2nd Place Vintage Worlds - A Preparation Report

[TD]

Winning worlds is a goal for every player in the vintage community and I am no exception. For those of you who don’t know me, my name is AJ Grasso. I first started playing Vintage around 2005. I really started hitting my prime around 2008-2009. During those years I truly felt like I was at the top of my game. I was innovating decks and Top 8ing nearly everything in the tri-state area. I was winning power with a variety of decks including Control slaver, Gush TPS, MUD, and BUG Fish but I am probably most remembered for my success with U/R Landstill. At the end of 2009 I put Magic down due to some life changes and personal reasons. Over the past 4-5 years I still tried to keep an eye on the state of vintage and I would even randomly show up to an event here or there, but consistently scrub out. I was out of the loop and out of practice, so it is no surprise that I couldn’t compete at the same level I once did. As many of you already know I took 2nd at Vintage Worlds this past weekend. I’d love to give you all the details of my matches and specific key plays from the day but to be honest I can barely remember most of them. Instead, I’d like to try something a little different than most tournament reports. This is a report on how I burst back onto the vintage scene with style!
   
   Before I even sleeved up a deck for Gencon last year I already knew it would be my last vintage championship run for a while. Money was tight and it didn’t make sense to fly out to Gencon year in and year out just to get smashed in a format I no longer paid attention to. I was defeated before the event even started. Little did I or anyone else, for that matter, know it would also be the last Vintage Championship for Gencon as well.

   In May Nick Coss “dropped a bomb” on the vintage community. He was hosting Vintage Worlds; everyone was excited including myself. This was perfect, I wasn’t going to Gencon this year but I could still play in Vintage Champs. I didn’t know what deck I’d be on but with worlds only an hour drive from my apartment I knew this was an event I couldn’t miss.

   
   Times are a lot different now, both in vintage and in my personal life. Four years ago I had a solid group of players to test with at the drop of a hat. Some of you may remember Team 0-2 drop. The core three of the team was Joe Davis, Bernie Parisi, and myself. Back then we knew the format in and out, up and down, backwards and forwards. We tested decks and played out matchups nearly every day. Since then all of our lives have stemmed away from magic, for different reasons, and as a result preparing for this year’s championship would be nothing but an uphill battle.

   I wish I could tell you we got the team back together and grinded games for months leading up to the event. In reality we got together for a few hours one single night in August and played some magic, some Mario Kart, and some Dominion. 99% of my testing for this event was done alone on cockatrice against randoms. I would theorize about card choices and test them online. I would post results and talk about the deck on a private facebook page so Joe and Bernie could see and discuss but there were hardly any actual games played between the three of us.

   When Young Pyromancer was spoiled I fell in love. I was texting Joe and Bernie about how powerful I felt the card was at all hours of the night. When Rich Shay took down an event with his Pyromancer brew and Menendian finished strong in the same event with the card I knew my instincts were correct. Young Pyromancer was a thing but I just wasn’t sure the best place for it.

   My immediate feeling was to play it with Gush. I also had some success with Delver of Secrets in legacy at my local card shop and I felt that the synergy between these two cards was too good to ignore. I remember Mike Solomossy having success with RUG Delver in vintage the year before so I started looking at some of his lists and card choices. I’m not going to spend a ton of time discussing specific card choices and there functions in the deck but I think it is important to show its progress before I ever took it to battle. Here are a few of the first lists I tested at the end of August and through September….

“this has been testing very well for me...
4 Delver of Secrets
3 Young Pyromancer
2 Snapcaster Mage
1 Mox Emerald
1 Mox Ruby
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Black Lotus
3 Tropical Island
4 Volcanic Island
1 Island
2 Flooded Strand
2 Misty Rainforest
4 Scalding Tarn
1 Fastbond
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Time Walk
1 Brainstorm
4 Gush
1 Mystical Tutor
1 Merchant Scroll
4 Force of Will
4 Mental Misstep
4 Lightning Bolt
3 Spell Pierce
2 Flusterstorm
1 Ponder
2 Ancient Grudge
1 Rites of Initiation
SB: 1 Ancient Grudge
SB: 2 Nature's Claim
SB: 2 Hurkyl's Recall
SB: 2 Trygon Predator
SB: 4 Grafdigger's Cage
SB: 1 Tormod's Crypt
SB: 3 Pyroblast
 August 20 at 11:53am”

“updated list....
rites was just cute but not good, joe i didnt try the grapeshot yet

4 Delver of Secrets
4 Young Pyromancer
1 Snapcaster Mage
1 Mox Emerald
1 Mox Ruby
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Black Lotus
3 Tropical Island
4 Volcanic Island
1 Island
2 Flooded Strand
2 Misty Rainforest
4 Scalding Tarn
1 Fastbond
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Time Walk
1 Brainstorm
4 Gush
1 Mystical Tutor
1 Merchant Scroll
4 Force of Will
4 Mental Misstep
4 Lightning Bolt
3 Spell Pierce
3 Flusterstorm
1 Ponder
2 Ancient Grudge
SB: 1 Ancient Grudge
SB: 2 Nature's Claim
SB: 2 Hurkyl's Recall
SB: 2 Trygon Predator
SB: 4 Grafdigger's Cage
SB: 1 Tormod's Crypt
SB: 2 Pyroblast
SB: 1 Flusterstorm
August 20 at 6:02pm”

“V1.3
4 Delver of Secrets
4 Young Pyromancer
1 Mox Emerald
1 Mox Ruby
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Black Lotus
3 Tropical Island
3 Volcanic Island
2 Island
3 Flooded Strand
2 Misty Rainforest
4 Scalding Tarn
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Time Walk
1 Brainstorm
3 Gush
1 Mystical Tutor
1 Merchant Scroll
4 Force of Will
4 Mental Misstep
4 Lightning Bolt
3 Spell Pierce
3 Flusterstorm
1 Ponder
1 Ancient Grudge
2 Preordain
1 Hurkyl's Recall
SB: 2 Ancient Grudge
SB: 2 Nature's Claim
SB: 1 Hurkyl's Recall
SB: 2 Trygon Predator
SB: 4 Grafdigger's Cage
SB: 1 Tormod's Crypt
SB: 2 Pyroblast
SB: 1 Flusterstorm
 August 21 at 5:17pm”

“doing some more testing today with this build...
4 Delver of Secrets
4 Young Pyromancer
2 Tarmogoyf
1 Mox Emerald
1 Mox Ruby
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Black Lotus
3 Tropical Island
3 Volcanic Island
2 Island
2 Flooded Strand
2 Misty Rainforest
4 Scalding Tarn
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Time Walk
1 Brainstorm
3 Gush
1 Merchant Scroll
4 Force of Will
4 Mental Misstep
4 Lightning Bolt
3 Spell Pierce
3 Flusterstorm
1 Ponder
1 Ancient Grudge
2 Preordain
1 Hurkyl's Recall
SB: 2 Ancient Grudge
SB: 2 Nature's Claim
SB: 1 Hurkyl's Recall
SB: 2 Trygon Predator
SB: 4 Grafdigger's Cage
SB: 1 Tormod's Crypt
SB: 2 Pyroblast
SB: 1 Flusterstorm
August 23 at 10:40am”

“some more quick updates to the SB to try and help out the Shops MU... the trygons were just not getting it done. i think they are most effective in decks with mana guys. Its just not a great option for this deck so im gonna try a basic and another claim for now but it might just become 2 claim.

