{Deck}[Combo] : TPS or Grim Long or IT?

[without]

IT is obviously the best of the three decks.  TPS runs bob in the main and he doesn't help in the storm combo, also they run Memory Jar and Mind's Desire which are both not needed.  Grim long has only one advantage over IT.  Grim runs Xantid Swarm (I hate that guy). This is why people are starting to run one Darkblast in their maindeck.  IT is the most  consistent storm deck out there, it goes off turn 2 or 3 most of the time. IMO i never liked casting Grim tutor unless it was REALLY needed to get my tendrils.

@Smmenen
You know that running one Chain of Vapor main and siding 3 of them is completely useless.  If they EVER drop chalice @ 1, none of the 4 chains can bounce it. I went 2-0 vs. someone running Smmenen.dec and i went turn one COTV @ 0, turn 2 COTV @ 1 and Null Rod. Two turns later i dropped COTV @ 2 and they scooped.

[Purple Hat]

@Smmenen
You know that running one Chain of Vapor main and siding 3 of them is completely useless.  If they EVER drop chalice @ 1, none of the 4 chains can bounce it. I went 2-0 vs. someone running Smmenen.dec and i went turn one COTV @ 0, turn 2 COTV @ 1 and Null Rod. Two turns later i dropped COTV @ 2 and they scooped.

his deck sucks because in one match you played a game where you had 3x chalice of the void AND null rod?  this one time I was playing dragon at waterbury and my opponent had MD waterfront bouncer and stifle, then sided in 13 cards against me.  I lost game 2....doesn't mean my deck sucked.

[Harlequin]

Yeah, I fail to see how any combo deck would beat that oustide of topdecking the 1 rebuild they run (and possibly sided out) and you not having a counterspell. 

[Webster]

Webster, I know morphling.de, but I didn't know I could search for decklists. Or do I have to search every tournament
for TPS lists? Is there an option to find them all?

As far as I know, there isn't a deck search option. I just look at whatever top8's are posted and there are usually 1-3 lists in each one.

I have tested with 4 Bobs MB, but I definately didn't like it. It is not the problem of life-loss, but drawing them
at bad times. Okay, a first turn Bob is good, but you also draw them if you need to (because of the life-loss) combo
out and then they stall you of even will fizzle you out. Though Confidant SB is very good. It replaces all bad cards
in that matchup and creates good/better matchups.

Confidant is good in every matchup except for oath. It's true, when you're going off he isn't a useful card, however, he gets you to the gamestate where you can go off more quickly than not.

I know I stopped playing tps when I had a tournament where I resolved a "bomb" in every game and didn't even beat mono-g beats....any tendrils deck that casts desire for more than 6 and doesn't immeadiately proceed to win the game is probably not worth playing in my mind.

I can only speak from my own experience playing the deck which is about 7 power tournaments. I have never been disappointed with how the deck performed. Any deck running desire _can_ fizzle. I don't think it's really fair to label TPS in particular as one that is more likely to because of a few situations where you didn't get the breaks you needed.

TPS runs bob in the main and he doesn't help in the storm combo, also they run Memory Jar and Mind's Desire which are both not needed.

Confidant isn't very useful the turn you are going off, however, each turn he is in play prior to that turn, he effectively acts as a mini tendrils and gives you card advantage setting you up for an easier kill which is why I like the deck so much. I have said it before and I'll say it again; TPS sacrifices speed for resiliency. It seems counter intuitive to play a combo deck that is slower than other viable combo decks, but TPS has so much staying power AND the ability to go off turn 1-2 which makes it a good choice.

Saying that draw7's such as desire and jar are not needed is wrong. Combo wants to see as many cards as possible, overwhelming your opponent's permission spells with mana acceleration spells which gets you to the gamestate of playing a lethal tendrils; saying that cards like mind's desire and tinker/memory jar are not needed goes against this strategy. Speaking specifically about mind's desire, it's a draw7 that is much more reliable against gifts, control slaver, oath, and any other deck that runs 8+ counters.


