The problems I see with the Hydra plan are twofold: 

Primarily, as I mentioned earlier, Hydra just isn't that effective without a stable way of recurring it.  The way I see it, most artifact decks would not be running Triskelion if they could not continually abuse it with welder (or at least have the reasonable expectation of doing so).  Ancient hydra, in an Oath deck that does not run blessing, falls into the same category.  It is an excellent tool, but it is in my opinion wrong for the deck. 

Secondarily, having 2-3 creatures in the board is a huge spatial commitment.  I realize that the Gifts deck that T8'd was able to do this, however his entire sideboard was dedicated to bringing in the Oath portion of the deck.  This deck works in a fundamentally different way, giving the opponent both looks game 1.  With the number of cards that I was already forced to cut out of the sideboard, I don't think it is possible to run 2-3 creatures main, and then 2 more in the side.  Ancient Hydra may well fill the Triskelion slot in the sideboard, however I am still fairly hesitant to insert it due to the mana considerations of activating it.  Triskelion can be tinkered out if need be, shoot a few little guys, and then having done his job swings for 1 or 2 until dealt with.  The fact that he can be tinkered for puts him head and shoulders above Hydra in my analysis of the deck

@ Fantaman
I really liked the 3 creature configuration, as it let me have a good chance of getting 2 haste creatures into play.  However, there is the option of cutting down to DSC and Akroma.  I'm not sure what single card would merit that cut, however.  I am not opposed to putting the 4th gifts back in, but at the moment I see no real reason to do so.

In regards to wasteland, my thoughts during testing were as follows:  with the exception of the Oath mirror, all the decks that generally pack wasteland have a horrible time with Oath.  I was willing to give up complete mana stability in those matches (mainly Stax and Fish) for a bomb that could most likely not be dealt with.  In retrospect, this plan may turn out to be faulty, but as or right now I can't really find a better mana base to work with.

Woodripper if is solid, but with no solid way to recure him as GWS Oath has in blessing, I felt it was a liability.  I also did not want an answer to Stax that was based solely on activating Oath, as that would be the easiest portion of the deck for them to shut off early if they got ahead.

As for the mana leak argument, I'm not sure if you are arguing for or against them.  I had them main due to the ability to raise my 1st turn and early game counterspell ability, and I think it was the right call.  Did you agree or disagree?

@ WW
The reason I wanted to run 3 guys main was that I mistakenly expected a good deal of Oath hate.  I wanted to make sure that a single cap activation couldn't lock me out of the game.  In hindsight, as I said regarding Fantaman's post, dropping Razia could be a consideration, but I am not sure what to fill that slot with.

@ ForceFieldYou
I tested Hydra, but again, without blessing to recur, it came up short in a good number of matches.  I felt that Razia was a better addition in the 3rd creature slot. 

I think in the metagame that is the NE, there is no reason to really run Kataki main deck.  Unless you have perfect clarity that the metagame you run into here is NOT definted by mana drain, True Believer is an absolute bomb.  The deck can support it, and the savage advantage it gives against gifts and slaver, let alone all sorts of tendrils based combo makes him a must counter.  When you know that your opponent can't win uless they deal with your 2/2, you are much more able to be aggressive and select with pinpoint accuracy what threats against you need to be countered.  In all, I think this was an extremely insightful maindeck addition to fight the metagame that was expected.

That was the gigantic thing I completely forgot to mention.  I felt that overall, leaks and Drain were fairly interchangable in the deck, except if you were going to play the deck very aggresively.  I wanted to be able to get out of the gate as aggresively as possible, and that meant forcing the issue with Oath.  It also meant that if you oathed on turn 1 or 2 off a mox, and your land was wasted, only if your mox was a sapphire would dropping your second land allow you to counter again your next turn.  I also wanted to raise my ability to counter on turn 1 as much as possible, as I felt that Stax and Oath would be strong contenders at the event (turn's out that they weren't, but I still was paired aginst them).  With the addition of the 2 angels, you turn the deck more into a beatdown strategy with gifts as a back up, whereas I felt the DSC only version was completely reversed, wanting to play the gifts route, and oathing if that was convenient and favourable.  This configuration lets you play as aggresively as the deck can, and still provides maximum control support.  However, without the angels, I think drain is the correct call.

