How fair is Mishra's Workshop?

[Panteren]

How Fair is Mishra's Workshop? Kenny Öberg, who came in 9th at last years GenCon, presents his thoughts here:
 
http://www.manapool.dk/nyheder.asp?id=314
 

Regards
 
Alexander Dick
Editor of Mana Pool

[Ric_Flair]

Very fair in a format in which Charbelcher wins 40-50% of the time on turn one.  This is an old debate and nothing has really changed.

[LOLinger]

Ric Flair: Charbelcher wins 40-50% of the time on turn one.

Thats not true !
Charbelcher kills around 10% on turn 1.
With that 40%-50% you probably mean that belcher puts the Blecher on turn 1 (for a turn 2 win during upkeep).

But still this makes Oxidize and other 1 mana answers possible (e.g. mogg salvage).
Also it allows for Stifle -> null rod on turn 2.

And a turn one win will NEVER be prevented by mishras workshop if the player piloting them lost the die-roll.

And honestly: with this article in mind its not the question wheter MW (+3sphere) can stop an extremely fast combo deck (which of course is a good thing for the format).
But its more wheter MW (in stax) can stop EVERY deck availlable and because of this screws the format.

And I think Kenny is altogether right with his article. Edit: And I hope the american proxy-based tournaments will prove this soon........

A reusable lotus is simply too good (on ANY benchmark). And the "drawback" lost a lot with the mirrodin block!

[Bulls on Parade]

Ric Flair: Charbelcher wins 40-50% of the time on turn one.

Thats not true !
Charbelcher kills around 10% on turn 1.
With that 40%-50% you probably mean that belcher puts the Blecher on turn 1 (for a turn 2 win during upkeep).

And a turn one win will NEVER be prevented by mishras workshop if the player piloting them lost the die-roll.

I didn't read the article, I'm just responding to these comments.

Charbelcher activates the Belcher (wins) a little over 1 in 3 games- I'd say 35% which is not far off what Ric said.  I'd say it goldfishes BY turn 2 about 90% of the time as well.  

Lolinger, Ric wasn't saying Mishra's Workshop is fair because it prevents Belcher from going off (at least to my understanding he wasn't) as much as he was intimating that if there's a deck that can outright win on turn 1 as often as Belcher then Mishra's Workshop is certainly fair considering the relative speed of the environment. I'm also not saying I agree with this assessment, just trying to clear things up.

[Machinus]

The forum responses were very interesting to read. But in the end, Workshop is merely the FoW of europe.

There is more combo there, and as Phil Stantan has shown recently, the wasteland-less eastern continent is a myth. Our european stax players have just as much disruption and more combo to deal with than we do. In the control dominated American environment, the idea of restricting FoW is terrible and no one ever brings it up because it is stupid. Workshop plays this role too. The true brokenness of the format is not combo, not prison. This is what we must keep in check.

If the American metagame were to shift towards the way it is in Europe, we would all appreciate workshop more. As it is, workshop plays an important role, and those who play and win with it have to be skilled to do so. Mulliganing properply is quite difficult, and anyone who has played stax knows there are more problems than this, such as mana flood, colored mana screw, and lots of hate.

And finally, restricting workshop would not stop the strength of the lock. Taking out three workshops from the deck would certainly put the consistency of the deck far out of mulliganing range, but the lock parts themselves would still be devastating. Stax would ultimately evolve to a point where it could still get them out early enough to annihilate combo and buy enough time to kill.

[Whatever Works]

I have a hard time complaining about Mishra's Workshop in T1, because first off its type 1 where broken cards like this should be played. The card is perfectly fair when you consider that there is so much artifact hate availible to type 1 players to deal with cards like workshop?

Can you even imagine how bad artifact decks would be in type 2 if they gorilla shaman, rack and ruin, or even energy flux was usable in the block???

Against Belcher workshop is irrelevent in the concept that EVERY deck vs. Belcher is put in the situation of I am going to have to stabalize the board by turn 2, or i am going to lose this game... Worshop curtainly helps with i win cards like trinisphere etc. but using belcher as an example doesnt really display the power of workshop, but instead the concept of the fundemental turn 2 that can make and break games for any deck.

Overall people have been whining for workshop to be restricted for years, and I for some reason have just accepted the power of workshop to be Type 1. Its all about the broken plays, and the moment shifts etc... a Workshop deck didnt win T1, and hasnt broke the format. A turn 1 trinisphere off a workshop (being the strategy), is not much (if at all) better then a first run B2B for Mono Blue. Its all part of a deck strategy, and all the advantages of workshop can be as easily denied in its drawbacks that even with the new expansions have not changed, because its still vulnerable to wasteland, and also B2B which is starting to see more play.

