Turn 3 Fish Kills

[AmbivalentDuck]

Rather than trying to destabilize the opponent with Fish, and then kill them slowly...  Is the metagame shifting into a position where it's easier to just outright win?  An example is Randy Buehler's recent leak of Meandeck Gifts Oath.  Removing both the Burning Wish and the Colossus ends the game.  So, given that many decks can beaten regardless of damage by removing 2-3 key cards from the game...  Back in the day, when people were still killing with Serra Angels, each angel you killed essentially wasted 25% of their deck...  If a deck only has 2-3 cards that can kill and remove them all, you win.  Nice opponents will just scoop.  Asses will drag the game out.  Board in Shahrazad against them (joke).

For this strategy to work, key spells have to be removed quickly and decisively while the opponent is sufficiently disrupted that they cannot/will not be played.  This huge focus on the early game allows certain cards like Daze to shine.  It necessitates full acceleration.  I've gone so far as to build in Root Maze as it completely stops Dragon, slows Mana Drain to a turn 3 spell, and keeps chalice for 2 off the board until it's too late.

(Now 61 cards, which one to cut is a meta call)

4 Rootwater Thief
4 Extract
4 Swords to Plowshares (often at least one of the key cards is a creature)
4 Meddling Mage (only reliable game 1, expect creature kill game 2/3)

1 Ancestral Recall
1 Time Walk
2 Serendib Efreet (beat other Fish builds, don't lose outright to decent aggro)
4 Oxidize
4 Root Maze
3 Daze
4 Force of Will
1 Mystical Tutor

1 Mana Crypt
1 Lotus Petal
6 LoMoxen
4 Flooded Strand
4 Tundra
4 Tropical Island
4 Wasteland (Strip effects still matter)
1 Strip Mine

Since this plan can easily fail outright against redundant aggro, Sideboard: Surprise!
4 Oath of Druids
4 Forbidden Orchard
4 Draw Spell (Thirst for Knowledge) or Chalice
1 Akroma
1 Razia
1 Meta flex slot. (Pithing Needle?)

What I've playtested against:
Control Slaver, yes it wins.  I'm 14/15 right now.  I'm assuming "naive" sideboarding which may not be fair by round 5-6 of a tournament.
Fish, Serendib is god.  Unforunately, you lose to Jitte.  It's heavily in your favor post-board.
(I'll continue updating this list...Gifts (Oath), Stax, and TPS matchups highly appreciated.  I have none of these built.)


Odd choices:
-1 Ancestral...I should probably add it, but I'm worried that it might actually slow the deck down.
2 Serendib, I swear, they really do give aggro fits. 
4 Root Maze, the R/G people have been trying to abuse it for some time, but a turn 4-5 clock is NOT quick enough in this environment, sorry.  Maybe it can work in this deck.  If not, consider it 4 Null Rod or 4 Jitte depending on the metagame.
-1 Mystical Tutor...If you put in the Ancestral, this goes with it.


Fire away, I'm expecting explosive criticism.  Mainly, the question is whether or not the "aggro dilemma," heavy dependence on the draw, causes this deck to fail.  I think my Control Slaver results disprove that...but it's only 15 games.

[Lunar]

not running ancestral recall basically means this post should be moved to the newbie section....sorry man...but thats just plain bad...it does look like you are missing your balance in there though...did you forget about it?

Just maybe tell me you were joking and everything will be okay...

[yespuhyren]

Why even run a fish build?

Just run a U/W control/landstill style deck, that runs 4 thiefs as its only non land creatures.  The rest can be landstill style

DO NOT EVER EVER EVER cut ancestral recall if you are playing blue. It is a MUST

[MuzzonoAmi]

Don't be so dogmatic. It's an extremely suspect decision, but it isn't absolutely horrible. I want to see more results. I've had similar thoughts, but haven't gotten around to implementing them.

[Moxlotus]

How do you do well with absolutely no draw engine?  Sure, you do stuff, but then you should run out of gas.  It also looks like you will have a hard time with Stax.  Even with 4 Oxidizes main, you have a total of 0 basics.  A few key wastes can cripple you.  Is your plan to simply to try to remove their crucibles before they hit?  Also, does a lack of Null Rod/Chalice hurt?

