Is Flash Really That Good?

[forests failed you]

Firstly, let me step up onto my soapbox:

Trinisphere wasn't exactly a poor performer in its day either.  Trinistax was one of the best performing decks in the format at that time.  Magic is actually more fun when there are not random "oops I win and there is nothing you can do about it" decks in the format.  When Trinisphere was allowed as a four of many, many games of Vintage were decided by:
 
"Do you have Force of Will for my Trinisphere?" 
"No." 
"Okay, you don't get to play spells for three turns and if I have anything better than complete garbage in my hand you lose."

The main difference between Trinistax and Flash is: 

"Do you have Force of Will?" 
"No" 
"Okay, you actually lose."

And a bit of editorializing:

In my opinion (and you are free to disagree) Magic is at its best when two players actually get to play the game against one another.  I have the most fun playing the game of Magic when I win--and so does everybody else, which is the problem, but I will get back to that.  Let me do something first..

My hierarchy of how I have the most fun (am most happy) after a game I played at a Magic tournament:

1.  When I play a really interactive game where my opponent and I both engage in an epic battle of strategy and at the end I prevail.  We both cast lots of spells, I have to think about things, and the battle is hard fought.  And I win!  (point being my opponent and I did something that felt like playing a strategy game)

2.  I win by completely blowing my opponent out with the nuts and he has nothing.  He is a goldfish.

3.  I lose a really interactive game where my opponent beats me after a hard fought struggle.  Maybe he catches some cards at the end to put him over the top, maybe I make a tactical blunder, maybe he makes an awesome play or has a card I'm not expecting.  I lose, but it was hard fought and I feel as though my opponent earned it.

4. I get blown out in a deck where I have cards that do things--but my opponent's strategy is so fast and unfair I don't even get to play.  For instance I play against a Workshop and he Trinispheres me--I don't have Force of Will and lose.  My opponent activates Bazaar of Baghdad and passes, I play a land on my turn, and the next turn he puts his whole deck in the bin, Cabal Therepys me three times, and attacks for lethal ( I even had a Force of Will in my opening hand, damnit!!).  My opponent plays a Mox, a land, and casts Flash.  I cast Force of Will, he plays Pact of Negation and I die.

Two trends I noticed when I thought about what makes me happy in tournament Magic:

1.  Everybody enjoys winning more than losing.
2.  (I will not be so bold as to claim everybody feels this way, but I do), I am happier about winning or losing when I feel as though I played and played hard--more so than when I blow somebody out with the nuts, or am blown out with the nuts.

All of that being said:

We are all guilty A holes because our desire to win encourages us to play decks that don't lose.  (stay with me here).  I would rather win with the nuts than get blown out by the nuts--because of that fact I will select a deck that has the best chance to win--which is very likely to be the most powerful deck, or even the most unfairly overpowered deck so that I can win rather than lose.

Because this is the case people play decks that are outrageously powerful in tournaments and they play their casual decks (my beloved peasant highlander deck!) for fun with their friends.  It is a player's responsibility to select the best deck that will allow them to win the event, and it is often a wise choice to select the most unfair and overpowered deck for such an effort.  However, it is the DCI's responsibility to ensure that attending a Magic tournament is fun, fair, and as pleasant an experience for everybody who attends.

If playing against turn one kill decks that say
 "Force of Will?" "
Yes"  "Okay, Pact... Kill you."  Or,
"Trinisphere, do you have the Force?"  "No."

Was something that people would do for fun, without the incentive of trying to win a tournament--we wouldn't even need Magic cards because we could sit at home and play:  flip a coin for money.  The difference here is that most people who choose to play Magic, and attend the events, do so because the genuinely enjoy playing the game.  It is up to the DCI to make sure that the game is fun to play, and I suppose it is up to the players to find ways to make the games as unfair and unenjoyable as possible.  What I am getting at here is:  that when things get to the point where it isn't fun because a specific card consistently creates a situation where players on a wide scale feel that they were cheated out of getting to play the game; or, that some aspect of the game is unreasonably unfair--that the DCI should find a way to correct that problem and create an setting where people's expectations of having fun playing a game are fulfilled.

