Gush in the metagame? (specifically North East Metagame)

[XxtSundaybxX]

I actually feel the opposite as most of the people in this thread. I will agree that workshops will negate the advantage that gush give you, it doesn't stop you from winning that matchup. In the past I've always had a very favorable shop matchup. All while still having the best blue matchup. I often played 16 land in the maindeck, but it didn't hurt other matchups because of the higher land count. Now maybe because of that, the advantages of gush weren't fully reached, I still had a better blue matchup than any confidant deck including playing against confidant. In fact it wasn't even close.

All I'm really trying to say is that I think gush is still competable. Very competable. Workshops are in more of a decline than in recent months, and confidant decks are on the rise. I dont think there is a better time to play gush.

[personalbackfire]

@ The Atog Lord/Smennen
Regarding skimping on lands in Gush as a way to achieve virtual card advantage or mana advantage, are you suggesting that Gush isn't playable unless you are able to do this or just that Gush is at it's best when you are able to?

Based on some quick research, before Gush was restricted the last time we saw
Gush Oath - 16 lands
Painter Gush -  15 or 16 lands
Demars Empty Drain Gush - 16 lands

Then after Gush was unrestricted again
ECW - 16 lands

It seems to me that Gush has done well in the past with higher land counts. Being able to add lands to a Gush deck to have a better shop matchup is a legitimate  strategy for Gush.

[The Atog Lord]

Being able to add lands to a Gush deck to have a better shop matchup is a legitimate  strategy for Gush.

No doubt, this is true. My question is: When you're at the point where you are adding lands to a Gush deck to let it compete in the metagame, would it be better to switch to a different deck entirely?

[PeAcH]

I think Gush is well positioned in the current metagame worldwide, obviously the core decklist needs some tweaking, but the deck is supercustomizable, so I think each pilot who wants to try the deck knows what does belong here and what doesn´t.

Last month I went 4-2 in the last LCV with this decklist (lost last round vs. Rest Obbedience):

http://www.thecouncil.es/tcdecks/deck.php?id=10996&iddeck=80341

Which is the decklist which Moatzu played in the BoM Trials:

http://www.thecouncil.es/tcdecks/deck.php?id=10831&iddeck=79089

I was rereading some insights on the different threads on Gush on TMD (specially Onslaught approach adding the 4th color) and I thought, why not? And builded this with several things in mind:


4 Scalding
1 Polluted Delta
1 Flooded
2 Underground Sea
2 Volcanic
2 Tropical Island
3 Island
1 Library of Alexandria

1 Black Lotus
1 Sol Ring
1 Mox Emerald
1 Mox Ruby
1 Mox Jet
1 Mox Sapphire


1 Ponder
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Brainstorm
1 Mistical
1 Vampiric Tutor
1 Demonic Tutor
1 Time Walk
1 Merchant Scroll
2 Jace, the Mind Sculptor
4 Gush

2 Flusterstorm
3 Mental Misstep
3 Mana Drain
4 Force of Will

2 Lightning Bolt
1 Nature´s Claim
1 Ancient Grudge
1 Hurkyl’s Recall

3 Snapcaster Mage
2 Talran, Sky Summoner

1 Fastbond
1 Yawgmoth’s Will

Sideboard:

3 Surgical extraction
1 Jayler
1 Nihil Spellbomb
1 Ravenous Trap
1 Mountain
1 Nature´s Claim
2 Lightning Bolt
4 Ingot Chewer
1 Ancient Grudge


I played this 4 color Talrand gush today @ LCV 2013. No storm wincons. I´m trying it...at first I was "no way", now it´s more "sometimes I miss you, sometimes I don´t". We will have to see.

@LCV I won vs. White Trash 2-0 and 2-1ed the Affinity decklist from NYSE. Then I lost very anticlimatically versus a White Trash (Thalia, Stony Silence and Graffdiggers all played in the last two final turns of me killing him 1-2. Then I beat 2-0 UW landstill (Alex Delgado from BoM 2013 top8 with the same decklist) and won 2-1 BUG Talrand (piloted by Miquel Alcoriza one of the best blue players in Spain).

