[Discussion] Isn't it obvious?

[Zherbus]

Stephen, even I missed the point of that post. Could you clarify a little, without the unnecessary venom?

[Smmenen]

No venom intended.  

Mark said specifically that he plays against Control Slaver decks every other round.  The last I saw Mark play was SCG III, Chicago, the only Slaver there aside from him was my team, the guy i drew into top 8 with and perhaps one or two others in the whole tournament.  I was simply trying to figure out where Mark has seen all this control slaver, since to my knowledge, he hasn't actually played since SCG Chicago.  

No insult intended - I was simply trying to ascertain the veracity of the claim that you see control slaver all the time.

Second, Welder doesn't need restriction becuase of either control slaver or its vulnerability.  It needs restriction becuase it is Skullclamp - it is in the best Workshop and Drain deck and even in one of the best Combo decks (Belcher).

[onelovemachine]

No venom intended.

Mr. Menedian, let's not joke ourselves here; no one is fooled.  It obviously wasn't just Mark and I who pulled animosity from that statement.  If you feel the need to verbally lash out (which I am not saying you can't by all means rip someone a new asshole in the forums, the moderators love that) at least just admit to it.  Your large vocabulary tends to give you away.  It's like a poker read I make on you:  whenever someone calls you on something that's the least bit rude that you have said, you apologize, you say that's not what you meant, and you spew entire pages of Webster's making me look up all those fancy words you use..... in actuality I'm sure everyone would just appreciate you saying, "yeah.. So what if I did mean it that way?"

Now back to the discussion....
As far as control slaver obviously offending the metagame, I just don't see it that way.  Now the data used in the beginning of the forum talks mainly about New England.  Everyone knows that control slaver is breeding like a rabbit out there and as long as the New England guys continue to love the fuzzy tails off their control decks that's just the way it will be.  Especially since many of the players out there are high quality,  it tends to make them believe they will just out play their opponents to death and control is their method of doing so.  

Why not oath then if control is where it is?  A million reasons, I don't personally know them all, but I do know through experience that I too prefer slaver to oath.  It is a strong, synergistic deck that plays the cards vintage is made of at the moment.  But does it kill you turn one?  Does it keep you from playing starting on turn one?  No, not really.  It does tend to do dumb things with mindslavers, the intuition build being especially quick with those.  Yet it has to be interactive to a point.  If, as Klep said, all of vintage is failing the interactivity test then imho, slaver is the closest to passing.  

As far as goblin welder being too strong:  right after, and I mean within hours or minutes, after World's people were quoting the number of goblin welders in the top 8 and talking about possible restrictions.  Yeah, it is a busted card.  But I hear that two for one creature removal is tech these days.

[doomhed]

Well, here is The Best I can do on this topic-

Everyone is gunning for Cslavery. EVERYONE. Any deck that can support the green mana short of dragon is running 3/4 groundseal Sideboard. ppl are running damping matrix main even to beat slavery, and it is not working. Slavery is still putting up huge numbers and taking alot of tournies. the problem is, that while about 7-12 cards maindeck change, the same conbstant parts are continually allowing the deck to overcome all the problems it faces and still kick the ass of its toughest matches.

There will never be a metagame full of "Deathlong and R/G Beats". Deathlong is dfficult to play well and most NE magic players do not have/want to put in that kinda time to learn it. R/G beats, While very good against slavery, rolls over and dies horribly to dragon/Tendrils variants, and can barely play oath (losing without maze of ith). This does not say that once in a great while the deck might take a few slavery matches to get its way into a T16/8/4 (the last Johnston RI mox).

The truth of the matter is, if you want to see a balanced metagame, then you have to axe the welder. You kill thirst, Cslaver will add more crucibles/citadel (or seat), and in builds that have cut FoF, it will be added back in, as well as adding intuition/AK to all builds. this cannot be better for our metagame. I believe 2 cards are going to be restricted to bring this deck down to a level where it plays on an equal footiing. These cards are Brainstorm and Welder. Brainstorm seems erroneous, but if you look at most T*'s, there will be a maximum number of them there. Hell, there are deck using blue for only thirst, brainstorm, and Broken blue (Tinker, walk, ancestral, mystical). When a card is being abused by all decks, such as skullclamp in T2, it needs to be looked at.