On a final note, I played in an Extended PTQ yesterday in Detroit and after one of the rounds I was standing outside smoking in a group of no less than 20 people all of whom were complaining about how much they hate the Dredge deck--and all of their horror stories about getting blown out of games where they didn't even get to play and there was nothing they could do about getting killed.  I played against the deck yesterday and in the second game I played a Sakura Tribe Elder, and 2 Tormod's Crypts on the first turn.  I hit two bridges with the Elder, and Crypted him twice and still couldn't win the game.  On the third turn I played a Tarmogoyf.  I didn't win because all that hate still wasn't enough.  On his first Dredge he put 4 Narcoaemobas into play and started bashing me too fast to race.

Is that good for Magic?  Maybe, I didn't feel very good about it.  The twenty other people complaining about how awful it was that the deck continues to exist didn't like it.  As a person who plays in events, supports the game, and buys the cards I feel as though Wizards and the DCI has failed me as a consumer when they allow things that are so obviously ridiculous to occur on a consistent basis at events that I pay to play in.

A quick hypothetical (and this has nothing to do with Dredge or Flash or anything real, but is merely just a thinking out loud to make you the reader think): 

If Wizards printed a promo card that was only legal in Vintage that said:

Artifact
Casting cost: 0
T and sacrifice:  You win the game.  Your opponent may reveal a White card from their hand, if they do you instead lose the game.

Would you:

Play 4 of it.
Play a deck with a lot of white cards.
Play with it and white cards.
Play your pet deck.
Play another format until it got banned.

Obviously, that would never happen.  It is just that I have been playing a lot of constructed Magic lately and I've been sussing out some of these ideas, and hopefully my thinking will inspire somebody else to think.  I'm not looking for agreement--but a little thinking never hurt anybody.






With all of that being said:

IMO:  Flash is the most unfair, absurdly powerful, and non interactive deck in the history of Vintage.

I have been playing a lot of games with and against Flash lately with my play testing partners.  In my experience Flash is extremely powerful and extremely consistent.  Especially, with the new Revelark based win, the deck has become even faster and even more powerful.  The ability to use Pact of Negation to counter Force of Will on the first turn in order to Tutor for Flash is completely insane--since you can just go off and win with the 'lose the game' trigger on the stack at instant speed.  

To say that Flash is extremely powerful might be a drastic understatement.  I have been playing Vintage competitively for many years now:  I played against 4 Gush GAT when it was dominant back in the day, and I played the real Long.dec before it got a whole laundry list of cards restricted.  In spite of that I am going to go out on a limb here:

I think that the new "Flash" deck might be the most powerful/consistent deck in the history of Vintage

There, I said it, I stand by it, and you all can hold me to it if I'm wrong...

In the next few months I predict that the following will happen:  Flash will become dominant, or the metagame will try and correct itself by playing slews of Flash hate in order to keep it under control.

However, from the testing I've did with Chapin, LSV and Windfall last week I have every reason to believe that:

1.  Flash is by far the most powerful deck in Vintage right now.
2.  Flash will be the best performing deck in the next few months.
3.  If you play against Flash at the next Vintage event you attend (and are not also playing Flash) that you will lose.
4.  We will very likely see Flash restricted in the near future, because it will be the best deck in the format.

Flash is already one of the best performing decks in the format (based on the data from Steve's last article) and it just got a lot better.

Feel free to disagree with me--it is impossible to be right or wrong about the issue of Flash right now.  It will take time and tournament results before we will know whether Flash is going to become out of control or not.  All I am trying to share with you guys is that based upon the games I've played with my friends that the new Flash deck is completely outrageous powerful.

This post is just my prediction based upon what I have seen and played against so far.  However, I am of the opinion that Flash may very well edge out Long.deck as the most unfair and powerful deck the format has ever seen.

[Shock Wave]

It is just that I have been playing a lot of constructed Magic lately and I've been sussing out some of these ideas, and hopefully my thinking will inspire somebody else to think.  I'm not looking for agreement--but a little thinking never hurt anybody.