I went 4-1 and had to play it all in versus Burning Long due to very bad tiebreakers. And I lost 1-2. Because I didn´t mulligan agresively enough to fight the combo deck.

I went 4-2 again losing in the last round (again). I finished 10th.

The decklist has 3 green mana cards, 3 black cards and 3 red cards. The landcount and proportion seems pretty accurated for this color combination. The decklist has some room for customization, and that´s what I highly value in this cases.

Lately I have realised how superhandy is Snapcaster Mage in this deck core. I had always been reluctant to play it in Gush style decks, but from now on my ideas on the matter have changed completelly.

One of the best cards in the decklist is Lightning Bolt. Why is the cards sooooooooooooo god right now?

The sideboard, specially versus MUD seems totally overkill. But I assure you it´s the only way to beat them. And sometimes it´s even hard

[Smmenen]

@ The Atog Lord/Smennen
Regarding skimping on lands in Gush as a way to achieve virtual card advantage or mana advantage, are you suggesting that Gush isn't playable unless you are able to do this or just that Gush is at it's best when you are able to?

The latter.

[Purple Hat]

I think Gush is well positioned in the current metagame worldwide, obviously the core decklist needs some tweaking, but the deck is supercustomizable, so I think each pilot who wants to try the deck knows what does belong here and what doesn´t.

Last month I went 4-2 in the last LCV with this decklist (lost last round vs. Rest Obbedience):

http://www.thecouncil.es/tcdecks/deck.php?id=10996&iddeck=80341

Which is the decklist which Moatzu played in the BoM Trials:

http://www.thecouncil.es/tcdecks/deck.php?id=10831&iddeck=79089

I was rereading some insights on the different threads on Gush on TMD (specially Onslaught approach adding the 4th color) and I thought, why not? And builded this with several things in mind:


4 Scalding
1 Polluted Delta
1 Flooded
2 Underground Sea
2 Volcanic
2 Tropical Island
3 Island
1 Library of Alexandria

1 Black Lotus
1 Sol Ring
1 Mox Emerald
1 Mox Ruby
1 Mox Jet
1 Mox Sapphire


1 Ponder
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Brainstorm
1 Mistical
1 Vampiric Tutor
1 Demonic Tutor
1 Time Walk
1 Merchant Scroll
2 Jace, the Mind Sculptor
4 Gush

2 Flusterstorm
3 Mental Misstep
3 Mana Drain
4 Force of Will

2 Lightning Bolt
1 Nature´s Claim
1 Ancient Grudge
1 Hurkyl’s Recall

3 Snapcaster Mage
2 Talran, Sky Summoner

1 Fastbond
1 Yawgmoth’s Will

Sideboard:

3 Surgical extraction
1 Jayler
1 Nihil Spellbomb
1 Ravenous Trap
1 Mountain
1 Nature´s Claim
2 Lightning Bolt
4 Ingot Chewer
1 Ancient Grudge


I played this 4 color Talrand gush today @ LCV 2013. No storm wincons. I´m trying it...at first I was "no way", now it´s more "sometimes I miss you, sometimes I don´t". We will have to see.

@LCV I won vs. White Trash 2-0 and 2-1ed the Affinity decklist from NYSE. Then I lost very anticlimatically versus a White Trash (Thalia, Stony Silence and Graffdiggers all played in the last two final turns of me killing him 1-2. Then I beat 2-0 UW landstill (Alex Delgado from BoM 2013 top8 with the same decklist) and won 2-1 BUG Talrand (piloted by Miquel Alcoriza one of the best blue players in Spain).

I went 4-1 and had to play it all in versus Burning Long due to very bad tiebreakers. And I lost 1-2. Because I didn´t mulligan agresively enough to fight the combo deck.

I went 4-2 again losing in the last round (again). I finished 10th.

The decklist has 3 green mana cards, 3 black cards and 3 red cards. The landcount and proportion seems pretty accurated for this color combination. The decklist has some room for customization, and that´s what I highly value in this cases.

Lately I have realised how superhandy is Snapcaster Mage in this deck core. I had always been reluctant to play it in Gush style decks, but from now on my ideas on the matter have changed completelly.

One of the best cards in the decklist is Lightning Bolt. Why is the cards sooooooooooooo god right now?