Web

[Purple Hat]

I know I stopped playing tps when I had a tournament where I resolved a "bomb" in every game and didn't even beat mono-g beats....any tendrils deck that casts desire for more than 6 and doesn't immeadiately proceed to win the game is probably not worth playing in my mind.

I can only speak from my own experience playing the deck which is about 7 power tournaments. I have never been disappointed with how the deck performed. Any deck running desire _can_ fizzle. I don't think it's really fair to label TPS in particular as one that is more likely to because of a few situations where you didn't get the breaks you needed.

Web

But TPS in theory SHOULD be more likely to fizzle off desire than other decks with a similar game plan.  it plays less tutors, less bombs and more things you don't want to hit off desire.  The fact that actual game play supports this isn't particularly surprising to me.

Hale

[LordHomerCat]

IT is obviously the best of the three decks.  TPS runs bob in the main and he doesn't help in the storm combo, also they run Memory Jar and Mind's Desire which are both not needed.  Grim long has only one advantage over IT.  Grim runs Xantid Swarm (I hate that guy). This is why people are starting to run one Darkblast in their maindeck.  IT is the most  consistent storm deck out there, it goes off turn 2 or 3 most of the time. IMO i never liked casting Grim tutor unless it was REALLY needed to get my tendrils.

@Smmenen
You know that running one Chain of Vapor main and siding 3 of them is completely useless.  If they EVER drop chalice @ 1, none of the 4 chains can bounce it. I went 2-0 vs. someone running Smmenen.dec and i went turn one COTV @ 0, turn 2 COTV @ 1 and Null Rod. Two turns later i dropped COTV @ 2 and they scooped.

This is quite wrong.  Not saying Grim is the strongest for sure, but it just runs so many threats and bombs that its very fast and very hard to stop.  My experience with IT was that I was always getting frustrated that none of my cards actually DID anything, especially against drain decks who would counter the one action spell and leave me waiting to topdeck something.  Grim put up very good results at the last SCG, and showed that with tight play it can be a very powerful contender.  Its ludicrous to say "obviously IT is the best because I can't play Grim very well" like you seem to be.  My Grimlong goes off turn 1-2 consistently, I don't know about yours.

[Tin_Mox5831]

Plus, if you see Chalices, you should be boarding in Hurkyl's Recalls. It's not rocket science, folks. Well, sometimes playing this deck kinda is, but not this example.  Also, if someone wants to tutor for Darkblast to off my Swarm, I win twice. They blow a tutor as well as wasting a card slot on a bad answer. I'll just Duress them and win anyway or Force their counter post-board. Anyone who is willing to tell themselves that either IT or TPS are better than Grim Long is just plain delusional. They're good decks for the most part, but the power levels aren't even comparable. TPS is like when your Dad taught you to ride the bike by running with you, holding on. IT is like riding with training wheels, and Grim Long is like flying down the highway on a Harley. (And hopefully you're wearing a helmet so you don't pull a Roethlisberger. Good guy, but dumb move.  )

[Moxlotus]

You don't need power to beat Stax.  You need resiliency and a stable mana base.  IT has that--Grim Long doesn't.  The opposite is true for Drain.dec.

[mistervader]

While yes, Stax is an issue for Grim Long, I think that with the ability of Grim Long to hasten the win better than IT, sacrficing the Stax matchup in favor of having a good advantage against Control in Game 1 is the way to go.

Head-on, I also realized that Grim Long will have a field day against IT for the most part, as resolving a bomb against IT (Which will more often than not happen.) really all but guarantees you the win already. I've had the opportunity to play against IT using Grim Long in the past, and I definitely had little worry about that match-up.

I'm sure most would disagree, but I would like to reiterate that when against Control, the best bomb to resolve against them is Mind's Desire. Unless they have three or more ways to counter you, Desire for four and up will most likely win you the game right then and there, or put you in a position to do it in the next two turns.

[Moxlotus]

Head-on, I also realized that Grim Long will have a field day against IT for the most part, as resolving a bomb against IT (Which will more often than not happen.) really all but guarantees you the win already. I've had the opportunity to play against IT using Grim Long in the past, and I definitely had little worry about that match-up. 

Paul M and I tested IT versus Grim Long in April and found that IT wins when it was on the play.