I'd like to extend my thanks to you for taking the time to post your thoughts, 95% of which I agree with and relate to as a player, especially that little blurb about when you have the most fun during a match. For me, it is equally satisfying to blow out my opponent as it is to lose a hard fought match. I'm not saying that to try to be holier than thou, but personally, this really dirty sensation comes over me after having ass raped some hapless opponent that had barely finished drawing their cards. By the same token, it has happened on occasion that I've lost a match, but my opponent made some really tight plays and pulled off a nail biter. These matches leave me thinking to myself, "Damn, that was a good one!". Winning is good and all, but shitting all over my opponent definitely leaves something to be desired.

As for Flash being the best deck ever, I'm not entirely sold on that. I think it's possible, but I'm not sure. What I feel very strongly about is everything you've articulated regarding the signs of degeneracy in Vintage and other formats; namely the blatant apathy towards player interaction.

Thanks again for sharing.

[forests failed you]

It is just that I have been playing a lot of constructed Magic lately and I've been sussing out some of these ideas, and hopefully my thinking will inspire somebody else to think.  I'm not looking for agreement--but a little thinking never hurt anybody.

I'd like to extend my thanks to you for taking the time to post your thoughts, 95% of which I agree with and relate to as a player, especially that little blurb about when you have the most fun during a match. For me, it is equally satisfying to blow out my opponent as it is to lose a hard fought match. I'm not saying that to try to be holier than thou, but personally, this really dirty sensation comes over me after having ass raped some hapless opponent that had barely finished drawing their cards. By the same token, it has happened on occasion that I've lost a match, but my opponent made some really tight plays and pulled off a nail biter. These matches leave me thinking to myself, "Damn, that was a good one!". Winning is good and all, but I shitting all over my opponent definitely leaves something to be desired.

As for Flash being the best deck ever, I'm not entirely sold on that. I think it's possible, but I'm not sure. What I feel very strongly about is everything you've articulated regarding the signs of degeneracy in Vintage and other formats; namely the blatant apathy towards player interaction.

Thanks again for sharing.

Just to clarify something

The hierarchy is when I have the most overall sense of joy at a tournament

I am happiest when I am 3-0 and not 2-1 having lost two really tough but hard fought matches.

However, as far as while I am playing a match of Magic I am happier during while I am playing a close hard fought battle than when I am blowing somebody out; If that makes sense?

For instance, if I am playing my CS deck against Goblins and we battle back and forth; he plays some guys, I counter some guys, I make a robot, he blows it up and Wastelands my land, I'm at 5 life trying to stabilize and get killed.

as opposed to:

I am playing against Ichorid and open up with Leyline of the Void and Tormod's Crypt and they are just cold.

I had more fun playing my game against Goblins and losing than playing a non-game of Magic against Dredge and winning.
However, I am always happiest in general (especially in between rounds) when I am winning.

I find it to be an absolute chore to play test with or against Dredge or Flash because it really isn't even like playing a game of Vintage, or even Magic in general.  Perhaps I am just an old timer and the game has changed.  Perhaps, I need to adapt more and redefine what it means to 'play a game of Magic.'  Perhaps, just Dredging one's graveyard, making Narcoaemobas, and casting Dread Return--or on the flip side, Drawing Tormod's Crypts and Leyline of the Voids is good clean fun Magic...  It obviously isn't my decision to have it that way, or not to have it that way.  The fact of the matter is that it is a DCI decision that is based upon the general consensus that decides whether or not that is acceptable. 

Its pretty obvious how I feel about it--I think it sucks.

Only time will tell--is 2 mana: kill you good clean fun or downright obnoxious? 

[Anusien]

If everyone seems to think this deck is that ludicrously unfair and good, why play anything else?  Flash tends to be underplayed in a lot of metagames, especially in the hands of skilled pilots.

My theory is that Flash is seen to be braindead, so a lot of the players that think they are good tend to play something else.  It is also a fully powered deck, which means that the unpowered players can't play it.  The powered players tend to think they are good, and play something else.