Goyf is ok... it even won me a game or 2 and i haven't ever felt like it was clogging up my hand or anything like that but im not crazy about it. i wish it was like delvers #5 and 6 and its just not, but i guess nothing is... maybe vexing devil???

i cut the mystical and the scroll and dont miss them. the tutors almost never mattered.. cutting them made room for more 4 ofs and more consistency.

back to 20 lands.

V1.4
2 Tarmogoyf
4 Delver of Secrets
4 Young Pyromancer
4 Force of Will
4 Mental Misstep
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Gush
3 Spell Pierce
3 Flusterstorm
2 Preordain
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Brainstorm
1 Ponder
1 Time Walk
1 Ancient Grudge
1 Hurkyl's Recall

3 Tropical Island
3 Volcanic Island
2 Island
2 Flooded Strand
2 Misty Rainforest
4 Scalding Tarn
1 Mox Emerald
1 Mox Ruby
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Black Lotus

SB: 2 Ancient Grudge
SB: 3 Nature's Claim
SB: 1 Hurkyl's Recall
SB: 4 Grafdigger's Cage
SB: 2 Pyroblast
SB: 1 Flusterstorm
SB: 1 Leyline of the Void
SB: 1 Mountain
 August 23 at 1:08pm”

“V 2.0
CREATURES= 10
4 Delver of Secrets
4 Young Pyromancer
2 Tarmogoyf

I/S = 31
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Time Walk
1 Brainstorm
4 Gush
4 Force of Will
4 Mental Misstep
4 Lightning Bolt
3 Spell Pierce
3 Flusterstorm
1 Ponder
1 Ancient Grudge
2 Preordain
1 Steel Sabotage
1 Mystical Tutor

1 Skullclamp

MANA = 18
1 Mox Ruby
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Black Lotus
2 Tropical Island
4 Volcanic Island
2 Island
1 Flooded Strand
4 Misty Rainforest
2 Scalding Tarn

SB: 2 Ancient Grudge
SB: 3 Nature's Claim
SB: 1 Hurkyl's Recall
SB: 4 Grafdigger's Cage
SB: 1 Leyline of the Void
SB: 1 Forest
SB: 1 Pyroblast
SB: 2 Umezawa's Jitte

Realized I don't need 2 reb and a 4th fluster in the SB to beat blue... we're just naturally like 90/10 vs jace decks. That opened up 2 slots for the creature decks which we struggle with a bit. Been thinking about -1 pierce -1 fluster +2 snare to help the creature MU a little more.
September 7 at 6:14pm”

   By October I had the deck very close to where I wanted it. I felt like I had a solid grasp on the format and that I had a legitimate chance at doing well at worlds. My only uncertainty was the fact that I hadn’t played a real tournament with this deck or any deck in a long while. Luckily I was able to get my work schedule clear for October and it was time to put my deck to the test. My first stop was Ron’s Comic world on October 6th. Ron’s is only about 35 minutes from my house so going alone was no big deal. Here is the list I played at Ron’s…

“My list for tomorrow...

V2.1
4 Delver of Secrets
4 Young Pyromancer
3 Tarmogoyf

4 Force of Will
4 Mental Misstep
4 Gush
4 Lightning Bolt
3 Spell Pierce
3 Flusterstorm
2 Preordain
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Ponder
1 Brainstorm
1 Mystical Tutor
1 Time Walk
1 Ancient Grudge
1 Steel Sabotage

1 Mox Ruby
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Black Lotus
3 Tropical Island
3 Volcanic Island
2 Island
1 Flooded Strand
4 Misty Rainforest
2 Scalding Tarn

SB: 2 Ancient Grudge
SB: 3 Nature's Claim
SB: 2 Hurkyl's Recall
SB: 4 Grafdigger's Cage
SB: 2 Pyroblast
SB: 2 Umezawa's Jitte
 October 5 at 11:05am”

I could barely get one foot into the door before some vintage veterans’ jaws hit the floor at the sight of me at a tournament. Yeah, I guess it really has been that long since I played. The event fired with only 10 players. This wasn’t going to be the tournament experience I was looking for but at the end of the day live testing was live testing and there was still a Ruby on the line. After 4 Rounds of swiss I was a perfect 4-0 beating oath twice, and shops twice. In the Cut to T4 I swept, beating shops and oath again. Being a perfect 6-0 I was driving home with a Ruby in my pocket and pretty high on vintage. Sure it wasn’t much of a turnout but this may have been just what I needed to get my confidence back and my feet wet. My deck did exactly what it had been doing for me online and my play felt tight and on point. I never felt like I was behind the 8ball and for the most part I felt ahead of the curve. There was another event in PA the following weekend and I wasn’t going to miss the opportunity to get more tournament experience despite having to drive 3 hours by myself.

I played the exact same 75 at MVPLS on 10/12. Only 8 players showed for this Time Vault. I was a bit frustrated with the vintage community. Why can’t we get players to show up to tournament only weeks before the biggest vintage event of the year?! Oh well here we go. 3 rounds of swiss cut to T4. I went 2-0-1 beating a gush combo deck and bomberman the first 2 rounds and IDing into T4 in round 3. In the Top 4 I beat Bomberman again and Forgemaster shops in the finals. So in the 10 rounds of the magic that I actually played my deck was a perfect 10-0. I couldn’t be happier with my testing and it was about this time that I really started to get psyched about the vintage championship. I just needed to get a tournament with a decent turnout under my belt. The final Top Deck Games event before worlds was a week away and I knew I had to go.

Here is the list I played both at TDG on 10/19 and at vintage worlds on 11/3.

4 Delver of Secrets
4 Tarmogoyf
3 Young Pyromancer

4 Force of Will
4 Mental Misstep
4 Gush
4 Lightning Bolt
3 Spell Pierce
3 Flusterstorm
2 Preordain
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Ponder
1 Brainstorm
1 Mystical Tutor
1 Time Walk
1 Ancient Grudge
1 Steel Sabotage

3 Tropical Island
3 Volcanic Island
2 Island
2 Polluted Delta
2 Flooded Strand
2 Scalding Tarn
1 Misty Rainforest
1 Black Lotus
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Mox Ruby

SB: 4 Grafdigger's Cage
SB: 3 Nature's Claim
SB: 2 Hurkyl's Recall
SB: 2 Ancient Grudge
SB: 2 Pyroblast
SB: 2 Umezawa's Jitte

        Finally, 40 players! 6 rounds of swiss cut to t8. I finished 4-2 in the swiss beating shops three times and humans once. I lost to a Forgemaster shops deck. I remember feeling like my mulligans weren’t good to me and my opponents’ draws were strong; I guess sometimes shops just gets you. My other loss in this tournament was to none other than Joel Lim on Merfolk. Joel savaged me worst than he eventually would in our worlds finals match. I remember after my shellacking calling Bernie and telling him about it. I told him that the matchup felt unwinnable. His deck just naturally does everything well vs. me. His guys are uncounterable, unblockable, and much larger than mine and he is also extremely fast. Bernie talked about possible SB options to help the matchup and I remember telling him I’d rather just ignore it since it seems like Joel is the only person that plays the deck and it would be unlikely that I’d get paired against it at worlds. Little did I know he’d be my end boss. I ended up coming in 9th place missing T8 on breakers.