I realize that the Gifts Oath deck is nothing new, and made top 8 at the Chicago SCG event, but I felt that after my hours of testing and play for this past weekend's SCG Rochester, that the Mean Deck version of the deck was significantly stronger and less succeptible to hate after adding Oath than it was before.  I know that this is a fairly strong statement, and one which I do not take lightly, but before I get into match-up analysis and the data that I collected, I present the list I played to a 12th place finish over the weekend.

Gifts Oath

1 Black Lotus
1 Mox Jet
1 Mox Ruby
1 Mox Pearl
1 Mox Emerald
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Lotus Petal
1 Sol Ring
1 Mana Vault
1 Mana Crypt

4 Oath Of Druids

1 Darksteel Colossus
1 Akroma, Angel of Wrath
1 Razia, Boros Archangel

4 Brainstorm
4 Force of Will
4 Mana Leak
3 Gifts Ungiven
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Krosan Reclamation
1 Fact or Fiction
1 Rebuild
1 Mystical Tutor

1 Time Walk
1 Demonic Tutor
1 Burning Wish
1 Regrowth
1 Yawgmoth's Will
1 Recoup
1 Tinker

2 Polluted Delta
2 Flooded Strand
3 Forbidden Orchard
2 Volcanic Island
2 Underground Sea
1 Tundra
1 Tropical Island
2 Island
1 Tolarian Academy

SB
2 R.E.B
1 Pyroblast
3 Oxidize
2 Annul
2 Ground Seal
2 Pithing Needle
1 Balance
1 Triskelion
1 Tendrils of Agony

The deck is exceptionally resistant to hate, especially given the fact that an early unanswered Oath is incredibly strong right now.  As soon as the field begins to seriously prepare for Oath this may change, but with the apparent reemergance of Control Salver as a viable deck choice (did it honestly ever go away?), I don't know if one can prepare to face Stax, Oath, and Slaver at once.  In a pick your poison metagame such as what we have seen lately, it appears that Oath is getting the least recognition.  As far as match-ups go, this is what I found in my testing.

Control Slaver:  The two players I tested with were especially interested in winning the GWS Oath match, and they found that they had a great deal of trouble with the deck running a traditional Slaver build, so in testing we decided to remove Duress and add Swords and Jester's Cap main, and even so, the match-up still went 60-40 in favor of Gifts.  The ability to drop an early Oath and then build for a Tendrils kill while Slaver searches for creature answers is HUGE here.  Generally, I found all of the Goblin Welder match-ups to be extremely difficult with DSC as the only creature, and as Slaver was the first extensive testing we did, it was that testing that convinced me that duress was an extraneous slot and could be filled by the traditional Oath angels.  Once you had a 2/3 shot at hitting a non-weldable creature, this match-up percentage skyrocketed in favor of Gifts Oath.  After board you can bring in blasts, needles, and possibly oxidizes, although in my testing I realized that oxidezes were generally overkill and were unnecessary.

Gifts Decks:
In general, this is one of the 2 match-ups where it pays to always be the aggressor.  An early Oath is almost game against Gifts, especially if you have any sort of control elements in your hand.  Again, the ability to bring Oath up a creature that their colossus cannot block will win you this game, as you get the extra swing, and can chump block with your second angel if necessary to go lethal.  Generally the FlameVault version Andy Probasco ran at the tournament has a bit of a better match up, as they have an easier route to victory with engineered explosives main and the time vault kill, however the match should still be largely in your favor.  When I played Andy this weekend, I only brought in blasts and needles, as I really don't think anything else will make a difference.  I thought about oxidize as an easy way to attack the mana development that Gifts so clearly needs, however I felt it was an unnecessary addition.