[AmbivalentDuck]

Thank you, I was looking for personal criticism.

On another note, while Ancestral is clearly very very good, having it in your opening is hand is not.  The deck is almost reliant on Extracting a key spell turn 1 or having Rootwater Thief active by turn 2.  Ancestral doesn't help with that.  It eats a key blue mana.  I you want it, cut a Daze and a Root Maze for Ancestral and Mystical Tutor.  Balance clearly would suck in this deck.

As far as why it's Fish, it isn't.  It just has a large number of cards in common with Fish. It plays very differently.

With regards to Stax, I haven't had an opportunity to test it yet.  The Oxidizes are there to hedge against Chalice for 2.  Remember, they kill with creatures, not Smokestacks/Crucibles.  Only three of which aren't 1/1's. 

Chalice is tempting...the problem is that chalice for 0, 1 doesn't help you more than it hurts them in most matchups.

I'm slowly starting to believe that the Lotus Petal is really a Chrome Mox.

I guess I need to explain the philosophy clearly: if you remove their late game in the early game, your late game can suck chimp balls as long as it's better than nothing.  Literally.  The deck's ideal (non-Lotus, off-color mox) play:
Turn 1: Trop, Mox, Thief
Turn 2: Trop, Extract, use Thief
Opponent: scoop


New development:
My playtest partner has figured out how to beat the strategy: mulligan aggressively to make sure a card that can win the game is in your opening hand.
Of course, that sucks if you surprise sideboard on them.  So...that makes things a lot more swingy and the game more psychological.

[Necrologia]

On another note, while Ancestral is clearly very very good, having it in your opening is hand is not.

I don't care what deck you're playing, this is wrong. Drawing cards is amazing, especially when you can cast your draw spell before your opponent has UU up. Back in 1998, whoever cast Ancestral first won. We've come a long way since then, but drawing 3 cards for U is still a good start to pounding your opponent into the ground.

You lose a blue mana. Oh noes. You also draw 3 cards, giving you an excellent shot of hitting more acceleration or counters to keep your opponent from doing something relevant. Ancestral can only speed your deck up, as seeing more cards gives you more chances to hit acceleration and threats. Saying otherwise is just wrong. Remember, you aren't always going to have land/mox/thief/extract in your opener. Recall can help in that regard.

Look, Brainstorm is an amazing card that gets play virtually everywhere. It's nothing more than Ancestral Recall with Agonizing Memories tacked on. Agonizing Memories is a pretty harsh drawback, but it's not enough to keep people from playing a card that says "Draw 3" on it. Hopefully that puts into perspective just how amazing Ancestral Recall is. Run it, or face ridicule, and having an inferior decklist.

EDIT: Typos

[AmbivalentDuck]

Since I've seen better topics get derailed over less...I'll change it in the list.

[Anusien]

You realize that with only 10 creatures and being completely reliant on the opening hand you autoscoop to shop decks and combo decks.  Also with anything less than the nut draw, the CS/Gifts player can just tutor up combo pieces and hold them in hand, nevermind that with CS builds you're going to have to extract like 5 combo pieces (2 Slavers, 3 fatties or so).  Also, considering you have absolutely no way to find the cards in a pinch, a turn 1 or turn 2 tinker is practically GG against you.  Who was playing the CS list against you?  What did that deck look like?

[Onslaught]

I completely forgot that Extract even existed. I think I read this thread at just the right time to realize the point you are trying to make. For the past few days, I've been playing with Gifts for fun and became more than cognizant of the "if this doesn't resolve I lose" sensation. With some decks having only 1 or 2 cards that actually kill you, Rootwater Thief and Extract make so much sense that it hurts.

All "LOL NO RECALL GO PLAY BALANCE" posts aside, this is definetely something to think long and hard about. I'm indifferent to the transformational sideboard and the preliminary list, but the idea of removing 2 or 3 cards to auto win is the key point.

If you remove their late game in the early game, your late game can suck chimp balls as long as it's better than nothing.

