[Report] UBW Fish makes Top 4 at Flint, MI Tournament

[KrzyMoose]

[Report] UBW Fish makes Top 4 at Kettering Lotus Tournament
Or why Jotun Grunt and Serenity are so broken.

My interest in Fish started several months ago, when I posted my initial design in a thread, being inspired by a similar Vintage list.  Quickly, however, it was dismissed, as everyone decided the Goblins matchup was too poor for Fish to ever be competitive.  But, a couple weeks ago, Hanni renewed my interest with his own Fish list, and I quickly got back to work, making a few changes based off some of Hanni’s ideas.  I wanted to run Fish to see how it would actually hold up in a competitive tournament, and the Kettering tourney was it.  After a while of hammering out some choices, I ended up playing this:

Mono-Blue Control with Black and White Splash Suggested by Richard Franklin on 2006-09-09 as a Potential Deck for Legacy
By Richard Franklin

4 Tundra
4 Underground Sea
3 Polluted Delta
3 Flooded Strand
3 Wasteland
1 Plains

4 Dark Confidant
4 Meddling Mage
3 Jotun Grunt
3 Mother of Runes

4 Serum Visions
4 Brainstorm

4 Force of Will
3 Daze
2 Stifle
1 Counterbalance

4 Swords to Plowshares
2 Duress
2 Vindicate
2 Umezawa’s Jitte

SB: 3 Serenity
SB: 3 Null Rod
SB: 3 Perish
SB: 3 Engineered Plague
SB: 3 Hyrdoblast

A couple of quick comments on the list, itself.  The 2/2 Stifle/Duress split was decided on the night before, a suggestion by Spencer.  The idea being that Stifle is too good in this format, but both Duress and Stifle want to be played first turn.  So, this way, you should only draw one of them in your opening hand.  The single Counterbalance was originally a Counterspell, but Spencer basically said “Dude, why the hell not?” and so it was changed.  Unfortunately, I only actually played it once in my Round 6 match, and it only countered a Viridian Zealot.  The rest of the games I either pitched it to FoW, or SB’ed it out.   

Now, on to the report.  41 people showed up, so we played six rounds.

Round 1: Goblins
This was interesting.  I kept a decent hand that included a couple land, Stifle, Jitte, and Meddling Mage, and I think a Brainstorm or two.  I won the roll, so I was on the play.  I lead off with an Underground.  He leads off with Wooded Foothills, which I Stifle (ftw!).  I lay my second land, and guess that he’s playing Goblins, and name Piledriver with my Mage.  He plays a second Foothills, which he breaks for a Mountain, and plays a Vial, which I let through.  Within the next couple turns, I play and equip Jitte on the Mage, and swing.  He attempts to get some Gempalm tricks going, but I Jitte the Green Dudes he’s played.  Meddling Mage swings for the win.  My life total this game was marked as this: 20 17, while his was this: 20 19 18 16 14 10 0.   1-0

Sideboarding:
-1 Counterbalance
-1 Something else
-2 Duress
-2 Vindicate
+3 Hydroblast
+3 Engineered Plague

I kept a hand with Jitte in it, again.  He gets off to a better start, and lays a Fanatic first turn, and I merely drop a land.  I counter his Piledriver, and drop Bob.  He gets a Port active, as well as a couple Wastelands, but I’m able to drop a Jitte, and eventually Wasteland his Port.  After a couple turns of Land wars, he shoots Bob with Fanatic, and drops a Goblin Tinkerer.  I drop a Wasteland, and pass the turn.  He taps out a Sharpshooter, which I let through, and passes.  I drop Plague, which cleans his board.  I counter his Warchief, and play and equip Confidant, swinging for the win a few turns later.  2-0

1-0

Round 2: UG Madness piloted by Liek
I’d seen him before the tournament started testing it, so I knew what I was up against.  Fortunately for me, I knew that Madness isn’t a very good deck.  I win the roll, but Mulligan to 6.  I drop a Mom on my turn, and he lays an Island and passes.  I drop Confidant, which he lets through.  He plays a Mongrel, which I let through, and Swords it on my turn, and drop Grunt.  He gets some pressure going with Arrogant Wurm(s) and a Jitte, but I’m able to keep counters off it, and deal with his threats via Vindicate and Swords to Plowshares.  Grunt, Bob, and Mom get in for the win.  1-0

Sideboarding: I don’t quite remember, but I think all I did was this:
-1 Counterbalance
+1 Perish

