Ongoing Waterbury Results

[49 Cents]

Hehe, you actually wrote 'I@n'

[Moxlotus]

I got the decklists yesterday

here's day 1

http://sales.starcitygames.com/deckdatabase/deckshow.php?&t%5BC1%5D=vin&start_date=2007-01-14&end_date=2007-01-14

Are the lists for day 2 also going to be published?

No.

And by no I mean whenever I have time.  This is a really busy week for me.

[CwaM]

DO you really have to write all decklists? I can't see how it can be useful :/

But if SCG pays for writing them all ... just wondering.

[Tobi]

I have to agree.

While I appreciate the work you put into wrting all the decklists, I wonder if this is really necessary. Top 8 ist most interesting anyway. In big tournaments probably top 16, but never all.

[RaleighNCTourneys]

I have to disagree. A tournament of that magnitude is defined by way more than the top 16. Aren't you curious what other people were playing and what the top 16 had to play all day to get there? Aren't you curious what the top Vintage players in the world who didn't top 16 were playing? The list can go on and on for reasons why all decklists are an awesome thing we should be thankful for. 

[Moxlotus]

I have to disagree. A tournament of that magnitude is defined by way more than the top 16. Aren't you curious what other people were playing and what the top 16 had to play all day to get there? Aren't you curious what the top Vintage players in the world who didn't top 16 were playing? The list can go on and on for reasons why all decklists are an awesome thing we should be thankful for. 

Pitch Long was inspired by a ~143rd place deck.  If people don't look at all the decklists they are missing on opportunities to innovate and win power.

Wait.

Nobody else should look at any decklists besides the top 8 or 16. 

[diopter]

I have to disagree. A tournament of that magnitude is defined by way more than the top 16. Aren't you curious what other people were playing and what the top 16 had to play all day to get there? Aren't you curious what the top Vintage players in the world who didn't top 16 were playing? The list can go on and on for reasons why all decklists are an awesome thing we should be thankful for. 

Pitch Long was inspired by a ~143rd place deck. If people don't look at all the decklists they are missing on opportunities to innovate and win power.

Wait.

Nobody else should look at any decklists besides the top 8 or 16.

Then we'd get our decklists faster! 

[meadbert]

I personally look over ever single list.  I want to know what the whole field looked like rather than just who made the top 8.

[GrandpaBelcher]

I like having all the decklists as a reference for deckbuilding.  It's convenient to be able to look at what kind of tech people are playing at all levels.  From the upper levels, I need to know what to prepare for.  And from the lower levels, it's nice to know what has been tested and failed.  Plus, sometimes I see people I know.

So, three cheers for the decklist transcribers!  They do a great service for all of us...
Hip-hip etc.

[Moxlotus]

I have to disagree. A tournament of that magnitude is defined by way more than the top 16. Aren't you curious what other people were playing and what the top 16 had to play all day to get there? Aren't you curious what the top Vintage players in the world who didn't top 16 were playing? The list can go on and on for reasons why all decklists are an awesome thing we should be thankful for. 

Pitch Long was inspired by a ~143rd place deck. If people don't look at all the decklists they are missing on opportunities to innovate and win power.

Wait.

Nobody else should look at any decklists besides the top 8 or 16.

Then we'd get our decklists faster! 

You do realize that you can find the decklists that are typed up, yet not finished by properly using the deck database right?  You can find decklists that don't have a link to them on the front page.  I've been done with 1-40 or so for Day 2 for a couple days.

[diopter]

I have to disagree. A tournament of that magnitude is defined by way more than the top 16. Aren't you curious what other people were playing and what the top 16 had to play all day to get there? Aren't you curious what the top Vintage players in the world who didn't top 16 were playing? The list can go on and on for reasons why all decklists are an awesome thing we should be thankful for. 

Pitch Long was inspired by a ~143rd place deck. If people don't look at all the decklists they are missing on opportunities to innovate and win power.

Wait.

Nobody else should look at any decklists besides the top 8 or 16.

Then we'd get our decklists faster! 

You do realize that you can find the decklists that are typed up, yet not finished by properly using the deck database right?  You can find decklists that don't have a link to them on the front page.  I've been done with 1-40 or so for Day 2 for a couple days.

I'm just jokin' man  I appreciate the work that you do to put these lists up.

[ashiXIII]

I have to disagree. A tournament of that magnitude is defined by way more than the top 16. Aren't you curious what other people were playing and what the top 16 had to play all day to get there? Aren't you curious what the top Vintage players in the world who didn't top 16 were playing? The list can go on and on for reasons why all decklists are an awesome thing we should be thankful for. 

Pitch Long was inspired by a ~143rd place deck. If people don't look at all the decklists they are missing on opportunities to innovate and win power.

Wait.

Nobody else should look at any decklists besides the top 8 or 16.

Then we'd get our decklists faster! 

You do realize that you can find the decklists that are typed up, yet not finished by properly using the deck database right?  You can find decklists that don't have a link to them on the front page.  I've been done with 1-40 or so for Day 2 for a couple days.