5CStax:
This is the match I wanted all day long, as this is where your MD Oath shines.  The deck has a horrible time with early, large men, and you have plenty in the board to stunt their early development.  I chose oxidize over sacred ground for many reasons, but the main two were that a) it answers a first turn lock piece much more efficiently, and b) it costs 2, which is the number that this decks fears chalice being set to.  Ground seal is another possibiity here, but I decided that I only wanted to bring it in games where I was going first, as the chance of hitting ti turn 1 or 2 was where it was best.  Later in the game it is still efective, but with ground seal out, you no longer have to worry about welder, and it allows you to be much more aggresive with your counterspells, something you couldn't do if it came down later.  Annul was also a bomb in this match, as it gives you 9 ways to answer a first turn lock piece (FOW, Annul, and Oxidize, for those of you playing our home game).  While you arre still susceptible to losing to an explosive opening, nothing that you bring in will greatly change that, so I felt fairly confident with this main deck and board plan against the most dominating board control deck in the environment (MidWest excepted).  As a side note, rebuild also went into the main as an answer to the 5C and UbaStax problem main deck, in case an early Oath was impossible or was dealt with.

UbaStax:
Sadly, I did not get the amount of testing done I wanted against this, but from the roughly week or so we played this match, it came down to early Oath versus early UbaMask.  No cards in this were any different than in the Stax matchup other than UbaMask.  Generally, when it succesfully resolved, this match was poor for my deck.  However, having the rebuild/tendrils option made this match slightly better preboard, and after we boarded, I felt confident that I had about an even matchup with the deck, and I felt that was about as good as I could get without devoting massive SB space to it.  Again, annul and oxidize came in, as did the tendrils.  I felt with the amount of disruption UbaStax could generate in the form of null rod and chalice (which would most likely be set at 0 and 2), it was better to have the tendrils main than to try and Wish it out. 

Oath:
This match-up is fairly close.  Game one I found it to be slightly in Oath's favor (to be fair, we only tested against GWS oath, which I felt would be predominant), but again, being able to stalemate with an Oath and then attempt to Tendrils was huge.  Having the anglels also meant that you could actually race them if Oath became active, something that Colossus cannot do.  In the only Oath Mirror I faced all day, My opponent opened with a First turn duress, took tinker, and then dropped his own Oath of a Lotus, not realizing I was playing Oath myself.  I was able to promptly Demonic for Orchard and kill him with his own Oath, as he did not have an Oarchard until his third turn.  After board, you bring is triskelion and needle.  Wasteland is so key to this matchup, needle is warranted even though it has only 2 real targets (Wasteland and Triskelion).  Blasts can be brought in against other Oath variants, but I didn't really see an overwhelming need to do so.

Fish:
Generally, all fish is a good matchup.  GENERALLY.  UW fish can be problematic, as you have to carefully weigh the options as to whether or not to Oath early, fearing a swords.  Generally, I tried to bluff a straight gifts deck in game 1 in both matches, and then in game 2 I played Oath very aggresively, and usually seals and other disenchant effects had been removed, leaving me only swords to deal with.  This is not always possible, expecially if fish gets down an early chalice, but it was my game plan and it worked exceptionally well in both matches.  I had little to bring in against fish other than the balance and the triskelion, however in retrospect I would have brought in the needles against stormscape apprentice and/or rootwater thief, I think.

Fast Combo:  This was the matchup that worried me, and thankfully I did not see a great deal of it.  You have no real options here other than racing them, which you are mildly prepared to do.  Post board you do not have a lot of answers either, but again, I did not test these matchups much, as I was really hoping it would be sorely lacking in this metagame (luckily, it was almost completely non-existant). 

