you run cards against combo, run the best against combo, don't run cards that are slightly better than your main deck cards in most matchups, run cards that are much better than your main deck cards in a single matchup.

Almost but not quite, what I say that if you use your sideboards to improve matchups, it needs to win the match - not a game. I can keep going back to Tormod's Crypt but lets take Leyline of the Void as another example. If you run 4 Leyline of the Void and your matchup postboard becomes 50/50 (as opposed to lets say 30/70 pre board then you won't effectively win a match with it (only 1 out of 4~). At that point, you're wasting sideboard space as you could've used that sideboard space to actually effectively win a matchup, brining a 40/60 matchup to 60/40 post board means you'll win the majority of the time while the gain in both matches is 20%.

I guess there's always a chance to get lucky; and that with only 2 Mindbreak Traps and 2 Ravenous Traps you'll win the combo and dredge matchup but statistically it just doesn't work that way.

So if you can only take out say, 10 cards, there is no real use in putting in more hate against one type of deck in your sideboard. In which case you can spread the remainder of your cards for other matchups.

I'm not advocating to use more then 10 combo hate cards, I'd advocate them to be more specialized.

I think Nessaja needs more luck in the matchups, and Gobolord needs more luck during the game. It's just about what you are after. Do you want a fair chance any game your play? Go with Gobolord. Do you want to be sure you can wreck those three top decks most of the time? Go with Nessaja.

(note that Gobolord did anticipate lots of combo, but has a sideboard against a wide array of combo, whereas Nessaja would bring:???... I'm curious)

It's pretty clear cut where the weaknesses of tribal aggro lie. I'd say. If you can have a board against green creatures.dec (3 Perish) 1 for artifacts (tinkerer) and 1 for other tribal aggro (sharpshooter) you still got dredge and combo to worry about with 10 spots of combo hate, what Gobolord chose to do was also devoting those spots to also shore up the Burn matchup but I don't think that's optimal at all, because he effectively still has a negative combo matchup which is much more common to face. I am in full agreement of using 10 cards against combo, what we disagree on is the order of importance.

In the first place combo hate needs to be effective against combo decks; after that it's a plus if it's also good against other decks. So with that, our major disagreement comes in the form of Earwig Squad which is slow and will only be effective if you got some sort of backup with it. Whereas a card like Thorn of the Amethyst is a turn faster and actually limits your opponent in finding an answer, that's the kind of time you need. IMO 4 Trap, 3 Thorn 2 Chalice. If that Squad is absolutely essential for other matchups... which I kind of disagree with 1 Squad for tutoring purposes.

[GoboLord]

It's pretty clear cut where the weaknesses of tribal aggro lie. I'd say. If you can have a board against green creatures.dec (3 Perish) 1 for artifacts (tinkerer) and 1 for other tribal aggro (sharpshooter) you still got dredge and combo to worry about with 10 spots of combo hate, what Gobolord chose to do was also devoting those spots to also shore up the Burn matchup but I don't think that's optimal at all, because he effectively still has a negative combo matchup which is much more common to face. I am in full agreement of using 10 cards against combo, what we disagree on is the order of importance.

True: we disagree on the order of importance.

But what do you (Nessaja) think was more common on the Dutch Masters:
(1) Combo
or
(2) all other decks against which Earwig Squad is worth boarding?

[JamieW89]

Setting Chalice@1 was basically gambling and it didn't work out. I just wanted to try it since I had no turn-2-play anyway.
About the ANT:

It was round 7 and we couldn't draw in the Top8 because there were many too many players with 15 points. So we had to play it out. My opponent was very nervous to begin with and I really wanted to win that - so I used every dirty trick I know. I played according to the rules but I'm quite good in setting my opponent under pressure psychologically. This is actually important because I don't think I would have won if he was more self-assured about what he did.

Game 1: We didn't know each other. I kept a hand with 6, he kept his 7. He pondered on turn 1, then DUressed me on Turn 2 and went off - too fast.

