why the backlash against md artifact removal?

[jpmeyer]

I was looking around today, and I noticed the following:

1) There are many decks that run maindeck creature removal of some kind
2) There are almost no decks that run maindeck artifact removal
3) There are many more artifacts played in Type 1 than creatures
4) The artifacts that are played are on the whole at least as powerful as the creatures

Yet, there also then seems to be the point that if maindeck artifact removal needs to be run, that something is "wrong."  Why is this?  Why is it OK to run a few copies of Fire/Ice or Swords to Plowshares maindeck but not Annul/Artifact Mutation/Disenchant/Rack and Ruin?  I personally think that this is different from the "Yeah, well 4 Wills would be OK, since you could just run 4 Planar Void" type of reasoning in that artifacts of all shapes and sizes get played in Type 1 in addition to the more overpowered ones like Trinisphere.  Honestly, I personally do find it amusing when people allow themselves to die to cards like Null Rod or Crucible of Worlds even though they're expecting them (I'm leaving out Trinisphere here because Trinisphere is a Force/Waste or no? proposition, rather than something that is still good on turn X+1).

[Machinus]

Fire/Ice can pitch to Force and it cantrips if you don't want to use it as removal. Very high quality. (Incidentally F/I can help out with 3sphere as well).

StP is a little tougher though. I think that decks that run these maindeck are like Keeper that have to survive the beatdown so they can build up enough resources to win.

Cunning wish is almost always just plain better than a maindeck answer though. With artifact removal you have to cast something like Rack and Ruin to really get the job done (and even then welders can bring them back, it just takes twice as long). Maindeck oxidize/naturalize seems like it is just too weak, and will often be a dead card in your hand, even against artifact decks.

What's wrong with Cunning Wish?

[Denney The Third]

Many artifacts that are threats are also creatures. Swords and Fire Ice kill those too. Alot of sideboards have wishable cards such as Rack and Ruin, Oxidize, and many other artifact hatters in them.
       People may feel safer keeping artifact hate in the sideboard. Lets say You are runnning some serious artifact hate game one and your opponent isnt running anything besides moxen? its a dead card. using wish in the slot instead leaves you open to fetching artifact hate, or anything else you need at the moment.

[jpmeyer]

Cunning Wish is slow.  While you're spending the time trying to Cunning Wish, you could have your land slipping away to Crucible or your life vanishing from a Sundering Titan.

I think Cunning Wish is great for dealing with random situations that might arise but gets relied on too much.

Or, how about this: switch around your Cunning Wish roles.  Put the Rack and Ruins main and move your StPs and company to the sideboard.

[Denney The Third]

I guesss what you maindeck depends on where your playing. If your in an oath heavy environment you want sword to deal with akroma and SoTn.If your in stax heavy go with the rack and ruin and/or oxidize.
   Depending on whic you play maindeck will only be effected by what your opponents are playing. You could compromise play a few of each maindeck and then have the spares sideboarded for the wish. But any of these choies comes with risk.

[Miaou]

One thing that could tip the scale towards creature removal is Goblin Welder. Sure go ahead and destroy that artifact, I'll just weld it back!
Since this card is very played, that could explain part of the problem.

[Joblin Velder]

I've had great success with 2-3 maindeck Oxidizes in Madness. I've never found them to be a dead card. I couldn't imagine not running them. With Control Slaver gaining in popularity (at least in my area), it's a pretty pretty gooood.

Then again, that goes back to the "depends on the meta" arguement.

[freakish777]

I think this is because more people want to play the reactive control route than the play the pre-empetive disruption route (for those that aren't playing 5/3).  In today's T1 environment, all decks other than storm based combo and belcher are killing with a creature.  Thus the logic is, stop their creature -> Win the game.  Unfortunately everyone is too near-sighted and thinks stopping the creature means killing it (with StP, Edict [is this even run anymore?], F/I, etc).  One of the most efficient ways I've found to stop 4cc from winning is by cutting off its access to white mana.  Swords is a quality choice due to the fact that it removes the creature from the game (no welder tricks, no Oathing into Gaea's Blessing and recurring the creature, etc), and is an instant.  It has a strike against it though for having to splash white.  If your meta is filled with decks that rely on artifacts to get their win condition out (or is the win condition), then you really should be running artifact destruction in the main deck.  If my meta was all (or over half even) stax/workshop based, I'd certainly run 4 - 8+ artifact destruction spells.

Side note:  Obviously prison has creatures (other then Welder) added more or less as an "oh yeah, I need an actual win condition" after-thought.  Here though, F/I or StP stops them also if they're relying on Welder (provided you can force it through against CS).  If its Stacker though then you are better off with artifact hate.

[Stupid_Newb]

Over the summer I remember testing quite a bit with an 7/10 variant, in which I ran one Shattering Pulse, and one Rack and Ruin. Both cards proved their worth against Stax, other Artifact Aggro, and decks that ran Null Rod. I'd definately run some form of Artifact removal MD if I had the room for it.