Exactly. If all they have left is draw and utility, you can win with (insert ridiculous hyperbole to demonstrate that literally anything is good enough for a win- I prefer tapping Prodigial Sorcerer for 20 turns). The question remains whether or not a Fishy type deck is the proper one to take advantage of this removal strategy. Perhaps some sort of control deck with a strong draw engine, a huge complement of pitch counters, and a simple/effective "finisher."

[Klep]

On another note, while Ancestral is clearly very very good, having it in your opening is hand is not. 

I'm one of the most restrained people on these boards.  I have a long track record of being one of the last people to resort to anything but reasoning for my assertions on The Mana Drain.  Even when arguing about whether or not Yawgmoth's Bargain belonged in a combo deck running Rituals, I stuck with reason and did not abandon my logic.  Thus, I hope you understand how taken aback I was by this statement, that it leads me to say what I am about to say.

That was perhaps the dumbest thing I have ever read.

I have never, ever been upset to see Ancestral Recall in my opening hand.  It looks at you and it says "Your chances of winning just skyrocketed."  The sheer, brutally efficient power of this card demands your attention and love, and you should rejoice every time you fan open your 7 and see it.  Should you not rejoice, it means either your hand has no blue mana sources or you actively want to lose.

What does this not mean?  This does not mean that playing Ancestral first is the right play.  If you need to play some other card to start your game, that is fine and acceptable and perfectly within reason.  What it DOES mean is that cutting Ancestral from your deck is wrong.  Not casting it eventually is wrong.  And asserting that you do not want to see it in your opening hand betrays a remarkable ignorance as to how this game, and this format in particular, works

[Necrologia]

I'm indifferent to the transformational sideboard and the preliminary list, but the idea of removing 2 or 3 cards to auto win is the key point.

Here's the thing, it's not an autowin. If your opponent has drawn one of their win conditions in their opening hand, you lose. If they happen to have anything resembling a tutor, you lose. If they aren't Gifts (ie they have more than 2 win conditions MD) you just lose. Storm combo might lose to this if they have a slow draw, but otherwise pulling people's win conditions is a total crap shoot. Shop decks can pull 3 cards turn 2 with Cap, yet Cap rarely sees play. Why should removing 2 cards using more cards be any better?

Don't knock swinging with welders for the win either. 2 Welders is a 10 turn clock. That's entirely reasonable if the CS player is holding a fist full of counter magic. I've seen more than 1 Control mirror end with Welder and Shaman beats. Saying it can happen isn't "ridiculous hyperbole", it's simple truth.

[AmbivalentDuck]

I've actually been wondering about the lack of Jester's Cap in Stax.  My guess would be that it's not a reliable strategy because it's only really effective turns 1-3.  That is, it's a dead late game draw.  Since you can't be guaranteed a Mishra's Workshop in every opening hand...  Just my guess, I'm not a Stax player.

As far as Gifts being the only deck with few win conditions, you're completely wrong.  Oath has two win conditions, CS has two win conditions (one of which is necessary for infinite recursion), Stax has 3 win conditions, and 3CC has two win conditions.  Storm-based combo didn't even show up at Starcity's Richmond tournament...

I know what you're saying about swinging with Welders and it doesn't work here.  They run 4 Welders, I run 10 creatures with toughness > 2.  They run 8 counters, I run 4.  I run 4 StP.  Do the math... 18 answers to 12 problems.  So, if they outdraw me 1.5 to one, we'll be even.

In terms of Ancestral...I don't want to get into that fight in the boards.  The viability of the deck has nothing to do with whether or not I personally think Ancestral is a win more card in this build.  It's in the deck.  Move on.

[Leon PD]

OK, so this is my first post/response ever.  But I've been playing magic since 4th edition and reading about vintage magic on TMD for over a year, and obviously  playing. 

