Ongoing SCG Chicago Results

[Prometheon]

On the Dave and ELD debate: Dave, when you quote prior SCGs and Waterburys where Gush dominated, you are ignoring the widespread adoption of Lorwyn, which has done a LOT to help format diversity. Of course, this fact also counters ELDs "it's been the golden age since Future Sight" point as well, but you both know what I mean. I think the current format (meaning post-Lorwyn) is fantastic, but also very frustrating due to it's diversity. I'vefound lately that Vintage has become more matchup dependant than it has been in a long time. Gone are the days where you can just pick up Gifts or Slaver and have a reasonable chance against everything. I think Gush-based decks are the best example of this at the moment, due to their consistency and raw power, which is why many people are playing them, but they are not currently over represented in Top 8s, so I see no problem.

[diopter]

On the Dave and ELD debate: Dave, when you quote prior SCGs and Waterburys where Gush dominated, you are ignoring the widespread adoption of Lorwyn, which has done a LOT to help format diversity. Of course, this fact also counters ELDs "it's been the golden age since Future Sight" point as well, but you both know what I mean. I think the current format (meaning post-Lorwyn) is fantastic, but also very frustrating due to it's diversity. I'vefound lately that Vintage has become more matchup dependant than it has been in a long time. Gone are the days where you can just pick up Gifts or Slaver and have a reasonable chance against everything. I think Gush-based decks are the best example of this at the moment, due to their consistency and raw power, which is why many people are playing them, but they are not currently over represented in Top 8s, so I see no problem.

So would you rather have diversity or predictability?
Ahh, Vintage players - we never stop whining...

[policehq]

the point I was trying to make is that good players can win with non-gush decks but that doesn't mean the format is suddenly healthy.

Good players can play with Gush decks but that doesn't mean the format is suddenly unhealthy.

I think it speaks well of the format to say that good players were able to perform well after setting Gush aside. There were several other options for them to take, and it didn't necessarily compromise their showing to pick something else up.

[Dxfiler]

On the Dave and ELD debate: Dave, when you quote prior SCGs and Waterburys where Gush dominated, you are ignoring the widespread adoption of Lorwyn, which has done a LOT to help format diversity.

Let me just clarify my position- I think the format could be better than it is.  It has undoubtedly gotten better with Lorwyn, but not by leaps and bounds.  I don't think Lorwyn has helped format diversity as much as you're implying.

Other than thorns, thoughtseize and ponder there isn't much that sees consistent play from Lorwyn... still 3 cards is good.  The issue is that 2 of those cards can instantly be popped into the best archtype in the format (gush decks) making them even stronger.  Proof?  Dan Carp's 3rd place deck using 4 thoughtseize in gush tendrils and Jimmy Mc Carthy using 4 ponder in his 4th place GAT deck.  That was just from day 1 one of this tourney.

Like I don't mind being the guy who gets tomatoes thrown at him (who doesn't love throwing tomatoes at a feinstein ) by saying I think this format could be healthier.  Lorwyn helped a little bit in terms of getting other archtypes viable or stronger to combat Gush decks... but it doesn't change that gush decks are still far and away the best archtype.

I don't mind one archtype being the best.  I kept quiet during the slaver era because that deck in my view was very easy to deal with (Jamison isn't the first to win power with GR beats :p).  I started piping up in the gifts era because 4 gifts and 4 scroll was just too much access to 'I win' cards.  I'm even more vocal right now because Gush, while not an immediate 'I win' card in the sense that gifts is... is incredibly powerful and having access to 4 of those AND 4 merchant scrolls is craaaaaazay :p


The last thing I'll say on this (since this is a results thread not a B&R debate) is that it brings a tear to the Feinstein's eye when RG beats win a tourney...especially a lotus.  Outside of Jamison you're not going to find someone happier that RG won SCG.  With that said, I think one weekend of clear diversity doesn't wipe away 5-6 months of the same archtype over and over again.  Lorwyn was legal before this tourney and the results before this weekend backed up what I've been saying all along- 4 gush and 4 merchant scroll just give you the clear edge over anyone not running them. 

If suddenly all these archtypes run wild and gush decks don't completely dominate from here on out then I think that's awesome.  I'd love for that happen.  The thing is prior to this tourney it didn't happen and I think after it we'll just go back to gush decks and everything else.  Steve posed a very good question and you've seen the responses- alot of people came into this weekend wanting to play something other than gush based decks because they were sick of it. 

You could argue that this weekend gives hope to 10-12 archtypes suddenly being top contenders... but it's one weekend.  Taken from a sample of the past 6 months for major tourneys I honestly just chalk this up to being an anomaly.  I hope I'm wrong.

- Dave Feinstein

P.S. Owen- Conrgats buddy =)  Good luck in Daytona.

[Vegeta2711]

2003 down

Saga Block had Academy being the far and away most powerful deck.  People played other decks, like Sligh, WW and Sui, but they had no legitimate chance of winning.  A large portion of the field was decks that would be considered casual by todays standards.  As I think back to the cards that were released, and how they impacted Vintage, I remember how there were only a small handful of decks that were actually competitive.  The card pool wasn't diverse enough to allow for the variety we have today.  Go ahead and pick a time period and try and reconstruct viable decks.