Game 2, he is on the play, but Mulligans twice.  I also take a Mulligan.  He drops a land and passes.  I drop a Tundra, and pass.  He Wastelands, and passes.  We develop our position for a couple turns, but eventually I play a Mage naming Mongrel, while finding three Swords, a Vindicate, a Perish, and a couple FoWs.  All I see from him are two Wurms, a Rootwalla and a Jitte.  He gets a couple swings through with a Rootwalla, but Confidant and Mom hold him off.  2-0

2-0

Round 3: Ravager Affinity
Okay, so.  Pre-board, I cannot beat Affinity.  Period.  I didn’t touch him at all, while my health quickly decayed. 0-1

Sideboarding:
-Some number of some such cards
+3 Serenity
+3 Null Rod

Game two and three, however, are a different story.  Turn two Serenity, followed by a Null Rod is pretty good, and that is exactly what happens game two.  My only notes for this game were “Serenity + Null Rod FTW!.”  1-1

He got off to a better start, and got me down to seven life before I stabilized.  Null Rod shuts him down, and my minions carry me to victory.  2-1

3-0

Round 4: Ravager Affinity piloted by Phil Cape
For those of you that don’t know, Phil Cape is ranked like 3rd in Michigan, and probably Top 50 in the country.  Accordingly, he’s one of the best players out there, or, at least, the best player I’ve ever played against.  Game one unfolds much like it did the previous round: he rolls over me. 0-1

Sideboarding:
-Some number of some such cards
+3 Serenity
+3 Null Rod

I kept a hand with good drawing power, including a Visions, Brainstorm, and Confidant, hoping to draw into hate.  Unfortunately, I didn’t see it before he dropped his entire hand on turn two.  Serenity came up turn 3, but it was too late by then. 0-2

3-1

Round 5: Stax piloted by emidln
I’m on the play and I keep a decent hand with Bob and Jitte, as well as some counter magic.  I drop a land, and pass the turn.  He Tomb’s into a Chalice for one, which meets a Daze.  He drops a 3Sphere, followed by Ensnaring Bridge, Crucible, and Smokestack, but I’m able to drop and equip Confidant with a Jitte, and swing a few times, before Smokestack sweeps our boards.  Fortunately, he’s been beating himself with Ancient Tombs, so Duress clears the way for two Moms to swing for the win. 1-0

Sideboarding:
-1 Counterbalance
-2 Swords to Plowshares
+3 Serenity

I keep a decent hand with Bob and Serenity.  I let his Chalice for one resolve, play a land, and pass the turn.  He drops a Sylvan Library, which resolves, and I drop Confidant.  On his third turn, he drops Uba Mask, which I also let resolve.  I reveal a land to Bob, and flip over a Serenity to Mask, which I play.  I pass the turn.  Unfortunately, he was so concerned about how he was going to play around Serenity, that he forgot to reveal to Mask, and he shuffled his hand around, resulting in a game loss.  It sucks that it had to happen that way, but, as he said, he had no way to get around Serenity.

4-1

All I have to do is ID into the Top 8, but my Round 6 opponent is seeded ninth, meaning that we have to play it out, unless FFY loses his match, in which case we can draw in.  But, we agree that we should play it out anyway, and then ID if we’re able to.

Round 6: RG Survival Advantage piloted by nartman66
He had no idea what I was playing, as, even though we were both at the same table during the fourth round (well, he was at table one, and I was at table two), he wasn’t paying attention.  He wins the roll, and leads off Forest and Fyndhorn Elves.  I drop a land, and Daze his second turn Survival, while he fails to drop his second land.  On turn three, he drops two more Fyndhorn Elves, and I drop a Mage naming Eternal Witness.  He eventually finds a Red source, and drops an Anger. I Wasteland his Taiga, and drop a Mom.  A few turns later, he tries to Flametongue my Mage, which gets Force’d.  A Jitte seals the deal within the next couple of turns. 1-0

Fortunately, Nam’s teammate beats FFY, allowing us to ID into the Top 8.