Obviously, FoW changed it for them, but later went on to say

I thought of FOrce of Will as a solution, and it stuck.  We tried it and it was amazing.  Part of its amazing ness though was its surprise value.  I'm not sure if it will be as good.

Eric Becker also won against Steve in Richmond on the play, so Steve's testing played out in the same way that tournament match did as well.  I would certainly not say that Grim Long would have a field day against IT.

[netherspirit]

Personally I'd choose Grim Long or IT, most likely Grim Long because of its access to so much tutoring, but it just comes down to whichever deck you are most skilled and efficient with. If you find you can make better use of one deck than another you really only have 3 choices:
1) Become more efficient with another deck.
2) Improve the deck you're best with (lol, often easier said than done).
3) Go find a new deck to use.

I think it all comes down to personal preference really.

[MaxxMatt]

I found a lot of *flawed* logic around some of the last sentences done about TPS-GL-IT.

The most important ones are about *speed* ad *resilience*

A lot of you seemed to want the first at any cost in situations ( real life tourneys ) where you have to look for the second before anything else.

All those decks have a winning strategies that always increase his impact on the game connected to mana development and cards drawn instead of being necessarily playable only during your first turns.

After turn 4-5, any one of the Storm based spells can be game ending.
Your other business spells would trade with the opponents.
You can storm up with all the shit in your hand to because you have mana on table turn after turn.
If they weren't Storm based spells that argument would not be possible.
On the other hand, you are playing with Tendrils, Desire and Brainfreeze.
So you have a lot of tools to arrange your victory DURING the game and not only as soon as the game starts


Be wise, men,  you are going to pay real moneys for tourneys!!!.
You aren't going to give organizers Nuts and RiversOfForums'Words.
You are going to give them money.
You can't play "Binary Decks" : 1-->Win, 0-->Lose

My question is:
Why should I play decks that would be frightened by opponent's first turn?

Maxx

[Purple Hat]

@Maxx
This is T1 here.  Not being frightened by giving your opponent a turn isn't wisdom, it's foolishness.  Any time you can not give him a turn is better than any time you have to.  The number of times someone goes "untap, I win" or "draw, I win" in this format is insane.

That said, I don't think any of these decks have an overwhelming fear of an opponents turn because they are all reasonably likely to win the game next turn if they didn't win the game this turn.

Hale

[MaxxMatt]

This is T1 here.

SarcasmON
Thanks for giving me a new perspective angle to better understand which game I'm playing, man
SarcasmOFF

Not being frightened by giving your opponent a turn isn't wisdom, it's foolishness.  Any time you can not give him a turn is better than any time you have to.  The number of times someone goes "untap, I win" or "draw, I win" in this format is insane.

I top8ed with Control Decks a shittload of times more than playing Combo ones.
Anyone who see me playing control usually told me that I should play combo, instead

More resilient combo decks have been the only ones that let me won something.
No Belcher, no Dragon and no Long won me enough games to reach top8 or win tourneys, that is the goal of losing an entire day during my weekends when playing with cards...

The number of times someone goes "untap, I win" or "draw, I win" in this format is insane.

This the binary condition that decks such as GrimLong or Belcher couldn't usually overcome.
They are completely lost in their "Ops, I won" or "Ops, I lose" circle.

Thinking about playing a deck that is 100% devoted to win and 0% devoted to recover, is inaccettable for me.

You have to think about inevitabilities even when they are going to crush you, not only when you are going to crush the opponent with them.

You have to try to be both "Ops, I won" and "Ops, YourThreatResolve, I still Win".

Fish can start playin Land, CotV0 and a critter that usually deny you of somethng that is not life points; then he would deplete your board with Wastelands and Shaman and would usually Counter your Rituals. Rod would completely nullfy your ways to recover from that position. They can stop your first rush with both Dazes and FoWs.

Drain.decs can chain a couple of good Counters on the right threats that you are going to pull out and then achieve a so good board position compared to yours that you are completely pissed off. They can Slave you, or Srcoll into counters or Combo you out in a single turn, as well as proceding to win during the midgame if you hadn't win during your first rush. They can block you with CotV and cheap counters as well as with Duresses and Drains. They have good sloutions to your spells as much as quick way to win. There are plenty of combinations that completely shut you up when you almost have no board position compared to their one.