   Finishing this event I was a total of 14-2 in the matches that I actually played. My online testing reflected similar results and I was getting restless waiting for November to come. At this point I knew that both myself and my deck were flying under the radar for most of the vintage community and that was a very good place to be going into worlds. I can honestly say I thought I had a good chance to not only T8 but to win this championship.

   November finally came and the wait was over. I toyed with the idea of playing in Saturday’s legacy event but I decided it wasn’t worth it for me to potentially burn myself out playing an event I had no shot at top 8ing. Instead I 3-0ed a vintage 8 man win a box, beating Grixis twice and Shops in the final round(17-2 now). I spent the rest of the night celebrating my birthday in Philly with friends and amazing girlfriend; getting completely hammered. I’m not going to lie here, MISTAKES WERE MADE. 

   After downing a hand full of tums and advil chased with a lot of water I was registered and waiting for Vintage Worlds to get underway. It was finally here. Everything I had been working so hard for the last two to three months would all come down to this.

   In Round one I beat Grixis. In round two I lost to Oath. This match was so savage that I didn’t even know it was Oath until after the match ended and my opponent offered up his SBing techniques. In game one I had lethal damage on the table when he resolved a Time Vault to go along with his key. In game 2 he vintage me with a 1st or 2nd turn tinker with drain back up. With 9 rounds in this event I was 1-1 to this point. I would need to go 6-0-1 the rest of the way to have a shot at T8. I felt confident in my ability to make this happen I just needed to take the event one round at a time. Besides it’s not like I hadn’t gone 6-0 or better with this deck before. In round three I beat Grixis again. In round four I beat White Weenie? In round five I beat Oath. In round six I beat Forgemaster Shops. At this point I really started feeling fatigued. I was 5-1 and T8 was only 2 wins and an ID away. I was running on an empty stomach but luckily my girlfriend was supporting me the entire way and came through with some lunch and more water. In round seven I beat Oath again in a long and grueling 3 games. In round eight I was playing for T8. A win would give me a shot at IDing my round nine into the cut. My only fear was that my breakers would cost me again. Nonetheless, I needed to win my round and hope. In round eight I got lucky. In game one my opponent had lethal damage on the table but was racing his bob. In the upkeep of the turn he would swing for the win his bob revealed him another bob while he was sitting on 2 life. In game two I mulled down to 3 and was finished in quick fashion. In game three my deck went on auto pilot. I had triple delver with time walk and some bolts. I don’t think this game lasted more than three turns. I did it! After 8 rounds I was 7-1 and when the standings posted it was clear that the top tables could all ID into the T8. I shook Reid Dukes hand in round nine and started filling out my T8 player profile questions. It felt surreal and I was excited but I didn’t come here to T8 I came to win a championship. As happy as I was I knew I still had a lot of work to do. In my hour lay off I ran to Wawa to get more water, and apple, and some much needed fresh air.

   In the quarterfinals I was paired up against the mirror. In game one I had the early lead. My Goyf was doing work but my opponent was resolving a Recall and at least 3 Gushes. I couldn’t keep up with this and he eventually answered my Goyf and dropped two of his own. In game two my Delver grabbed a Jitte and ran away with the game. In game 3 my deck went on auto pilot again. I got a Young Pyromancer down and my elemental tokens took over then game.

   In the semifinals I can honestly say I wasn’t nervous despite being paired against Reid Duke. I haven’t been living under a rock, I knew exactly who he is and what his magic accomplishments are. I knew he was on a storm combo deck and while I never tested that matchup it seemed glaringly obvious that my deck was favored. I was also pretty confident in my ability to play on the same level as him. To this point I was 25-3 in tournament matches with my deck. I also was pretty sure that I had much more overall vintage experience under my belt than Reid. On a Pro Tour stage Reid has the upper hand but in a Vintage Semi Finals he was on my turf and I wasn’t going to allow his Planeswalker points to intimidate me. I wish this match was featured because I don’t remember much. I know in game one he tried to go off with a Desire for three which I stopped while chopping at his life total with my guys. In game two he kills me on the first turn. In game three he is mana light and I have a disruptive hand with some Goyfs to get there. The one thing I do remember about this round was that his Duress’s and Probes really kept me from being able to bluff anything. He seemingly always had perfect information.

   In the Finals of Vintage Worlds I got paired against the only deck in T8 that I didn’t want to see. I knew if I was going to win this title I was going to need some more of those solid hands and for Joel to stumble a bit. The video of this match is on youtube for you all to see but Joel simply had it. He made very quick work of me just as he did two weeks earlier at Top Deck Games. I have to tip my (Mets)cap to Joel. I played 30 rounds of vintage over the course of a month and went 26-4. Two of those four losses were thanks to Joel.

   To be completely frank that loss was crushing for me. I have never run so ridiculously hot before. I felt like I was playing the best magic of my life. I was making good reads, making solid plays, and always felt like I was two steps ahead of the format. I put a ton of hard work into getting to this point, dedicating nearly all of my free time for two months leading up to the event to testing, tuning, and grinding games online. I was very intimate with my deck and knew it inside and out. I had nailed the metta and was prepared to dismantle it. I felt like I was on a mission to take home a championship and I wasn’t going to be stopped. That loss is going to sting for a long time but the vintage community better believe I’m back. I’m going to be making an effort to start attending events regularly in 2014. Now that I have proven to both myself and the world that I am capable of taking this event down I will be focused on getting my championship.

   I know I didn’t spend much time discussing the deck specifically but if the community drums up enough interest I would be willing to write up a bit of a RUG primer discussing card choices and match up analysis. I’d also like to thank Nick Coss for running such a great event and to everyone who helped me along the way to the final table. You guys know who you are.

I hope to see you all at Top Deck Games soon!
-AJ

[The Atog Lord]

AJ, thanks a lot for this report. I really enjoyed seeing how the deck evolved over time, and how you kept tuning it. This was a very good read.

[Prospero]

Congrats on the finish, AJ!

[DubDub]

Awesome to see effort like this pay off.  Congrats AJ!

[Samoht]

Awesome finish AJ. Also fond of the report, I like to see evolutions.

[mr.grim]

Congrats on the finish !~

[Varal]

Congrats on the finish, I was a bit sad to learn you lost in the finals. I think you played better than me in the quarterfinal and you earned your finish even though your accidental Jitte reveal could have cost you the game.

I recall drawing a lot of cards in game 1 and double bolting your goyf after a huge counter war that depleted your hand. We then each played a goyf, you bolted mine after I blocked yours in a short counter war but three more goyf for the win afterwards.

In preparation for game 2, you revealed your Umezawa's Jitte by mistakes so I sided back in some artifact removal but I didn't draw any of them in game 2. You played an early Jitte I couldn't counter. I got many hits with an early Snapcaster Mage but you killed it eventually. I eventually ancestral recalled, drew and played a Tarmogoyf but you had 2 Lightning Bolt in hand to kill it. When you played your Delver you started your magic with Jitte. I couldn't deal with Jitte or Delver fast enough and you killed me.