All that aside, here's a possible suggestion.  Why don't you try pairing the extract/thief combo with some black duress action.  That way if they got it in hand, you can make them discard  it.  If they tutor it up (assuming you didn't ditch their tutor) you can make them discard it.  And if it's in their deck you can remove it.  Seems pretty logical to me.  A deck with some serious duress effects i.e. mesmeric fiend, cabal therapy, duress (duh), and unmask (to help make sure you destroy their hand EARLY and use mana on destroying their deck) and the thief/extract combo would seem pretty interesting.  Clearly you wouldn't use ALL of the above duress effects, but they all fit into a possible blue/black heavy disruption vial phish sort of deck.

Just something to think about from a TMD "newbie"

Peace & Love.

[Moxlotus]

What happens when you don't draw the nut draw and are able to remove all of their win conditions by turn 3?

What happens if they have a win-condition in their hand?

I would also like to know how CS only has 2 win conditions.  Last time I checked they had 4 Welders, 2 Mox Monkeys, and 3 [large artifact guy]. 

So, if they outdraw me 1.5 to one, we'll be even.

And I think with your zero draw engine compared to CS's Thirsts, Gifts, FoF, Brainstorms, and possible Skeletal Scryings, CS will out draw you more than 1.5 to 1.

[AmbivalentDuck]

Because I'm a nice guy...
http://www.starcitygames.com/php/news/article/10479.html

[Greenebean]

It just kills me to see no ancestral recall, like the other have stated.

My suggestion, is go the WTF path and run Rootwater Thief MD in there. You still get Swords, Meddling Mage, Rootwater Thief, ANCESTRAL, along with other ridiculous cards such as Wild Mongrel with a Umezawa's Jitte connected to it.

I played WTF pre-saviors, and now i would assume Pithing Needle can take up 2 MD slots to add lock in even more. So in my own opinion, WTF is a better choice if you are going to run any "fish" type deck.

[Moxlotus]

Because I'm a nice guy...
http://www.starcitygames.com/php/news/article/10479.html

Sorry, TWO large artifact guys, 4 Welders, 2 Mox Monkeys.  Along with Ancestral, 4 TFK, FoF, Demonic->card, and Yawgmoth's Will to outdraw your 1 Ancestral.

And you still haven't said what happen if they draw their win condition.  Or if you don't get an amazing start.

[Jim Sardonic]

I kind of like this idea. I'm not sure whether it's viable or not, but it's quite interesting.

I think it's important to note a few things:

A) This is not fish.
B) Though the title says turn 3, there's enough disruption that most Vintage games aren't fully decided by turn 3. Even if there's a huge swing (Tinker/Colossus), this deck possibly has the answer.
C) For the sheer surprise factor alone, this deck could do decently well.
D) You get to know what you're up against fairly quickly, game 1, and can adjust your play accordingly.

I think we're looking at it a bit wrong. If a turn one Thief gets online, it's a matter of removing threats.

Vs. Gifts: Colossus, Time Walk, Recoup, Yawg, Belcher... it's a player decision.
Vs. Slaver: Welders, Titan/Pentavus/Trisk/whatever. Slaver isn't such a huge deal if it can't be repeatedly welded, and can be countered.
Vs. Stax: Tough match, but removing Workshops or Crucibles could be a massive help.

The problem here, and the reason I think Recall was cut, is the 2 that you need to pay to use the Rootwater's ability. That can end up tying up a lot of mana -- mana most Vintage decks would spend drawing cards.

The other things to consider, here: Decks that still play wishes. Sure, they're few and far between, but they've effectively circumvented your strategy. I think we're looking at pretty much auto-lose against Stax, save for a very lucky draw. Something like FCG, or the other random decks you'll run across in a tourney will probably tear you up as well, on speed alone. I'm agreeing with whoever it was above, that the idea is interesting, probably not viable, but would work much better in a more "controllish" skeleton. With the ability to make the deck last more than 3 turns, you've got the ability to remove innumerable cards, and with proper defense (counter/STP) you might be able to drag out a game long enough to steal the win. I just feel that the proactive side of this deck is too retroactive, naturally, to make a big dent.

That was perhaps the dumbest thing I have ever read.

Actually made me laugh out loud.