...
...
 
You really have no idea, do you? 2003 was when Scourge and Mirrodin were released.

Viable decks in that time-frame:
Mask, Stax, Welder-MUD, Stacker, TnT, GAT (Even post restriction), Tog, Keeper (The much more coherent forms), Dragon, Phid, Storm decks (First variations), Rector Trix, Fish and Madness (the good version).

That's roughly 13 decks and even if you cut some of the variations down to like just Stax or just Shop Aggro you'll still have at least 10, not counting more fringe decks. Even if you only count the top tier decks, you'll end up including more because the power imbalance between the top and bottom decks was less than it is now.

[forests failed you]

2003 down

Saga Block had Academy being the far and away most powerful deck.  People played other decks, like Sligh, WW and Sui, but they had no legitimate chance of winning.  A large portion of the field was decks that would be considered casual by todays standards.  As I think back to the cards that were released, and how they impacted Vintage, I remember how there were only a small handful of decks that were actually competitive.  The card pool wasn't diverse enough to allow for the variety we have today.  Go ahead and pick a time period and try and reconstruct viable decks.

...
...



Don't forget SLAVER.
 
You really have no idea, do you? 2003 was when Scourge and Mirrodin were released.

Viable decks in that time-frame:
Mask, Stax, Welder-MUD, Stacker, TnT, GAT (Even post restriction), Tog, Keeper (The much more coherent forms), Dragon, Phid, Storm decks (First variations), Rector Trix, Fish and Madness (the good version).

That's roughly 13 decks and even if you cut some of the variations down to like just Stax or just Shop Aggro you'll still have at least 10, not counting more fringe decks. Even if you only count the top tier decks, you'll end up including more because the power imbalance between the top and bottom decks was less than it is now.

[Smmenen]

The debate between ELD, Dave, and Josh is quite interesting, but I'd like to split the difference.

Let me break this down by issue.

First Everyone pretty much admits that Gush is king.   The question is whether that is actually a problem.   It's a subjective question that essentially turns on what matters most.   Someone, I think Chad Ellis, wrote some time ago that the "best deck" metagame can sometimes be the best to play in.   That's, I think, what we have here.   GAT being the best deck actually means an interactive metagame, where a much wider swath of decks can compete, but super fast decks like Gifts or Pitch Long can't dominate.

Second Metagame Diversity.    I think Josh has been criticizing ELD for saying Golden Age and all that, but while I agree with Josh's numbers, I think it's mostly semantic.   ELD's central contention is true as a general matter.  The metagame IS the most diverse its been since I've been playing.   The metagame in 2001, 2, and 3 may have seemed diverse, but it was mostly a function of appearances. 

This format is actually the most FUNCTIONALLY diverse I've ever seen Vintage.   EVER.  In 2003, you could play more decks, but Masknaught was in decline with Rector was on the incline.   

Viable decks in that time-frame:
Mask, Stax, Welder-MUD, Stacker, TnT, GAT (Even post restriction), Tog, Keeper (The much more coherent forms), Dragon, Phid, Storm decks (First variations), Rector Trix, Fish and Madness (the good version).

I mean, while this is true, if we break 2003 up into thirds, we see that it's not really as true as it looks.

In the first few months of 2003, TNT and Keeper were the top decks (with Phids - Mask was mostly a 2002 holdover at this point).   By March, GAT was the top deck.   By May, Rector and Stax had joined GAT as the other two decks to beat.   TNT and Keeper were completely displaced.   Mask was mostly a 2002 deck.   

Gush was restricted and everything changed.   Tog decks rose up, Rector died out, and Dragon decks took the world by storm.   Stax and MUD were still being developed and tuned.   Venguer Masque made a brief splash.    By the fall, Long was ascendant (along with the Shining), then nuetered, and the world was about to change again with MIrrodin.   

So, yes, during 2003 TONS of decks were good, but at any given time, not really.

At this time, I feel like a million decks are viable (and can win):  GAT, Stax, Aggro Stax, Mask decks, Goyf decks, Dragon, Storm combo of all flavors, Goblins, Ichorid, Flash, and that's just the beginning of a long list of decks.

I think the answer is the answer that ELD gave: there are more cards.   Like, Ichorid and Flash are both viable, but they are not decks that people win with right now.  RIGHT NOW.   Once the metagame somehow starts to not put cards like Jailer and Leylines in SB, Ichorid could jump up and grab you.  Same with Flash.  Flash is super deadly.

It's because I think the product of:

1) More and more cards in the metagame

2) a policy of generally not restricting

3) a policy of encouraging unrestriction.

[Smmenen]

I found the article I was talking about: It's Metagames by Ken Krouner. http://www.starcitygames.com/php/news/article/7973.html   Here's the relevant excerpt:

One Best Deck
We are all very familiar with this metagame. This is the metagame that is Mirrodin Block Constructed. Ravager Affinity is insane in this format. The deck is favored against every other deck available, provided near perfect play. Sometimes the best deck is so good that you don't even need perfect play. That is generally when bannings occur... those decks don't last very long at all. Another great example of this was Trix. Trix dominated and nothing could really stop it, so they banned Mana Vault and Dark Ritual. Then after that, Trix dominated so they banned Necropotence and Demonic Consultation. Then for a change of pace, Trix dominated, so they took Ice Age Block out of Extended.