The sideboard, specially versus MUD seems totally overkill. But I assure you it´s the only way to beat them. And sometimes it´s even hard

Hadn't read this, but almost played almost this exact list today at comic book depot.  I think with 6 fetch, md shop hate and sufficient sideboard cards you can beat shops.  your sideboard is almost exactly the way I would build it except that I'd probably go 7 dredge cards, 8 mud cards instead of the 6/9 split you have right now.  Post board you can just 1 for 1 MUD since it turns out that you have a draw engine and they don't as long as you can access it.  This type of deck with young pyromancer fit in would probably have a pretty good mud match since you can profitably play 1 spell per turn and win.

also, you ARE playing a storm win condition....it's talrand.

[PeAcH]

@Purple Hat

When I say storm wincon I mean cards like Brain Freeze or Tendrils...cards that allow you to win on the spot.

Even Empty the warrens (which I was playing for two weeks).

Talrand is superawesome as a wincon, but it´s far from being comparable to aforementioned Freeze and Tendrils. They serve different roles versus different decklist and are answered by different cards.

I´m glad we have reached similar conclusions on the archetype and played decklist being literally a world apart

Pyromancer seems a must-add card in this type of deck. And I will try it for sure, however, deck manabase has to be slightly modified to include the Pyromancer as it´s very suited for current color balance.

Thanks for your comments!

[TheBrassMan]

I have not seriously played vintage in quite some time, and I'm almost positive TheAtogLord and Smmenen are currently in better fighting shape than I am (not to mention the others in this thread who agree with them) - but my experience is so far off that I felt it was worth sharing. Note that while I haven't played in some time, shop decks haven't significantly changed in the past few years, and haven't changed in fundamental way in over a decade - I don't believe anything particularly relevant has been printed since the last time I seriously played the matchup. There's a consensus (and this is by no means a new belief) that workshops edge gush decks out of a metagame.

On the contrary, however, there is no blue deck I think is BETTER against shops than Gush.

Yes, shop decks were originally designed to beat Gush decks - but anyone who played back then knows they didn't actually do that. That's why over half of the cards in the original Gush deck were eventually restricted, and none of the cards in Stax were (later came Trinisphere, but even that was a far cry from the blue cards they hit).

Yes gush decks have a lot of spells and stax has cards that are good against "a lot of spells" - but "a lot of spells" is also one of the most effective ways to win the matchup.
The blue vs shops matchup is characterized by: powerful openings that come down under lock pieces; cheap spells, counters, and removal that let the blue player function under a sphere or two; and the ability to close out the game quickly when you see a window, either with a kill or some massive card advantage generating threat -- and Gush decks are just better positioned to play this game than anything else. The big pondorous control decks that are catching on everywhere now are exactly where you don't want to be in the matchup - playing a midrange-style game against some number of metamorphs, duplicants, lodestones and who knows what else, which are frankly better at that kind of game.

If I were designing an anti-stax blue deck from the ground up, I'd want to be positive that I had strong early plays and that I could take advantage of the one turn window offered by Hurkyl's Recall (which, when you can use it effectively is the best anti-stax card ... but many decks just can't do anything with it). Those two requirements would naturally push me towards a Gush build. Of course when you bring other matchups into the mix, Gush keeps looking pretty. If you can build a deck that feels naturally comfortable in blue mirrors or combo matchups, you can afford to drop some of the now-popular anti-blue counters (flusterstorm, spell pierce, mental misstep) for cards that do more against shops -  which is more important in the matchup than any of the draw spells people are fussing over in and of themselves.

My biggest problem with Gush in the shops matchup is how costly it is to add red to the deck, given how much I like Ingot Chewer in the matchup. Three color decks are quite stable in the matchup, but four with Fastbond and Chewer starts getting ugly. That said you're better off than any other blue deck that splashes a color - one Tropical Island is enough to support Fastbond, but you need something like 2 Tundras and a Plains to run Bomberman (and most lists have much more).

Of course while I believe Gush is the best blue control deck to beat shops with, this is not to say I would bring it into a heavy shops meta. Shops are a little absurd right now and it's possible that even if Gush has the best shops matchup - it might still be a bad one. I wouldn't be shocked if it wasn't statistically the best chance against Shops was Dredge or the mirror.

