Just wanted to say thanks! I really like that RUG delver, looks awesome to play..

Paradigm:

I think we mix up the discussion here (probably my fault). It's not only the Mana Drains that helps the control-first-combo-later gameplan but also the additional togs and maindeck berserk. And keeping UU open was not much of a difficulty because as i said earlier, you didn't really try to force the deck to be as fast as possible. Sometimes you held on to your gush so you could use it as Wasteland protection or if you already made your land drop for the turn. But maybe this just is a matter of playing style, i haven't played that much against the new metagame of flash and ichorid, so its hard to tell.

To answer your questions.

1) I'm not sure that 4 mana drain is the way to go, maybe 3 och even 2 might be the right number. If i would cut something from the list presented earlier in this thread i would probably cut regrowth, merchant scroll 3 and 4. Maybe the forth duress. Lotus Petal and Strip Mine, the street wraiths (but well, then i would include sleight of hand instead). Those are the cuttable cards in my opinion.

2) Hard to tell, there are significant differences for sure. Back then you faced a lot of blue based control decks and workshop aggro. None of which are any part of todays metagame (after gifts restriction, even though my limited playtesting with a mind twist control deck showed some promise ). Ichorid is a completely new kind of deck and combo is faster and more played. So, i really don't know . But i think it is safe to say that the 2007 metagame is much faster than the 2003 metagame. So maybe thats why mana drain doesn't fit. But still, wouldn't more togs and maindeck berserk suit a faster metagame?

I'm not saying that "this is the way it should be built!!", because i have no idea, i just wanted to ask the questions that came to my mind.

Thanks for your answer, but still i'm not sure if this playstyle is the best. The problem as i see it is that a starting hand without a Dryad is not a very good starting hand if this is how the deck is built even though the amount of cheap draw. In the old GAT if you did'nt have an early dryad you could just counter some spells, build card advantage, find a tog and gush-zerk for the win. Although this still is possible i really think that 2003 GAT > 2007 GAT if you don't have a Dryad in your starting seven.

I'm not sure, but it seems to me that most people just remember the games where GAT won on the second turn after gush-bond-ywill crazyness. Most of the games were not played out like that (well, gush-bond-ywill crazyness occured often, but the deck did not force it to happen as soon as possible). The 2007 GAT decks reflect this i think and really try to force the deck to be aggro-combo and leaving the control bit out.

I might be wrong, and i really need to playtest more, i just wanted to share this observation with other people that maybe have become blinded by the Gush crazyness.

It seems that even tho this list is not many cards away from the standard list from a couple of years ago it plays alot different. Focus seem to be more on comboing out with Gush and fastbond to build up a huge dryad. The thing i liked about "old" GAT was its ability to drop an early dryad and control the game from there in some matchups(seems like a viable strategy still but the lack of mana drain/counterspell makes it harder), while in other matchups focus more on Gush/Fastbond/Tog/Berserk combo (here focus is more on building up a dryad instead of tog, maybe works just as well).

Don't you miss the additional togs, the mana drains/counterspells or the maindeck berserk?

Is this version really better than the 2003 version?

Well, maybe apprentice logs are not the best way to show how games are played. But better than just leaving it at theory. The problem with doing like smmenen did is that i guess it takes alot more time then just posting apprentice logs. And i rather have many apprentice logs as a resource for learning about matchups i find troublesome than reading about 2-3 matchups in nice plain english. For example, when smmenen posted his hulk build early this year(22 mana sources), i tried it and had big troubles with the fish matchup. I did'nt know if i played the deck wrong, i looked through plenty of articles but no one covered the fish matchup. I guess he had'nt tested against fish at all because now in the new Smmenentog he talks about fish as a troublesome matchup. Anyways, if i had been able to look up some apprentice logs to see if i did something wrong i could have:
A) Learnt to play the deck better.
B) Seen that it was'nt just me that had problems with that matchup.

Non-apprentice matchup analysis are probably more entertaining to read, but a lot of apprentice logs could be more useful for the reader. Anyways, the writers of those articles do what they want

Try it. Im not much of a theory guy, but TFK works extremly well in gat, at least when i use it.

I think many other strategy writers could learn from rakso and his apprentice logs. Apprentice logs are a way to show how the deck works in practice instead of just posting stuff like "just drop the tog and win". Although keeper vs keeper is not that interesting to me .

When i play this deck the card that i fear most is trinisphere. I have yet to win a game when this card resolves. ESG helps a bit but usually the workshop deck have gotten enough time to do what they want and removing trinisphere is not enough to get back in the game.
Has anyone tried SB annul or even goblin vandal to deal with trinisphere? I realise that if the workshop deck goes first there's nothing to do except fow.
The dice roll gets more and more important .

Has Enlightened Tutor been tried ? I have begun to like it more and more in combo because the ability to set up a second turn kill with lotus. It also finds necro or fastbond. The problem as i see it is that there is not a single card in the maindeck that i would like to cut :/. Would be interesting to see other peoples conclusions on this card.