4-1-1

Top 8: Ravager Affinity
This is the guy I played in Round 3.  He’s on the play for game one, he smokes me with Cranial Plating.  0-1

Sideboarding:
-Some number of some such cards
+3 Serenity
+3 Null Rod

Game two goes much better, with a turn two Null Rod.  I Duress the Naturalize out of his hand and Vindicate his Glimmervoid.  He’s left with relatively no outs, and Grunt beats for the win.  1-1

Game three is a little more scary.  I gets out to a nice start, dropping two Workers and a Disciple via Vial.  I play a Serenity turn two, and pass.  He contemplates the situation for quite a while, and announces “I think I have you.”  He drops his hand, playing Frogmite, Ravager, and a land.  He swings with the Workers and Disciple, sacks his board to Ravager, save for a Worker and Disciple, and puts counters on the Worker.  After all the damage resolves, I’m left at four life.  However, I Swords his Disciple in response to the Serenity trigger, and then drop a Rod.  Meddling Mage and Grunt finish the job. 2-1

Top 4: Ravager Affinity piloted by Phil Cape
He’s on the play, game one.  I manage to Swords a couple of his threats, but eventually Cranial Plating does its thing.  0-1

Sideboarding:  I’ll give you three guesses.

Game two goes significantly better than our last meeting.  I play a Rod turn three, followed by Serenity, and, after Serenity pops, a Rod, which seals the deal.  1-1

Game three was close.  I drop Serenity turn two, but unfortunately, he’s dropped two Darksteel Citadels, along with a Blinkmouth.  I don’t have the Rod to follow up Serenity, so I just play a Bob and pass.  He drops a Furnace and a Frogmite, and passes.  I flip the Rod to Bob, and play it.  In response, he taps his Furnace for Shrapnel Blast, which puts me to three life.  Unfortunately, I didn’t have the counter.  So, it was my Grunt, Mage, and Confidant against his Frogmite.  I make the fatal mistake of swinging with all three of my dudes, instead of leaving the Mage back, which leaves me open to Frogmite on his turn.  To try to cover myself, I drop a second Confidant, and pray I don’t flip over lethal.  He says “draw, go.”  I flip Stifle and a Mage.  1-2
 

Well, if I had to lose to anyone, I’m sure as hell glad it was Phil Cape.  Not only is he the best player ever, but he’s also the nicest guy ever.  After all our games, he gave me advice on what I could’ve done better, and I sure as hell will remember it.  He and John Wilkerson (both of Team RIW, yes, the one with Mark Herberhezzy, and both playing Affinity) meet in the finals, and split.  And so, I leave with a foil Merit Lage, and shattered hopes and dreams.

So, the moral of the story is that Ravager Affinity is really good, as Dan (cancerstix), Drew (Dan’s friend), and I were discussing on the ride back.  We were debating the broken-ness of Goblins versus the broken-ness of Affinity, and reasoned that Goblins is broken because it plays all three archetypes at the same time: it plays Aggro, it plays Combo, and it plays Control.  It does so with extreme efficiency, and each facet interacts well with the others.  Affinity, however, is the most broken pure Aggro deck in the format: it has so many, ridiculously under priced threats and tricks that it’s almost impossible to deal with.  When the field is not prepared, Affinity can easily take the cake, as was demonstrated on Saturday.

The field was pretty standard: a fair share of Goblins and Threshold, and IGGy-Pop taking Solidarity’s place.  I believe there was only one Salvagers-Gamekeeper present.  There was everything ranging from Stax to Enchantress to Survival to Suicide Black to Ichorid to Train Wreck.  Pretty diverse, and, in the end, the best decks won out.

I’m very happy with Fish’s performance.  It proved that it can stand up to the format and succeed.  It can handle Goblins and can handle (with the right Sideboard) Affinity, as well as Aggro-Control, Control, and, of course, Combo.  I’m happy that I’ve learned that Fish is competitive.  As it has been said, good decks run good cards, and this proves true.  Dan was talking to one his friends on the phone, during the card ride back, and, in explaining what Fish was, said that “It runs the best counterspells and best removal, as well as really cheap, good creatures.”  Jotun Grunt shined as the most efficient beater in the format, and Meddling Mage is ridiculously powerful.  It took me a while, however, to settle on the right creature base.  I was set with 4 Confidant, 4 Mage, and 3 Grunt, but I didn’t decide on until quite late that I would run 3 Moms.  Originally, they were Stormscape Apprentices, which I cut for Isamaru.  However, I realized that I had no need for a beater, and decided that Mother of Runes does the same thing Stormscape does, except it does it for free.  In fact, it does Stormscape’s job better, as I can nullify opposing Mongeese, Trolls, and what-have-you.  Fish also has the right control base to not let situations get out of hand, and can draw into answers with ease. 