In game 3, I'd Island, Mox Sapphire, Black Lotus but when you countered my Ancestral Recall and my Snapcaster Mage the following turn. I couldn't draw another land and you Pyromancer and your Delver put me on a short clock that I couldn't get out off.

You played better than me in the last two rounds even though your shuffling was sub-par and I'm glad you got to play in the finals. I agree with you that RUG Delver is really good in the current metagame. I'm not sure Young Pyromancer is really better than Snapcaster Mage but the former is a way better threat.

[personalbackfire]

AJ,
Thank you for the write up! I was glad to see you do well. Clearly you will do well if you put your mind to it. Your top 8/win run with Landstill was ridiculous when you played a lot.

Hopefully I see you around at some tournament some time soon.

Steve

[Ten-Ten]

Niiice report! A primer would definitely be apreciated.
I still dont understand how storm doesnt have the upper hand in the MU.
What are your thoughts on Tarmo going forward? Did you ever feel four were too many? Why not the fourth Pyromancer and another control card instead of Tarmo#3-4?

Again, thank you for the great report on your road to Vintage Champs.

[JustABee]

Congratulations once again on your finish AJ.
We are all very proud of you and you've reminded me how much fun competitive magic can be.

Hopefully I can make it out to more events in the coming year. Thanks for the motivation.

[brianpk80]

I still dont understand how storm doesnt have the upper hand in the MU.

The card advantage and counter density of this deck make it nearly impossible to get anything relevant accomplished except in the narrowest windows (ie Turn 1). 

[Chubby Rain]

I still dont understand how storm doesnt have the upper hand in the MU.

The card advantage and counter density of this deck make it nearly impossible to get anything relevant accomplished except in the narrowest windows (ie Turn 1). 

Historically, aggro/control decks have an advantage against combo decks. Combo beats aggro by being faster and noninteractive. Against control, the combo deck takes its time sculpting the perfect hand and baiting out countermagic. Aggro-control/tempo decks like RUG delver attack combo by presenting a significant clock, which prevents the combo deck from sculpting its hand, and forcing the combo player to play into counters or other disruption.


Congrats, AJ. I played you at MVP (bomberman - jitte destroyed me in the second game, mana crypt in the third) and it was awesome seeing you, Joel, and Greg representing the NE Vintage scene. I'd also be interested in reading a primer on your version of RUG delver.

[ramrodjon]

Congratulations and thanks for the write up!

[TD]

What are your thoughts on Tarmo going forward? Did you ever feel four were too many? Why not the fourth Pyromancer and another control card instead of Tarmo#3-4?

My original list didn't run Goyf. As I played the deck more I was looking for more threats. This deck really wants to land a threat and either protect or disrupt my opponent until the threat takes over the game. If you look at the progression of my lists Goyf went from 0 to 2 to 3 and finally to 4. I have to admit I didn't think goyf was good enough for a long time but the more I played with it the more I realized it was exactly what the deck needs. Delver of Secrets is far and away the best creature in this deck. Goyf might be 2nd on that list. Pyromancer is sweet on turn 1-2-3 but after that its really hard to get a pyromancer going. Goyf is a much better top deck in turns 4+ in games where you either didn't have an early threat or it was answered. The other nice thing about Goyf is people aren't prepared for it. You pretty much need an abrupt decay to stop this guy as he is often out of bolt range and much larger than most of your opponents "fair" creatures. I'm currently on 4 Goyf and I don't see myself changing that anytime soon.

[Smmenen]

Congratulations AJ. 

I appreciate and enjoy the style of report that describes your process and preparation rather than just the events of the tournament.

What happens before the tournament is 99% of the work.  So the fact that you described it provides great insight.    But to better understand it, I think it would be valuable if you had indicated in between the decklists what the exact differences between each list like:

- 3 CARD NAME
+ 3 CARD NAME

That would help us see the direction of your adjustments over time.  Clearly, there are developments you are making over time that matter, like cutting Fastbond and Snapcasters (right calls, for this deck, I think).  But the more subtle ones or tweaks are difficult to spot.

I obviously think Pyromancer is amazing, and one of the best Grow creatures ever, so I'm all about Pyromancer in Gush decks, so I applaud that.  I really like my Grow deck, and I appreciate what your deck is trying to do.  The one thing I am skeptical of is the lack of a full complement of Preordain.  You have 18 mana sources maindeck.  All of your lists have just 2 Preordain. 

Playing Joel in the finals, I think the matchup is winnable, but you have to be exceptionally clever.  How much thought did you put into tactics you might employ to trick him?  With 4 bolts and 4 Gush (to negate Islandwalking) you can definitely make plays against him and try to out tempo him and trick him. I would be looking for plays like playing a Pyromancer or a GOyf and then trying to Gush in response to his attack to kill his creatures and then swing back.   I haven't yet watched your finals match on video, but I look forward to doing so to see if you pursued these avenues.   

I wish you continued success with this archetype.  Glad to see Gush decks doing so well, especially with Pyromancer in grow-like decks.

[TD]

Congratulations AJ. 

I appreciate and enjoy the style of report that describes your process and preparation rather than just the events of the tournament.

What happens before the tournament is 99% of the work.  So the fact that you described it provides great insight.    But to better understand it, I think it would be valuable if you had indicated in between the decklists what the exact differences between each list like:

- 3 CARD NAME
+ 3 CARD NAME

That would help us see the direction of your adjustments over time.  Clearly, there are developments you are making over time that matter, like cutting Fastbond and Snapcasters (right calls, for this deck, I think).  But the more subtle ones or tweaks are difficult to spot.

I obviously think Pyromancer is amazing, and one of the best Grow creatures ever, so I'm all about Pyromancer in Gush decks, so I applaud that.  I really like my Grow deck, and I appreciate what your deck is trying to do.  The one thing I am skeptical of is the lack of a full complement of Preordain.  You have 18 mana sources maindeck.  All of your lists have just 2 Preordain. 

Playing Joel in the finals, I think the matchup is winnable, but you have to be exceptionally clever.  How much thought did you put into tactics you might employ to trick him?  With 4 bolts and 4 Gush (to negate Islandwalking) you can definitely make plays against him and try to out tempo him and trick him. I would be looking for plays like playing a Pyromancer or a GOyf and then trying to Gush in response to his attack to kill his creatures and then swing back.   I haven't yet watched your finals match on video, but I look forward to doing so to see if you pursued these avenues.   

I wish you continued success with this archetype.  Glad to see Gush decks doing so well, especially with Pyromancer in grow-like decks.

Thanks Steve.
To be honest I kind of raced through typing up this report because I wanted to get it up quickly. You're right I should have spent a little more time on the lists and describing the changes. As for the the Merfolk matchup sure it is winnable with tight plays but the point I was trying to get across is that the way the two decks are stacked up Merfolk has a huge advantage. I was aware of the gush play but I never had the opportunity to use it as the inly gush I saw all match was my only blue card for force of will. Lightning bolt also seemed to go missing  until the end of game 2 where it no longer mattered. There are deffinatly avenues to victory in this matchup but they are very narrow. The real problem is I think the changes to make the matchup better take to much away from the strengths I have vs the rest of the field. One huge mistake I made in game one of the finals was scooping. I should have ran out my 2nd goyf and bluffed the gush. Joel basically said in his report that he would have swung into my goyfs and called my bluff but it was still a huge line I missed.