To address the original question? It's the same ugly reasons it ever was, right? People tend to always play decks they enjoy, it's not really a matter of optimization and it never has been. I can't necessarily begrudge them this. The last time I played serious vintage I ran a Bomberman deck, even though I sincerely believe there is an almost strictly-better gush list out there - I just didn't want put in the weeks of testing I'd need to figure out a list I like - and even then face a big disadvantage on tournament day. Gush is really difficult to play, and I just didn't feel like I was in good enough magic shape to deal with it. As people have said already in this thread, there are just so many ways to customize the list - and that's intimidating. Really, as an archetype it's about as broad as saying "Jace deck" or "Brainstorm deck" - it's such a big area there isn't really anywhere great to start.

But like I said, that's just me and I'm out of practice. Maybe it just like, sucks or something.

[failtofind]

I agree with Andy, the matchup is all about setting up hurk-win, not about 1 for 1ing them or slowly establishing control, the better the blue deck is at finding the gap/resources to do this and then being able to win that same turn, the better the matchup is in my experience..

[Samoht]

I disagree that the match up hasn't changed much, as the Density of cards that the Shops decks can access has changed in their favor to how blue has changed. Blue has been forced to have situational (MM, Fluster, Pierce) counters instead of hard ones. Shops got Lodestone, Metamorph, and even Revoker has all come to be rather important at choking off the ability to resolve Hurkyl's against them.

[personalbackfire]

I disagree that the match up hasn't changed much, as the Density of cards that the Shops decks can access has changed in their favor to how blue has changed. Blue has been forced to have situational (MM, Fluster, Pierce) counters instead of hard ones. Shops got Lodestone, Metamorph, and even Revoker has all come to be rather important at choking off the ability to resolve Hurkyl's against them.

As far as the counters go, I disagree. Blue doesn't have to run situational counters like MM, Fluster, or Pierce. Isn't one of the reasons Bomberman is better against shops because they don't? They run Drain and a different situational counter (Snare) that happens to be better against them. There is no reason why Gush decks, or blue decks in general can't take that approach.

[vaughnbros]

I disagree that the match up hasn't changed much, as the Density of cards that the Shops decks can access has changed in their favor to how blue has changed. Blue has been forced to have situational (MM, Fluster, Pierce) counters instead of hard ones. Shops got Lodestone, Metamorph, and even Revoker has all come to be rather important at choking off the ability to resolve Hurkyl's against them.

As far as the counters go, I disagree. Blue doesn't have to run situational counters like MM, Fluster, or Pierce. Isn't one of the reasons Bomberman is better against shops because they don't? They run Drain and a different situational counter (Snare) that happens to be better against them. There is no reason why Gush decks, or blue decks in general can't take that approach.

Bomberman's md actually isn't good against shops at all.  It's very dependent on the SB to win that match.

[XxtSundaybxX]

I disagree that the match up hasn't changed much, as the Density of cards that the Shops decks can access has changed in their favor to how blue has changed. Blue has been forced to have situational (MM, Fluster, Pierce) counters instead of hard ones. Shops got Lodestone, Metamorph, and even Revoker has all come to be rather important at choking off the ability to resolve Hurkyl's against them.

As far as the counters go, I disagree. Blue doesn't have to run situational counters like MM, Fluster, or Pierce. Isn't one of the reasons Bomberman is better against shops because they don't? They run Drain and a different situational counter (Snare) that happens to be better against them. There is no reason why Gush decks, or blue decks in general can't take that approach.

Bomberman actually runs all the counters you mentioned. Having 2x (insert situational counterspell) isn't going to weaken your shop matchup more than it will help out your other matchups. Especially if you have main deck cards against workshops(grudge,hurks,claim)

The way I look at a draw engine vs the given decks in the metagame is, You can't tak FULL advantage of gush vs workshops and bob can be weak as well. You have a creature based draw engine that uses your life as a resource to fuel card advantage. So your shops opponent has a golem and maybe a revoker or a factory attacking you and you want to use your life as a resource? I personally don't. So if neither engine is superb against shops/creatures, why not play the engine that will give you the advantage in the blue matchup?