MW.dec is the staple among my examples that can be almost unwinnable when playing multicolor combo decks. Almost anyone of their common plays are threats. SoRs and Trini are game ending. A CotV0 followed by a SoR can simply deny you playing nothing more than Land.Go. Any one of your lands would optimize theirs Wastelands too. Rods and CotV1 can be considered an autolose, because your answers didn't function and your mana consist only on lands. Smokestack would screw you as much as Wires. You have to produce mana during your own mana phase and not during your upkeep. You can't hold 0cc artifact into your hand, because of CotV and you can avoid board development because of Smokestacks and CoWs recursions. And, I have not referred to playing broken things in multiple.

AggroDecks, when well assembled, can pull you out quick kills and Pyropillars or CotV or Rods or anything useful.

Dragon and other fast combo decks have as much as you the ability to win, Dragon being more protected than you are.

You are going to mulligan, too. Any mulligan can be translated in the unlucky  position of not being able to double threat your opponent before he can be able to lock you out in some way.






Is GL a shitty deck?

NO!
NO!
NO!

It is good and strong.

But all that he can do is win games.
Does it happens so many times that you are willing to play this deck?
Not at all, or anyone would play GL instead of other strong and good decks.



..now...
Think aboout cutting H.Recall for Chain of Vapor... :-/
Thnk about HOW FEW RESPECT for opponents move that decision showed to me.

You are going to hope that anyone would put a CotV1 against you.
A CotV1 AND a lot of other things.
You are limiting your self on winning ONLY when opponents cannot play threatening spells against you.
My opponents usually play CotV1 against me AND all the other shitload of hate spells that commonly prevent me from doing anything else.

I'm not going to neglet the high winning rate that GL have during his first turn.
But, I'm not going to support the arguments that are defending his weakness since months until now.

How can you be sure that being able to win a lot of games during turn 1 or 2, losing all the others, would be  better than trying to win any games on turn 3 or 4 without putting a deadly-clock on your head?

You can't blind yourself and open your eyes only when your opponent have done with is turn.
You could find that he had won and you have loss, before playing anything  else.

Thanks
MAxxMAtt

PS:

That said, I don't think any of these decks have an overwhelming fear of an opponents turn because they are all reasonably likely to win the game next turn if they didn't win the game this turn.

....Only the ones that can still play spells after opponent's first turn or have a positive perspective of being able to do so in the subsequent future

[netherspirit]

Not being frightened by giving your opponent a turn isn't wisdom, it's foolishness.  Any time you can not give him a turn is better than any time you have to.  The number of times someone goes "untap, I win" or "draw, I win" in this format is insane.

I top8ed with Control Decks a shittload of times more than playing Combo ones.

Big woop, thats just you, everyone has their own way of playing the game and finds some decks more comfortable than others. You can't just say that combo isn't good because you don't have so much luck with it as with control.

[Neonico]

I dont think its what he said.
I have to say that i totally agree how he sees combo deck. Grim long, more than TPS relies on resolving one spell, mainly yhe tutor and cant recover if it fails.
Perhaps i just saw bad grim long players (And i dont think this deck is that hard to play, it seems to be because it doesnt recover from a hate spell such as TPS can do)
I actually mainly testing Meandeck tendrils because i bet with a friend i could top8 in a tourney with it and if i want a turn one combo deck, its the one ill pick every day. When i want to compete, i take a deck that can recover (ANd here in europe, i saw so much games tps recovered) because you cant rely on praying youropponent wont get FoW.

[Purple Hat]

@maxx:
dude...I tried to quote you, but there's just too much there.

1)not everyone agrees with cutting Hurkyls recall for exactly the reason you pointed out, however Hurkyls doesn't solve some other annoying cards that show up in main decks from time to time, like meddling mage.

2)most control decks have combo finishes that only take one turn.  are you saying that you want to let slaver or gifts untap on turn 4-6?  it's really easy to go on to win once that slaver activation, will or tinker/timewalk resolves.