[Smmenen]

To be honest I kind of raced through typing up this report because I wanted to get it up quickly. You're right I should have spent a little more time on the lists and describing the changes.

You can still go back, edit your original post, and do that.  It would be great to see the exact changes between lists, as they aren't evident from a careful scan in many cases.

. The real problem is I think the changes to make the matchup better take to much away from the strengths I have vs the rest of the field.

I don't think the matchup is nearly as bad as you seem to be suggesting.  If you carefully test it, you may discover/uncover lines of play or tactical options that can produce victories if pressed, such as those I suggested and others besides.  You have Jitte post board and pyroblasts.  Jitte is insane in this matchup, provided they don't land Null Rod first.  I don't think you need to make any changes to your deck, just prepare more for the matchup from a play standpoint.  I'm speculating, but it seems like you may have been psychologically defeated, in the sense of not expecting yourself to win the match, before the finals began.  That may have damped your pursuit of active/available tactical opportunities in the match.

I've played the Tempo Thresh v. Merfolk match in Legacy many times(Joel's deck is very similar to Legacy decks of maybe 2-3 years ago), and if you can accelerate out two Goyfs in the first few turns with one removal spell, I always won.  I don't really see a chasmal difference here.  I've used Dazes in Legacy like a Gush to negate Islandwalk, and it's a backbreaking play. I think there are many routes to victory if pressed/pursued given your existing configuration.  

[Oath Breaker]

AJ
Great job last weekend.
Oddly enough I saw your deck list after you played to a win at MVPLS, and decided to give it a try myself. I copied the same 60, minus the Goyf's. In there place I played Snapcaster, and Trygon Predator. Needless to say I did not have the same luck. I Went 0-4 drop at the Harrisburg PA event.
The deck was a ton of fun to play, and I would love to see you start a primer to see better choices.
Thanks, Kevin

[TD]

To be honest I kind of raced through typing up this report because I wanted to get it up quickly. You're right I should have spent a little more time on the lists and describing the changes.

You can still go back, edit your original post, and do that.  It would be great to see the exact changes between lists, as they aren't evident from a careful scan in many cases.

. The real problem is I think the changes to make the matchup better take to much away from the strengths I have vs the rest of the field.

I don't think the matchup is nearly as bad as you seem to be suggesting.  If you carefully test it, you may discover/uncover lines of play or tactical options that can produce victories if pressed, such as those I suggested and others besides.  You have Jitte post board and pyroblasts.  Jitte is insane in this matchup, provided they don't land Null Rod first.  I don't think you need to make any changes to your deck, just prepare more for the matchup from a play standpoint.  I'm speculating, but it seems like you may have been psychologically defeated, in the sense of not expecting yourself to win the match, before the finals began.  That may have damped your pursuit of active/available tactical opportunities in the match.

I've played the Tempo Thresh v. Merfolk match in Legacy many times(Joel's deck is very similar to Legacy decks of maybe 2-3 years ago), and if you can accelerate out two Goyfs in the first few turns with one removal spell, I always won.  I don't really see a chasmal difference here.  I've used Dazes in Legacy like a Gush to negate Islandwalk, and it's a backbreaking play. I think there are many routes to victory if pressed/pursued given your existing configuration.  

You are correct that there are avenues to victory in this matchup and you are also correct that I should test the matchup more. Jitte is good but it's not great in this matchup because of the speed of Merfolk combined with the disruption of wasteland and my light mana base. Merfolk can easily be winning on turns 3-5 which is exactly where my Jitte would start to be active. I understand that  you are just speculating but I think you should really try to play the matchup before telling me that it is not nearly as bad as I've seen it to be. The example of just play double goyf with a bolt and have gush to negate islandwalk is much easier said than done. The reason I feel this matchup is so poor for RUG is because the only paths to victory and very narrow. You need to have gush and goyf and you can't get wastelanded in the process and even if you do have those things you probably still need a lightning bolt. I would encourage you to test the matchup because the games I've played and seen with my own eyes play out much differently that what you are theorizing about or remember from an entirely different format from 2-3 years ago.

AJ
Great job last weekend.
Oddly enough I saw your deck list after you played to a win at MVPLS, and decided to give it a try myself. I copied the same 60, minus the Goyf's. In there place I played Snapcaster, and Trygon Predator. Needless to say I did not have the same luck. I Went 0-4 drop at the Harrisburg PA event.
The deck was a ton of fun to play, and I would love to see you start a primer to see better choices.
Thanks, Kevin

Yeah I wouldn't call it luck. I've tested both snapcaster and trygon a lot and found both to be underwhelming. It sounds like you cut your biggest threat (goyf) to make room for them to boot. Try the deck again but with goyf I think you'll be amazed how much differently the deck plays out.

[Smmenen]

Merfolk can easily be winning on turns 3-5 which is exactly where my Jitte would start to be active.

 Barring a god draw, it's extremely unlikely that he will win the game before turn 4.  Unless he draws Lotus and Sapphire, I think it's impossible to deal 20 damage on turn 3, and not much easier on turn 4 with a normal draw.   I watched Kevin's match against Joel, and Joel's deck was quite slow, and even slower with minimal disruption.   I think Kevin probably had 10 turns in both games.

 I understand that  you are just speculating but I think you should really try to play the matchup before telling me that it is not nearly as bad as I've seen it to be.

Well, I'm very familiar with how Joel's deck plays out and his archetype, and I'm very familiar with all manner of Gush decks, including RUG Delver.  

I'm not saying that the matchup is favorable, just not quite as bleak as your report seemed to suggest.  After all, you said "I told him that the matchup felt unwinnable."  All I'm saying is that I think it's much better than that kind of remark suggests.

The example of just play double goyf with a bolt and have gush to negate islandwalk is much easier said than done.

Understood, but that was just illustrative.  I think a double Delver draw could outrace Joel's deck with a minimal amount of disruption and some burn as well.  You can deal 6 damage a turn on turns 3-5, which can easily outrace him if you are able to counter or burn one Lord.  Gush is just icing that makes your land creatures walls.  

on another note, you should go back and show what the changes were from list to list.  That would be cool to see.

[TD]

 Barring a god draw, it's extremely unlikely that he will win the game before turn 4.  Unless he draws Lotus and Sapphire, I think it's impossible to deal 20 damage on turn 3, and not much easier on turn 4 with a normal draw.   I watched Kevin's match against Joel, and Joel's deck was quite slow, and even slower with minimal disruption.   I think Kevin probably had 10 turns in both games.

Just like you were drawing conclusions about this matchup based on an entirely different format from 2-3 years ago now you are drawing conclusions about this matchup based on an entirely different matchup that you watched play out. His deck runs 14 lords and that damage piles up fast. And while I admit a turn 3 kill may have been a bit exaggerated on my part I'm telling you that every game I've played vs Merfolk getting past turn 5 and to turn 6 has been a real challenge.

I'm not saying that the matchup is favorable, just not quite as bleak as your report seemed to suggest.  After all, you said "I told him that the matchup felt unwinnable."  All I'm saying is that I think it's much better than that kind of remark suggests.