This metagame has the capacity to be the best or the worst. When the deck requires a great amount of skill, it is a good format. The best players will generally win, and playtesting is greatly rewarded. When the deck doesn't require skill you wind up with a degenerate, broken format.

Sideboarding in this format can be very interesting. At GP: Phoenix the then-dominant team ABU brought Trix decks that had main deck Phyrexian Negators and Skittering Horrors. This was a metagame choice against the mirror match. They began with their deck pre-sideboarded. Trix was so powerful, it could support this. Don't be fooled by the top 8 at that GP. Trix was by far the best deck. There may not have been any in the top 8, but there were five in the top 16. One of them was yours truly (shameless self promotion alert). If you elect not to pre-sideboard, then you must be ready to dedicate at least seven slots in your sideboard to the matchup with the best deck.

These metagames can be frustrating on several levels. If the deck is good regardless of the player, it's fairly obvious why this metagame is frustrating. When the deck is player dependent, it can be even more frustrating. When you take the best deck and create a deck to defeat it, your testing group likely doesn't contain a Huey or a Kai or an Osyp. You may tune your hate deck to perfection, take it to a GP, and get rolled over by a high caliber player playing the very deck you were supposed to beat. Playtesting is paramount in these metagames, but if you are confident in your play, you should focus your prep on becoming an expert with the best deck.

[Prometheon]

On the Dave and ELD debate: Dave, when you quote prior SCGs and Waterburys where Gush dominated, you are ignoring the widespread adoption of Lorwyn, which has done a LOT to help format diversity. Of course, this fact also counters ELDs "it's been the golden age since Future Sight" point as well, but you both know what I mean. I think the current format (meaning post-Lorwyn) is fantastic, but also very frustrating due to it's diversity. I'vefound lately that Vintage has become more matchup dependant than it has been in a long time. Gone are the days where you can just pick up Gifts or Slaver and have a reasonable chance against everything. I think Gush-based decks are the best example of this at the moment, due to their consistency and raw power, which is why many people are playing them, but they are not currently over represented in Top 8s, so I see no problem.

So would you rather have diversity or predictability?
Ahh, Vintage players - we never stop whining...

Of course not! It's just lame when you pick up a deck with a great GAT, Stax, and Flash matchup, and then get paired against Oath, Landstill, and Goblins. This isn't from personal experiance, as I've recently been having a lot of success at the local level, but I've seen it happen time and time again to friends playing strong metagame decks.

Add to the fact that sideboards are only really 10-11 cards (as you MUST run Ichorid hate even though it's metagame presence is low) and you have a difficult nut to crack. Fortunately, most Vintage players seem to like a challenge 

[Dxfiler]

It's just lame when you pick up a deck with a great GAT, Stax, and Flash matchup, and then get paired against Oath, Landstill, and Goblins. This isn't from personal experiance, as I've recently been having a lot of success at the local level, but I've seen it happen time and time again to friends playing strong metagame decks.

The beauty of having alot of even decks with no deck just clearly better than everything else is that even if you're in a bad match or a perceived tough match... if you know your deck well enough you can beat whatever is across the table from you most of the time.  Metgaming only gets you so far... ultimately it's up to you the player to find a way to beat the other guy.  If the decks are close to even then it's very clear who's going to win the match most of the time: the better player or the guy who knows his deck better (usually this player is one in the same).

Add to the fact that sideboards are only really 10-11 cards (as you MUST run Ichorid hate even though it's metagame presence is low) and you have a difficult nut to crack. Fortunately, most Vintage players seem to like a challenge 

Sideboarding goes back to metagaming.  You should never have the mindset of 'I must have these cards for this deck every tourney'.  What if that deck doesn't show?  Going into every tourney with the exact same board usually spells disaster in a healthy format.  The beauty of a diverse metagame is that it forces you to think about what you think will show and what you think is worth siding for in a specific tourney.

The current state of this format hasn't exactly pushed those limits of metagaming because of the dominance of gush and the fact that its same main conteders always show up.  Almost every deck has the exact same boarding principles behind it:
You pack some stax hate, some ichorid hate and whatever you think is proper hate for gush decks.  The problem is those gush decks are so good and they can hit you in a multitude of ways just getting past whatever you have in the board.  Cards that deal with Gush tendrils usually won't deal with GAT... and vice versa.  So then what?  You pack 10 cards for 2 decks based around the same 8 cards?  Boo-Hiss.  :p

Again, there's absolutely nothing wrong with there being a best deck and being forced to metagame against that best deck... but when you metagame against the best deck and it still runs wild for months on end that sends a message of 'you should play this or else.'  I guess you could argue that no one has been properly metagaming against Gush decks up until this past weekend... but I don't buy that.  The archtype still did fine, it just didn't completely own the room as it had for the past large events.