3)games, with the obvious exception of time limits and dragon, are, by their very nature, binary.  You either win or you lose.  Thats how they work.  The fact that you have troubble winning with grim long doesn't mean that the decks you win more with aren't binary.

4)Who are you playing against with grim long that you auto lose the match if you lose the die roll....also...it's possible that your play style or experience aren't well suited to the deck, I feel like this is the root of my problem with TPS.  You might not be the only person on these boards advocating  this position, but you're certainly one of the few.  Saying that grimlong loses any game that the opponent gets a turn in is absurd.   Read steve's report.  He won through hate all day, even against top players.

I dont think its what he said.
I have to say that i totally agree how he sees combo deck. Grim long, more than TPS relies on resolving one spell, mainly yhe tutor and cant recover if it fails.
Perhaps i just saw bad grim long players (And i dont think this deck is that hard to play, it seems to be because it doesnt recover from a hate spell such as TPS can do)
I actually mainly testing Meandeck tendrils because i bet with a friend i could top8 in a tourney with it and if i want a turn one combo deck, its the one ill pick every day. When i want to compete, i take a deck that can recover (ANd here in europe, i saw so much games tps recovered) because you cant rely on praying youropponent wont get FoW.

How does grim long rely more on one spell than tps?  it's FAR more likely to topdeck the win as it's playing 2x as many buisness spells.  It's certainly not easy to play. subtle errors, such as fetching timetwister instead of wheel or slightly misordering spells (ie. led, ritual, ritual instead of ritual, ritual, LED) cause you to lose games that you would have won if played correctly.  These examples are just what came to me off the top of my head, and as such seem reasonably obvious, but situations where a subtle error swings the game one way or the other come up frequently and are often only realized later.

[LordHomerCat]

I dont think its what he said.
I have to say that i totally agree how he sees combo deck. Grim long, more than TPS relies on resolving one spell, mainly yhe tutor and cant recover if it fails.
Perhaps i just saw bad grim long players (And i dont think this deck is that hard to play, it seems to be because it doesnt recover from a hate spell such as TPS can do)
I actually mainly testing Meandeck tendrils because i bet with a friend i could top8 in a tourney with it and if i want a turn one combo deck, its the one ill pick every day. When i want to compete, i take a deck that can recover (ANd here in europe, i saw so much games tps recovered) because you cant rely on praying youropponent wont get FoW.

I see some major flaws here.  You say that you think Grim Long is bad because, in the games you've watched, it loses if it gets its tutor countered.  But then, you say that the only players you saw were BAD players.  So, from these, we can deduct that BAD players lose to counterspells with Grimlong.  Ok, that seems valid.  However, in my experience (and Steve's, and Paul's, etc.), getting one action spell countered is hardly the end of the world.  Really, Grim is the most resilient to that problem; if TPS loses its counterwar, theres like 2 spells left in the deck that even do anything anymore.  IT also runs many less action spells, so if it fails to protect the one it does draw, its very hard to restart.  In Grimlong, if your Necro gets countered, then next turn you cast Twister, then Tutor -> Will, then Desire, etc.  There are always more insane bombs in the deck, and every other draw is some insane spell.

You don't always have to try to go off turn 1 with no protection with Grim.  By saying that you see bad players lose to a single counterspell, it really doesn't add much to the thread, other than to establish information about bad players (which don't have anything to do with which deck a good pilot should choose).

As far as resolving the tutor or losing:  if its that important, why are there only 3?  Will is hardly the only win in there.

[Toad]

Whenever I played IT, I wanted all my Intuitions to be Gifts Ungiven, because these Intuitions are really awful most of the time. And since IT with Gifts Ungiven over Intuitions is basically TPS, I would run TPS over IT all day long in tournaments. It looks like IT only runs Intuitions to feed Force of Will and to give Threshold for Cabal Rituals, and nothing else. It fuels no broken plays.

As a sidenote, saying that IT is better because it runs Grim Tutor while TPS does not is a poor argument. I *do* play Grim Tutor in TPS. If you are considering pre Starter legal decklists of TPS, you will obviously find no GT in these. For a good reason.