Dragon:
This is what I was waiting for.  My last 2 run ins with the Canadian Vintage players had taught me to be extremely respectful to the resiliance of Dragon, and I wanted to make sure I was prepared for it.  Ironically enough, it was a loss to Dragon that knocked me out of top 8, but I digress.  The game 1 matchup is fair enough, and you really want to apply pressure with Oath.  I almost completely ignored the Gifts portion of the deck, and focused solely on activating and protecting Oath.  SB, you can bring in annul, needle (definitely set to bazaar and compulsion), and ground seal.  You do, however, really need to remove your targeted graveyard recursion, as dropping and protecting ground seal is a huge priority.  I didn't take it out, and it turned out to be a horrible mistake.  Blasts can also come in, as they are another way of allowing you to force through an Oath against their FOW's, but they may not be necessary.

Overall, I was exceptionally pleased with this deck in testing and during the tournament.  The fact that the other gift deck I saw running Oath (SB, in that case) made T8 again encouraged me in my belief that I was on the right track with evolving the deck for the current metagame. The changes I made to the maindeck may be a bit controversial, but I never really missed duress, and the fourth gifts (which I removed for a MD rebuild) never mattered either.  I only cast gifts more than once during a game on one occasion, the first time gifting for mana against stax, the second time gifting for Oath and recursion.  The strength of Oath main is shown in many of Gifts worst matches, and the addition of the 2 angels allows you to aggresively gifts into an opposing welder, something that the deck could not do previously.  It also allows you to allow a turn 1 welder to resolve, as this neither a serious threat to your creature base, nor a serious threat on their side of the board.  The rebuild allows for much greater ease in casting a lethal tendrils, and gets around chalice at 2, which was nearly an auto-loss for this deck previously, as the only must counter spell left in your deck was tinker.  Thoughts and comments would be greatly appreciated, and as always, thanks for paying attention.

No, I meant I understood the consequences of him playing the Oath, it just seemed that he was saying that his opponent shouldn't have been able to activate his Oath, or something along those lines.  Maybe I just misinterpreted. 

 "This just hit me, and i'm dumb founded that I didn't notice it before. Game one he oathed with my oath, *sigh* i'm an idiot".


Maybe I missed it, but why exactly is this a problem?

The problem that you will most likely run into is that without the acceleration the true power gives, you will most likely have a very difficult time against aggro decks.  Not being able to start powering out threats on turn 1 or 2 all of the time gives aggro and aggro-control like fish a valuable opportunity to build up the resources they need to overcome your lock.  Given the fact that your workshop replacement of ancient tomb also deals 2 damage to you every time you tap it, they will have a much easier time getting you down to low life where the game hangs in a very tenuous balance that is often in your opponents favor.  I have always found it impossible to replace power in a deck like this, as moxen not only act as an accelerant, but also as  easy to cast welder fodder.  Overall, if you need to use no power, and would still like to use a welder/workshop deck, I think that the Transmute decks that were popular on the forum a few months ago would be a better fit for you.  As for the second part of the question, control slaver without drains is problematic at best, and is less likely to succeed than powerless stax.

I realize that this suggestion may be flamed by many, but I have been testing it in various situations, and it seems to be, while possible not optimal, at least an area I am willing to test a bit more.  In both the stax and the Fish matchups, or any match up where Chalices and other artifacts are the main problem, I really feel meltdown may be to slow.  What about pulverize?  While losing 2 volcanic Islands will no doubt be a major issue, doesn't the ability to slip by almost every chalice or sphere make it at least test worthy?  Under trinisphere, which is where it would be the worst, it costs 3.  Also, it is a valid wish target, even if that does mean you now have to win with Colossus (unless you have previously boarded in tendrils, of course).  It also wrecks aether vial, jitte, and other non-desireable artifacts, leaving your opponent in a bind, while fueling a massive will on your part.  Thoughts?

Arcane Lab is a solid idea, as long as it can be adequately protected.  The cost of 3 shouldn't be too costly, as long as you are running a full power compliment and at least have the chance of dropping the Lab in the very early game.  If you are aren't running power, then the Lab is a component that is playing directly into Mana Drain, as casting it turn 2 - 4 is exactly the time span you don't want a threat drained.  Also, remember that the Lab itself counts as your spell for the turn, so you are giving your opponent a free spell, and an Ancestral or other spell like gifts or bounce on your end step cold be debilitating.