IN: 4 Chalice, 3 Mindbreak Trap, 3 Earwig Squad
OUT: 4 Vial, 3 Gempalm, 1 STinger, 1 Wort, 1 Ringleader

Game 2: We drew our hands. My first hand was unkeepable (without any colored land or hate), but I took my time to think about it (actually I was checking out my opponents reaction on that. He decided to take mulligan, so did I. My 6 cards were: 2 Lands, Lackey, Warchief, Instigator, Chieftain. Again I was thinking for a long time - this time because I was calculating how fast this hand was. Turn 4 seemed alright for me, especially when my opp was taking mulligan into Discard. All I needed to draw was either manadenial OR a Piledriver OR a Matron OR 1 of my 10 hatepieces.
So I went first with Mountain, lackey Go. He duressed me, found nothing.
On the next turn Lackey connected into Warchief. I drew a Piledriver this turn but starting mindgaming again. I was thinking for a long time, asking him about the number of cards in his hand (wanted to pretend a Chalice of the Void). Then I dropped Chieftain and passed the turn. On his turn he Duressed me again, find nothing again. Then he used Lotus Petal to play a Preordain. Preordain found a land. Land-drop for another Preordain. Pass the turn.
Now, with Piledriver and Warren Instigator on my hand I needed a land to kill him on turn 3. That's what I found.

I pretended to use my Sideboard again. Actually al I was doing is shuffling my SB and MD in one Pile then pickout those cards again that were in SB after G1.

Game 3: I kept my seven cards after thinking for a long time again. Basically it was decided after 2 seconds: Mountain, Fetch, Wasteland, Lackey, Warchief, Chalice, Trap. My took mulligan to 6. On his first turn he pondered again. I drew a Matron, then played MOuntain, Lackey, Go.
He did nothing but Cantripping on his Turn. I connected with Lackey, into Warchief;, then wasted his U-Sea. Now I was one turn short from winning. Next turn my Lackey would connect into Matron (searching Earwig Squad). That'S what happened. I played Squad but didn't find a Tendrills to rip. I "only" found 2 AdN and 1 Iggy. So he had his Tendrills on hand. I did the math and came to the conclusion that we would never be able to generate storm-count 9 + Tendrills if I didn't use my Trap. So he tried to go off, would have been able to do 18 dmg, but I had a Trap anyways.

Game 3 was simply Overkill.

That ANT player would be me.
You mention me playing discard about 5 times but I played 7 chants, 0 discard :P
Game-1 was a fast IGG kill, turn-2 or 3.
Game-2 I kept a 6 with some cantrips and mana. I never cantrip into an infernal tutor and you have some nuts damage for a mull to 6 on the play.
Game-3 I have Infernal, some rits and a cantrip. You play turn-1 Chalice@0, I topdeck LED and preordain into another one. Then I topdeck Tendrils the turn after which is pretty bad, although you had the Earwig the turn after. I was short a storm by infernalling for extra rituals and then tendrilsing so I was hoping you'd be stupid and trap something else, but you played it well.

It was a dissapointing end to a good day for me, losing to a pretty decent matchup (even with traps/chalices/earwigs) after not being able to draw in.

[GoboLord]

You mention me playing discard about 5 times but I played 7 chants, 0 discard :P

Mea culpa. I mentioned that you Duressed me twice. Those "Duresses" have probably been Ponders and Preordains then.

[Nessaja]

True: we disagree on the order of importance.

But what do you (Nessaja) think was more common on the Dutch Masters:
(1) Combo
or
(2) all other decks against which Earwig Squad is worth boarding?

There's a difference between worth boarding and significantly increasing matchups that aren't good enough yet. In any case, 3 seems excessive. And to be honest - I don't like Squad in any matchup, its most viable application (combo) it is outclassed in by other cards.

[GoboLord]

There's a difference between worth boarding and significantly increasing matchups that aren't good enough yet. In any case, 3 seems excessive. And to be honest - I don't like Squad in any matchup, its most viable application (combo) it is outclassed in by other cards.

In my eyes combo is not it's most viable application. And: Yes, there is better combo hate than Earwig Squad.

[Nessaja]

Fair enough. Lets leave it at that. You obviously did great at the Dutch Legacy Masters regardless of/thanks to the Earwig Squads.

I'd be interested in the matchups you boarded them in and why you boarded them in. What matchups did it win you the game?