[andrewpate]

It seems to me that the recent decline in artifact hate is due more than anything to people just freaking out about Oath.  It's the same reason we had 2-3 md Racks in everything under the sun during the period earlier this year when Workshops were all over the place.  Maybe in the slow period we're going into, things will settle back down into the more reasonable 2-3 spells apiece to remove artifacts and creatures.

[jpmeyer]

It seems to me that the recent decline in artifact hate is due more than anything to people just freaking out about Oath.  It's the same reason we had 2-3 md Racks in everything under the sun during the period earlier this year when Workshops were all over the place.  Maybe in the slow period we're going into, things will settle back down into the more reasonable 2-3 spells apiece to remove artifacts and creatures.

But on the same token, people had a lot of success at SCG III by running Seal of Cleansing maindeck.

[VGB]

Essentially, JP, you seem to be asking "why the hell aren't people metagaming?".  There was a recent article by Piemaster that answers that question.

Just the other day I played against a Madness deck, and the guy was playing U/Gr (red was for Anger and sideboard hate).  I was playing my bastard 7/10.  After I won the match (the first game I lost to his maindecked Gilded Drake, horror of horrors, which stole my first turn Titan), I asked him why he didn't play Artifact Mutation (which would have essentially handed my ass to me), and he said "all I need is Rack and Ruin", and I was like "but AM would have won the game where RnR didn't do jack for you", and he was like "whatever".

[Covetous]

I would think that part of the reason that most decks that run either MD creature hate or MD artifact hate choose creature hate is that while artifacts may help your opponent win the game, creatures can simply kill you.  In addition, almost every deck that is not combo runs creatures to win.  Not all of these same decks run artifacts.  Artifact hate would seem to be more likely to be dead a larger part of the time.  For instance, you can play around 3sphere or CoW (although of course it is a pain in the ass), but a 5/3 will kill you in short order unless you kill it.  It goes like this:  If you are locked under a turn 1 trinisphere followed by a turn 2 juggy to beat your face, which will you kill once you get to the requisite 3 mana?

Many of the successful decks of late have access to both artifact and creature hate before the SB (i.e. MD hate or MD Wish-->hate).  The cunning wish route is of course slower but more flexible in such a way as to potentially over-ride the slowness factor.  And, it is important to remember that many decks run welder, which is in itself artifact hate of a sort.  So, if you count that, do more people still run creature hate?

[Gandalf_The_White_1]

I would think that part of the reason that most decks that run either MD creature hate or MD artifact hate choose creature hate is that while artifacts may help your opponent win the game, creatures can simply kill you.  In addition, almost every deck that is not combo runs creatures to win.  Not all of these same decks run artifacts.  Artifact hate would seem to be more likely to be dead a larger part of the time.  For instance, you can play around 3sphere or CoW (although of course it is a pain in the ass), but a 5/3 will kill you in short order unless you kill it.  It goes like this:  If you are locked under a turn 1 trinisphere followed by a turn 2 juggy to beat your face, which will you kill once you get to the requisite 3 mana?

The reasoning is quite flawed.  Most decks are far more worried about lock components than creatures.  A turn 1 sphere is far more scary than a turn 1 juggy.

Also, on the subject of not all decks running artifacts, virtually every optimal decklist runs moxen.  If this wasn't what you were talking about (as in you were referring to big artifacts that arn't mana sources), I apologise, but the statement taken literally is blatently false.  Also, this fact is important when considering cheap and effective maindeck artifact hate: things like rod and oxidise can be run effectively maindeck, while R&R and artifact mutation are more dubious choices for that task and thus regulated to the sidebaord.

I am interested in how people frequently won games playing around sph3re and COW.  Ususally if these hit within the first few turns they create such massive tempo swings as to end the game.  A 5/3 creature is not very significant compared to these most of the time (this realates to my first point).

As for your question, it may have been retorical, but to me the answer is not very obvious.  Assuming a single targeted artifact removal spell and requesite mana to cast it I would base my decision on numerous conditions such as cards in hand and grave of both players, board position, cards in my hand number of cards in my opponent's hand, life total, etc.  I don't think you can just ask "juggy or trini."

Edit: In case this is necessary: for juggy and trini example, just to clarify.  Say I can cast a artifact mutation.  I have 2 options: 1: kill sph3re and trade the 3 tokens with juggy, 2: kill juggy and have 4 token while trini remains in play.  If I had say an ancestral and gorilla shamen in my hand, I would probably opt for #1, allowing me to remove the sph3re and ancestral myself next turn as well as playing a shamen to eat any moxen/shut off welders or w/e, although it still depends on my opponents baord(this sitaution is most liekly to happen with WTF/r having these pecific cards  in deck).  If my opponent went turn 1 shop, mox sphere, turn 2 juggy with no other land, turn 3 no play, I would probably kill the juggy and leave my opponent locked under their own sph3re.