[Nastaboi]

Since you already run Mystical and full artifact acceleration, isn't running Tinker + Colossus far better way to keep you losing to random aggro? Yes, you have no way to put Colossus back if you happen to draw it, but that brings us to a point: Why are you not running brainstorms at first place? For me, they seem more attractive than random green hate cards, and they really help you finding your extract-combo pieces.

[EDIT:] Oh yes, and I was suggesting Tinker/Colossus as a replacement of Serendibs, if that wasn't obvious.

[Dozer]

You might win the first game against an unsuspecting Gifts player. But the problem you have is that once the cards are in the Gifts player's hand or graveyard, it is unlikely that you'll ever get some action in. One resolved Gifts makes your game plan moot. Unless you had some graveyard removal, too (Phyrexian Furnace?), you need luck to actually win those games. I used to be afraid of Rootwater Thief, and I still say that it is annoying to play against with Gifts, but it is not an auto-loss at all. Also, a single Thief activation will not be enough, since you need to remove three cards from the Gifts deck to cripple it: DSC, Burning Wish, Belcher. As long as one of those is left in the deck, Gifts can win. Versus Oath Gifts, you need to take DSC and Burning, so Extract packs a slightly bigger punch. But Oath Gifts will be faster than you, and on the draw you are likely to lose.

The problem is that your offense is so small that if your game-plan doesn't work in the first few turns, you are basically a Goldfish. Granted, you will steal a couple of games against Gifts, but all other decks should give you a sound trashing especially when you run into real Fish or (heaven forbid) Ravager. I wouldn't put my eggs in that basket in a tournament, though the idea is cute. The extra removal, btw, is nothing that the decks aren't prepared for, so don't count on that.

[AmbivalentDuck]

You people keep missing this.  My disruption isn't aimed at the midgame.  It's aimed at turns 1-2 so that I can counter their Thirst for Knowledge/Tinker/Gifts.  All of which are horribly slowed by Root Maze.  If they do pull a turn 1 Colossus, I'm ready for it.

If you want Tinker/Colusses, cut the Serendibs.  People keep whining about an Ancestral that's in the deck, but they don't complain about the Serendibs, by far the iffiest choice here. And BTW, against Gifts, you only need to nerf 2 cards by turn 3: Tinker and Buring Wish.  They'll have to draw the Belcher because they can't reccur it with gifts if I'm not stupid.  By the time they can cast a Colussus with NO Drain help because you're not stupid enough to play spells costing more than 1, you should have won handily.

As far as a more controllish skeleton, you could do it.  Cut the Meddling Mages for Drains, the Root Mazes for Draw, the Dazes for Brainstorms, and the Serendibs for Tinker/Colossus

[Lunar]

Have you ever stopped to consider that perhaps we are not the ones missing the point here? Perhaps you are.  Starting out the thread stating that Ancestral Recall is bad was a terrible start for you here, especially after the whole Balance should be in Fish thread that you got dogged on. You dont HAVE to do something groundbreaking right off the bat here to make a splash in the community. You might consider just going back over the basics a few times and seeing if you can improove your T1 knowledge a bit more first.  I know im being a jerk, but maybe thats what you need here. Look, your deck almost auto-loses to anything with more than 2 win conditions, and even against those decks you are playing against other control decks that are going to have at least 50/50 odds of stopping your extract or theif, even if you get the first through, there are no garuntees that they will not just Oath up condition #2 or #3 and beat you with that before you ever resolve another decker, or before you ever beat them down with the little guys.

This strategy MIGHT work if you called your meta PERFECTLY, AND got the exact matchups you needed...I dont really need to go into the odds of that though for anybody here.

Take critisism of your ideas when it comes, I think many of the people on here know what we are talking about (heh, at least most of the time) and we will definatly let you know when you have something that is really worth going into.

[Necrologia]

You people keep missing this.  My disruption isn't aimed at the midgame.  It's aimed at turns 1-2 so that I can counter their Thirst for Knowledge/Tinker/Gifts.  All of which are horribly slowed by Root Maze.  If they do pull a turn 1 Colossus, I'm ready for it.