I have said from the start that whenever you choose not to play the perceived best deck or best cards you can play with, you put yourself at a clear disadvantage.   What people gloss over very often is that having a disadvantage in deck power is perfectly OK and often times negligible if whatever you chose to play can still put up a fight against whatever the perceived bully is in the format at that time.  Right now the bully is Gush... but you aren't fighting just him.  You're fighting 8 of him.  So if you think you can just let the knowledge of your deck or perhaps your playskill edge help you in getting your lunch money back from him... get used to not eating at school :p

You can't have a format where players are forced to run a single archtype or else they're just playing on a different field.  Steve quoted the Krouner article where having a clear best deck such as affinity was fine because the better affinity player would just win... that may very well be true, but who wants to play in that environment?.  I was at GP New Jersey (the GP referenced in the Krouner article) and I saw 60% of the room (roughly 400 players+) playing affinity and it made me sick to my stomach.  I had a similar feeling watching the coverage of GP Philly earlier this year and seeing 500 fish/flash go at it every round (didn't go to that one because it was clearly going to be a mess).  When you have over 50% of the room playing one-two decks in a 100+ person tourney, that's almost always due to the format being warped.

Vintage isn't currently at the stage that I just described.  It isn't clearly 'gush or no' and people are choosing to play the decks they want to play for the most part... the issue is that up until this weekend that freedom of deck choice hasn't done much to stop Gush/Merchant scroll from clearly being the best weapons to duel with.

At this point I'm thinking only one thing can truly stop gush/merchant scroll dominance... Ron Paul.

- Dave Feinstein

[Implacable]

So we want a deck that can beat the metagame.  Fine.  But a truism that applies to life in general and Magic specifically is that you can't have your cake and eat it too.  You can beat the metagame, but you can't beat the metagame and the spoilers.  If the field is filled with a mix of top decks and spoilers, then the only reasonable thing to do is play an objectively powerful deck and then make yourself really good at all the matchups.  Obviously, playing a spoiler is too risky, because of the spoiler v. spoiler effect, where the outcomes are unpredictable as a result of the high degree of customization found in spoilers (as opposed to top decks).  Consequently, an evenly distributed and varied field is the most skill-intensive one,  because those who can outplay their opponents when deck power is equal have the biggest advantage. 

However, it should be noted that R/G beats won Day 1 of the SCG.  Is R/G beats an objectively powerful strategy, relative to Type 1?  No, of course not.  What happened, then, was the R/G player hitting the equivalent of the lottery - his deck could not possibly have had great matchups against random spoilers (like Oath), but it was great against the Big 3 of Stax, Gush, and Flash, and he managed to hit those matchups and then rock the Top 8 (to where the good decks had naturally floated).

[OwenTheEnchanter]

So we want a deck that can beat the metagame.  Fine.  But a truism that applies to life in general and Magic specifically is that you can't have your cake and eat it too.  You can beat the metagame, but you can't beat the metagame and the spoilers.  If the field is filled with a mix of top decks and spoilers, then the only reasonable thing to do is play an objectively powerful deck and then make yourself really good at all the matchups.  Obviously, playing a spoiler is too risky, because of the spoiler v. spoiler effect, where the outcomes are unpredictable as a result of the high degree of customization found in spoilers (as opposed to top decks).  Consequently, an evenly distributed and varied field is the most skill-intensive one,  because those who can outplay their opponents when deck power is equal have the biggest advantage. 

However, it should be noted that R/G beats won Day 1 of the SCG.  Is R/G beats an objectively powerful strategy, relative to Type 1?  No, of course not.  What happened, then, was the R/G player hitting the equivalent of the lottery - his deck could not possibly have had great matchups against random spoilers (like Oath), but it was great against the Big 3 of Stax, Gush, and Flash, and he managed to hit those matchups and then rock the Top 8 (to where the good decks had naturally floated).

MASTERFUL! I couldn't possibly have put it better myself, this Implacable guy knows his stuff!

[Titanium Dragon]

Of course not! It's just lame when you pick up a deck with a great GAT, Stax, and Flash matchup, and then get paired against Oath, Landstill, and Goblins. This isn't from personal experiance, as I've recently been having a lot of success at the local level, but I've seen it happen time and time again to friends playing strong metagame decks.

That is not lame; that is called bad metagaming. You can't build a metagame deck in a highly diverse format precisely because it doesn't have a small enough meta to meta against. If you have a good mix of archetypes, and a good mix of decklists, then a "meta deck" won't work because the very premise of a meta deck is that it hoses a certain deck or subset of decks. Its your own fault if you bring the wrong meta deck to a tournament, or bring a meta deck into a diverse meta, and lose horribly.

You pack some stax hate, some ichorid hate and whatever you think is proper hate for gush decks.  The problem is those gush decks are so good and they can hit you in a multitude of ways just getting past whatever you have in the board.  Cards that deal with Gush tendrils usually won't deal with GAT... and vice versa.  So then what?  You pack 10 cards for 2 decks based around the same 8 cards?