[Xeeko]

Ric Flair: Charbelcher wins 40-50% of the time on turn one.

Thats not true !
Charbelcher kills around 10% on turn 1.
With that 40%-50% you probably mean that belcher puts the Blecher on turn 1 (for a turn 2 win during upkeep).

And a turn one win will NEVER be prevented by mishras workshop if the player piloting them lost the die-roll.

I didn't read the article, I'm just responding to these comments.

Charbelcher activates the Belcher (wins) a little over 1 in 3 games- I'd say 35% which is not far off what Ric said.  I'd say it goldfishes BY turn 2 about 90% of the time as well.  

Lolinger, Ric wasn't saying Mishra's Workshop is fair because it prevents Belcher from going off (at least to my understanding he wasn't) as much as he was intimating that if there's a deck that can outright win on turn 1 as often as Belcher then Mishra's Workshop is certainly fair considering the relative speed of the environment. I'm also not saying I agree with this assessment, just trying to clear things up.

Honestly, since when is Belcher.dec too good?

But more on topic; The Mishra Workshop problem doesn't seem to exist in the states in the same amount it does in Europe. Looking at american stax-builds, and the Gencon lists you find a lot of sub-optimal builds and some weird desire to play fat with the WS, instead of just playing lock-components and win. This could be a result of the large amount of Fish being played in the states, a deck that isn't exactly blooming in Europe (at least not in Sweden), due to the dominance of stax. But anyway like LOLinger said, I hope the proxy tournaments will show you the true power of stax, and why Mishra's Workshop deserves to be restricted.

[Nantuko Rice]

Would it kill Prison Decks if they were forces to run City of Traitors or Ancient Tomb instead of Workshop?

Traitors can be brought back via Crucible.

Life is a very expendable resource in type 1. As long as it's not zero you're fine.

Traitors or Tomb + mox still equals first turn 3sphere or crucible. I would say that's acceptable since STAX is likely playing 5 moxes anyway.

[VGB]

In a game where LED is broken, MWS is a given.  Especially with the advent of MD5.

[Nantuko Rice]

Whatever works, b2b and workshop -> trinisphere are very different.

B2B can be beaten by playing non-basic lands. I can put together something like Oshawa and beat b2b-mono-blue.

Workshop + 3sphere can be beaten by..... well I could change my entire deck so that all the spells cost 3 mana but have no mana accelerants.

I accept that type 1 is broken, but take this example of a game I played in this saturday. My opponent, Kowal, does the following in game 3:

Workshop, Crucible. Lotus, Any 0 artifact, Tinker -> Smokestack. Two Restricted cards in his opening hand allowed him to completely lock me out of the game. And if not turn one, then by turn two he could've hardcasted his smokestack by playing a land.

How am I suppose to respond to such a play? Well, I could play Force of Will... but that's exactly what the article written by Kenny is saying. It's either Workshop vs Force or Workshop vs Workshop.

I'll accept broken plays from restricted broken cards like... Lotus, Walk, Will, Lotus, Walk, Recall... but broken plays from unrestricted cards... how often does that happen? It happens everytime I see a workshop.

[wuaffiliate]

As soon as workshop decks dominate you can restrict them, until then, stop wasting time with useless discussion and improve your play as opposed to wasting your time with such discussion.

[dicemanx]

I think that right now the only cards worthy of restriction are Trinisphere and Crucible. These cards might not be part of a dominant archetype, but instead they can result in stupid first turn kills without requiring an ounce of brainpower or playskill. That to me is perfectly valid reason for restriction. Sure, they could restrict Workshop to try to alleviate the Trinisphere issue, but why axe something that spawns 4-5 reasonable archetypes when you can just nail the real problem card?

Furthermore I think they should axe Belcher. No deck should exist that can combo out turn 1 with such terrifying consistency, no matter how badly it can get hated out. They got rid of long.dec for exactly that reason, so why haven't they gotten around to Belcher yet?