Here's a list of things you seem to be missing:

1) Extracting things is not a win condition. One tutor and your main goal of the deck is nullified. Decks like Fish, and Goblins, and Shop Aggro which run more than 2 win conditions just roll you.

2) You sure as hell are aimed at turn 1-2. With no draw at all, if your opponent counters one of your key cards you pretty much lose when they Brainstorm/Thirst/Gift their hand full again as you sit there top decking helplessly.

3) Root Maze is not good against Gifts in this list. Root Maze is only a good card to hose combo, or when it's backed up by a clock. See point one.

4) You are woefully unprepared for a Turn 1 Colossus. Your only outs are 4 Swords which will be countered. Even if you do manage to StP him, you've now burned your hand. You're one Thirst for Knowledge away from being gradually locked out of the game.

Look, everyone who's posted in this thread has tried to help you, and you've basically rejected all criticism out of hand. You added Ancestral Recall only after being badgered to, and only as a metagame slot. The fact that you consider Ancestral Recall to be cuttable in any deck, let alone one with no draw spells and a very low threat density shows that you just don't have a solid grasp of Magic, let alone Vintage. You're likely going to take this entire post as a flame, but that's not my intention. Try reading some of rakso's early Control Player Bible stuff. Recall is beyond broken, Extracting stuff isn't good enough, and draw spells make decks not bad. Think Fish vs Sui black.  Listen to the people who have posted here, they know what they're talking about.

[AmbivalentDuck]

Root Maze doesn't have to be good against anything, it has to buy exactly a one turn respite from tutors, Thirst for Knowledge and Gifts. 

As far as my opponent countering key spells, they'll only be better suited to attack my spells than I'll be to defend them if they go first on a Sapphire  draw.  I'll also be far ahead going first on a Sapphire draw.  The point is moot.

I can just...oh say...counter the tinker... or Swords it...or Extract the Colossus when I go first.  I have every valid response that any tier 1 deck in this meta has and more.  Saying that I lose to turn 1 Colossus is similar to saying that there are few valid answers to a turn 1 colossus.  I'm running almost all of them.

If you're trying to "help me," you could...say...sleeve the deck and play it two or three times.  Anyone who does so will quickly see why the Ancestral and Mystical got cut.  It should be obvious that they got cut during playtesting.

Help and spouting dogma are not synonymous.  I've been playing type 1 for five years, and I've consistently piloted underpowered decks to above average finishes in powered environments.  Sleeve up the deck, post some results saying that your win ratio is actually higher with Ancestral or stop polluting this space.  This is an experimental science.  If we could just sit down and pop out perfect decks in a spreadsheet, this would be a very different game.

The only arguments that can really be logical entertained are:
Metagame viability of this deck in its current form, a stax form, and a control form
Suggestions for those forms (builds or improvements).  Saying a particular card is not OPTIMAL places the burden of proof on you.  Obviously, I'd be happy to cut the Root Mazes for a 56 card deck.  But that wouldn't be legal, would it?

"OMIGOD he put balance in fish OMIGOD no ancestral" reflects more on you than on me.  You're making yourself look dogmatic by spouting dogma instead of results.  If your results are different than mine (I've only had time for ~20 5-6 turn games), that's fine. 

I have a transformational SB for a reason.  I'm not hating particular decks, or adding many to one (but limited scope) threats.  I'm changing the entire strategy of the deck.  This should tell you that I've had no problem muscling through early Thiefs and Extracts against CS.  On the other hand I've had horrible matchups with FCG and Workshop Aggro.  Sleeve it up, play it, then whine.

[jpmeyer]

Flametongues are a very powerful card. But what all the pros fail to realize are that its only good vs. Decks with creatures.

[Pyromaniac]

1. Root Maze doesn't have to be good against anything, it has to buy exactly a one turn respite from tutors, Thirst for Knowledge and Gifts. 

2. As far as my opponent countering key spells, they'll only be better suited to attack my spells than I'll be to defend them if they go first on a Sapphire  draw.  I'll also be far ahead going first on a Sapphire draw.  The point is moot.