Oh, you can hate out Gush. To be honest, the more I look at it, the less impressed I am with the deck. The deck runs 15 lands, yet needs every land it gets because otherwise Gush doesn't work, and Gush can't get too ridiculous without a Fastbond out before turn 4 or so. If people really didn't want Gush decks to win, they'd run wastelands and strip mines, and possibly some hand/land hate besides. I doubt GAT would enjoy facing a deck like that because it makes it difficult to actually use Gush effectively. And, if you look at the T8s, you'll see some people did apply that strategy - several decks had a number of strip effects in them, some as many as the full five. Maybe people just hate running LD, but LD is not Gush's friend, especially coupled with a second form of disruption or a fast clock.

Ichorid is a stronger deck than Gush is; you have to run a huge amount of hate to stop its game plan, otherwise it will walk over and kick you in the nuts. But few people complain that every sideboard includes 4-6 pieces of Ichorid hate, and some decks even MD a fair amount of it, just to fight that deck. Sure, hosing Will occaisionally with Leylines is nice, but right now that's largely incidental as compared to stopping Ichorid from running you over (and to hose Flash, which is an added bonus). Do you think if everyone suddenly decided they never again wanted to lose to Gush that Gush would do as well as Ichorid does? I doubt it.

[LordHomerCat]

Ichorid is a stronger deck than Gush is; you have to run a huge amount of hate to stop its game plan, otherwise it will walk over and kick you in the nuts. But few people complain that every sideboard includes 4-6 pieces of Ichorid hate, and some decks even MD a fair amount of it, just to fight that deck. Sure, hosing Will occaisionally with Leylines is nice, but right now that's largely incidental as compared to stopping Ichorid from running you over (and to hose Flash, which is an added bonus). Do you think if everyone suddenly decided they never again wanted to lose to Gush that Gush would do as well as Ichorid does? I doubt it.

You must be joking.  Ichorid is stronger than Gush decks?  Have you played vintage before?  Have you looked at top8 slots and tournament wins lately?  Remember Indy, where Gush beat out Ichorid 7-1 in the top 8?  Or even this weekend, where Gro posted 3 top 8's and Ichorid posted none?  Or pretty much just vintage in general where maybe one lucky ichorid squeaks into most top8's, and Gush has been the best performing deck by an appreciable margin?  There are a ton of people who metagame heavily against Gro, running 9 spheres and powder kegs and full wastelands and gorilla shamans and magus of the moon and all kinds of hate for Gro and still lose.  Thats a lot more than 4-6 cards post-board against Ichorid.  Maybe the reason you think people aren't trying to hate out Gush decks is because Gush is not some terrible linear decision-scarce strategy that basically can't do anything without its graveyard in tact?  To "never again lose to Gush" you have to be able to deal with huge monsters for 2 mana, Yawgmoth's Will, the best counterbase in the format, the best draw engine in the format, a terrific tutor engine that finds them as many answers as they choose to run, and a surprisingly solid manabase because of all the draw and cantrips and the low curve?  Not to mention, by nature of only running 18 mana sources, vs 25 or more in things like Slaver and up to 30+ in Tendrils, you are practically assured to just straight up draw spells more often.

I'm not trying to be a jerk, but you don't seem to have any actual knowledge of Vintage and I would prefer if you didn't make these outlandish and flat-out false statements as they might mislead people who don't realize that you're wrong.

[nataz]

To be fair, ichorid *is* certainly a stronger deck game 1. Of course magic is a game of matches, and decks are 75, not 60 cards deep, but I think ichorid does highlight an interesting point. Sideboards matter very much in vintage.

There are a ton of people who metagame heavily against Gro, running 9 spheres and powder kegs and full wastelands and gorilla shamans and magus of the moon and all kinds of hate for Gro and still lose

 

While you have a very pretty looking list of "hate" cards, im not sure they are all that relevent. I mean, what competitive deck runs 9 sphere effects? And while mangus is certainly a powerful card, wasteland/shaman is much less scary to Gat then Leyline + Jailer is to Ichorid.

I think the point T-Dragon is trying to make is that many decks devote 4-6 slots to beating ichorid, and ichorid only, whereas very few decks seems to devote that many slots to a single-minded beating of GaT. Your list of hate cards is only a relevent analogy once almost every deck starts with a sideboard of 4x mangus of the moon + 2x powder keg.

All this said, Gat is still a "better" deck to bring to most meta-games, although Ichorid would be a great choice to bring to a GaT infested meta-game. 
 

[hvndr3d y34r h3x]

I wouldn't say RG beats hit the lottery, the stax match up is apparently 50/50 (or so I'm told), and I believe he did get matched up against oath and still took it home. Like the rest of the top 8, it was just good players doing well with deck's they play often.

[Titanium Dragon]

To be fair, ichorid *is* certainly a stronger deck game 1. Of course magic is a game of matches, and decks are 75, not 60 cards deep, but I think ichorid does highlight an interesting point. Sideboards matter very much in vintage.

This was indeed my point; it wasn't "you should be playing Ichorid" but rather "Ichorid is an inherently stronger, if more hosable (and hosed) deck".