Brainstorm is one of the most used (if not the most used) cards in Type 1. This Card is the single reason for our smaller manabases. When combined with the universal use of fetchlands, we are looking at one of the most under recognized cards in Type 1. Brainstorm single-handedly allows for some of the most saving plays and broken starts. It is used in Combo (TPS/Deathlong/Meandeck SX), Control (4CC), Aggro-Control (U/G madness, EBA, Gay/R, Gay/W), Control-Combo (Cslavery, Oath, GAT), Aggro-Prison (5/3, 7/10), and pretty much everything else.

This Leads to a big question. What, if anything, will be nerfed IF they decide to stop Cslavery? My theory is, if they want to stop it, they will have to hit the Welder. They will probably also be hitting Brainstorm. They may have to hit intuition, because Hulk/GAT will be insane if they don't.

Thats All I got @ 5:30am

[Eastman]

Well, here is The Best I can do on this topic-

Everyone is gunning for Cslavery. EVERYONE. Any deck that can support the green mana short of dragon is running 3/4 groundseal Sideboard. ppl are running damping matrix main even to beat slavery, and it is not working.

The thing is that isn't the case. Here in NE people are running the same crap that has been losing to slaver right into the matchup when they show to tourneys. The hate really isn't around yet.

I hadn't played since Waterbury when I went to Mike's mox this weekend. I assumed that there would be ridiculous slaver hate and it would slow the deck down. Instead there was relatively little, and players still ran the same crap they lost to slaver with at Waterbury.

I'm not saying that slaver wouldn't be dominant in a more 'mature' meta. I really wouldn't feel comfortable making that statement unless i saw it happen. I can say however that at least in NE people haven't quite made the jump to 'umm, i should hate slaver' quite as much as you're saying.


On the 'restrict welder' issue. It would surprise me if they restricted a creature. The ubiquitous use argument is a good one, he is in a lot of decks, but so is Force of Will. Also he is one tiny little dude, and I just don't see them axing something that goes down to a Mogg Fanatic.

[forests failed you]

If anything needs to go it has to be Dark Ritual. TPS and Tendrils based combo is insane right now, and as far as our testing has proved, aside from playing first and having Trinisphere, or having the god slavery hand; nothing consistently stops the deck. It seems insane to me to call for the restriction of Goblin Welder based upon the results of a Mana Drain infested top 8 at Waterbury, which is notoriously known for being a Mana Drain metagame. Honestly did anybody expect anything different? In every circle of good players I've tested with Tendrils steam rolls everything in the format with consistency I have not seen since Long.dec. Honestly, if a player cannot consistently win playing Tendrils, they must be a bad player because the deck has everything it needs to win and is extremely difficult to sideboard against. TPS may not put up the same numbers as Workshop and Slavery, but that is only because it doesn't make up 65% of the field because it is difficult to play correctly.

I agree with onelovemachine, Smen's rip on Windfall was completely uncalled for.  Also, Smen, last time I checked you weren't, nor have you ever been, the Vintage World Champ; so, you should probably show Mark a little bit more respect. Everybody has a bad day and gets unlucky draws once and a while there is no need to rub it in.

However, luck or no luck, TPS is busted and Dark Ritual is much more of a problem than Welder is.
_________________

[jpmeyer]

I love how this entire thread has nothing to do with the poster's original question.

Suffice to say, this is why we really dislike restriction threads, although that also is not to say that this post was originally supposed to be about restrictions.

Also, I personally thought that it was commonly known that Smmenen often times has trouble phrasing what he wants to say in a way that gets across the point that he intended.[/color]

[ascribe]

I'm a English Major.

Now THAT shit is funny.

Ground seal against CS=gg.
Lava Dart, Lightning bolt, Fire/Ice are pretty good against 1/1s.
REB's work pretty well since most of the deck is blue.

Hell, everyone should play Sligh or R/G Beatzzzzzzz. That would knock the snot out of this deck if it is as rampant as is being claimed.

[Cafe_Cafe]

These cards are Brainstorm and Welder. Brainstorm seems erroneous, but if you look at most T*'s, there will be a maximum number of them there. ...When a card is being abused by all decks, such as skullclamp in T2, it needs to be looked at.