[Dante]

But more on topic; The Mishra Workshop problem doesn't seem to exist in the states in the same amount it does in Europe. Looking at american stax-builds, and the Gencon lists you find a lot of sub-optimal builds and some weird desire to play fat with the WS, instead of just playing lock-components and win. This could be a result of the large amount of Fish being played in the states, a deck that isn't exactly blooming in Europe (at least not in Sweden), due to the dominance of stax. But anyway like LOLinger said, I hope the proxy tournaments will show you the true power of stax, and why Mishra's Workshop deserves to be restricted.

Xeeko, most tournaments these days in the U.S. are proxy tournaments of some sort, with big conventions like Gencon and Origins being the exceptions.

Why don't you try and "show us the true power of stax" by pointing out where in Europe these dominating Stax decks are?  Maybe give some arguents for the restriction of MW other than "look at what happens if they go MW -> trinisphere turn 2 crucible strip mine".  Otherwise, no one is going to take this as anything other than whining about Trinisphere and Crucible (which seem to be the main whining points, not MW).

Bill

EDIT - the points in this guy's article seem to be very weak w.r.t Mishra's Workshop.  His biggest "points" seem to be 1. MW had a small print run & 2.  Crucible/Trinisphere "locks".  #2 can be avoided by using basics (obviously Strip mine excluded, but now we're talking about a MW, Crucible, Strip Mine combo).  For his data, he picked out 3 tournaments all in the same city (Barcelona) and Gencon.  He hasn't shown any of the commonly accepted criteria for restriction of MW.

[VGB]

Sure, they could restrict Workshop to try to alleviate the Trinisphere issue, but why axe something that spawns 4-5 reasonable archetypes when you can just nail the real problem card?

Try to alleviate the Trinisphere issue?  Seems to me like it would definitely alleviate it.  As for Crucible, recent events speak for themselves - something that makes mono-U good again can't be all that bad.

MWS is starting to sound like the Contract of T1 - as in the only people arguing to keep it are those with a vested (conflict of) interest.

[LoA]

MWS is starting to sound like the Contract of T1 - as in the only people arguing to keep it are those with a vested (conflict of) interest.

Who do you mean by this?  Anyone who owns Workshops?  Dealers?  Collectors?  Speculators?  This seems like a pretty broad accusation that is nigh impossible to back up.  And how does a vested interest in something equate to a conflict of interest?  They're two very different things.

Browsing the recent results in the Tournament forum, I see Workshop decks in Top 8's, but there are a lot of Workshop-free decks winning out there.  Workshops mean artifacts and artifact hate is cheap and/or good (like Artifact Mutation vs. Oxidize).  Plan accordingly.

I'm pretty happy with the current B/R list right now.  There are lots of decent control decks out there, lots of decent aggro decks out there, and lots of decent combo decks out there.  It keeps you on your toes, which a good thing.  No one wants a return to "play deck X or a hate deck or lose."

[DI419!]

My question is, is there any deck that can consistently beat stax and/or slaver?  I mean ANYTHING, even something tailor-made for it.  It's ridiculously powerful, I think we all agree, but it seems to be able to often pull off the "oops, I win" hands; I mean, what can really deal with turn 1 3sphere on a regular basis?.  The only thing that could have a good winning percentage would be something ridiculous like burn w/ 4 Crash and other crap.

[dicemanx]

Try to alleviate the Trinisphere issue? Seems to me like it would definitely alleviate it.

You know this for a fact? If Workshop was restricted you could still run *one* and you could run up to four Ancient Tombs. Tomb + Mox would still allow for quick Trinispheres and stupid first turn wins.

MWS is starting to sound like the Contract of T1 - as in the only people arguing to keep it are those with a vested (conflict of) interest.

What a cop-out argument. If we identify Trinisphere as a culprit, why does Workshop automatically have to get the axe and not Trinisphere itself?

[Saucemaster]

MWS is starting to sound like the Contract of T1 - as in the only people arguing to keep it are those with a vested (conflict of) interest.

You know, I never get in on these threads, but this is where I have to call bullshit.  Have you noticed that almost every successful deckbuilder, winning player, and respected team in competitive Type 1 thinks that, while Workshop is potentially dangerous, it's not restrictable right now?  Seriously, take a poll and watch as all the brightest lights of the Type 1 community agree that MWS isn't broken enough to restrict yet.  At least, those who care to even respond.  We've settled this debate.  Some disagree on whether other cards (like 3Sphere and Crucible) are restrictable, but we can pretty much all get together on MWS.  We just had a Worlds T8 that included as many decks as there were T8 slots.  We're only now adjusting from a metagame shift brought about by fish.  Fish.  Let me say that again: FISH.  If Fish can compete at the absolute highest levels of Type 1, how broken can the metagame POSSIBLY be?  And where is your evidence that Workshop is dominating the format?  If no one's arguing about restricting Workshop, it's because we've all more or less come to a consensus of which you seem blissfully unaware.