Understood, but that was just illustrative.  I don't  think the matchup is 0/100 by any means but I do feel like the matchup is much much closer to 10/90  than it is 50/50 and the point I am trying to make  that you seemingly continue to gloss over is that I really feel like any changes I made to my deck to make this matchup closer to 50/50 would take to much away from my decks overall performance against the entire field. Because Merfolk is such a niche deck in the format I feel that it is  better to ignore the matchup rather than try to fix it.

[Smmenen]

I finally got around to watching the finals video, and what I saw reinforced my originally stated concerns.

In the first game, you blundered by playing Volc instead of Tarn on turn one.  Everything in the game flowed from that simple mistake.

He was able to play T2 Wasteland on you, and you put yourself into a compromised position by Forcing the Lotus (which I agree with the commenters was questionable -- not for their reasons tho, but because you had to pitch Gush).  Had you not, you could have played Gush when he went to attack,you could have easily put yourself in a position to kill a very important creature with a surprise block with Goyf AND Pyromancer and then Gush. I agreed with your play of Spell Piercing the Lotus, but the way the game unfolded you bottlenecked yourself, while he continued to have a stream of threats.  Had you played the Tarn first, you would have been able to activate Gush and keep your stream going with card and mana advantage from Gush. You would have set up and executed exactly the play I've been saying could have paid big dividends, not only by generating far more card advantage,  mana and tempo advantage inherent in Gush, but also put Joel off balance by the surprise effect.  That may have also set you up for a failed bluff in game 2.  I'm not saying you would have won the game had you 1) played Tarn first, and 2) held Gush, but I think your chances would have been clearly much better than the lines you selected.  

TLDR: had you played the Tarn on turn one instead of Volc, you could have done everything I suggested: Play Dudes, and then get massive advantage from Joel with Gush, blocking and killing his army.  

Joel was insanely lucky to draw Lotus in his opening hand both games, but that's variance, and not representative of the matchup.   Joel drew insane in both games, but you weren't toast.

Your play of not Bolting the Phantasmal Image made no sense because the Misstep wouldn't have been able to stop it from dying.  It's just targeting it wins.  His Mental MIsstep just blew you out then.  Not saying you would have won the game, but that was the nail in your coffin.  These two critical mistakes in both games, I think, underscored my concerns about your mindset/perception of the matchup going in.  You made multiple mistakes that directly contributed to game losses.  It's hard to say whether that was the just the culmination of a long day or factors like those I'm suggesting, but your dismal view of the matchup couldn't have helped. In your posts you say I "gloss over" some things, but you don't even mention these mistakes in your report (nor did the commentators even notice the first one).  

Barring a god draw, it's extremely unlikely that he will win the game before turn 4.  Unless he draws Lotus and Sapphire, I think it's impossible to deal 20 damage on turn 3, and not much easier on turn 4 with a normal draw.   I watched Kevin's match against Joel, and Joel's deck was quite slow, and even slower with minimal disruption.   I think Kevin probably had 10 turns in both games.

Just like you were drawing conclusions about this matchup based on an entirely different format from 2-3 years ago now you are drawing conclusions about this matchup based on an entirely different matchup that you watched play out.

What's so remarkable or problematic about 'drawing conclusions' from information such as that?    Both your words and tone seems to suggest that it would be absurd or wrongheaded to use any of my observation of Kevin's match or knowledge/experience of the Legacy Merfolk deck to inform my judgment of how Joel's deck plays out.  On the contrary, I'd be stupid not to.  

That's one area in which humans are still superior to computers: we can draw inferences and distill lessons/principles where situations are different, but alike in enough ways that can be of use to us.  Our intelligence (rather than machine intelligence) allows us to see what matters and reason through analogy.  Our ancestors could see a snake with a certain shape head and know its poisonous despite never having seen that particular species before.   It's how we can rent a car and drive it despite not having been trained to drive that car model before.  

It's also the entire basis for the concept of a "principle":  The idea of abstracting/deriving from the particular to the general, and then applying those principles again to the particular.   If we were to dismiss all things just because they were different, we wouldn’t have a system of laws let alone a vocabulary or language. Hell, we wouldn't have survived very long.  Every novel context would befuddle.

Joel's deck is almost an identical port of Legacy Merfolk updated with the latest Lord grafted into the long standing Type I/Vintage archetype (using few pieces of power and Null Rods), making it resemble alot of the Merfolk/Fish decks from 2002-04, like Marc Perez' famous deck.  

I've played countless matches with Legacy Tempo Thresh/Goyf in Legacy against Legacy Merfolk, and extrapolating that experience to decks and archetypes with which I'm very familiar is a useful way to correlate disparate pieces of information into a coherent set of insights.  The idea that Legacy is an "entirely different format"and that it was "2-3 years ago" does not render that information irrelevant.  Magic experience from an even greater format divide and a greater span of years can teach us much.  

Magic players still apply principles learned in 1994 to their play today.  Reading Weissman's great articles still generates useful heurstics and insights.  something from 2011 is certainly relevant, as a piece of the larger puzzle.    Hell, I’ve rebuilt decks with success from 2007 and 2002.  My 2007 Vintage Championship Grow deck was a rebuild of my 2003 version, a 4 year difference.  If anything, the long reach and slow evolution of Eternal formats cautions against dismissing information just on the basis of age alone, as the cyclical revival of Schools of Magic suggests in my History of Vintage series.  Heck, most of the tactics learned in this format can be learned years ago, and many tactics can be learned from other formats (like timing Brainstorm or how to use Brainstorm).  It's a bit like learning to ride a bike. Once you learn it, you can do it, and it doesn't matter if it was 3 years ago.  

I also have an intimate understanding of how Null Rod Fish decks work in Vintage for well over a decade now (my Tog deck was repeatedly crushed by UR Fish, to take one much older example).  It's not hard to take those disparate pieces of information and form a coherent picture of how Joel's deck plays out, especially since I watched him play it, which merely reinforced my basic view.  

The idea of "drawing conclusions" from such sources is only a problem if that's the only basis for such conclusions.  Your post tries hard to make it seem that I am, yet from everything I've said it should be obvious that I’m not.  I’m pulling from a broad range of informational inputs as a basis for my conclusions.  But your criticism, not only obscures this fact, but I think, obscures what my conclusion is.  

My point above wasn’t to say that Joel’s deck doesn’t win until turn 10.  I'm simply saying that Joel's deck is not as fast as you suggested (pointing out that turn 3 wins are virtually impossible, and turn 4 unlikely).  And, with each bit of disruption, especially slowing it down early, can buy huge amounts of time (basically a single counterspell can buy an entire turn or more).  

His deck runs 14 lords and that damage piles up fast. And while I admit a turn 3 kill may have been a bit exaggerated on my part I'm telling you that every game I've played vs Merfolk getting past turn 5 and to turn 6 has been a real challenge.

I understand.  I’m not trying to dispute your insights or suggest that the matchup isn’t a problem.  I’m simply saying that I don’t think it’s as bad as you have been suggesting (in your original post you said it was unwinnable - that's partly what I responding to).   Your deck is capable of goldfishing just as fast as Joel’s deck, although it’s not necessarily as consistent in that regard – it’s still capable of doing so.  

If you are on the play, and he is on the draw, I think you could straight race him with the right draw and a bit of either burn or countermagic (or he tempos himself with Daze).  His deck doesn't even play a creature most of the time on the first turn (his only drop being Cursecatcher) barring a piece of power, and only drops a bear on turn 2.  That means you can easily have a Delver and a Goyf on the table before he has even *cast* his first creature.  On the play, I bet you can press lines of play that win alot more than your described win-ratio.