Are you serious ?
When was last time you countered a Brainstorm ?
Do you really think this level of card selection and cantrip is broken enough to deserve a place right between Ancestral Recall and Black Lotus ?

PS: IF
Turn 1: Volcanic Island + Goblin Welder = Broken
THEN
Turn 1: Underground Sea + Planar Void = Broken

[The Atog Lord]

The thing is that isn't the case. Here in NE people are running the same crap that has been losing to slaver right into the matchup when they show to tourneys. The hate really isn't around yet.

I agree completely. For some reason, everyone is saying how amazing Control Slaver is, but no one is actually taking steps to run it out of the metagame. If you keep trying to make your Control deck out-control Control Slaver, it just isn't going to work all that well. Instead, maybe you should think about trying a new deck against it.

What of those cries for Workshop's restriction? And of Trinisphere? And of that pernicious Psychatog? And Doomsday? Have they fallen silent? It wasn't long ago that everyone was screaming for their blood.

Long, long ago, in the Control Slaver Primer, I wrote about how the deck would never  rise to dominate the metagame because it has bad matchups against many budget aggro decks. I predicted that if Control Slaver rose to power, it would be brought down by cheap beatdown decks. Well, why hasn't this happened? Most likely the number of Proxy events that are happening now. Now one is forced to play budget any more, and everyone can play powered decks. Well, Control Slaver is good against most powered decks. Against Kird Ape? Not so much.

So, all I'm saying is that maybe you need to rethink your strategy against Control Slaver. Throwing some random hate cards into your Keeper sideboard is probably not going to work.

Also, for what its worth, I went 1-2 drop in the last tournament I played in. It happens to everyone.

[forests failed you]

The thought that a creature would need to be restricted is completely insane to me.  There are so many viable ways to deal with a 1/1 creature in type one that if you can't, or don't, it is your own fault.  The purpose of restriction in Type one is to keep the metagame fair, and stop one particular deck from becoming dominant.  For instance consider the restriction of Gush when Growatog was dominant or Burning Wish/Chrome Mox when Long.dec beat everything.  The trend seems to be: not to take good cards out of the card pool, but rather to keep the playing field fair so a variety of different deck types have the opportunity to compete.  The metagame seems fairly balanced at this point, control, combo, and aggro (I consider Workshop decks the Agro decks of Vintage) to all be represented and competitive with one another.  However, of these three archtypes Tendrils combo is far and away the most explosive, consistent, and broken.  I don't think anything needs to go.  However, if anything goes Dark Ritual should go as well, because TPS is already the best deck in the format.  Any further watering down of the tools control and prison have to use against Tendrils, would make those match-ups even worse than they already are.  In my experience I have never had a problem dealing with 1/1 creatures that take a turn to become active, what I do have a problem with is losing games on the second turn because I didn't have a Force of Will in my hand.  Type one is about broken things happening, and that is why it is the best format in the game.  There are a lot of really good decks in the format but no one that is dominant.  That folks, makes for good type one.  Leave it alone.

I said I was an English major, not a typographer.  Typos happen in online forums and are funny, embarrassing, et cetera.  However, what would have really embarrassed me is if I had suggested Sligh was a good deck in this metagame.  Man, I would have felt dumb about that.       jk.

[Revvik]

The thought that a creature would need to be restricted is completely insane to me.

Echo this sentiment.  It's one of the most vulnerable cards in existance, despite its power.  Restricting it just to nuke Control Slaver is not a very well-thought out gameplan.

- Mishra's Workshop Decks (of which there are several)
- Cerebral Assassin
- Control Slaver

I doubt the DCI really wants to wipe out probably a third of the Vintage field when there are probably better alternatives out there.  More to come later, when my boss isn't watching me.

[[supa_t(im)]]

It confuses me as well that people go up in arms for a card's restriction when it dominates one metagame out of many.  Maybe the problem doesn't lie in the card's power, but in our unwillingness to adapt to that card's power.

I don't think playing combo is the answer to control slaver.  I believe arcane lab worked very well against combo for at least a few slaver players.  If we can adapt to beat combo, why can't we adapt to beat slaver?

The format is healthy right now, we don't need the DCI coming in and ruining things.

[Smmenen]

No venom intended.