As an aside, if you go to the random Vintage tournament, what percentage of players think they are better than the average player in the room?  75%?  (Does this number increase if you only ask the players playing Drains?)

[nicofromtokyo]

If everyone seems to think this deck is that ludicrously unfair and good, why play anything else? 

Because it's boring?

Any player (included me) played the deck at least one time in tournament. But all the people I know who played the deck (included me), just didn't want to play it anymore.

My most awful souvenir : last December, Tokaido Vintage tournament in Shizuoka, TOP8 : 4 Flash, TOP4 : 3 Flash, Winner : Flash, the 3 rounds took like 90 minutes...

"I got Flash, you got Fow?"
"No"
"Next?"

"I got Merchant to get Flash, you got Fow?"
"Yeah"
"Anyway I got PoN, Next?"....

[forests failed you]

The Nostalgic Theory for why Vintage players play bad Decks and not Flash and Dredge:

I have a theory that I have been playing around with in my head.

I tried to post it in Steve's "Metagame Report Article" thread and it actually logged me out and I lost it because it took me so long to type it out.

Here is my grand theory on Vintage and the way things are, for better or for worse.

Firstly, I am going to start my argument off by citing my own personal experience.

"I play Vintage for a different reason than I play the other constructed formats, and I approach Vintage in a very different way than I approach the other constructed formats."

For instance, in preparing for the Extended PTQ I tested out a series of different decks trying to figure out which deck I could win the tournament with.  (I lost in the finals, games one and three to my opponent top decking multiple Barbarian Rings when I was at 4 and I had him locked out with a Counterbalance...Dead on board next turn...with outs in my deck that I simply couldn't find before he raw dogged his third ring of the game--but let's not go there).  Anyways, when playing preparing for an Extended PTQ this season I tested trying to find the most unfair deck, with the best match ups, that gave me the best chance to win the entire event.  I picked Next-Level because I felt that it was the deck that was the most unfair and had the best match ups around the board.  However, when I approach a Vintage tournament I do it differently.  I think:  "Well I am playing Control Slaver.  Now, how should I tweak my deck to beat the popular decks."

Do I think that Control Slaver is the most powerful deck in the format?
No.
Do I think it is one of the best five decks in the format?
No.
Do I think that I would have a better chance of winning a SCG P9 event if I played Flash?
Absolutely.

So, obviously I select Control Slaver every single time.

Is it because I don't feel comfortable playing Flash in a big event?
No.
Is it because I have not play tested at least a billion games with Flash?
No.

Then why?  Why am I cursed to play the awful Control Slaver--when I know that I would be more successful with any number of other better decks?

(And yes I am building to a point please bear with me while I ramble at 5:20 in the morning).

Why?  

I play Control Slaver for the glory.

Yes, I'll admit it--I am that guy who shows up playing Keeper with Morphlings because he wants so, so, so, badly for it to be good--because it has all of my favorite cards that I have a nostalgic hard-on for in it.  Mana Drain, Force of Will, Thirst, Brainstorm, Goblin fing Welder, MINDSLAVER!!!  TRISKELAVUS!!!!  TINKER!!!! Seriously, it doesn't get any cooler than that.

For me playing Control Slaver is sort of like when Obi-Wan says in A New Hope of his lightsaber:  "A more elegant weapon from a more civilized time."  Or, something of that nature.

Anyways, I was talking to Smennen on the phone today and I mentioned my theory of Vintage as a casual player's format; and obviously he disagreed with me (Steve, feel free to jump right in and state your argument because it was a good refutal).  Anyways, I don't think that the Vintage scene is different from the PTQ scene, or the pro scene in some ways.  First of all, the Vintage community seems to me much more connected socially than the PTQ scene is.  I have gone to many, many, PTQ's in my life but when I am there I really only recognize maybe 25 of 150 players at an event.  However, at a Vintage tournament of equal size I'll be damned if there are only 25 people who I don't know fairly well.  The reason is that Vintage is much more of a national community of players who are more committed to traveling to events--since they are much more sparse;  PTQ's for the most part are a local phenomenon where the majority of the players at a PTQ in Chicago will be from Chicago, or a Detroit PTQ will be players from Detroit.  SCG Richmond has players driving down from Detroit, Chicago, New York, Coloroado, et cetera.  As a result Vintage players seem to have a much more interconnected sense of community than the other constructed formats maintain.  As a result of this playing and attending a SCG or Waterbury becomes much more of a social event to hang out with friends from out of state, than it is an opportunity to win a Black Lotus.  If I lose who gives a rip--Jeff Anand and I have a long standing tradition of whenever one of us makes a Vintage top eight of going to the bar before the top eight starts and getting crocked so that we'll enjoy the experience more.  