[Smmenen]

Exactly.  Marc Perez is of the view that good players don't play Workshop decks (although I'm not sure why almost his whole team did at Gencon) simply becuase of consistency issues.

You have to have balls to play Workshops in this environment.  Workshop Trinisphere is begging to be destroyed by Wasteland.  Workshops provide inconsistent decks that don't win tournaments.

Aside from Sweden WHAT WAS THE LAST TOURNAMENT WON BY A WORKSHOP DECK!?  Gencon?  Nope. SCG?  Sorry.  CCC?  Nope.  ECC?  Nope.  

Since restricted list policy is driven by RESULTS, NOT THEORY, I fail to see an iota of evidence for its restriction.

[LOLinger]

Workshops provide inconsistent decks that don't win tournaments.

Are you serious?

http://www.morphling.de/top8decks.php?id=178
http://www.morphling.de/top8decks.php?id=185
((http://www.morphling.de/top8decks.php?id=177 14 players))
http://www.morphling.de/top8decks.php?id=158

Smmenen its those kind of FALSE assertions which possibly keeps the larger crowd in your U.S. metagame off workshops.

Those tournaments were all sactioned. I think that even has some negative impact on the nr. of workshops played.

And its not only this but as Kenny reflected pretty well in his article its the sheer number of worshops appearing in ANY T8 lately. (GenCon Worlds anyone?)

Edit: From the top of my head - so dont flame too much plz *g*:
Off all those big tornament Smmmenen is mentioning which decks tended to be at the top of the crowd after the swiss?

[Triple_S]

Shortbus did run MWS Aggro (5/3) at Gencon since we felt it had the best option to yield high results...but the consistency of the deck is huge.  Case in point:  Thorme, SliverKing, and I all run the same deck.
Thorme:  2nd place.
Sliverking:  11th place.
Me:  1-2 drop

The same at SCG1:  all running nearly the same deck we place 9th and 19th while others go 2-2.  The deck has HUGE broken potential, but its power variance is very high.  Mark is a much better person to describe this phenomenon as he brings it up most often in private discussions.

[M]

Since restricted list policy is driven by RESULTS, NOT THEORY, I fail to see an iota of evidence for its restriction.

Why is Chrome Mox restricted then?

EDIT: @Moxlotus below:
It's not the number of Workshops in top 8's that is the issue in the article.
It's the number of Workshop based decks in top 8's when you consider just how rare a playset of Workshop really is (twice as rare as a Mox).
You can't make the same argument for FoW, Brainstorm or Wasteland because they are all relatively common. Mana Drain, maybe.
The argument is that if a playset of Workshop were as easy to obtain as a playset of Wasteland then Workshop based decks designed to beat other Workshop based decks would dominate the metagame.

The fact that they are not dominating the metagame in 5-10 proxy environments is well, sort of a mystery.

[Moxlotus]

Workshops provide inconsistent decks that don't win tournaments.

Are you serious?

http://www.morphling.de/top8decks.php?id=178
http://www.morphling.de/top8decks.php?id=185
((http://www.morphling.de/top8decks.php?id=177 14 players))
http://www.morphling.de/top8decks.php?id=158

Smmenen its those kind of FALSE assertions which possibly keeps the larger crowd in your U.S. metagame off workshops.

Those tournaments were all sactioned. I think that even has some negative impact on the nr. of workshops played.

And its not only this but as Kenny reflected pretty well in his article its the sheer number of worshops appearing in ANY T8 lately. (GenCon Worlds anyone?)

Edit: From the top of my head - so dont flame too much plz *g*:
Off all those big tornament Smmmenen is mentioning which decks tended to be at the top of the crowd after the swiss?

If we want to go by sheer numbers of cards in top 8s we would restrict Mana Drain, FoW and Wasteland too.  How many of each of them were in the T8 of Gencon worlds?

 So a deck is good for a while until people realize that its able to be beaten.  Workshop->3sphere sucks monkey balls when your opponent lays turn 1 Waste.  Look at what happened to Tog.  Fish was also huge until it got shot(for the most part) at GenCon.  Dragon of last year also was hated for a long time while people were like "omfg, I'm a bad player/deck innovator-restrict Bazaar !!!11!!one!1

When decks based on Workshops are winning a huge majority of tournaments, then it may be time for the restricted list, but until then the card and decks are fine.