Mr. Menedian, let's not joke ourselves here; no one is fooled.  It obviously wasn't just Mark and I who pulled animosity from that statement.  If you feel the need to verbally lash out (which I am not saying you can't by all means rip someone a new asshole in the forums, the moderators love that) at least just admit to it.  Your large vocabulary tends to give you away.  It's like a poker read I make on you:  whenever someone calls you on something that's the least bit rude that you have said, you apologize, you say that's not what you meant, and you spew entire pages of Webster's making me look up all those fancy words you use..... in actuality I'm sure everyone would just appreciate you saying, "yeah.. So what if I did mean it that way?"

When I said no venom intended, I mean no venom intended.   Go reread my original post and hopefully that will be clear.  My tone and my mood when I posted that was fairly benign.  I konw becuase I was there.   You don't know me very well if you think otherwise.

Again, here is why I said what I said:

I was simply trying to ascertain the veracity of the claim that you see control slaver all the time.

[Revvik]

Cheap shots at Smmenen aside, I'm following up with what I was talking about. since my boss has left the immediate area (keep in mind, this is all pretty much opinion based on what I see.  I am often wrong):

IF the DCI were to intervene on Control Slaver (and this is a mighty big if, in my mind) Welder is by no means the problem card.  I honestly have no clue as to what they would hit, personally.  Looking at the list, the biggest offenders would go:

- Mindslaver (not even 2 are necessary, so whoopdeeshit)
- Thirst for Knowledge
- Intuition (Not every build runs these)
- Mana Drain (Which I view as untouchable - I enjoy the control archetype, but sometimes Mana Drain can't even help it keep up with today's environment)

Is there lack of hate?  No.  It was already stated that irritating little red and green creatures beat Control Slaver into a bloody pulp, and I'm sure other decks can do the same.  I firmly believe that the DCI won't step in to make your lives easier when they may have potentially bigger problems.  No, this seems like something we as a community can fix (meaning: Meandeck will come out with something even cooler in a month)

Hey, answers are one thing I never claimed to have.

Note: the above post was made by someone who will not prepare for the Control Slaver match for his next tournament, based on the notion that "Hey, no one will want to play that stupid mirror all day."  Take with a grain of salt.

[Nantuko Rice]

Long, long ago, in the Control Slaver Primer, I wrote about how the deck would never  rise to dominate the metagame because it has bad matchups against many budget aggro decks. I predicted that if Control Slaver rose to power, it would be brought down by cheap beatdown decks.

Remember the time in Newington when i played against you with a R/G budget deck? It butchered your CS. Why did I stop playing it? Because it didn't have good game against combo or stax. But that's because I built it wrong... maybe I should bring it back...

[Garth One Eye]

It seems to me that these arch types (Control, Fish, Slaver, etc) tend to gain prominence and dominate for a while and until we, the beloved Type 1 Magic community innovate and adapt (which is a hell of a lot of fun) by trying to topple the current "king of the hill" (or hills as the case may be)  

Unless there's an obvious flaw in the format (Remember the Summer of Necro?) I don't think there's any cause for alarm, and the DCI doesn't need to act.  We as Type 1 players simply need to do our homework and playtest, playtest, playtest.

[yespuhyren]

I completely agree with that.  Half of the fun is being innovative and creating new decks to see if you can beat the best decks.  Too often now, when a deck becomes good, people will cry for bannings to destroy the deck.  Though unrestricting usually doesn't affect the environment as much as restricting something (OK...doomsday is good...but stroke, geyser, fork are super SHITE right now)

Restricting a card like workshop, trinisphere, ritual, drain etc, would completely change the environment, and thats not what we are looking for

figure out how to win the game as is, don't cry for them to change it so you can win and do no work for it deck building wise

[forests failed you]

I would like to point out in defense of my point that Tendrils Combo is actually the deck people should be most worried about, three of the top eight were playing some kind of Tendrils Combo.  So, in a field dominated by Control Slavery (N. England), 37.5% of the top eight was still comprised of Tendrils based Combo.  Does anybody have the breakdown of how many Control Slaver decks were in the tournament as opposed to how many Tendrils Decks were registered?  That would be really interesting to see.