Depending on the metagame, I would either play Grim Long or TPS. IT, never.

[ErkBek]

Whenever I played IT, I wanted all my Intuitions to be Gifts Ungiven, because these Intuitions are really awful most of the time. And since IT with Gifts Ungiven over Intuitions is basically TPS, I would run TPS over IT all day long in tournaments. It looks like IT only runs Intuitions to feed Force of Will and to give Threshold for Cabal Rituals, and nothing else. It fuels no broken plays.

As a sidenote, saying that IT is better because it runs Grim Tutor while TPS does not is a poor argument. I *do* play Grim Tutor in TPS. If you are considering pre Starter legal decklists of TPS, you will obviously find no GT in these. For a good reason.

Depending on the metagame, I would either play Grim Long or TPS. IT, never.

Gifts ungiven sucks vs. both Chalice and null rod. 4 mana for a spell that doesn't even get you the cards you want is bad. Funny, almost every time I draw intuition I'm glad its not gifts ungiven.

Intuition fuels broken yawg wills, even when you've only seen 8 or 9 cards the whole game.

IT is faster than TPS.

[MaxxMatt]

We can't keep going on and on, trying to iterate always the same concept.
This thread, started with the best chances to be an insightful one, is going to be underrated to a Stupid  Penis' War.

Which is the longest?
Mine!
Not mine!
...Not ours?
Nooooo
Mine!

Hooraaaayyyy Hooooraaaayyy








In the end.
I would divide those 3 decks into 2 categories.
Bicolor ones, with a stable mana base, good cards' selection but different spells' choice and Multicolor one with an iffy mana base but a lot of thing to do in order to win.

Metagame can weight which one could be preferred among those two categories.
Playstyle would help anyone pick up one of the three, instead.

No way to cathegorize these decks in a way that would not upset some category.
I think to know what I should play in my metagame and I'm going to be confidant of my won choices.


I can't state anything about what is better to be played all around the world, but I can state that I'm going to play the most stable of the decks, because they can win fast enough for me but only one of them can win against real life players scrubbing out less than the others.

If we have metagames different from mine, then I can support you: play whatever you have learned and mastered.



On the other hand, I'm sure not to possibly be addressed by anyone of you as *possibly good* or *possibly bad* at playing magic. Excluding Toad & Bram.
They *also* saw HOW GOOD are my friends.
They are far better than me.
I have only a longer tongue and I write more than I play.
Such as a lot of you.

The same argumentation is valid for me, of course.

Anyone who argue about *inherent* flaws on this logic isn't Vulcanian enough.
Anyone would argue that good combo players play GL and bad combo players play IT or TPS.. then...
...they can continue that infamous "Penis-War"... alone... :-/

Maxx

[Phele]

After all these P... Wars, why not try to take the best out of all the worlds. Why not try to further develop the list Heiner presented a little ago that is called Litz Long. Grim Long does play almost the same brokeness as Litz Long and now even FoW in the sideboard. So the only real differences are Regrowth, Wheel of Fortune and Xantid Swarms. I just dont get it, why I should play such a bad manabase - not safe from Wasteland, Bloodmoon whatever, no shuffle effects - just for these three cards. Regrowth is totaly not neccessary, Wheel is nice and thats it  - as bad as Windfall is, Wheel of Fortune is not that much better - and Xantids are great against Control but doesnt have Grim or Litz Long already have a great control matchup? Couldn't you play Boseijus instead? Couldn't you just incorporate Green by a single Bayou? I think an Long List with Fetches and Basics would be the best, why has noone here on TMD presentet at least a list. You could even play ESG and Hurkyls in the side if thats your plan against Staxx. But you could also play an Oath plan or Bobs and Lands as a sideboard strategy against the artifact monster instead.

I also think it makes no sense to compare IT/TPS with Grim/Litz Long. IT and TPS have the same land count and almost the same goldfish turn. Same for Grim and Litz Long, so why not compare just these decks.

