[Article] Part Two: Burning Through Type One

[Smmenen]

Burning Through Type One, Part 2: The Control Matchup

I had to separate part two into two separate parts.

There are quite a few minor editing gaffs in this article, and I should have done one last read through to try and synthesize the key points.  Sprinkled throughout the article are the five principles I lay out for beating control, although it would have been better if I had added a summary at the end to draw it all together.

Still, I really hope you guys enjoy this.  This is my first real attempt at serious, in-game analysis like Oscar does, except I'm not using Apprentice .  

Stephen Menendian\n\n

[rozetta]

This was a very good article. I'd venture to say one of the best Magic-related article's I've ever read. You obviously put a lot of effort into making this series. Good job!

[Hawk]

Great report! I like your visualisation more than app.logs. So the reader knows, what you are thinking about.
This is exactly how I wanted to make my report, with opening hands and all, but since I wasn't too familiar with the deck, I needed lots of time for finding the (hopefully correct) best path and couldn't take too detailed notes. My first turns lasted about 5-10 min. every time. ^^°

In testing against my Tog I managed to cast several Draw7s without the Tog-Player getting even 1 FOW! Scary, isn't it? But it doesn't matter anyway, because after the first draw7 there are so many options from Duress to multiple Wish/Tutors.

I'm looking forward to part three hopefully against some decks with Spheres and/or Pillars. ^_~

Hawk

[Spizzard]

Even though I don't play burning desire/Long myself, I really enjoyed the article.  It helps me realize what the Long player is thinking and increases the chances that I will make correct plays against it and will know what/if the long player is setting up.

That is easily one of the best strategy type 1 articles I have read in a long time.  Nice work.

[Rico Suave]

Very good.

This is an excellent article even for non-combo players.  Concepts like gaining tempo, maximizing resources, and forcing uncomfortable positions onto your opponent are all key strategies for almost any deck.

[Maxx Matt]

@smmenen:  good read and what a great work you do to be so puntual in your description ..

Have you tested only agaisnt Hulk ( because of 4xDuress and 4x FoW... ) as the Ephitome of the Control/AggroControl Decks, or have you done a more Large Range testing session  ( maybe facing ZherbusKeeper or UR.Phid or MonoBlu ).

I think that it is not a bad position the one that Keeper can gain using FoW and Waste+Shaman respect the one that you analize facing Hulk and his 4xDuress+FoW.

In a 1 or 2 turn match ( such as a lot of your winning results )
duressing a Key spell or Denying you to have Real mana to play the same not duressed spell by a Keeper player should not be so different

In a middle-long match ( more than 2 turns... ) this last strategy offers me more options and can evade better than duress your ability to cast multiple Treats in one turn with a consequent rising on the winnign rate of the control player.

What do you think?

[Freddie]

Excellent article.

You are the new and improved model of  

[MoreFling]

Quote (Freddie @ Oct. 02 2003,17:22)Excellent article.

You are the new and improved model of  

I missed the part where that is actually a compliment  

[dandan]

I doubt we'll see Burning through Type I: Part 104

Rakso has a clear lead.

[CyberKnight]

Although I won't be playing long.dec myself, it is a great read to understand when I have to pitch something to FoW when playing against it. Compliments.

[ELD]

Outstanding article.  I only wish more people would use similar methods to explain the madness that is type 1.  Truly enjoyable, attention holding and easy to understand.  In the past  I had just went nuts on control, being fine with losing game one 24% of the time (the odds of them having force in opening hand and me not having duress)  I see now that the control player can be outplayed as well as beat up and look foward to trying out a new approach.  

Peace,
Eric
ELD

[leviat]

Quote My opening hand:
Black Lotus, LED, Sphere, Consult, Brainstorm, Jar, Windfall

... My options are many: I could play Lotus, Consult for Ritual, Ritual, (BBBB floating), Sphere, break it for Blue drawing a card, and then Windfall, sacking LED. The other option is to just Lotus, Windfall and sac LED. I think I do the latter, but the former would have been better because I get more options with the card I could draw off the Sphere. Can anyone else think of something else I could have done?

I probably would have gone...
1) Lotus
2) LED
-) Sac Lotus for BBB
3) Consult for Wish (sacing LED for RRR)
4) Wish for YawgWill (with BBR in pool)
5) Cast YawgWill
6) Lotus
7) LED
-) Sac LED for UUU
8) Windfall

Obviously this is a very risky play but it leaves you with the strongest position.

Anyways, great read.