There are a ton of people who metagame heavily against Gro, running 9 spheres and powder kegs and full wastelands and gorilla shamans and magus of the moon and all kinds of hate for Gro and still lose

I dunno about "still lose"; stax does that, and it can certainly win if it goes nuts on its GAT hate. I've seen a few T8 stax decks recently who basically went with 6+ spheres, a full or near-full complement of strip effects, and the odd keg or barbarian ring. There is also that RG deck, which runs Magus of the Moon, Tin-Street Hooligans, and a bunch of strip effects and some burn as well to keep those Dryads off the board. I mean, it is pretty clear that GAT is hatable, and a lot of that hate is much more powerful in general than Ichorid hate, which tends to be a lot worse against random decks. There really aren't many decks that Magus of the Moon or Strip effects are bad against, but there's plenty of decks that don't really mind a turn 0 leyline. I think that as time goes on, hate will increase for the deck.

All this said, Gat is still a "better" deck to bring to most meta-games, although Ichorid would be a great choice to bring to a GaT infested meta-game. 

Oh, I agree.

[DarkfnTemplar]

Ichorid is a stronger deck than Gush is; you have to run a huge amount of hate to stop its game plan, otherwise it will walk over and kick you in the nuts. But few people complain that every sideboard includes 4-6 pieces of Ichorid hate, and some decks even MD a fair amount of it, just to fight that deck. Sure, hosing Will occaisionally with Leylines is nice, but right now that's largely incidental as compared to stopping Ichorid from running you over (and to hose Flash, which is an added bonus). Do you think if everyone suddenly decided they never again wanted to lose to Gush that Gush would do as well as Ichorid does? I doubt it.

You must be joking.  Ichorid is stronger than Gush decks?  Have you played vintage before?  Have you looked at top8 slots and tournament wins lately?  Remember Indy, where Gush beat out Ichorid 7-1 in the top 8?  Or even this weekend, where Gro posted 3 top 8's and Ichorid posted none?  Or pretty much just vintage in general where maybe one lucky ichorid squeaks into most top8's, and Gush has been the best performing deck by an appreciable margin?  There are a ton of people who metagame heavily against Gro, running 9 spheres and powder kegs and full wastelands and gorilla shamans and magus of the moon and all kinds of hate for Gro and still lose.  Thats a lot more than 4-6 cards post-board against Ichorid.  Maybe the reason you think people aren't trying to hate out Gush decks is because Gush is not some terrible linear decision-scarce strategy that basically can't do anything without its graveyard in tact?  To "never again lose to Gush" you have to be able to deal with huge monsters for 2 mana, Yawgmoth's Will, the best counterbase in the format, the best draw engine in the format, a terrific tutor engine that finds them as many answers as they choose to run, and a surprisingly solid manabase because of all the draw and cantrips and the low curve?  Not to mention, by nature of only running 18 mana sources, vs 25 or more in things like Slaver and up to 30+ in Tendrils, you are practically assured to just straight up draw spells more often.

I'm not trying to be a jerk, but you don't seem to have any actual knowledge of Vintage and I would prefer if you didn't make these outlandish and flat-out false statements as they might mislead people who don't realize that you're wrong.

How many people played ichorid at indy... Oh.....1
How many people played gush at indy...50%
gush had 5 not 7 of the top 8
(Have you read before?)
Flash has the best counterbase
Did I miss anything else you falsely claimed?
if gush didn't put up those numbers based on shear population and odds alone, It would have to be a shitter.
Ichorid has a semi favorable match up versus gush depending on the sb.
As far as what deck is stronger, probably gush. However, if i could guarantee a bazaar in my opening hand, id say ichorid. The only thing that stop ichorid from being the best deck in the format is its inconsistency.
And Yes, I have played vintage before, so that argument wont work either (although its a character attack and not an arguement.)

[Vegeta2711]

gush had 5 not 7 of the top 8

http://sales.starcitygames.com/deckdatabase/deckshow.php?&t%5BC1%5D=vin&start_date=2007-09-16&end_date=2007-09-16&city=Indianapolis

Take a good look there, that's seven Gush decks.

However, if i could guarantee a bazaar in my opening hand, id say ichorid. The only thing that stop ichorid from being the best deck in the format is its inconsistency.

If I could guarantee a Lotus in my hand I'd say Long.  To post purely to point out 'false claims', you sure set yourself up to not be taken seriously.

[OwenTheEnchanter]

Ichorid has a semi favorable match up versus gush depending on the sb.

Never thought of it that way.

[Demonic Attorney]

Snarky personal attacks don't do very much to foster productive discussion.  Just in case anyone here forgot.

[LordHomerCat]

How many people played ichorid at indy... Oh.....1
How many people played gush at indy...50%
gush had 5 not 7 of the top 8
Flash has the best counterbase

Actually, if you had attended SCG Indianapolis, you would have seen that there was actually a LOT of ichorid around.  I played it twice in 5 rounds, for instance.  There were lots of people who just showed up because they lived in the area and could build a vintage deck for $40 (Ichorid), which made it an extraordinarily large part of the metagame compared to its normal status. 

Also, there is no chance Gush decks were 50%, and I have no idea where you get those numbers from.  I would be surprised if Gro comprised more than 25-30% of the total field, and that's probably a high estimate but I didn't actually count up archetypes at the tourney. 