[Vegeta2711]

Whenever I played IT, I wanted all my Intuitions to be Gifts Ungiven, because these Intuitions are really awful most of the time. And since IT with Gifts Ungiven over Intuitions is basically TPS, I would run TPS over IT all day long in tournaments. It looks like IT only runs Intuitions to feed Force of Will and to give Threshold for Cabal Rituals, and nothing else. It fuels no broken plays.

As a sidenote, saying that IT is better because it runs Grim Tutor while TPS does not is a poor argument. I *do* play Grim Tutor in TPS. If you are considering pre Starter legal decklists of TPS, you will obviously find no GT in these. For a good reason.

Depending on the metagame, I would either play Grim Long or TPS. IT, never.

Gifts ungiven sucks vs. both Chalice and null rod. 4 mana for a spell that doesn't even get you the cards you want is bad. Funny, almost every time I draw intuition I'm glad its not gifts ungiven.

Intuition fuels broken yawg wills, even when you've only seen 8 or 9 cards the whole game.

IT is faster than TPS.

Being perfectly honest here, isn't Intuition just a card you pray control players bother to counter? Otherwise, wow, it fetches mana / makes Will better (Because we really need cards that make Will better). Oh and the newer lists can hook me up with DA for a total cost of 5 mana + 3 life for 2 cards. Savagery.

Gifts will at least give you some amount of brokenness in hand.

[ErkBek]

If intuition is a bait spell, then grab duress with it. When its not (80% time) you get what you need to win.

EDIT: There are other matchups than just CS and gifts. Intuition is a amazing vs. Null rod and Chalice.

[Moxlotus]

Intuition is the nut high for going off in the face of a Chalice and/or Rod.  I don't see how people don't understand that.  That is why the deck is amazing.  It doesn't give 2 shits less about Chalice or Rod.  Gifts Ungiven doesn't help you do shit in the face of a Chalice or Rod, if you could even cast it @ 4 mana.

Otherwise, wow, it fetches mana / makes Will better (Because we really need cards that make Will better). 

Because on turn 2, when you didn't draw any rituals or Lotus, Will is the absolute nuts...

EDIT:

I would play Grim Long in a Drain concentrated area.  I would play IT in a Shop concentrated area.  If I wasn't sure, I'd contemplate JD's 2.5 color long deck.  I would probably never play TPS because, in my opinion, its worse than all of the other options.  IT stands up to artifact hate better.  Grim Long smashes Drains better. 2.5c long is faster than TPS (though not faster than 5 color always) with about the same ability to hold up to hate (although not as well as IT). 

[Tin_Mox5831]

I think some folks may be recieving the commentary from the Grim Long players in the wrong way. Just because someone picks up IT or TPS rather than Grim Long doesn't mean that I think they're bad at all. I just stated that Grim Long requires the tightest play of the three options. The deck is tough to pilot, but rewards your efforts by being simply more broken than the other two. There's really no arguing that fact. I do agree that IT is more structurally sound in regards to a Workshop meta, but I also feel that the better combo players will cover their weaknesses regardless of which of these decks they choose. IT has a better game to some extent versus Shops, but I would honestly feel comfortable playing against nothing but Stax with Grim Long. They can't afford to play CotV @ 2 due to their high threat density at that CMC, and that always proves to be their undoing via Regrowth and Hurkyl's Recall.

About Chain versus Hurkyl's in the MD:
I found it funny that someone took this switch as a sign of disrespect/apathy towards the opposition. It's the better move, plain and simple. Hurkyl's Recall makes you figure out which is more important, bouncing the opponent's threats or building Storm. Chain Of Vapor does both in one tidy package. Also, what good is Hurkyl's versus an angel, an Oath, or an ItEoC? None whatsoever. Chain can answer any targetable threat, and it can build Storm at the same time. I can't speak for everyone else, but I won through CotV @1 on four different occasions at SCG: Rochester. It's a nuisance to be sure, but it's not the end of the world. It simply makes your task easier by eliminating a significant number of the possible permutations that you have to consider in order to win. Your decision tree is narrowed, you just have to look at it from a positive perspective and keep thinking on your feet.

[Vegeta2711]

Because on turn 2, when you didn't draw any rituals or Lotus, Will is the absolute nuts...