For whatever reason, some believe that Fish can only win if it runs Standstill and AEther Vial and such.  This is not the case.  Fish does not win because of its creatures.  It wins because of its ability to control the game.  By diluting your control, by adding more creatures, Standstill, which, as we’ve seen, doesn’t really do anything in this format, anymore, and AEther Vial, you’re weakening its overall strength.  Fish really shouldn’t run more than 16 or so creatures.  By running more than that, and running AEther Vial, you’re making yourself more susceptible.  Vial Fish is not the route to go.

In addition, and perhaps the best part, is that decks can’t truly hate against my build.  Aside from Pyroblast, Fish is immune to most Sideboard hate.  It still has the efficiency of Threshold, but it does not share its weakness.  Even with running almost solely non-basics, I was able to win through mana-denial, while, at the same time, fighting back with my own mana-denial.

Any deck that can run Serenity should. 

Also, Null Rod isn’t as random as people think.  Not only does it hose Affinity, but it also hoses Gamekeeper, IGGy-Pop, Belcher (hey, just in case), and Angel Stompy. 

One of the other things I’ve come to realize, and it isn’t very intuitive, is that, after you pass a certain level of skill, the deck you’re playing matters less, and less.  I’m not sure how many of you play Guild Wars, but this is the easiest analogy I can think of: the skill level of your team matters more than what your build is.  Any build can beat any build, but it’s the players that make the difference.  I guess you could draw an analogy to Poker, as well: a player dealt J-3o can still beat a player dealt pocket aces, even if the first player doesn’t make a hand.  That’s what makes the best players the best, and the same holds true for Magic.  But more on that later.

Well, that’s about it.  I’m sitting here two hours and 3,000 words later with several hours of homework to do for tomorrow.  I had a great time, and I definitely look forward to the next big event.

Props
-emidln, for setting this tournament up
-cancerstix, for giving me a ride
-cancerstix, for running Quirion Dryad
-nartman66’s teammate, for beating FFY and allowing Nam and I to draw
-Spencer, for suggesting various changes
-Spencer, for running Ichorid
-My deck, for performing well
-Jotun Grunt, for being b0rken
-Serenity, for being so good
-Null Rod, for not being as random as people think
-Engineered Plague, for being good
-Phil Cape and John Wilkerson, for being winnar
-The organizers, for having $ .50 pop
-Hanni, for rekindling my interest in Fish


Slops
-Spencer, for having such bad luck
-Affinity
-Phil Cape, for beating me twice
-The tournament, for only having 40 people
-The Round 3/Top8 Affinity kid, for being a sore loser
-emidln, for messing up his Uba Mask during our match

[SpencerForHire]

It doesn't look like you mentioned the part where you gave me some of your luck, lost a match and I won my match..

[cancerstix]

VERY nice report Rich.  You let alot of good info out that we've been holding onto for a while.  I really like your list which happens to be very very similar to the WUB deck "Blueberry Grunt" I've been working on secretly...until yesterday when you and Drew learned of its existence.  I will be testing the deck as you have it listed and comparing its strengths and weaknesses to my build, which is 13 cards (I think) different than mine.  I guess that makes them significantly different enough to be two different decks, huh.

Props

-cancerstix, for running Quirion Dryad

-Jotun Grunt, for being b0rken

Thanks Rich.  Dryad totally pwns the UGx thresh kinda-mirror, which I expected to see alot of, never paired against it, and dryad was still amazing!  

And yes, Grunt is broken.  Anyone who fails to realize that yet...deep breath...I will refrain from all references inferring noobish, rudimentary level of game knowledge, buffoonery...well I tried too anyways.

[Hanni]

Nice report, I got your PM about discussing the deck a day too late to reply, sorry. I'm very pleased that you made Top 8 with this deck... like I've been saying all along, it has solid matchups against pretty much everything, just like Gro, except there is less hate targeted against it. I wish we could have gone over a few things before hand, I made a few significant changes to the deck the day before your tournament.

I edited my current version of the decklist in my thread, so feel free to check what my current listing is. Also, check your messages because I sent you my AIM and Yahoo Messenger ID's so that we can discuss this deck in real time chat.

I'd like to ask you, how were the Mom's working for you? It seemed in your report that you either didn't mention what they did for you or it seemed like you played with them differently than I do. I'm curious about this because I know that in your posts in my thread that you said you weren't going to run them.