Chrome Mox is restricted because the DCI hates combo.  Hell, they restricted Earthcraft.

[thorme]

Shortbus did run MWS Aggro (5/3) at Gencon since we felt it had the best option to yield high results...but the consistency of the deck is huge.

This is the primary reason that we have dropped 7/10.  The deck can be explosively broken, but it suffers from severe consistency issues.  I built 5/3 in an attempt to give the deck more resiliency to Null Rod and to make it more consistent.   I think the current list makes great strides in that direction.

Workshops decks also require a high degree of skill in the art of the mulligan...something in which far too few players have any proficiency.

[VGB]

Who do you mean by this?  Anyone who owns Workshops?  Dealers?  Collectors?  Speculators?  This seems like a pretty broad accusation that is nigh impossible to back up.  And how does a vested interest in something equate to a conflict of interest?  They're two very different things.

The vested interest is people owning $500-$800 worth of cards not wanting to see it shoot down to a quarter of its original value with a single stroke of the DCI pen.  The conflict of interest is people basing their arguments in support of Workshop on the following:

1) T1 is a broken format.
2) It keeps combo in check.
3) Trinisphere/Crucible are the real problem.

Which are all besides the issue or simply irrelevant.  Workshop makes all artifacts effectively cost 2 less mana than that printed on the card.  That is enough to make many overcosted and overpowered artifacts into undercosted and overpowered when coupled with the rest of the prodigious mana acceleration in T1.

Browsing the recent results in the Tournament forum, I see Workshop decks in Top 8's, but there are a lot of Workshop-free decks winning out there.  Workshops mean artifacts and artifact hate is cheap and/or good (like Artifact Mutation vs. Oxidize).  Plan accordingly.

Environments where you play X.dec or X-hate.dec are not indicative of a healthy format.  If the only decks that are performing are Workshop decks and decks tuned to beat Workshop, then something has to change.

I'm pretty happy with the current B/R list right now.  There are lots of decent control decks out there, lots of decent aggro decks out there, and lots of decent combo decks out there.  It keeps you on your toes, which a good thing.  No one wants a return to "play deck X or a hate deck or lose."

The sad fact of the matter is that Workshop simply allows for too many instances of broken openings.  You can treat it like Necropotence and restrict all the cards that make it good until there simply becomes too many, at which point it will get the axe anyways, or give players immediate relief.  My favorite deck for over a year now has been a Workshop-based deck, and what makes it my favorite is the simple fact that it is completely unfair - and MD5 has made it excruciatingly so.  The format is already X vs X-h8.

You know this for a fact? If Workshop was restricted you could still run *one* and you could run up to four Ancient Tombs. Tomb + Mox would still allow for quick Trinispheres and stupid first turn wins.

I would more readily accept decks with 4 x Ancient Tomb.  Manlands and cheap aggro become much better when a deck is hurting itself on that scale.

Trinisphere alone doesn't win the game - but in conjunction with Workshop, it literally has zero drawback.

Without Workshop, Trinisphere becomes less a win condition and more an Arboria.

What a cop-out argument. If we identify Trinisphere as a culprit, why does Workshop automatically have to get the axe and not Trinisphere itself?

Because then people will just go back to playing Sphere of Resistance and Chalice of the Void (in conjunction with the one 3Sphere) until something better surfaces.

Trinisphere definitely puts Shop over the top, but so do a lot of other cards printed recently.  If Workshop decks had just stuck to bashing face or relying on tenuous multicard prison combos, then it wouldn't be as disgusting, but alas, it has long since surpassed that point.

Aside from Sweden WHAT WAS THE LAST TOURNAMENT WON BY A WORKSHOP DECK!? Gencon? Nope. SCG? Sorry. CCC? Nope. ECC? Nope.

Since restricted list policy is driven by RESULTS, NOT THEORY, I fail to see an iota of evidence for its restriction.

I remember you writing a B&R list article, and a lot of the arguments for and against Workshop draw a disconcerting amount of parallels with Gush - and I think we know how that argument ultimately ended.  And Workshop posts results - more and more disturbing results the more artifacts are printed and time passes.

- edit

fixed incorrect link

[Smmenen]

Workshop never has nor never will even CLOSE to approach the level that Gush did in terms of dominating the format.