Because your always keeping hands w/o any relevant mana acceleration or other broken cards, but are relying on Will to win. Yeah. Happens all the time. 

Intuition is the nut high for going off in the face of a Chalice and/or Rod.  I don't see how people don't understand that.  That is why the deck is amazing.  It doesn't give 2 shits less about Chalice or Rod.

As much as I hate sounding like a parrot, Smmenen is correct about GL dealing with hate. GL really doesn't give two shits about Chalice or Rod, I've gone off in the face of both seperately and togheter before. Unless I had to mull or am facing double chalice + more disruption, these aren't great concerns to me. I'm not even factoring in the number of games where you win turn 1 and totally ignore this stuff. Saying Intuition is awesome vs. Chalice or Rod is probably one of the worst reasons to keep it in the deck.

[Moxlotus]

Because on turn 2, when you didn't draw any rituals or Lotus, Will is the absolute nuts...

Because your always keeping hands w/o any relevant mana acceleration or other broken cards, but are relying on Will to win. Yeah. Happens all the time. 

Intuition is the nut high for going off in the face of a Chalice and/or Rod.  I don't see how people don't understand that.  That is why the deck is amazing.  It doesn't give 2 shits less about Chalice or Rod.

As much as I hate sounding like a parrot, Smmenen is correct about GL dealing with hate. GL really doesn't give two shits about Chalice or Rod, I've gone off in the face of both seperately and togheter before. Unless I had to mull or am facing double chalice + more disruption, these aren't great concerns to me. I'm not even factoring in the number of games where you win turn 1 and totally ignore this stuff. Saying Intuition is awesome vs. Chalice or Rod is probably one of the worst reasons to keep it in the deck.

I'm sorry, I just had to sig part of this.  Intuition is the nuts against Stax and if you've even played the match its pretty obvious.  Can GrimLong go off before Stax can put something relevant on the table?  Absolutely.  Does its chances go down significantly if Stax is on the play.  Definitely.  Does its chances to win go down significantly against Stax if you has to mull?  Certainly.  What about IT?  Sure, but nowhere near as much as Grim Long.  If Stax plays turn 1 SoR, Grim Long can't even play a few lands to EOT bounce because they are all nonbasic.  IT can.

Note the bolded part above.  IT can come back against Stax much much easier in these situations than Grim Long.  Hell, it was designed to go off in the face of crucible/waste+2 other lock components.

I just stated that Grim Long requires the tightest play of the three options. The deck is tough to pilot, but rewards your efforts by being simply more broken than the other two. There's really no arguing that fact.

No arguments here.

[Vegeta2711]

Intuition is the nuts against Stax and if you've even played the match its pretty obvious.

Apparently a card that's only sort of good against Stax, ass in the drain matches and meh everywhere else is reason enough for it to take up 2-3 slots in a combo maindeck. Neat. I'm saying if the main reason Intiution is there is to help the Stax match, the card isn't worth running in the maindeck. Cut it, run an extra mass bounce, add two good cards and call it a day. If you're that scared of the deck, run ESG. At least those don't totally suck in other matches.

Go ahead, sig it. I stand by my thought that Intuition sucks.

If Stax plays turn 1 SoR, Grim Long can't even play a few lands to EOT bounce because they are all nonbasic.  IT can.

ESG and Force of Will. Thanks.

[Moxlotus]

Grim Long runs FoW maindeck?  So game 1 your plan is to hope to have the 1 or 2 ESGs in your hand, in addition to the 1 Chain's in your hand...in the initial seven.  Good luck with that.

Intuition is far from bad against any deck.  It is certainly not ass in the Drain matchup and I'm really not sure how anyone could come to that conclusion.  It shines the best against Stax.

GWS's testing with IT against Brian Fisher playing CS (who got 1st @ Richmond day 2, so he's competent) shows IT has the upper edge barely.  At worst its even, so I really don't know why people keep saying IT has a bad matchup against Drains in general.

The deck struggles against Gifts decks, on the draw against Grim Long, and possibly Dragon--haven't tested that matchup since its not popular in our area.