I don't play Vintage to win really... That isn't to say that I don't try to win--because I do, but when I play Vintage I always win regardless of whether I make top eight because I get to kick it with people that I really like to hang out with and only get to see a few times a year.  On the other if I don't make top eight at a PTQ I am always pissed that I wasted a Saturday.  

Anyways that is part I of the argument:

Vintage = Social experience
PTQ = Competitive

Secondly, the fact that I view Vintage as less of a competitive experience that is about going to the tournament where the only thing that matters is 'winning it,' and more of an experience where 'I'm really just there to hang out' leads me to believe that Vintage players may select decks for different reasons than they might select a standard deck.  At a PTQ I'd play Dredge--If I think I can win I'll play Kithkin I don't really care what I play, how fun it is to play, or whether or not I like the artwork on my cards.  However, I would never in a million years play a Dredge deck at a Vintage event.  Nor, would I play Flash (which is a lie--With Revelark Flash is so fucking insane that I probably will play it just because its too insanely powerful not to play.  Thanks Wizards!).

Okay, but within reason I always just play Control Slaver because I like all the cards in the deck and I like playing with them.  I love playing with Mana Drains--They make me all nostalgic for when I played Keeper like 8 years ago and had a blast.  I like playing decks where I get to have a battle of wits with my opponent and the games last longer than 3 turns.  I think that a lot of people choose the Vintage decks that they do for nostalgic purposes--just because they like playing some specific deck.  Look at players like Roland or Kevin who always play Stax, or Ben Carp who always plays Oath, or Eric Becker who always plays Dark Ritual, or Brian DeMars (yeah, I totally did that) who always plays Control Slaver.  These players play these decks because they are the Champions of those decks--they are recognized as the undisputed masters and torch carriers of those decks.  I have a lot of fond memories of my CS decks--It makes me happy when Control Slaver decks win tournaments that I'm not even at.

I play Control Slaver because I like playing it, and I want to make it win; And, if I don't make it win nobody else will.

I'm not saying that everybody is as completely insane as I am--or, that most Vintage players have some kind of unreasonable neurotic connection to their deck of choice.  However, what I will wager is that most people tend to play decks that they like, and even more so in Vintage that PTQ formats since Vintage is more social than competitive.  

It could also be that Vintage players become more attached to their chosen decks because the cards are so damn expensive.  For example, "I paid $800 for this playset of Mishra's Workshop and that is what I own so I'd better get good with it because its an investment."  The same goes for Drains and Dual Lands, or people who own Bazaars--et cetera.  Once you bought it then you own it so might as well play it.

Here is where I am going with all of this:

The fact that people form these nostalgic attachments to decks they like to play--and I feel like the majority of Vintage players I know have this sort of mentality.  "I would prefer to play my pet deck--unless there is something else that is so obviously broken that I have to play it...unless I can come up with a spicy sideboard that beats the best unfair uberpowerful deck..."

Anyways, I am un-derailing that thought:

And here is my thesis statement:

Assuming that because of all the aforementioned reasons Vintage players, more so than PTQ and PT players tend to form nostalgic attachments to their pet decks is it particularly surprising that Dredge and Flash would be perhaps the two most underplayed decks in the format when one considers that

a. The Dredge mechanic is only 2 years old; hardly enough time for people to be Nostalgic for "The good olde days when we used to Dredge."

b. And Flash a card that was only Errata'd to be playable less than a year ago.