Flash may have the best counterbase when it comes to resolving the spell Flash, but in any other instance Gro is much better at stopping the opponent from going crazy.  Between duress, force, Misd, reb, drain, disrupt, and thoughtseize, Gro has the best options for using stack and hand control to keep the opponent from doing whatever they want, and only a slightly lower ability to force through its own stuff (altho also no chance of losing to its own counterspells).

[SyntheticAngel]

Ichorid is a stronger deck than Gush is; you have to run a huge amount of hate to stop its game plan, otherwise it will walk over and kick you in the nuts. But few people complain that every sideboard includes 4-6 pieces of Ichorid hate, and some decks even MD a fair amount of it, just to fight that deck. Sure, hosing Will occaisionally with Leylines is nice, but right now that's largely incidental as compared to stopping Ichorid from running you over (and to hose Flash, which is an added bonus). Do you think if everyone suddenly decided they never again wanted to lose to Gush that Gush would do as well as Ichorid does? I doubt it.

You must be joking.  Ichorid is stronger than Gush decks?  Have you played vintage before?  Have you looked at top8 slots and tournament wins lately?  Remember Indy, where Gush beat out Ichorid 7-1 in the top 8?  Or even this weekend, where Gro posted 3 top 8's and Ichorid posted none?  Or pretty much just vintage in general where maybe one lucky ichorid squeaks into most top8's, and Gush has been the best performing deck by an appreciable margin?  There are a ton of people who metagame heavily against Gro, running 9 spheres and powder kegs and full wastelands and gorilla shamans and magus of the moon and all kinds of hate for Gro and still lose.  Thats a lot more than 4-6 cards post-board against Ichorid.  Maybe the reason you think people aren't trying to hate out Gush decks is because Gush is not some terrible linear decision-scarce strategy that basically can't do anything without its graveyard in tact?  To "never again lose to Gush" you have to be able to deal with huge monsters for 2 mana, Yawgmoth's Will, the best counterbase in the format, the best draw engine in the format, a terrific tutor engine that finds them as many answers as they choose to run, and a surprisingly solid manabase because of all the draw and cantrips and the low curve?  Not to mention, by nature of only running 18 mana sources, vs 25 or more in things like Slaver and up to 30+ in Tendrils, you are practically assured to just straight up draw spells more often.

I'm not trying to be a jerk, but you don't seem to have any actual knowledge of Vintage and I would prefer if you didn't make these outlandish and flat-out false statements as they might mislead people who don't realize that you're wrong.

How many people played ichorid at indy... Oh.....1
How many people played gush at indy...50%
gush had 5 not 7 of the top 8
(Have you read before?)
Flash has the best counterbase
Did I miss anything else you falsely claimed?
if gush didn't put up those numbers based on shear population and odds alone, It would have to be a shitter.
Ichorid has a semi favorable match up versus gush depending on the sb.
As far as what deck is stronger, probably gush. However, if i could guarantee a bazaar in my opening hand, id say ichorid. The only thing that stop ichorid from being the best deck in the format is its inconsistency.
And Yes, I have played vintage before, so that argument wont work either (although its a character attack and not an arguement.)

Gush doesn't only get in by shear numbers. A number of the best players in Vintage have chosen to pick up the deck. Gush is a hard deck to play, but is superior in the hands of a good player. At Chicago you saw players who were playing Gush at the top tables and at the bottom because the deck is hard to play well. Play skill gives you an edge while playing many decks, but playing Gush is pretty hard. Anyone can play Ichorid, or a deck with Bazaars and Squees. Decks like those have little room for play error, but you still misplayed.

[Suicideking]

I personally played against ichorid rounds 1 and 2 with empty gush and none of my sideboarded games were even close.  the fact you can just combo out on Ichorid freely makes the matchup not that tough.

[DarkfnTemplar]

I was thinking of gencon indy, sorry.
Yes, I know SCG indy had 7, I totally forgot about scg indy. Yes, there was a shit load of ichorid there too, but 95% were horrible players (myself included). Comparing ichorid players (who can't usually afford blue duals, drains, power, etc.) to gush players at a proxy event is a bit unfair. Ichorid is the deck you are goign to play if you dont have the cards. Period. Therefore, the skill level of the gush players will (should) be a lot better.
Lotus in longs opening is in no way comparable to a bazaar in ichorids opening. Lotus does not win the game. Disruption/counters hits lotus or its buisness (Im not saying you should counter lotus). A bazaar in ichorids opening hand is more powerful. There are more counters and discard effects that kill long than wastelands and needles that stop bazaar (but still after one acivation!)

The only deck that is linear with bazaars is ichorid. Stax, Dawn, and CS have lots of room for play error.

@ Cat, I agree with the disruption as a whole. Gat certainly has that.

@Owen and any other downy- You should know this, but Ill go ahead and say it. Ichorid will face only three cards against gat. Needle, Leyline, or Jailer (singularity is just another enchantment, so I dont count it) Pure leyline is favorable. Jailer/ needle is slightly bad. All three is look on someones face when they lose to the worst vintage player ever.