[Zherbus]

Remember the time in Newington when i played against you with a R/G budget deck? It butchered your CS. Why did I stop playing it? Because it didn't have good game against combo or stax. But that's because I built it wrong... maybe I should bring it back...

That's a very telling statement right there. That's the exact reason why you SHOULDN'T play R/G budget decks, it still loses to the other half of the field. I would say from a metagame sampling of 40% Slaver, you'll still have the remainding 60% make up Oath, TPS, or whatever else invalidates RG Aggro.

[LSD]

I truly believe that something has to be done.Countrol Slaver is a Top Deck since it came out and now people tweaked it and it turned out the most powerfull Deck in the format since it can just outdraw most of the other Decks.

In my opinion Thirst of Knowlege just has to be restriced.Not that Control Slaver is too broken but TfK makes all the difference.It is the reason why Contro Slaver is soo much better than all the other Control Decks in the format(i.E:Tog,4CC).
Also TfK seems much more powerfull to me than FoF was espacially in Decks like Control Slaver.I renember when people complained about turn 4 FoF but turn 2 or 3 TfK seems to be a stronger Play if you ask me.

[The Atog Lord]

That's a very telling statement right there. That's the exact reason why you SHOULDN'T play R/G budget decks, it still loses to the other half of the field.

What is the alternative? That RG Beats beats the entire format? To me, this is a sign of a healthy metagame. The Rocks-Paper-Scissors effect has taken hold, it seems.

[Hi-Val]

Instead of an R-P-S metgame, I think we need to look at what happens at a tournament. Let's assume you're playing a tempo deck. You play some slaver players, but then you get rocked by workshop decks. The problem is that the decks you're supposed to beat go 50/50 against workshops/combo, whereas you don't get the same percentages. That means that the decks you are good against never get to you because you lose to too much, while the best decks still go half with everything else. That's why you can't play a hate deck, and why unfortunately Fish has not been able to crush Slaver again, thanks to workshop aggro.

[forests failed you]

If I had the choice between running four Fact or Fiction or four Thirst for Knowledge I would play the Fact.  Fact is so many times more busted than Thirst that it is ridiculous.  It digs two cards deeper, many times nets you more cards (five if you control your opponents turn), and still puts artifacts in the yard.  It is one of the best one ofs in Slavery.

In general the weakness of Thirst for Knowledge in comparison to Fact or Fiction is that it is limited in its scope.  That is, Thirst for Knowledge is only good in artifact decks.  If Fact or Fiction were not restricted there would be a variety of control decks that benefit from its brokeness;  whereas only Slaver and Stax can really utalize Thirst.  I think it is a mistake to compare the power of Fact or Fiction to Thirst, mainly because before Fact was restricted there was one deck dominating the metagame, MonoU control.  Right now, there are a variety of decks using Thirst, but they are varied: Stax and Slaver.  Not to mention there are still other viable and extremely potent decks in the format that don't even use TFK.  
(anything playing Tendrils, anything aggro).

Honestly, this thread just seems like a forum for people to whine about how they are scared of Control Slavery decks.  The metagame is as diverse and far-reaching in the sense that there are a variety of different types of viable playable decks in the format.  Control, aggro, and combo are all viable right now, and all of those choices are REALLY good right now.  The problem isn't that one particular deck is too good, it is more that people are too lazy to metagame properly or playtest enough.  There are plenty of viable options available for disrupting and beating Control Slavery.  However, if people spend all of their time whining about how Wizards should just nuke the deck out of existence rather than inventing tech and playtesting, the chances of those person being successful in tournaments are not so hot.

Also, I agree with Atog Lord that in a metagame full of Slaver decks aggro with hate has a good chance of winning.  But only if it has been tested thoroughly and in the hands of a competent player.

[The Sovereign]

Unfortunately, I don't have time right now to respond to everyone that I'd like to...Maybe later tonight.  But just one question to forcefieldyou regarding this quote:

Honestly, this thread just seems like a forum for people to whine about how they are scared of Control Slavery decks. The metagame is as diverse and far-reaching in the sense that there are a variety of different types of viable playable decks in the format. Control, aggro, and combo are all viable right now, and all of those choices are REALLY good right now. The problem isn't that one particular deck is too good, it is more that people are too lazy to metagame properly or playtest enough. There are plenty of viable options available for disrupting and beating Control Slavery. However, if people spend all of their time whining about how Wizards should just nuke the deck out of existence rather than inventing tech and playtesting, the chances of those person being successful in tournaments are not so hot.