Both of these decks tend to do really well when piloted by players who are decent--and for the relatively small amount of people who play these decks they tend to put up really good numbers.  Steve's report showed Flash as one of the top performing decks as of lately.

I think that both Flash and Dredge are probably better decks than they actually get credit for being--because they don't put up the numbers, because they don't get the love, because they are the new kids on the block.

Also, the players who tend to be good at Vintage tend to be those with experience.  The players with experience tend to play the decks they grew up in the format on.  For instance Blue decks that draw cards and play Yawgmoth's Will, or decks that play Dark Ritual and Yawgmoth's Will, or Mishra's Workshop.

Also, could it possibly be that playing Flash or Dredge just doesn't feel like playing Vintage?  After the event Paul Mastriano isn't going to be impressed when I tell him about all of my games that were:  "So I cast Flash, and then Pact of Negation and killed my opponent."  Or, "So, I tapped Bazaar of Baghdad and flashed back Dread Return."  I want stories about bluffing with Drains and Welding out my opponents Smoke Stacks, and welding Solem Similacrum into a Pyrite Spellbomb.  Or, when against Stax I end of turn cast Fire on my opponents one Gorilla Shaman to remove his only blocker and one to the dome, sacrificed my last two lands and attacked my lone permenent--A Solem Similacrum--into the red zone to deliver the last two points of damage.

Also, part of the friendships Vintage players develop with other Vintage players (people that you don't talk to regularly--but go out to dinner with after the event) revolve largely around the games we play.  For instance, PacManXSA or Chris, have an epic Stax V. Slaver match up at every RIW event and we talk about all the games.  It wouldn't feel right if we didn't have our monthly Slaver v. Stax showdown.  

I played against Eric Becker at SCG Virginia in the first round.  We both sit down and lament that we should have to play a good player in the first round and shuffle up.  He says "The only upside is that I have a good match up against you."  I win the die roll and play Dark Ritual into Necropotence and his jaw dropped.  "What is going on??  This is no Mindslaver deck."  He gave me a look that said:  you are supposed to be playing Slaver--Dark Rituals are my deck!"  (I am over overemphasizing, but he was totally surprised).


Anyways, that is my theory and I'm sticking to it.
In conclusion, in general:

IMO Dredge and Flash are the two best decks in the format the don't get played enough because people don't have nostalgic hard-ons for them yet.  Also, Vintage players choose decks based upon what they enjoy playing not based upon what they think is objectively the best deck to win with.  Vintage players will find reasons to talk themselves into playing with bad decks rather than good decks because deep down they want to play their pet decks.

I <3 Control Slaver and Mana Drain and I don't care who knows it.

Cheers.

[fury]

Interesting analysis. According to me, keeping an archetype to improve it in the long term, and fleeing the temptation to play the toptier decks of the moment, is not a bad strategy. The Control Slaver archetype is a strong one. In France, we have a star of this archetype, which makes a lot of top8 with it, even with plenty of Ichorid and Flash in the metagame.

The fact that a lot of players build their deck with Internet doesn't improve the creativity or the hard-work on former archetypes, which are yet still competitive with some adaptations.

[Spacebalzz]

Forest Failure man,

Dude.

Those are some awesome thoughts and I wholeheartedly agree with you.  I guess I wouldn't go to the extreme to say that Vintage is a particularly less competitive format; however, I do believe that there is a tendancy of Vintage players to play a deck that has a lower probability of winning because they know how to play it or have a soft spot for the deck.  Personally, I don't get to play many tournaments (and can't really since I don't have the resources at the moment), but I do often play on MWS.  When I do play online, I never play Dredge or Flash because I'm looking for a fun game thats going to kill an hour or so.  Further, I rarely play GAT or Stax because I'm not really fond of either deck.  Most often I play some Bazaar variant or some mono-blue variant because I find that I have the most fun when playing these decks.  These decks probably aren't the best decks in the format, but I find that they generally spurn the most enjoyable experience for me, even if I lose.  I think that alot of Vintage players probably feel the same way.

You should start a thread with your thoughts.  I'd be interested to see what others have to say.