Addressing posters you disagree with as "downy" violates Rule 2, Inflammatory Posting.  Because you were already asked to stop and persisted anyway, I'm giving you a Full Warning.  Please read the forum rules before continuing to post.  We'd hate to lose your insightful posts so early on in your TMD membership.  -DA

[zeus-online]

Ichorid is the deck you are goign to play if you dont have the cards. Period. Therefore, the skill level of the gush players will (should) be a lot better.

This just dosn't make sense to me...Money does not make you good at magic...This is so wrong on so many levels.

Lotus in longs opening is in no way comparable to a bazaar in ichorids opening. Lotus does not win the game.

This is also wrong, lotus is absolutely the best card for long to have in the opening hand - And for most other decks for that matter...Lotus swings the game so heavily that it definetly wins the game.....Yawgmoth's will, ancestral recall  and time walk does not technically win the game either, but you wouldn't say that will dosnt win, would you?

Disruption/counters hits lotus or its buisness (Im not saying you should counter lotus).

Another error, sometimes it's correct to counter lotus...Especially against combo.

Now, i won't go into GAT vs. Ichorid....As i honestly have no idea since i've barely played T1 since the meta became Flash/Ichorid/GAT/"Stax"/randomdeckswhichsomepeoplethinkaregood.

/Zeus

[ErkBek]

Ichorid is the deck you are goign to play if you dont have the cards. Period. Therefore, the skill level of the gush players will (should) be a lot better.

This just dosn't make sense to me...Money does not make you good at magic...This is so wrong on so many levels.

I think what DarkfnTemplar means is people with little vintage experience (whether new to magic or quality ptq player) have a much higher chance of running Ichorid than Gush because of budget restrictions. Often times when people run ichorid it is for 1 of 2 reasons: either they lack format knowledge or a new to the game. In either case, they aren't on the same level as an experienced Gush player.

[zeus-online]

That's true, i just dislike that argument...It's true that most people who own power are more committed to the format then people who don't - But money/cards still has nothing to do with playskill.

I think it's true that ichorid players are generally worse then GAT pilots, since Ichorid is about the easiest deck to play it's often the correct deck choice for a worse player, while GAT rewards good play and thus good players play it. I just don't like the argument that it's because of money.

/Zeus

[OwenTheEnchanter]

Vintage players on a budget choose Fish just as often as they choose Ichorid as their weapon of choice.

Ichorid never wins a tournament for a reason, because yes LEYLINE IS STOPPABLE you devoted your 15 card sideboard to include lands and Disenchant so your all good right? not a chance, Leyline comes down and you have to spend 5 turns trying to remove it and in that time I can use my deck manipulation to either stockpile counters and continue to make Leyline unbeatable or I can execute my decks game plan: get Platinum Angel Out, attack with Phyrexian Dreadnaught twice, or play Fastbond + Gush.

[DarkfnTemplar]

Ichorid is the deck you are goign to play if you dont have the cards. Period. Therefore, the skill level of the gush players will (should) be a lot better.

This just dosn't make sense to me...Money does not make you good at magic...This is so wrong on so many levels.

Lotus in longs opening is in no way comparable to a bazaar in ichorids opening. Lotus does not win the game.

This is also wrong, lotus is absolutely the best card for long to have in the opening hand - And for most other decks for that matter...Lotus swings the game so heavily that it definetly wins the game.....Yawgmoth's will, ancestral recall  and time walk does not technically win the game either, but you wouldn't say that will dosnt win, would you?

Disruption/counters hits lotus or its buisness (Im not saying you should counter lotus).

Another error, sometimes it's correct to counter lotus...Especially against combo.

Now, i won't go into GAT vs. Ichorid....As i honestly have no idea since i've barely played T1 since the meta became Flash/Ichorid/GAT/"Stax"/randomdeckswhichsomepeoplethinkaregood.

/Zeus

I never said that having cards meant you were a better player. What I was implying was that good players have the cards (unless your Eric Becker, then you just get the cards from your mates because you are vintage master) When you start magic, you usually dont have a playset of every staple in the format and players who are very good don't usually win moxes. Being good at magic gets you money, i think you misunderstood me in your haste to dissagree with me.
I was simply stating that amount of expensive staples is correlated to play skill. Not causation.

Its rare that you would counter lotus versus combo. Id rather counter the card in their hand that lets them win, not something that can rebuild from after a couple of turns and catch me off guard. Long can produce mana from +10 sources ( a very modest estimate), its win has 8 outs, tops. (Necro, bargain, will, desire, draw 7), most of which get countered.

Yawg will wins the game. Thats why its called yawg win, yawg will kill, etc. Lotus is amazing, but other cards do the same job for the basic kill, one which is a 4 of.

Lotus doesn't kill, and isn't necessary for the kill. Yawg will will be for most combo kills.

Fish is still more expensive than ichorid.
I dedicate 7 spots to lelyine in the sb. Im sure Ichorid will see a top 8 soon. (as long as they are not playing chalice of the void)

Fianlly, I would like to apologize for the downy comment. I see that I'll have to be a bit more subtle next time.