3. I can just...oh say...counter the tinker... or Swords it...or Extract the Colossus when I go first.  I have every valid response that any tier 1 deck in this meta has and more.  Saying that I lose to turn 1 Colossus is similar to saying that there are few valid answers to a turn 1 colossus.  I'm running almost all of them.

4. If you're trying to "help me," you could...say...sleeve the deck and play it two or three times.  Anyone who does so will quickly see why the Ancestral and Mystical got cut.  It should be obvious that they got cut during playtesting.

5. Help and spouting dogma are not synonymous.  I've been playing type 1 for five years, and I've consistently piloted underpowered decks to above average finishes in powered environments.  Sleeve up the deck, post some results saying that your win ratio is actually higher with Ancestral or stop polluting this space.  This is an experimental science.  If we could just sit down and pop out perfect decks in a spreadsheet, this would be a very different game.

6. The only arguments that can really be logical entertained are:
Metagame viability of this deck in its current form, a stax form, and a control form
Suggestions for those forms (builds or improvements).  Saying a particular card is not OPTIMAL places the burden of proof on you.  Obviously, I'd be happy to cut the Root Mazes for a 56 card deck.  But that wouldn't be legal, would it?

7. "OMIGOD he put balance in fish OMIGOD no ancestral" reflects more on you than on me.  You're making yourself look dogmatic by spouting dogma instead of results.  If your results are different than mine (I've only had time for ~20 5-6 turn games), that's fine. 

8. I have a transformational SB for a reason.  I'm not hating particular decks, or adding many to one (but limited scope) threats.  I'm changing the entire strategy of the deck.  This should tell you that I've had no problem muscling through early Thiefs and Extracts against CS.  On the other hand I've had horrible matchups with FCG and Workshop Aggro.  Sleeve it up, play it, then whine.

I've numbered your points and respond to every single one.

1. Where's the logic in this? Buying 1 turn isn't good enough, because it costs you the same turn to cast Root Maze.

2. Ok, yet another weird logic. Of course they're better suited to attack you on a Sapphire draw, or indeed any draw, because THEY WENT FIRST

3. You're stating the problem: you're running only responses, no real threats of your own.

4. If I play 2 or 3 games, chances are that I won't see either of those cards. If I play 2-3 games with DeathLong, and I don't see a Lotus, should I cut that from the deck? Ok, next...

5. What is an 'above average' result exactly. Do you mean you go better then even like 3-2, or do you actually win a decent amount of tourneys, against good players/decks?

6. You've actually stated why Root Maze is bad in this deck: it buys the turn you spend casting it. Other then that, I won't comment on this point, I have nothing else to say.

7. I have no idea what the problem is here: In the past, Balance wasn't good enough for Fish, so why should it be now? Balance is an absolute wrecking ball, in the right deck: either you empty your hand and play it, which this deck can't, or use/abuse it as a last ditch effort to stay alive. That means that, without some form of card drawing, you've already lost.

8. How is boarding into an Oath deck viable without ANY way of either finding the cards or shuffling creatures back?

I'd like you to think about a few points we raise here before you type up your next reply, or just give it like, 20 minutes to sink in. We're only trying to help you, nothing else.

[rakso]

It still kills Noble Panther.

[jpmeyer]

It still kills Noble Panther.

But you can't kill Noble Panther if they don't run it!

[AmbivalentDuck]

1. Root Maze doesn't have to be good against anything, it has to buy exactly a one turn respite from tutors, Thirst for Knowledge and Gifts. 

2. As far as my opponent countering key spells, they'll only be better suited to attack my spells than I'll be to defend them if they go first on a Sapphire  draw.  I'll also be far ahead going first on a Sapphire draw.  The point is moot.

3. I can just...oh say...counter the tinker... or Swords it...or Extract the Colossus when I go first.  I have every valid response that any tier 1 deck in this meta has and more.  Saying that I lose to turn 1 Colossus is similar to saying that there are few valid answers to a turn 1 colossus.  I'm running almost all of them.

4. If you're trying to "help me," you could...say...sleeve the deck and play it two or three times.  Anyone who does so will quickly see why the Ancestral and Mystical got cut.  It should be obvious that they got cut during playtesting.