Do you play Control Slaver regularly?

Be honest.

[forests failed you]

In response:

Yes, I do play Control Slavery "regularly."  However, that being said I also play every other deck in the format regularly.  My teamate Windfall, a few good friends (onelovemachine and everythingitouchesdies), and myself playtest every single deck and matchup on a regular basis.

Right now I would only play Control Slavery if I were playing in a tournament where I expected the majority of players there to be scrubs.  a. Because Windfall and I have playtested it for about six months now, and know exactly how to pilot it.  2. because it is fairly consistent and doesn't lose to mana screw.  

I however would not play it in a large scale tournament because:  EVERYONE is netdecking it and the mirror is largely luck based around who can weld in a Mindslaver first.  and of course b., if 40-50% of the field is playing Slavery, why not just do the homework and play something that has game against Slavery?  

Honestly, if I have learned anything over the past two weeks it is that Tendrils is the deck (props to onelovemachine for new tech on the TPS build), partly because it WRECKS Control Slavery if built correctly. However, combo is much more difficult and taxing to play...therefore less people tend to play it.

This is just a personal opinion/observation (and I've been playing Vintage since Wizards split Type 1 and Type 2 so I've seen a few things) but I think the reason Mana Drain based decks are so popular is most veteran players feel most comfortable playing control.  Keeper was the deck FOREVER and alot of people feel comfortable playing decks that feel like Keeper in Vintage.  In my opinion this is why when there is a tier one deck that plays Mana Drain, an overwhelming portion of the field will tend to play it.  As evidence for this just look at how many people played Keeper at GenCon knowing it was clearly NOT one of the best decks in the format.  

The point is, everytime I read results fror Waterbury they are always saturated with Mana Drain decks, regardless of what is in the metagame looks like.  For Christsake, Wizards could have printed a card that for one Blue mana let a player search through their opponet's deck for a card named "Mana Drain" and if it was found forced player to lose the game...and people would still have played Drain-Slaver at Waterbury.  Which is why I disagree that using data from a Waterbury Top eight is grounds enough to base an argument for nuking cards from Slaver on.  

Just because a lot of people are playing a deck doesn't mean it is the best deck in the format, it only means it is the deck to beat.  Keeper is a perfect example of this idea perfectly distilled.  Slavery is a good deck, but it is far from being the powerhouse that GROWATOG or LONG.DEC were.  Slavery is perfectly beatable, and there is no reason anything needs to be restricted.  People just need to metagame smarter.

No, I'm not playing Slavery... I'd rather play TPS.
(once again mad props to onelovemachine for the savage list.)

[Hi-Val]

In response:

I however would not play it in a large scale tournament because:  EVERYONE is netdecking it and the mirror is largely luck based around who can weld in a Mindslaver first.  and of course b., if 40-50% of the field is playing Slavery, why not just do the homework and play something that has game against Slavery?  

I outlined it above. The decks that have game against Slavery are terrible against the rest of the field. Thus, they don't get played. Since Slaver has a 50/50 matchup at worst with the entire field outside of these decks, and seeing as the decks that beat it don't show up, I'd say it was a pretty good choice to play because you'll never encounter the decks that will beat you.

[onelovemachine]

I was just curious as to what decks you would put in the list that slaver has a 50/50 against.  It seems to me that slaver isn't exaclty 50/50 against the combo nonsense.  Secondly, if many of the matchups you will see are 50/50 why not just roll die to decide who wins?  I just feel that if my match isn't like 55/45 against the majority of the field than a different deck is in order; one that will perform with a higher win percentage.

[forests failed you]

There is no way that the Slavery V. TPS match up is 50-50%.  In the testing that our team has done it is very difficult for Slavery to stop a properly tuned TPS deck.  And to be honest, I don't think Slavery is better than 50%-50% against Stax either.  Slavery is popular because it does not have any terrible matchups right now, and because it beats aggro shop.  However, the days of Agro-shop are limited, because it is not a good deck and loses to everything but budget.  