By the way, the 6th place "Gifts" list was playing exactly 0 Gifts.

[Tobi]

You do realize that you can find the decklists that are typed up, yet not finished by properly using the deck database right?  You can find decklists that don't have a link to them on the front page.  I've been done with 1-40 or so for Day 2 for a couple days.

Now that helps! 
Thanks a lot.

For anyone not skilled with the deck-search engine of SCG: Decklists Waterbury Day 2

[Shades]

Hmm both the 2nd and 5th place are playing without Necro and with Tinker but NO Jar. Do you guys want to find Black Lotus only?
Otherwise pretty cool Top 8 with lots of the top players and top decks in there.

[ErkBek]

Hmm both the 2nd and 5th place are playing without Necro and with Tinker but NO Jar. Do you guys want to find Black Lotus only?
Otherwise pretty cool Top 8 with lots of the top players and top decks in there.

I can understand omitting Tinker/Jar, but cutting Necropotence? That card, in my opinion, is one of the reasons to play ritual combo. The most confusing part to me, is that Infernal Contract and Merchant Scroll were played over them. If Cross or Outlaw could make a post in the Full User forum about the omission of necro, and their reasoning, that'd be great.

EDIT: Looking further into Cross' List, I can't help but think its a lot like IT. Here's the differences

IT                                        CrossLong
+1 Necro                               (Contract)
+1 Twister                             (Desire)
+1 Scroll                                (Time Walk)
+2 Remand / Bounce / Perplex  (2x Cabal Rit)
+2 Intuitions                           (Contract + Tendrils)
+1 Land                                 (Tinker, but no jar)

The card choices are a little different, but many are similar in function, leading me to wonder how in the world you beat gifts? Do you bring in Leylines vs. gifts?

[Cross]

I’m not a full user, but a couple of things:

Tinker should actually be in neither of our lists. In my list it was a Timetwister, I am not sure what it was in Justin’s because he ran a few cards different, but I suspect it to be the second grim tutor.

The inspiration for the list actually comes from TPS lists from like 2 years ago, the only difference being that it ran full a set of cabal rits and grim tutors. Obviously IT and pitchlong have been successful and are also good sources of inspiration.

I played gifts a lot that weekend, and I only lost to it in top 8 against demars, and both of his openings included strip mine and tormod’s crypt. I think that cutting necro and jar make a big difference in the match up though. I have never really had a good experience with tinker+jar and necro. Other people rave about it, but it has been my experience that they are too much for a good effect, but that does not guarantee the game. I’d rather put the same amount of resources into finding better bombs like bargain and desire, or drawing four cards off contract. I am not the only one to come to these conclusions; if you check Gagooch’s tourney report from ELD’s mox, he was playing my list also. He played at Waterbury too and did poorly in the main events but did top 8 in the day 2 side event.

[Outlaw]

My list definitely didnt run Tinker.  Our lists ran less "all-in" cards.  Tinker -> Jar is a definite all in play along with necro, despite resolving either of these its not a guranteed win.  I ran a gifts which I soon cut, the merchant scroll was for finding recall, h.recall and gifts.  We both ran desire, bargain, twister, 2 tendrils, contract, and x grim tutors.  I ran 2 merchant scrolls and a single grim tutor if i'm right.

[Moxlotus]

Sorry about the extra Tinkers.  It was in my copy/paste

I am with Becker in finding it odd that you guys don't like Necro.  I have found it wins about 90% of games it comes down and its about 95% when it comes down on turn 1.  Of course, PL has Misdirections to get it to resolve instead of Duress, so you aren't wasting a turn playing Duress.  But even in IT I thought the card was #2 in the deck, behind Will. 

I mean, Infernal Contract costs the same as Necro but it only draws 4 cards for 9-10 life instead of 10 cards.  I don't understand why Contract would be better than Necro.

[Gaagooch]

Hmm both the 2nd and 5th place are playing without Necro and with Tinker but NO Jar. Do you guys want to find Black Lotus only?
Otherwise pretty cool Top 8 with lots of the top players and top decks in there.

I can understand omitting Tinker/Jar, but cutting Necropotence? That card, in my opinion, is one of the reasons to play ritual combo. The most confusing part to me, is that Infernal Contract and Merchant Scroll were played over them. If Cross or Outlaw could make a post in the Full User forum about the omission of necro, and their reasoning, that'd be great.

EDIT: Looking further into Cross' List, I can't help but think its a lot like IT. Here's the differences

IT                                        CrossLong
+1 Necro                               (Contract)
+1 Twister                             (Desire)
+1 Scroll                                (Time Walk)
+2 Remand / Bounce / Perplex  (2x Cabal Rit)
+2 Intuitions                           (Contract + Tendrils)
+1 Land                                 (Tinker, but no jar)

The card choices are a little different, but many are similar in function, leading me to wonder how in the world you beat gifts? Do you bring in Leylines vs. gifts?

