Duress or Dispel?

[Cyberpunker]

So here is the dilemna. I am currently working on a build of Oath that has room for cards against the Drain mirror/ Tendrils.dec And the 2 cards for consideration are Duress/Thoughtseize or Dispel. I want to ask the community for its insight and help in making my decision.

Dispel
-It is my experience that reactive counterspells are the best because you can answer the card that your opponent draws in the Draw Step as well as leaving them with mana tapped during your turn.
-Pitches to Force of Will
-Counters most threats
-Can be Merchant Scrolled for (not as big of deal but still can make a difference!)

Duress Effects
-Can get more threats than Dispel can but at the cost of being vulnerable to the card they Topdeck as well as leaving them with mana open to cast other spells
-Cannot pitch to Force of Will

I am looking to try and win the Drain mirror through having overwhelming number of answers if that makes sense. what do you guys think? Is this a viable strategy? What would you guys choose? Why?

[nineisnoone]

Duress.  But I'm biased (I friggin' love Duress).  And by Duress, I mean Thoughtseize.

But to add to that...
Most good top decks aren't going to be instants (only like Gifts, Facts, Recall, Thirst?, and Vamp?).
Duress doesn't get hit by REB.
Duress is better against Tendrils (well, in my opinion at least).
Turn 1 Duress is better than Turn 1 Dispel.  There aren't really an insane amount of turn 1 instant plays (Recall, Brainstorm, Vamp?).

[limitedwhole]

What's better on their turn 3 and your turn 3?  Generally speaking when you look at the decks most people play, thoughtseize will probably serve you better, if you do not have answers to sideboard the dispels out for.  The thoughtseizes are at least passable for pulling a play out of a shop decks hands turn 1 or pulling a leonin arbiter etc.  However I don't like thoughtseize much personally but since your playing oath you want that oops i win factor.  You want to ewin the games your opponent keeps a week hand that dies to thoughtseize.  Dispel is a good card though.  If you play with Merchant Scroll you might try one copy of it.

[gamegeek2]

Duress.

1. Stops Jace
2. Stops Oath
3. Stops Artifacts
4. Stops Yawg Win

[TheBrassMan]

From a flexibility standpoint there are decks that just completely ignore dispel, even if duress is not particularly exciting there.  I understand that you're speaking specifically from a blue vs blue perspective here, but how much so? (i.e. are these sideboard cards?).  You should consider the option of something even more dramatic.  You might get more value out of some kind of "bomb" like Remora, Jace, Deep Analysis, Mind Twist, Sundering Titan as your Tinker target - things that turn the game around rather than maintain the status quo. 

If you're limiting the question just to "Duress v Dispel", I think Duress wins pretty handily - mostly for the reasons gamegeek2 listed

[DubDub]

Duress does require an Underground Sea, although depending on Gush's prevalence we may see Wasteland fall off a little.  Duress is generally more useful in my opinion since with Duress you're investing the , but you gain information.  With Dispel, it is your opponent doing the investing, but if that investment is 'free', like with Gush, or trivial, like with Ancestral, you're not making a big tempo gain, and you haven't gained information.

[limitedwhole]

The problem with cards like Duress is that they fail because you have no information.  Duress really doesn't give you information, it requires information to play it.  This is why you see its power increase in decks that can reliably play it on the first turn, have a synthetic card advantage due to density, and can win against hands to die to an early duress.  Think about it, you are trading the what could have been the best card in your hand (had it been another card rather than duress) for your opponents best card.  Essentially what you are doing is reducing the total number of options available to each player and betting that your deck can win off fewer options.  People often fail when evaluating duress in a decklist, because they forget that it could have been another card and secondly because you always get to pick a card they assume that it was effective.

When you play Duress you often play it blind and unless you are capable of capitalizing on it immediately you are often playing blind form there on out.  When I play a card like Swords to Plowshares or Mana Drain, my opponent gives me the information that I need to make the decision.  When I play duress, my opponent gives me no such information.

The second problem with Duress is that it costs mana but does not force my opponent to pay mana where swords to plowshares or mana drain produce a mana surplus.

I would recommend only playing duress in decks that can produce synthetic card advantage due to density or in combinational decks.  It is worth noting that abeyance is often better in combinational decks if you intend to face other combinational decks as you can use it steal there fundamental turn and then take your fundamental turn.  The additional cost of abeyance is a drawback however, when trying to force expensive spells through of if you are runing mana light builds.

Given that Duress is black it requires you to fetch an underground sea up immediately limited your colors and thus spell selection.  It also can make you vulnerable to wasteland unless you play ALLOT of fetchlands

Lastly, duress is at sorcery speed and although cheap, casting on turn two cuts you off from drain and casting it on turn 3 can cut you off from drain if your opponent has wastelande whereas playing a reastive card allows you to leave the extra mana untapped.

Duresses value also dramatically increases if you are really good at winning coinflips  and at being on the play.

[Delha]

Looking at an opponent's hand "not really giving you information"? It's arguably the most relevant information you would possibly want in a vast majority of unspecified gamestates. I'm really not following your logic in this claim.

Your argument that Duress could have been the best card in your hand also doesn't make sense to me. As a general rule, the best card in your hand is probably going to be a broken restricted card. You don't typically cut bombs to fit another Duress, you cut weak draw or protection. Duress is competing for support slots, and the post by Cyberpunker which brought this up serves as a fine example. He's asking about Duress over Dispel, not Duress over Oath.


Edit: Grammar is hard.