I ran into this problem at Origins, at least very early in my testing.  While it isn't an amazing answer, I found that SBing 3 Damping Matrix was actually a very good answer to this.  While it is a bit slow, it does answer a good deal of problem cards that can make the deck work less optimaly.  Primarily it will deal with crypt, but it also shuts off welder, all of Stax creatures, mindslaver, and a good deal of other random hate.  I was also pleased that while being so effective, it did absolutely nothing to my deck other than shore up my board position and occasionaly allow me to use Academy for a slightly larger amount of mana.  Overall I'm not sure if this is the correct answer to crypt, but it did work well for me all weekend


Welder is generally the least of your concerns.  While it does pose a problem in the early game, shutting of a potential early tinker -> colossus, it doesn't impact your board position as much as it forces you to then deal with the artifacts that your opponent will be welding.  While this sounds fairly obvious, it is true.  The ability to tendrils out the game "fairly" simply is extremely strong, and a good number of my wins came off a Tendrils at 10 - 12 storm in the early to mid game.  Post boarding in game 2, I would very often simply side out tinker and Colossus for tendrils, thus making a good deal of the bounce and their welders less effective to my game, and allowing me to focus solely on adding to my storm count.


Not even going to continue this, as I firmly agree with everything Steve has said.


I went 3 - 0 against combo playing Gifts on the weekend, beating 2 clamp decks (which the deck rolls as long as you have any type of early countermagic) and Jdizzle playing Deathlong.  While game is is entirely about who gets the nuts faster, as I truly believe that you can race them if you get a good/great hand, the post SB games were swung heavily in my favor due to Mystic Remora.  The threat of the Remora forced JD to slow his game plan a great deal, allowing me several turns of draw and search, and when he finally felt he had a strong enough hand to attempt to go off, I outdrew him and out powered him card for card off the Remora, forcing him to pass the turn and allowing me to Storm him out game 2 and 3.  The biggest realization I had against combo was that the deck really shouldn't be trying to win with a Colossus, it should be racing against them to get a lethal tendrils.  Once I came to that realization, the match-up became much "simpler" because it was clear on each and every one of my tutors and brainstorms exactly what I should be searching out, allowing me to focus solely on winning the storm count. 


I never really had a problem in the late game.  Granted, I was never really in a situation late where I was stripped of resources in my hand and looking to actively find answers, but I never really had a concern with what was coming off the top.  Generally I had worked myself into a position where my draws were maximizing my Will, which is what I wanted.  I can definitely see a scenario where you are stalled out or stopped early or mid game and forced to go into top deck mode, but on the occasions I did see Steve, Kevin and the other gifts players have to do this, the sheer weight of merchant scrolls and brainstorms in the deck still allowed them to rather quickly find the pieces they needed to finish the game off.  While merchant for brainstorm is not the play you dream about making late game, it is still exceptionally strong, especially if you are in a situation that will conceivably lead to either Will or Rebuild, as either one will allow you a much easier path to a Tendrils victory.

Kevin really did play Gifts, and it was bittersweet seeing him cast Drains and forces, even though his play was excellent.  Somehow I just kept expecting everything to end up with Karn being in play.

I picked up the deck early Thursday morning on my way to Origins, and it took me a few days to get moderately comfortable with it, so I didn't play it until the Champs Prelim on Saturday.  Having little time to work out an "optimal" sideboard, this is what I ended up running:

1 Red Elemental Blasts
1 Pyroblast
1 Echoing Truth
2 Pyroclasm
3 Damping Matrix
2 Tormod's Crypt
3 Mystic Remora
1 Tendrils of Agony
1 Sundering Titan