I'm not saying that the matchup is favorable, just not quite as bleak as your report seemed to suggest.  After all, you said "I told him that the matchup felt unwinnable."  All I'm saying is that I think it's much better than that kind of remark suggests.

Understood, but that was just illustrative.

While ironically mimicking an earlier response of mine , you are misrepresenting what I said.  When I said that there were lines of play that could give you edges and even game victories, I didn’t mean they all had to converge.  They were merely illustrative of the kinds of edges you might pursue.  Your remark, on the other hand, didn’t seem illustrative (meaning an example) of a general idea, it seemed to be the idea itself.  

I don't  think the matchup is 0/100 by any means but I do feel like the matchup is much much closer to 10/90  than it is 50/50

I believe that you could get it better  than 10/90 and closer to 20/80 (and possibly better) with extensive practice (both an understanding of the kinds of hands and lines that are typical for his deck (through repetitious practice), and lines/hands/mulligans that maximize your chances of winning) without any changes to your decklist configuration.  And, if you can win the die roll, your chances of winning get much better.   Your deck has enough possible opening configurations that can give Joel’s deck fits.   RUG Delver should not be a 90/10 dog to Merfolk in my general view.  You have too many tactical edges with cards like Bolt and Delver and Jitte to just roll over that badly as a 90/10 dog.

and the point I am trying to make  that you seemingly continue to gloss over is that I really feel like any changes I made to my deck to make this matchup closer to 50/50 would take to much away from my decks overall performance against the entire field. Because Merfolk is such a niche deck in the format I feel that it is  better to ignore the matchup rather than try to fix it.

I’m not trying to gloss over that fact at all.  I understood that to be a key point in your original post and response to my original set of questions.  
Part of what I was trying to suggest earlier – and I apologize if you took this the wrong way or as a hostile criticism – is that the entire tone of your original post seemed to suggest to me more than a simple view about being strategically or tactically disadvantaged – it seemed like you were psychologically disadvantaged.  Your mindset, by your own account, going into the finals, was that this was the "one matchup you didn’t want to face," that "you couldn’t win even if you played perfectly (that he'd have to fumble)", and that the match seemed "unwinnable."  I find it hard to believe that that kind of mindset going into the finals couldn't have affected the match outcome in any way.  It may not have harmed it in any obvious way, but it may have had sublte effects, such as (and I'm merely being illustrative here) leading you not to be quite as aggressive (perhaps in mulliganing or taking risks) as you may have otherwise been.  

[TD]

I finally got around to watching the finals video, and what I saw reinforced my originally stated concerns.

In the first game, you blundered by playing Volc instead of Tarn on turn one.  Everything in the game flowed from that simple mistake.

He was able to play T2 Wasteland on you, and you put yourself into a compromised position by Forcing the Lotus (which I agree with the commenters was questionable -- not for their reasons tho, but because you had to pitch Gush).  Had you not, you could have played Gush when he went to attack,you could have easily put yourself in a position to kill a very important creature with a surprise block with Goyf AND Pyromancer and then Gush. I agreed with your play of Spell Piercing the Lotus, but the way the game unfolded you bottlenecked yourself, while he continued to have a stream of threats.  Had you played the Tarn first, you would have been able to activate Gush and keep your stream going with card and mana advantage from Gush. You would have set up and executed exactly the play I've been saying could have paid big dividends, not only by generating far more card advantage,  mana and tempo advantage inherent in Gush, but also put Joel off balance by the surprise effect.  That may have also set you up for a failed bluff in game 2.  I'm not saying you would have won the game had you 1) played Tarn first, and 2) held Gush, but I think your chances would have been clearly much better than the lines you selected.  

TLDR: had you played the Tarn on turn one instead of Volc, you could have done everything I suggested: Play Dudes, and then get massive advantage from Joel with Gush, blocking and killing his army.  

Joel was insanely lucky to draw Lotus in his opening hand both games, but that's variance, and not representative of the matchup.   Joel drew insane in both games, but you weren't toast.

Your play of not Bolting the Phantasmal Image made no sense because the Misstep wouldn't have been able to stop it from dying.  It's just targeting it wins.  His Mental MIsstep just blew you out then.  Not saying you would have won the game, but that was the nail in your coffin.  These two critical mistakes in both games, I think, underscored my concerns about your mindset/perception of the matchup going in.  You made multiple mistakes that directly contributed to game losses.  It's hard to say whether that was the just the culmination of a long day or factors like those I'm suggesting, but your dismal view of the matchup couldn't have helped. In your posts you say I "gloss over" some things, but you don't even mention these mistakes in your report (nor did the commentators even notice the first one).  

Barring a god draw, it's extremely unlikely that he will win the game before turn 4.  Unless he draws Lotus and Sapphire, I think it's impossible to deal 20 damage on turn 3, and not much easier on turn 4 with a normal draw.   I watched Kevin's match against Joel, and Joel's deck was quite slow, and even slower with minimal disruption.   I think Kevin probably had 10 turns in both games.

Just like you were drawing conclusions about this matchup based on an entirely different format from 2-3 years ago now you are drawing conclusions about this matchup based on an entirely different matchup that you watched play out.

What's so remarkable or problematic about 'drawing conclusions' from information such as that?    Both your words and tone seems to suggest that it would be absurd or wrongheaded to use any of my observation of Kevin's match or knowledge/experience of the Legacy Merfolk deck to inform my judgment of how Joel's deck plays out.  On the contrary, I'd be stupid not to.  

That's one area in which humans are still superior to computers: we can draw inferences and distill lessons/principles where situations are different, but alike in enough ways that can be of use to us.  Our intelligence (rather than machine intelligence) allows us to see what matters and reason through analogy.  Our ancestors could see a snake with a certain shape head and know its poisonous despite never having seen that particular species before.   It's how we can rent a car and drive it despite not having been trained to drive that car model before.  

It's also the entire basis for the concept of a "principle":  The idea of abstracting/deriving from the particular to the general, and then applying those principles again to the particular.   If we were to dismiss all things just because they were different, we wouldn’t have a system of laws let alone a vocabulary or language. Hell, we wouldn't have survived very long.  Every novel context would befuddle.

Joel's deck is almost an identical port of Legacy Merfolk updated with the latest Lord grafted into the long standing Type I/Vintage archetype (using few pieces of power and Null Rods), making it resemble alot of the Merfolk/Fish decks from 2002-04, like Marc Perez' famous deck.  

I've played countless matches with Legacy Tempo Thresh/Goyf in Legacy against Legacy Merfolk, and extrapolating that experience to decks and archetypes with which I'm very familiar is a useful way to correlate disparate pieces of information into a coherent set of insights.  The idea that Legacy is an "entirely different format"and that it was "2-3 years ago" does not render that information irrelevant.  Magic experience from an even greater format divide and a greater span of years can teach us much.  