I'm also curious how the extra 4 cantrips (Serum Visions) worked out for you. I had tested the extra cantrip version and really felt that the deck didn't need them... they don't increase card quantity, they increase card quality. I had felt, in testing, that the deck already had sufficient quality due to the lower amount of lands (15 in my current build with 3 Vials). I realize that my current list (it got tweaked quite a bit in the past few days) is now considerably different than the one posted in this report... and that's why I ask how well the Serum Visions were working for you.

Lastly, the 2/2 Stifle/Duress split seems a bit interesting, although I'm pretty sure that without Wasteland I'd prefer to go with the full 4 Duress (I don't run Wastelands anymore in my list). Did this split work well for you? I seen that it saved you in game 1 against Goblins, but do you think only 2 makes it too narrow to help like that consistently? It seems like a solid option though, and if you think it's a really good split, I'll probably playtest it and try it out.

That's about all I got for now, congrats on Top 4. I really think this deck concept is going to start taking off very soon... Fish (or Wizards) may be unplayed right now but I can see it at least being considered Tier 2 very soon. I've been waiting for you to leave feedback on my thread about my new changes, so if you'd be so kind to do so I'd appreciate it. Actually, I'd prefer to discuss this deck on AIM/Yahoo and playtest it and versions of it against commonly played archtypes. Not only do I think this will progress the deck idea itself, it will also share our knowledge and playskill of the deck with eachother and we both may learn some things that we didn't know prior. I know that I pilot my deck very well, having been building it and playing it for 10+ months, but I know that there are still things to be learned. I live in Ohio, maybe we can start going to tournaments together and keep placing this deck in Top 8's until the deck is recognized as a Legacy Proven Deck.

[Anusien]

Yeah, Grunt is ridiculous.  I feel like a new man everytime I cast him.  It is of course worse against Iggy, but you have Null Rods, which is a saucy metagame call.  Congratulations.

How is the Goblins matchup?  It seems like you'd run into all the problems that UGW Thresh runs into versus Goblins.

[The Chosen One]

Im glad to see someone placing with this deck. Great job!

As I had commented in Hanni's thread, stifle is just fantastic.

Are you comfortable only running 14 creatures? did you feel at any point that was not enough?

Joe

[KrzyMoose]

I'd like to ask you, how were the Mom's working for you?...because I know that in your posts in my thread that you said you weren't going to run them.

I wasn't going to, originally.  But after a lot of testing and playing around with different creatures in that spot, I realized that Mom fit perfectly.  I didn't need another beater, and Mom does the same thing Stormscape does for cheaper.  However, I wanted to run Stormscape mainly because he was pitchable to FoW.  But, when I realized I was going to be running 2 Stifle, I figured that I could get away with one less Blue card.  And so, I ended up with Mom.  She performed quite well, especially in the Madness and RGSA matches.  (Of course, those were really the only matchups in which she could actually have been useful, seeing as the other ones were Affinity and Stax.  Jitte took care of Goblins.)

I'm also curious how the extra 4 cantrips (Serum Visions) worked out for you.

Are you comfortable only running 14 creatures? did you feel at any point that was not enough?

Originally, the Visions were Mother of Runes, and the Mother of Runes in the current version were Stormscape Apprentices.  Like I said in my report regarding an increased creature count, I felt that I didn't need more creatures, as creatures are pretty much worthless.  What Fish wants to do is draw into answers, not necessarily draw into threats.  Serum Visions is amazing at digging for whatever you need.  Also, the only creatures you really want to play early-game are Meddling Mage and Dark Confidant, and possibly Mother of Runes.  You don't need beaters until late game, by which time you will have found a Grunt or two and a Jitte.  You don't need utility creatures such as Voidmage Prodigy and Azorius Guildmage.  You don't want to waste mana on something you don't need.  I felt 14 was the perfect number for my build.  It is a low-enough count to ensure that you don't draw too many, but it is high enough to ensure you draw them when you need to.

Lastly, the 2/2 Stifle/Duress split seems a bit interesting...Did this split work well for you?

I actually liked it quite a bit.  It isn't as narrow as one might think, because both Duress and Stifle want to be played first turn.  This way, you should only end up with one in your hand, and, either way, they're never dead.  Your right though, in that if you aren't running Wasteland, you probably don't need Stifle.