The Truth, I believe after seeing the deck work on Saturday and Sunday,  should definitely be a sorcery speed bounce spell to be wished for.  The crypts I only used once, but they were exceptionally strong.  Also, I think that the mystic remoras are metagame calls, but I saw a good deal of combo, including several kobold clamp and deathlong, and a lot of Gifts mirrors, and I think that are exceptionally strong.  The Titan was my "techy" addition to the sideboard, and it came about as a last minute addition to the deck after analysing the play of most of the people piloting the deck.  As I saw the matchups go down, many poeple were allowing tinker for Colossus to resolve, and then attempting to deal with the Colossus, especially in the mirror.  The belief that the deck has such unencumbered card search allowed many people to play as if the card necessary, rebuild or truth, was already in hand, and thus it was easier to fight over that than the tinker.  I played Steve in round 1 and resolved tinker --> titan against him, nuking his board.  It would have been a back breaker but for a small mistake on my part not countering a brainstorm I believe, and his savagely tight play and top decking.  Overall, I was very pleased with my SB configuration.

What type of matchup does this deck have with dragon?  It's not a huge contender in my area, however it does always seem to be a thorn in my side.  I would assume that since it is a BIT slower than other combo, it may be a better match up, however I am fairly unfamiliar with this deck past a few test games.

I understand the argument about Juggernauts and Su-chi in regards to TA, however I think you are looking at this the wrong way.  I think no matter what the article says to the contrary, the Transmute deck functions primarily as a combo deck. It's general purpose is to drop whatever bomb will beat the opponent as quickly as possible.  While that is a viable strategy, it is not what I am suggesting here.  First and foremost, this deck is about the artifact beats.  You want Juggernaut and Su Chi early as they are a fast, powerful clock to put your opponent on.  Later, when these threats have been dealt with, then you go on the attack with your bullets and your Transmutes.  That is the way that 5/3 has always functioned, and that is fundamentally the way that this deck plays.  

As for the comment about TA against combo, I really don't think there is a single situation I would realistically TA for anything other than Trinisphere first.  Unless I am looking at an immediate loss and absolutely need something removed, I think the quickest and easiest way to attack combo is by removing their explosiveness, and that means abusing Trinisphere.  And to be honest, with the way that most workshop decks work, if I have either an early su-chi or juggernaut AND can also TA, it most likely means I will have the 4 mana needed to activate cap (assuming I paid 4 for one of the earlier threats.  While this is not always necessarily the case, I think that the times I will be able to use it will outweigh the times I will not.

The recent discussion on the Vintage forum regarding the use of Transmute Artifact in a deck specifically designed to abuse the power of Su-Chi and silver bullets has led me to reexamine my build of 5/3.  The aforementioned deck, I felt, lacked the necessary disruption and pressure to properly address the current metagame.  Combo was a disasterous first game, as was Oath much of the time.  The near complete inability of the deck to win game one, no matter how strong games 2 and 3 were post board, made me completely abandon the idea as a valid deck choice.  While I do recognize the power level that the multiple silver bullets add to the deck, the consistant need to win games 2 and 3 against several of the strongest and most prevalant deck types (Oath, Doomsday, Belcher, MeanDeath, etc.), is simply unacceptable.

What I suggest, therefore, is a hybrid of the Transmute deck and of 5/3, attempting to assimilate the finer points of both decks into one that is capable of both consistant disruption and considerable pressure.  The addition of transmute artifact to the deck will also allow for a smaller number of situation specific silver bullets both in the main deck and the sideboard.  The deck list follows, and a brief discussion of some of the Sideboarding possibilities ends the post.

Mana Base (27):
4 Mishra's Workshop
3 Wasteland
1 Strip Mine
4 City of Brass
3 Gemstone Mine
2 Glimmervoid
1 Tolarian Academy
1 Mana Crypt
1 Sol Ring
1 Gilded Lotus
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Mox Ruby
1 Mox Pearl
1 Mox Jet
1 Mox Emerald
1 Black Lotus

Men (15):
2 Su-Chi
4 Juggernaut
4 Goblin Welder
1 Platinum Angel
1 Triskellion
1 Sundering Titan
1 Duplicant
1 Razormane Masticore

Draw (5):
1 Ancestral Recall
4 Thirst For Knowledge

Search (5)
1 Tinker
4 Transmute Artifact

Disruption/Bullets (8):
4 Trinisphere
1 Crucible of Worlds
1 Memory Jar
1 Mindslaver
1 Jester's Cap