Magic players still apply principles learned in 1994 to their play today.  Reading Weissman's great articles still generates useful heurstics and insights.  something from 2011 is certainly relevant, as a piece of the larger puzzle.    Hell, I’ve rebuilt decks with success from 2007 and 2002.  My 2007 Vintage Championship Grow deck was a rebuild of my 2003 version, a 4 year difference.  If anything, the long reach and slow evolution of Eternal formats cautions against dismissing information just on the basis of age alone, as the cyclical revival of Schools of Magic suggests in my History of Vintage series.  Heck, most of the tactics learned in this format can be learned years ago, and many tactics can be learned from other formats (like timing Brainstorm or how to use Brainstorm).  It's a bit like learning to ride a bike. Once you learn it, you can do it, and it doesn't matter if it was 3 years ago.  

I also have an intimate understanding of how Null Rod Fish decks work in Vintage for well over a decade now (my Tog deck was repeatedly crushed by UR Fish, to take one much older example).  It's not hard to take those disparate pieces of information and form a coherent picture of how Joel's deck plays out, especially since I watched him play it, which merely reinforced my basic view.  

The idea of "drawing conclusions" from such sources is only a problem if that's the only basis for such conclusions.  Your post tries hard to make it seem that I am, yet from everything I've said it should be obvious that I’m not.  I’m pulling from a broad range of informational inputs as a basis for my conclusions.  But your criticism, not only obscures this fact, but I think, obscures what my conclusion is.  

My point above wasn’t to say that Joel’s deck doesn’t win until turn 10.  I'm simply saying that Joel's deck is not as fast as you suggested (pointing out that turn 3 wins are virtually impossible, and turn 4 unlikely).  And, with each bit of disruption, especially slowing it down early, can buy huge amounts of time (basically a single counterspell can buy an entire turn or more).  

His deck runs 14 lords and that damage piles up fast. And while I admit a turn 3 kill may have been a bit exaggerated on my part I'm telling you that every game I've played vs Merfolk getting past turn 5 and to turn 6 has been a real challenge.

I understand.  I’m not trying to dispute your insights or suggest that the matchup isn’t a problem.  I’m simply saying that I don’t think it’s as bad as you have been suggesting (in your original post you said it was unwinnable - that's partly what I responding to).   Your deck is capable of goldfishing just as fast as Joel’s deck, although it’s not necessarily as consistent in that regard – it’s still capable of doing so.  

If you are on the play, and he is on the draw, I think you could straight race him with the right draw and a bit of either burn or countermagic (or he tempos himself with Daze).  His deck doesn't even play a creature most of the time on the first turn (his only drop being Cursecatcher) barring a piece of power, and only drops a bear on turn 2.  That means you can easily have a Delver and a Goyf on the table before he has even *cast* his first creature.  On the play, I bet you can press lines of play that win alot more than your described win-ratio.

I'm not saying that the matchup is favorable, just not quite as bleak as your report seemed to suggest.  After all, you said "I told him that the matchup felt unwinnable."  All I'm saying is that I think it's much better than that kind of remark suggests.

Understood, but that was just illustrative.

While ironically mimicking an earlier response of mine , you are misrepresenting what I said.  When I said that there were lines of play that could give you edges and even game victories, I didn’t mean they all had to converge.  They were merely illustrative of the kinds of edges you might pursue.  Your remark, on the other hand, didn’t seem illustrative (meaning an example) of a general idea, it seemed to be the idea itself.  

I don't  think the matchup is 0/100 by any means but I do feel like the matchup is much much closer to 10/90  than it is 50/50

I believe that you could get it better  than 10/90 and closer to 20/80 (and possibly better) with extensive practice (both an understanding of the kinds of hands and lines that are typical for his deck (through repetitious practice), and lines/hands/mulligans that maximize your chances of winning) without any changes to your decklist configuration.  And, if you can win the die roll, your chances of winning get much better.   Your deck has enough possible opening configurations that can give Joel’s deck fits.   RUG Delver should not be a 90/10 dog to Merfolk in my general view.  You have too many tactical edges with cards like Bolt and Delver and Jitte to just roll over that badly as a 90/10 dog.

and the point I am trying to make  that you seemingly continue to gloss over is that I really feel like any changes I made to my deck to make this matchup closer to 50/50 would take to much away from my decks overall performance against the entire field. Because Merfolk is such a niche deck in the format I feel that it is  better to ignore the matchup rather than try to fix it.

I’m not trying to gloss over that fact at all.  I understood that to be a key point in your original post and response to my original set of questions.  
Part of what I was trying to suggest earlier – and I apologize if you took this the wrong way or as a hostile criticism – is that the entire tone of your original post seemed to suggest to me more than a simple view about being strategically or tactically disadvantaged – it seemed like you were psychologically disadvantaged.  Your mindset, by your own account, going into the finals, was that this was the "one matchup you didn’t want to face," that "you couldn’t win even if you played perfectly (that he'd have to fumble)", and that the match seemed "unwinnable."  I find it hard to believe that that kind of mindset going into the finals couldn't have affected the match outcome in any way.  It may not have harmed it in any obvious way, but it may have had sublte effects, such as (and I'm merely being illustrative here) leading you not to be quite as aggressive (perhaps in mulliganing or taking risks) as you may have otherwise been.  

Steve,
I'd like to explain some of my plays because I don't feel they were all mistakes.

In game one he leads with a cavern and a catcher. On my turn I know I'm landing a goyf with FOW back up and I know I have to race. I have the option to play either a fetch or a volcanic. I chose to lead with the volcanic because I expect his next turn to be land/lord attack. If I can get him to waste my volcanic on his 2nd turn I Essentially trade my volcanic for a timewalk turn with a goyf in play. pushing him a turn back off his lord and awarding myself a free attack phase while still holding a fetch to get any color mana I need. If he doesn't waste and still plays an island and a lord then on my turn I get to play my fetch and have gush up to protect my lands and block his guys. If i knew he would be drawing a black lotus for his turn sure I would lead with the fetch but I believe given the information at hand I made the correct play of leading volcanic.

As far as the lotus is concerned I feel FOWing it was correct. At that point he didn't show a land for the turn and with cavern of souls in play my force of will had little to no targets. FOWing the lotus potentially keeps him from playing multiple threats that turn like land catcher, lord, lord. Unfortunately for me Gush was the only card I had to pitch to my FOW. It was a calculated risk to pitch the gush at that point because I was going all in on disrupting his mana to buy more turns with my Goyf to race.

While the lightning bolt play was just a blunder that I feel I wouldn't have made in say round one of the event I think it is incorrect to hastily label the land drop and the lotus play as mistakes. The real mistake I feel I made in game one that you may have missed was scooping. On my last turn I could have played a 2nd goyf and tried to bluff a gush. I think Joel probably still calls my bluff and attacks into my goyfs but it's still a play I should have taken and just didn't see. While you will more than likely chalk that up to being mentally defeated I can honestly say I don't think I would have seen the play even in a great matchup.

Since it doesn't look like we are going to reach an agreement on many of these topics this will be my last response. I want to thank you for your insight into both my play and the matchup. I will be taking these points into consideration when evaluating my personal game and the merfolk matchup in the future.

Thanks,
-AJ

[Godder]

Thread unlocked. Keep it civil from here on out. Full warning to Smmenen for thread derailment and inflammatory posting (posts have been moved to the Storage Tank). Steve, tread very carefully from now on.

[Eastman]

Great report, and great run in what was not just the largest, but one of the most competitive vintage player pools in history!   Congrats.

I appreciate the details on your preparation, etc. as well.