How is the Goblins matchup?  It seems like you'd run into all the problems that UGW Thresh runs into versus Goblins.

I've never found it to be as bad as one might think.  Granted, Goblins can get the stone-cold nuts draw, and you might not have the counter for it.  But, 95% of the time, you can deal fairly well with their early drops.  You have Dazes, Forces, Swords to Plowshares, and Mother of Runes.  All of those can deal with Lackey.  As long as Ringleader doesn't get too insane, an active Jitte will win you the game.  Game two, Engineered Plagues pretty much seals the deal, as you have enough draw to find one early, but, should you not, you have enough removal to survive until you do. 

One thing I want to add is that, even though I firmly believe Vial Fish/the other misc. builds of Fish are strictly worse (and they are), they are only worse because they're not the deck I  want to play.  Does that make sense?  My build of Fish is better than the other builds because it is the best build for me.  If you find that you're better with another version, than, by all means, run it, and do well with it.  What makes Fish so interesting is that there are a number of routes to go, and they can be tailored to the individual's taste.  There are some people out there who believe that your play style doesn't really matter, and that there is (or should be) one 'best build' of a certain deck, and that build should be universally accepted as such.  This is not the case.  An example is this: it is accepted, at least on The Source, that Mystical Tutor does not belong in Solidarity, and that Force of Will does.  In the version I Top 8'ed with a few months ago (I should actually have won that tournament, but I decided that it would be a good idea to cast a lethal Brain Freeze in response to Psychatog attacking.  Pretty smart, huh?), I ran Mystical Tutor, and did not run Force of Will.  And you know what?  It worked for me.

What works for you works for you.  You're the only person who knows the best choice, so you're the only one who can make it.

*edit* Going back to what I was talking about with how the deck starts to matter less and less the better you get, and sort of combining that idea with what I just talked about:  The only time I've failed to Top 8 at a Legacy event was when I was running UGr Threshold at a 16-man tournament at Pande.  Obviously, UGr is not the deck for me.  It doesn't suit my style at all.  This is interesting, because it sort of contradicts what I said about the deck not mattering.  What I mean to say is this: 

When you find a deck that you love playing and that just fits, you can beat any deck in the format, regardless of what deck you decide to run. 

I hope that makes a little more sense now.

*edit* I also find that, for me at least, it's usefull to never run the same deck for two consecutive tournaments.  I find this is a great way to not only build your own playskill and improve your adaptability, but it also teaches you a lot about other decks in the format.  More on this later.  Gotta get to class.

But I'm not done yet.

[Anusien]

Thanks for the speedy replies.

One thing I want to add is that, even though I firmly believe Vial Fish/the other misc. builds of Fish are strictly worse (and they are), they are only worse because they're not the deck I  want to play.  Does that make sense?  My build of Fish is better than the other builds because it is the best build for me.  If you find that you're better with another version, than, by all means, run it, and do well with it.  What makes Fish so interesting is that there are a number of routes to go, and they can be tailored to the individual's taste.  There are some people out there who believe that your play style doesn't really matter, and that there is (or should be) one 'best build' of a certain deck, and that build should be universally accepted as such.  This is not the case.  An example is this: it is accepted, at least on The Source, that Mystical Tutor does not belong in Solidarity, and that Force of Will does.  In the version I Top 8'ed with a few months ago (I should actually have won that tournament, but I decided that it would be a good idea to cast a lethal Brain Freeze in response to Psychatog attacking.  Pretty smart, huh?), I ran Mystical Tutor, and did not run Force of Will.  And you know what?  It worked for me.

What works for you works for you.  You're the only person who knows the best choice, so you're the only one who can make it.

*edit* Going back to what I was talking about with how the deck starts to matter less and less the better you get, and sort of combining that idea with what I just talked about:  The only time I've failed to Top 8 at a Legacy event was when I was running UGr Threshold at a 16-man tournament at Pande.  Obviously, UGr is not the deck for me.  It doesn't suit my style at all.  This is interesting, because it sort of contradicts what I said about the deck not mattering.  What I mean to say is this: 

When you find a deck that you love playing and that just fits, you can beat any deck in the format, regardless of what deck you decide to run.