SideBoard:
2 Seal of Cleansing
3 Swords to Plowshares
2 Eon Hub
2 Tormod's Crypt
3 REB
3 Rack and Ruin

Against Oath, the deck is fairly well set up main deck, with an aggresive set of threats and multiple ways to find Platinum Angel, Duplicant or Jester's Cap.  However, the game is not especially good game one, requiring a solid draw on this decks part to pull out a win.  However, post board, Transmute can come out and be replaced with the standard set of STPs and Seal of cleansing.  As a fifth card out, I would suggest Mindslaver.

The Stax matchup is good game one, and gets better with the addition of Eon Hub out of the Board.  Rack and Ruin can also be added, removing possibly the cap and the Trinispheres, especially if going second.  

The combo matchup remains relatively the same for this deck and conventional 5/3, with an early trinisphere and constant pressure often enough to take a win.  The board offers several options against combo, however they are also relatively similar to conventional builds, and therefore I will not go into specific commentary regarding them.

I chose Razormane over Karn for Several reason, and the "mirror" demonstrates this fairly well.  While this card is a liability while your opponent has welder dominance, it enables you a constant source of damage that will remove opposing welders, juggernauts, and the like, and will enable more welder tricks on your part.  However, using a Karn in this spot can certainly be justified, and it is a matter of preference and metagame that I chose to include the former over the latter.  

As for the maindeck cap and mindslavers, I felt that they were valid, powerful choices in a deck that can consistantly "tutor" for artifacts, and each one can disable a deck on it's own with a single, well timed activation.

While I have done some extensive preliminary testing, I am open to any and all thoughts, and would greatly appreciate the feedback of the forum in general.

2 quick things. Primarily, I chose the TFK over meditate as it is a card drawer that doesn't force me to wait to use it.  Meditate digs deeper and allows you to extend your lock, but it doesn't do a single positive thing if you have either stalled or are trying to bait a counter.  Yes, it may draw you into a piece you need, however the likelihood of that being countered against control, and then giving them a free turn is too high.

Also, smokestack has nothing to do with the name of the deck STAX.  The name is derived from the phrase "the 4 thousand dollar solution" (T4K$S).
When you shift the last s, you get ST$KS, or STAKS, the real namesake of the deck.

I am not refuting anything you have said about the deck whatsoever, as strictly speaking you are correct.  However, the format has evolved to a point where loading your gun and shooting it no longer gaurantees a win.  The format has morphed into an environment that is exceptionally full of hate for artifacts and non-basics, which this deck thrives on.  

I understand that the idea is a departure from what people are used to seeing, however, I think that there are a great many valid points.  Primarily, tanglewire is a good, solid lock piece, however it is only good in 2 situations: 1 is very early, and the other is after smokestack has severely reduced the number of permananents an opponent controls.  A fisrt turn tangle is a horrible play, unless you are playing second.  A tanglewire midgame is also subpar, as generally it is little less than a small nuisance for the opponent.  I thought that orb, on the other hand, was a card that HAD to be dealt with no matter what the circumstances.  An opponent can just tap out under tanglewire, tutoring or drawing cards to no end.  With the orb, along with trinisphere, the game becomes exceptionally difficult for a control player to correctly play.  When you know every counter costs 3, and it will be 3 turns before you can counter again, exactly what spells need to be countered?  This situation allows for a great deal of error on the part of the opponent.

As for chalice being redundant, I would agree to a certain extent.  However, as anyone who has ever played one will agree, a chalice for 2 against fish or Mono-U is as close to a hard lock as can be obtained.  If/when the chalice resolves, the control deck is fundamentally neutered.  Also, it is yet another potent threat that must be dealt with by another deck, be it control or aggro.  The more must counter spells I can play without destroying the viability of the deck, the better.  If dropping a first turn chalice for two into a force means that my trinisphere has a better shot of slipping through, so be it

I have been doing a great deal of testing lately, and it appears by my results that while still exceptionally powerful, Stax has been severely affected by the rampant non-basic hate in the environment.  While still capable of simply breaking a game open either early or late, it often has trouble competing against many decks with mid to large quantities of hate, or even a single B2B.  None of what I am saying is hot news, however I haven't really seen a viable answer to the problem as of yet.  Possibly with more information from the Waterbury tournament, this question will receive a suitable resolution, but until then this is my suggestion.