-Matt

[forests failed you]

It is true that once a player reaches a certain level of expertise with a deck that they would prefer to keep playing that deck if they could tune it in such a way as to make it win.  However, look at PTQ players:  most good ones don't tweak their deck all season long--rather, they look at what the metagame looked like the week before a pick a deck that they think can win the following week.

Another reason we may see the trend of players continuing to play the same decks rather than pick up new decks is that since tournaments are so sparse, with regard to locations and the time that elapses between significant events, it can be much trickier to follow the metagame since it takes longer to define itself.  Its not like where in Extended there are three 150 man events every weekend--which makes it much easier to define what trends are on the rise and which are on the ebb.

[Zherbus]

I don't play Flash or Dredge (or MUD) because I always get boned by the drawbacks of such decks. I can play tightly, but there are some games where the plan just doesn't come together. There are games where the hate was too much. I play other decks, because at least I won't get hated out and I don't need to worry so much about my plan coming together as I do worry about theirs coming together.

I also enjoy blowing out the pseudo-linear decks.

I feel that every Energy Flux or timely Hurkyl's Recall made a Workshop Aggro/MUD player second guess the deck a little more.

I feel that every Ichorid player who couldn't remove Leyline of the Void in time or over-extended into a bad Tormod's Crypt activation lost faith in the deck a little more.

I feel that every Flash player who had to spend a turn to dig for that Chain of Vapor or got bitten by their own Pact trigger learned a small lesson in greed.

And I hope those experiences add up. I like that none of those shutdowns can happen to me. I like the feeling of knowing that I took a player, who wholly had the intentions of not playing Magic with anyone, had to play Magic with me. I like it even better when they didn't like playing Magic with me.

On the flip side, while I should question my deck every time someone beats me when I virtually never got to play, I only need to question the math.

[Toad]

I've played Stax with 4 Trinispheres. I've played Long with 4 Burning Wish and 4 Lion's Eye Diamond. I playtested decks with 4 Mind's Desire before the card got preemptively restricted. I've played 4 Memory Jar, 4 Tolarian Academies or 4 Yawgmoth's Bargains back when these were still constructed legal. I've possibly played most of the broken atrocities that have ever been designed in Magic.

Compared to Flash, all these broken decks are Block decks. Flash is quite possibly the best deck in the history of Magic. The Reveillark kill has pulled the deck to an extreme raw power level.

Flash is still under the radar because everyone has a little Brian Demars in him (get real mate, Slaver is bad!). I'm playing Vintage once every 3 years now so saying I'll stop playing Vintage until Flash is out would be pointless, but well, that's still how I feel :P
Vintage has reached a critical mass in terms of tutoring power. The times where Merchant Scroll was getting Mana Drain or even Ancestral Recall (Draw 3 cards? That's awful... Just win instead!) are far behind us.

Get Flash and (maybe not, but well) Merchant Scroll out of T1 :)

[AngryPheldagrif]

Maybe I'm just biased because of my love for complex mathematics, high quantities of Duress-effects in decks, experience playing against Umezawa's Jitte in CBS drafts, or maybe even all of the above, but I thoroughly enjoy having Flash in the metagame. And I can assure you I have never once piloted the deck in a tournament, so I'm not just arguing for my own benefit.

I believe it was our own beloved Steve Menendian who stated that perhaps Leyline of the Void is becoming the defining card of Vintage, ending the decade-long reign of Force of Will. We have no qualms about reflexively starting our decklists with 4x Force of Will, so why is maindeck Leyline outside of Ichorid and random things like GobLines such a taboo? If you're sick of losing to Flash killing you on turn 1 with quadruple Pact backup, then bingo, play Leylines! Or Chalices. Or extra Duress-effects.

I think part of the problem is that a lot of players, including good players who should know better, have adopted the 'Flash is unfair and is going to beat me on turn 1 with counter backup no matter what' mindset. Run the math. Flash is a 4 card combo. Flash with backup is 5. This is not going to happen the majority of the time. Run the numbers again if you don't believe me. Go into the game with the expectation that you will see a turn. If not, oh well. You could spend forever agonizing over the perfect control hand and still get blown out by a mediocre Ichorid draw.