I make a slanderous generalization that Workshop hasn't won squat and the most someone can pull up is 3 tournament results out of literally dozens upon dozens that have been posted on morphling.de and elsewhere.

If Mishra's Workshop goes, so does Dark Ritual, Mana Drain, and Bazaar.  I'll tell you that much right now.

You all need to calm down and let the tournament data prove itself.  If Workshop is a problem then for christ sakes let Pip show us the data that proves it.

[LOLinger]

Smmenen: let Pip show us the data that proves it.

2.8, _3.4, _3.1, _3.3, _4.0, _4.0, _3.1 - 28 Yawgmoth's Will
_7.8, _6.4, _4.7, _8.9, _4.2, _6.0, _9.8 - 88 Mishra's Workshop
10.4, _8.5, 10.2, _9.3, 13.8, 10.3, _8.0 - 72 Mana Drain
_5.2, _7.4, _6.3, _6.3, _8.5, _8.9, _6.1 - 55 Cunning Wish
_1.6, _5.6, _4.0, _4.7, _4.0, _4.6, _4.8 - 43 Dark Ritual
___, ____, ____, ___, ____, _0.4, _4.6 - 41 Crucible of Worlds
_1.6, _0.0, _3.0, _1.3, _1.8, _1.9, _0.4 - 4 Elvish Spirit Guide

So he did

[LoA]

The vested interest is people owning $500-$800 worth of cards not wanting to see it shoot down to a quarter of its original value with a single stroke of the DCI pen.

This assumes everyone who owns these cards are trying to sell them.  How about people who like playing with a set of Workshops?  How about people who simply enjoy having a set of Workshops handy if they decide to try out a different deck?  I would imagine the people who have the most vested interest in keeping Worshop unrestricted are those who work very hard at developing Workshop decks, using proxies or originals since restriction would shoot a lot of hours of work down the drain, but that's not an economic arguement.

Environments where you play X.dec or X-hate.dec are not indicative of a healthy format.

I agree 100%.

If the only decks that are performing are Workshop decks and decks tuned to beat Workshop, then something has to change.

I agree here too.  I imagine where I would disagree with you is the next step of the thought: And we're there now.  In my estimation, we're not.  One needs to take Workshop decks into account when designing a deck, but by the same token decks also need some means of dealing with cards like Sundering Titan and Exalted Angel nowadays.  Being common doesn't mean a card warps the format.

The sad fact of the matter is that Workshop simply allows for too many instances of broken openings.

But this is Type 1, broken things happen     I'm not sure I consider Workshop->Crucible/Trinisphere any more broken than Land/Mana Crypt/Tinker->Colossus or Dragon/Draw7 winning on turn 1 or 4CC top-decking Yawgmoth's Will at the right time.  Moreso in Type 1 than any format luck is a factor since you get to play with such game-altering cards; sometimes all you need to win is to draw them at the right time or in the right combination.

[Smmenen]

Look a little more closely at that data

1)  For the vast majority of the year, Cunning WIsh and Mana Drain have exceeding Workshops numbers.

2) that is HARDLY the dominance or distortion that warrants restriction.  Assuming that it is, then that means that Drain surely meets that threshold as well, does it not?

[VGB]

Workshop never has nor never will even CLOSE to approach the level that Gush did in terms of dominating the format.

And Mind's Desire never even saw a single day as a playset in sanctioned play.  Workshop decks have just about gotten to that point, albeit they don't flat out play cards that say "I win now".

I make a slanderous generalization that Workshop hasn't won squat and the most someone can pull up is 3 tournament results out of literally dozens upon dozens that have been posted on morphling.de and elsewhere.

T1 being the format that it is, and what with the players being so skilled, usually other factors often influence who takes the very top spot - prize-splitting, matchslip errors, game losses due to rulings snafus, etc.  What I am speaking of here are T8's in general.

If Mishra's Workshop goes, so does Dark Ritual, Mana Drain, and Bazaar.  I'll tell you that much right now.

Of course Ritual and Drain are only 1-shot sources, and Bazaar having a hefty drawback of being a nonbasic land that doesn't provide mana and results in severe initial card disadvantage offsets any potential abuses it can enact.  T1 just might end up being a highlander format one day, though - would that really be so terrible?

You all need to calm down and let the tournament data prove itself.  If Workshop is a problem then for christ sakes let Pip show us the data that proves it.

Does the DCI wait upon this Pip of which you speak?  Or does it more or less base its decisions upon what is best for the format/appeases the majority/appeals to new players?