Mana Sources

4 Mishra's Workshop
4 Volcanic Island
2 Island
3 Polluted Delta
4 Wasteland
1 Strip mine
7 solomoxen
1 Mana vault
1 Mana crypt

Combo Pieces:
4 Trinisphere
3 Smokestack
3 Winter Orb
3 Chalice of the Void
2 Crucible of Worlds

Broken Items/Draw
4 Thirst for Knowledge
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Time Walk
1 Wheel Of Fortune
1 Tinker

Tricks

2 R.E.B.
2 Fire/Ice

Men

4 Goblin Welder
1 Karn, Silver Golem
1 Sundering Titan

SB
2 R.E.B.
1 Mindslaver
3 Tanglewire
3 Rack and Ruin
1 Platinum Angel
1 Triskelion
3 B.E.B.
1 Hurkyl's Recall

    Let me first explain a few of the odd card choices.  I chose winter orb over tanglewire maindeck as I feel that it is better in a longer game situation.  The ability to drop a threat or 2, tap an opponent, and drop a game breaker such as this is worth the slight tempo loss that tanglewire gives.  I also found myself dropping a tanglewire, and then having an opponent drop either B2B or some other hate that I did not have the resources to pull out of, due to my own lock.  
     
I also felt that in an environment so full of blue and blue based combo, blast would never really be a dead card game one, and would give me a chance to answer force of will on the first turn if the correct situation presented itself.  I also felt that Fire/Ice was exceptional in the Mirror, against fish and aggro, and even in turning of my own winter orb during an opponent's end step.  Given the testing I have done, the presence of Orb necessitates the presence of these two cards.

     Now, there are both pros and cons to the decklist I have presented, and as far as I can see through testing, they are fairly equal.  While you lose a bit of broken power not playing the splash of black and white, the deck becomes much more consistant.  Rarely are you struggling to find the correct mana to play cards, and the small number of basic lands allows you to attempt to play under a B2B as normal, a feat that Trinistax had a great problem with previously.  However, it does seem as if you lose some of you "tricks" with balance and will.  The question I pose is, is the consistancy element gained by stramlining to 2 colors worth the loss of power?

Is the card disadvantage created by masticore (either version) worth the investment?  Your main card advantage is through phid, and while masticore is in play, you are generally just using a 2 card merfolk looter system.  Now I understand the idea that Masticore would work as a finisher, and therefor would not be on the table that long, however, what happens if an opponent can neutralize him?  you have invested 3 cards (either tinker, and artifact and core) or more (depending on the number of turns it stayed in play) for a "useless" threat.
   
 The main question is, are any of these cards actually necessary?  Yes, tinker and colossus, or any other artifact win condition you have will add flash to the boring game plan of Mono-U, but are they necessary?  As far as I can see, they remove a great deal of redundancy from a deck that is designed to be so.  The more neat little mini-combo's you add to a deck like this, the less reliable and consistant it is.  Ass for adding seat of synod, why would you bring in a card that you own lock (b2b) negates?  An opening hand of seat and island or fetch is almost unplayable if you also have a b2b you need to drop early.  Why add more situations where the deck will need to reshuffle and worsen it's chances of victory?

     As a final note, while I believe that Platinum Angel is a solid card, the idea of adding it to Mono-U to beat combo is rather far-fetched.  The chances of hitting either angel or tinker,and the appropriate space to cast them in the early turns against combo is fairly small.  If a mid to late game answer is needed, it is decent.  However, the deck should already bo in almost complete control against combo at that point

Did anyone else notice that the stax list has no kill card, and is 6 cards short?