I really feel the need to respond to this thought, even at the risk of derailing the thread.  I find more and more that playstyle is a myth.  There's no such thing as "UGR Threshold not being the deck for me."  That usually indicates one of a few things: 1) Bad metagame call.  2) Bad build.  3) You don't know how to play the deck properly.  If you try to play UGR Thresh like UGW and you lose, it's not because your playstyle isn't suited to playing the deck, it's because you don't know how to play the deck properly.  But consequently, there's no such thing as a "control player" or a "combo player".  Justin Droba (JDizzle) for example is widely known as a combo player since he consistently Top 8s (or did) with Long and Belcher.  You know why?  It's because he goldfished the ever-living shit out of the deck, and tested the matchups.  You know what?  I hear he did alright with Stax too.  You would not play Zoo or Goblins the same way you would UGW Thresh, would you?  If you think a deck doesn't match your playstyle, chances are you're defective, not the deck.  There's no reason one can't learn to play UGR Threshold as well as UGW Threshold; it just means you need to learn the deck.
(This is not a personal attack, it's just a rant that needed to be posted, since more and more people are buying into the myth of playstyle).

[Mr. Nightmare]

I both agree and disagree with you, Kevin.  I agree that there is no real truth in the statement "Deck X doesn't fit my playstyle, so I choose not to play it."  I would put forth, however, that ammending that to, "Deck X doesn't fit my preferred playstyle, so I choose not to play it," is not only a valid statement, but a common one.  In my past as a player, I have on occasion played aggro.  I would not, however, play it with any consistency if there was another viable option.  This doesn't mean I don't know how to play it, or even that I couldn't do well were I to pick it up.  It simply means that I prefer to sit in the control role (and I like comboing on my oponent's face, too).  That is my preferred playstyle.  To the UG/x end, I choose not to play red because I feel it isn't as good as white, and playing good decks is also my style.

[Hanni]

KrzyMoose, when you get a chance, answer my PM.

As far as the deck goes, I decided to drop the 3 Stormscapes in my build for 3 serum Visions. I suggested the Serum Visions to you before but I didn't test them much before I went back to the Visionless build. Your tournament report got me thinking about the advantages and disadvantages of both cards and I ultimately decided to go with Serum Visions. My reasoning for this can be found in the Fish thread.

As far as playstyle and such goes, I agree and disagree. As far as 2 people playing the same deck goes, if a deck (lets say UGr Gro) plays well in a specific metagame, you should also play well in that metagame with the same deck... the deck is the deck and playskill is playskill. Playskill does make a big difference, but you are probably not going to beat IGGy Pop with Zoo no matter how much your playstyle fits Zoo (unless the IGGy Pop player is incompetent). Don't hold me to the Zoo vs IGGy Pop argument 100% because it was just an example, I'm not saying that Zoo can't sideboard for it. So basically, I disagree with the fact that playskill is more important than the deck in terms of "any deck can beat any deck depending on playskill." However, I do agree that decks really don't have an optimal list (I'd say 99%), although many of them are very tight and only allow for a tiny bit of personal preference on card selection. They still allow for selection though, and this pertains to my agreement of your statement about Vial vs Vialess. In my version, I decided to not run Stifles or Wastelands and went with Vials and Azorius Guildmages instead.

Back on the topic of Azorius Guildmage, I think this guy is pretty sweet. At worst, he's a 2cc 2/2 that's easy on the manabase. At best, he's a Pithing Needle on a beatstick that can also tap an opponent's creature too (mana pending of course) and his abilities don't require him to tap so he still puts on a clock. I disagree with you when you say that Fish doesn't need to put on a clock until late game... I think that you want to put a clock on as soon as possible (after establishing board control) and run with it. You say the deck doesn't need utility creatures but all Mother of Runes really is is utility as he puts on a terrible clock in terms of aggression. In your build, I think Azorius Guildmage would be even more nuts... early game Stifles + Wastelands followed up by reusable Stifle effects (non triggered abilities) with Azorius Guildmage on turn 3+ (hitting fetchlands with your mana denial route). Personally, I'd drop 2 Vindicates for 2 Azorius Guildmage in your list.

Deleted lots of unnecessary spacing at the end of your post. - Bardo

[KrzyMoose]

You say the deck doesn't need utility creatures but all Mother of Runes really is is utility as he puts on a terrible clock in terms of aggression.

What I meant to say was that the deck doesn't need more utility creatures than it already has.  Mother of Runes is basically your utility slot.  Combined with Meddling Mage and Jotun Grunt, you're all set. 

Azorius Guildmage, while she is pretty good, is pretty much icing on the cake.  Mother of Runes takes care of whatever creatures make it into play, so you really don't need anymore than that.