5. Help and spouting dogma are not synonymous.  I've been playing type 1 for five years, and I've consistently piloted underpowered decks to above average finishes in powered environments.  Sleeve up the deck, post some results saying that your win ratio is actually higher with Ancestral or stop polluting this space.  This is an experimental science.  If we could just sit down and pop out perfect decks in a spreadsheet, this would be a very different game.

6. The only arguments that can really be logical entertained are:
Metagame viability of this deck in its current form, a stax form, and a control form
Suggestions for those forms (builds or improvements).  Saying a particular card is not OPTIMAL places the burden of proof on you.  Obviously, I'd be happy to cut the Root Mazes for a 56 card deck.  But that wouldn't be legal, would it?

7. "OMIGOD he put balance in fish OMIGOD no ancestral" reflects more on you than on me.  You're making yourself look dogmatic by spouting dogma instead of results.  If your results are different than mine (I've only had time for ~20 5-6 turn games), that's fine. 

8. I have a transformational SB for a reason.  I'm not hating particular decks, or adding many to one (but limited scope) threats.  I'm changing the entire strategy of the deck.  This should tell you that I've had no problem muscling through early Thiefs and Extracts against CS.  On the other hand I've had horrible matchups with FCG and Workshop Aggro.  Sleeve it up, play it, then whine.

I've numbered your points and respond to every single one.

1. Where's the logic in this? Buying 1 turn isn't good enough, because it costs you the same turn to cast Root Maze.

2. Ok, yet another weird logic. Of course they're better suited to attack you on a Sapphire draw, or indeed any draw, because THEY WENT FIRST

3. You're stating the problem: you're running only responses, no real threats of your own.

4. If I play 2 or 3 games, chances are that I won't see either of those cards. If I play 2-3 games with DeathLong, and I don't see a Lotus, should I cut that from the deck? Ok, next...

5. What is an 'above average' result exactly. Do you mean you go better then even like 3-2, or do you actually win a decent amount of tourneys, against good players/decks?

6. You've actually stated why Root Maze is bad in this deck: it buys the turn you spend casting it. Other then that, I won't comment on this point, I have nothing else to say.

7. I have no idea what the problem is here: In the past, Balance wasn't good enough for Fish, so why should it be now? Balance is an absolute wrecking ball, in the right deck: either you empty your hand and play it, which this deck can't, or use/abuse it as a last ditch effort to stay alive. That means that, without some form of card drawing, you've already lost.

8. How is boarding into an Oath deck viable without ANY way of either finding the cards or shuffling creatures back?

I'd like you to think about a few points we raise here before you type up your next reply, or just give it like, 20 minutes to sink in. We're only trying to help you, nothing else.

1. What if you cast the Root Maze on turn 2?  (*gasp*  That's unconventional.  We can't!)  In that case, it does exactly what I claimed it does: it sets Thirst for Knowledge, Tinker,  and Gifts back by 1 turn.

2.  Right. We're agreeing.  Except that you're ignoring the Dazes at a time when mana is tight and draw spells haven't come online yet.

3.  Again, we're agreeing.  I'm saying my response to 1st turn Tinker Colossus is slightly better than most decks in the format because I run the full complement of StP.  The fact that it's a wrecking ball is unchanged and not a challenge I have to uniquely over come.  Especially if I run it over the Serendibs.  Something I still haven't had time to test.

4.  If you put a Lotus into your opening hand in DeathLong and it sits in your hand while you win, yes you should cut it.  Of course, if that happens you should also stop smoking crack.

5.  I mean that in many roughly 20-man tournaments, I never finished below the top ten.  

6.  See 1.  I don't spend a turn casting it.

7.  Balance in fish is not an appropriate topic for this list.  There is no reason to play it in this list, it's over.  If you want to discuss it elsewhere, feel free to PM me.

8.  You have the option of making those draw spells in the board Brainstorms...  I would highly appreciate constructive feedback on the transformational sideboard because I know an Oath transform has been successfully used by other decks in the past.  I'm unfamiliar with it, I've piloted Meandeck Oath but that's a completely different situation.