My metagame choice against Slaver would be to play Tenrils.  However, the average netdecker refuses to play the deck because it doesn't autopilot the same way that a control deck does.  Instead, everyone plays the same deck and then complains about the results being a crap shoot, because of all the mirror matches.  

This is exactly why teams like Meandeck and good players in general always come out on top.  Good players realize that for the most part the majority of Vintage players are sheep that just net deck off the ManaDrain or Starcitygames, and then they invent tech based on that knowledge.  

I'm not saying that nobody should play Control Slaver, or that it isn't a great deck.  It is one of the best two, or three, decks in the format; however, aside from the X-factors of playtesting, playskill, and metagame tech, playing the mirror match all day long is only 50%-50% odds against half of the field.  

In a metagame filled with Goblin Welders, Rebuild has to be the most savage tech card I have ever seen.  Against Stax it is game over, it is money against things being welded into play, it gets rid of Platnium Angel, and ups your storm count all at the same time.

The whole intention of this whole conversation was to examine the results of the highly Slavery infest Waterbury top 8 and discuss whether or not Slavery was format domintated and needed to be pruned back via restrictions.  My opinion is a very strong "NO," for all of the reasons I have thus stated in this, and the previous few posts.  Waterbury is not a good sample of the type one community in general, because it is a tournament held in a region that is nuts for Mana Drain.  

However, I do agree completely with Hi-Val that at the moment there is no viable hate deck in the format to deal with Control Slavery.  Which, is probably a major boon for people choosing to play the deck in the first place.  The fact of the matter is, Slavery is a perfectly beatable deck.  It is nowhere near the format dominating level, I repeat DOMINATING level that previous decks (i.e. Growatog w/gush, or Long w/wish, c.mox), had held.  Anyways, savage props to everyone who was smart enough to play TPS at Waterbury, because three made top 8.

[Elric]

I outlined it above. The decks that have game against Slavery are terrible against the rest of the field. Thus, they don't get played. Since Slaver has a 50/50 matchup at worst with the entire field outside of these decks, and seeing as the decks that beat it don't show up, I'd say it was a pretty good choice to play because you'll never encounter the decks that will beat you.

If this statement were true, then the metagame would look like: Slaver (beats "Workshop/Combo" 60-40), Workshop/Combo (beats “R/G” 80/20) and R/G (beats "Slaver" 60/40).  The most played deck in the format should be the one which has a hate deck with the worst bad matchup (each decks splits 50-50 with itself).  That is, since R/G has the worst bad matchup (gets crushed by “Workshop/Combo”), then Slaver should be the most played deck in the format.  Sound about right?  

[Aside: the numbers used above should be match win percentages.  If you’re using per game winning percentages for this kind of analysis, you’re missing the goal in a tournament (winning 2 out of 3)]

Note that if the rest of the metagame featured these 3 decks in even proportions, “Workshop/Combo” would be the deck to play, since “Workshop/Combo” has the best good match compared with its bad match.  Now, if no one ever plays “R/G” because they’re worried about “Workshop/Combo”, then you should be playing exclusively Slaver.  Once enough people play Slaver, though, other players will give up on “Workshop/Combo” to play R/G to beat Slaver.

What’s the best deck in the format?  Well, if each of these decks is played in the appropriate percentage the answer should be none of them.  If one deck had a 75% “deck concentration share” in the metagame there could be something to worry about.  However, and I can’t see Dr. Sylvan’s recent article to get the most recent data, this has not been the case with Vintage for the previous six months he surveys.  There’s nothing close to the concentration of type 2 Affinity.

As for the good performance of Slaver: the most skill-rewarding deck should be the most successful one because the top players have an extra incentive to play it.  If there was a deck that made magic play like chess (a pure strategy game of perfect information), then the top players would crush everyone else and the deck might be worthy of restriction.  Generally, every deck has a bad matchup- R/G can’t beat everything.  It is a problem when a deck’s only bad matchup is a version of itself designed to beat the mirror and no other deck can beat it consistently (say, 4-Gush GAT).

There’s also the fun/interactivity factor.  That is a completely different issue, though.  People don’t want magic to become chess but at the same time what they mind more most of the time is when it becomes “War.”  Metagaming and deckbuilding should never be the sole skills involved in magic.