That having been said, your Vial Fish and my non-Vial Fish are totally different decks.  Vial Fish does need more creatures to work, while my build does not.  It's simply a difference.

Also, I think I should clarify myself a little bit regarding the playstyle issue (although, perhaps it should be another thread?).  I do think that someone's style of play is important because it guides them to choose what deck to play.  In addition, it tells them what decks they will enjoy playing.  That is the most important part: the fact that you enjoy playing a deck.  I could play Lands all day, win a tournament, and I will still tell you that the deck sucks, and it doesn't suite my playstyle.  (note: I'm not blaming my failure with UGr on the fact that it didn't suite my style and that I didn't really like the deck.  I understand completely that I lost with it because of my own errors and lack of thorough understanding.)  For me, the only bearing on playstyle is whether or not you like the deck.  That's what I mean by playstyle.  (but really, this discussion should probably be moved, or continued elsewhere)

And, for completeness's sake, I want to go back to what I was saying about playing a different deck every tournament.  This is probably the single most important thing you can do to improve yourself as a player.  Testing a deck for a couple hours a day is one thing, but sitting down for an entire day with a deck in a competitive environment is much more beneficial.  Not to toot my own horn or anything, but being able to succeed with a variety of decks makes you the best player you can be.  This also helps in a tournament setting when you run into a deck you've played with.  Being familiar with your opponent's deck might win you a game.  But knowing that you were able to top 8 with your opponent's deck will win you the match.

[Bardo]

If you try to play UGR Thresh like UGW and you lose, it's not because your playstyle isn't suited to playing the deck, it's because you don't know how to play the deck properly.

I believe this is 100% true.

But consequently, there's no such thing as a "control player" or a "combo player". ... If you think a deck doesn't match your playstyle, chances are you're defective, not the deck.  There's no reason one can't learn to play UGR Threshold as well as UGW Threshold; it just means you need to learn the deck.

In the past, I've agreed with you on this point. But I'd note that people aren't machines and we all have a certain disposition. Like, I freely admit that I'm not a terribly good control or combo player. I just don't have the patience to play control optimally, and I find most combo decks give me unnecessary headaches. Can I tighten my game, test my ass off and become better? Absolutely. Do I have the inclination? Not really, no.

People will generally do better with things they enjoy, than with things which feel forced. They're more likely to keep practicing, find creative ways to get out of jams and thus develop as players, since we're talking about playing a card game and not correctly filing our taxes.

So, I'm with KrazyMoose on this one. And it should be apparent what kind of player I am!

edit - Fun fact: the TMD autofilter changes all instances of "r0bot" to "big artifact."

[Anusien]

Back on topic, I find Azorius Guildmage to be pretty chaffy.  If you were going to use him, he would be at his best turns 3-6, by nuking fetchlands, getting beats through and turning off Aether Vial.  The problem is that those early turns are exactly when you want to make more dudes, equip, counter spells, and do more relevant things.

[Hanni]

Anusien, Azorius Guildmage is a 2cc 2/2 at worst, so it's never really dead weight. It has the ability to tap out an opponent's creature if you need to, so that option of utility is available for 2W. The same applies to the needle effect for 2U. It doesn't require him to tap, so he can continue to attack or whatever. You don't have to use his abilities in a given game and he can still be useful. However, games typically last much much longer than 3-6 turns with this deck and Azorius' abilities are typically useful throughout the entire game (depending on what your playing against of course). You don't want to rely on his tap ability turn after turn but it is nice to use for a few turns until you can dig for an StP for your opponent's Exalted Angel or whatever. Same thing goes for stuff like Pernicious Deed... once Azorius is on the table, your opponent is never going to be able to crack it open until they either spot removal him or unless you don't have sufficient mana sources for whatever reason. It just adds amazing utility, and that utility doesn't even need to be used for him to still be a useful as a 2/2 creature for 2cc.

[Blackest Lotus]

Congrats on the finish! Apparently the Serenity and Rod spots were a damn good call. Nice.

[KrzyMoose]

I haven't really tested Azorius Guildmage.  If I were to add her, she'd be in the Vindicate slot.  I can't argue against her usefulness, but the question is whether or not she is truly needed. 

Anusien is right, though, that she's really most effective during the early turns.  If I were running AEther Vial, then it wouldn't be too big of a problem, but it might be hard to keep 2W or 2U open all the time.