From my experience I really have to question why you would ask how this deck beats gifts.  Of all the gifts I played in both days at waterbury and Eld's mox #2 I lost one match to gifts.  The only reason I lost this matches was because my opponent had the rare gifts god draw in both games, it happens and i'm over it.  But the gifts match is very much winable, it's no where near an auto-loss.  Shouldn't combo with duress beat gifts?  Without running tinker->jar we take out some gas, but at the same time we help protect ourselves against a gifts deck.  Now when I duress them any card I cast, other than timetwister, will generally lead me to where I want to go with little to no disruption.  Timetwister against gifts however can be a big reset button.  As for the Necro debate, i've been wanting to cut it for some time, and I, as I state in my tournament report, feel that in the current state of type one necro is worse.  This would be because of the very high number of duress that are running around, I tested without necro and to this point have not been dissapointed.  I do however believe that eight rituals is one too many and am testing many cards in that slot and the merchant scroll slot.

Sorry about the extra Tinkers.  It was in my copy/paste

I am with Becker in finding it odd that you guys don't like Necro.  I have found it wins about 90% of games it comes down and its about 95% when it comes down on turn 1.  Of course, PL has Misdirections to get it to resolve instead of Duress, so you aren't wasting a turn playing Duress.  But even in IT I thought the card was #2 in the deck, behind Will. 

I mean, Infernal Contract costs the same as Necro but it only draws 4 cards for 9-10 life instead of 10 cards.  I don't understand why Contract would be better than Necro.

Contract give me the cards right away, instant gratification.  Necropotence makes me wait until the end of turn.  When I pay three mana for any spell I want it to be the spell that helps me end the game right away, and I personally feel Contract does that better. 

[Moxlotus]

Contract give me the cards right away, instant gratification.  Necropotence makes me wait until the end of turn.  When I pay three mana for any spell I want it to be the spell that helps me end the game right away, and I personally feel Contract does that better.

You find yourself able to go off the same turn after spending your Ritual to draw 4 random cards and use half your life?  What turn are you trying to kill on?  Turn 4?  I dont see how Necro isn't better than Contract on turn 1 (unless you drew the absolute balls for your opener) and most of the time on turn 2. 

I agree that Necro sucks more in a heavy Duress environment, but if you Contract and pass turn you paid 3 mana and 10 life to draw 4 cards and RFG your best. 

[Cross]

I started a thread about it in the open forum to move the discussion there rather than clog up this thread.

[Moxlotus]

So day 2 is up.  Post any typos.  Sorry Day 2 took over a week to get up--I had an unusually large amount of physics, a Gross Anatomy test and a 30 minute presentation for Seminar--Biochemistry Majors to finish.

[Smmenen]

Up where?  I didn't see a link on the SCG front page. 

[OfficeShredder]

Scroll up 

[Gekoratel]

I appreciate you taking the time to type up all of the decklists.  There was one small mistake in my two Pitch Long decklists they are both 61 cards because you have Time Walk listed but I did not run it either day.

Thanks again,
Jeff Folinus

[Moxlotus]

I appreciate you taking the time to type up all of the decklists.  There was one small mistake in my two Pitch Long decklists they are both 61 cards because you have Time Walk listed but I did not run it either day.

Thanks again,
Jeff Folinus

Bah, you guys are making it really hard to just go on autopilot and not think while typing.  Some not playing Tinker, now you're not playing Walk.  STOP MODIFYING NETDECKS

j/k

I'll fix them

[yespuhyren]

I have to disagree. A tournament of that magnitude is defined by way more than the top 16. Aren't you curious what other people were playing and what the top 16 had to play all day to get there? Aren't you curious what the top Vintage players in the world who didn't top 16 were playing? The list can go on and on for reasons why all decklists are an awesome thing we should be thankful for. 

While looking through I noticed a deck, this one:

http://sales.starcitygames.com/deckdatabase/displaydeck.php?DeckID=20705

16th place, yet it piqued my interest more than any deck in the T15 because it was extremely different and a very revolutionary and interesting version of Uba.  I for one have already contacted Jeff and hope to gain some further insight into his deck.  I am also VERY thankful we are publishign decks beyond T8, and this is part of the reason.

[RaleighNCTourneys]

Also... I'm 100% sure I wouldn't have put together/thought of Drain Tendrils and got 1st at Roanoke if SCG and Waterbury lists past top 8 weren't published... so I am VERY thankful.

[desolutionist]

I appreciate you taking the time to type up all of the decklists.  There was one small mistake in my two Pitch Long decklists they are both 61 cards because you have Time Walk listed but I did not run it either day.

Thanks again,
Jeff Folinus

Bah, you guys are making it really hard to just go on autopilot and not think while typing.  Some not playing Tinker, now you're not playing Walk.  STOP MODIFYING NETDECKS

j/k

I'll fix them

http://sales.starcitygames.com/deckdatabase/displaydeck.php?DeckID=20714

I didn't use Walk either.