Magic is by definition unfair. Completely contrary to what was stated earlier in the thread, Vintage is ENTIRELY about breaking the so-called rules of Magic. Moxen and Fastbond break the 'one land per turn' rule. Time Walk breaks the turn-by-turn rule. Force of Will and Misdirection break the 'spells cost mana' rule, as do the Pacts and Gush. Mishra's Workshop breaks the 'lands produce 1 mana' rule. Don't even get me started on how many rules the Dredge interactions break. Sure some of those are restricted, but many are not. Flash is just another broken rule in a format full of them. And like the rest, it has plenty of foils at a number of convenient levels. If you aren't willing to devote the requisite slots (and I refuse to believe that is such an excessive number) just as you already do for Ichorid, MUD, etc., go play another Flashless format. We call our amazing stuff in Vintage 'broken' for a reason. That doesn't oblige every B/R update to try to fix something.

[Suicideking]

Flash does have a lot of raw power, but what deck doesnt.  Oath cheats in 8 drop creatures on turn 2.  Mud gets to use lands that tap for 3 mana.  Its part of the game.  I still have yet to see a metagame run over by flash.  Gifts was dominant.  Every top8 had 3-4 Gifts decks in them.  Granted the times have changed, but flash isnt destroying the metagame.  Decks like flash and ichorid present such different strategies for winning then every other deck so they are inherrently more difficult to deal with.  So what?  You can either except thatyou will lose to flash, or you can play with leylines.  Theyre good against other decks anyways, and devoting 4 sideboard slots to helping atleast 2 different matchups seems very exceptable to me. 

[playkenny]

I tend to have a love/hate relationship with Flash, and Ichorid for that matter. I don’t play either in comps, and am a drain player at heart, but I like that the two decks are in the meta cos it skews and changes the normal deck building/meta gaming in Vintage. Like Pheldagrif said, these decks force you to adapt, and ask that you have Leylines in the Board or play more stifles, crypts, needles and duresses. Or perhaps do something totally left field and play Jailers and Samurai of the Pale curtains, Moonsongs and Mindsencors (yes, white…). It’s also good because there is no real “best deck” at the moment cos a deck with good game vs flash/ichorid, usually has a not so good game against drains/oath so most matchups are 50/50ish. Isn’t that a good thing? More tight games and hours of testing/deck building to find those random cards and tech? Even against flash, playing those first 2 turns and making those key bluffs and decisions still make you feel like you played a good game. Sure its frustrating that you not just cannot pick up your tried and true deck and win, and you have to actually think about a real sideboard and not net deck someone’s, but that would mean this discussion would be about a stagnant meta blah blah blah.

I think that most of the players who hate Flash and Ichorid don’t really hate it due to brokenness, but because it causes them grief that their beloved archetypes get blow out of the water and cannot find viable ways to adapt to fight these 2 decks without totally switching decks, or are just lazy! Heaps of decks are broken, and sure flash is a 2 mana instant and wins at instant speed, and any phase, but the deck is build in that “all in way” like ichorid, where disrupting the combo REALLY disrupts the combo. I don’t think that there is a deck at the moment which really fights flash and ichorid properly whist still maintaining matches against the rest of the field.

I personally don’t like Flash because I don’t own full power, and thus for non-proxy events, I am forced to play sub-par “fishy” decks and to metagame a deck for such a varied field of Oath, Gat, Stax, Flash and Ichy is truly a really tough to do, but still fun!

[TheWhiteDragon]

It's been a while since I've chimed in, but here's my two cents on Flash

Yes, it is that broken (consistent turn 1 kills with counter backup show this)
No, it shouldn't be restricted.
Assuming you have 2 mana, flash, and hulk..you have to assume that you haven't drawn any slivers, that you have a pact (and your opponent doesn't have 2 counters), or you have force AND a blue card in your remaining 3.  These are not impossible, but a well placed counter (or 2) can wreck you, and in the instance of a force/misD or 2x force on the opponents part, backing up your flash with pact just cost you the game.
Also, turn 1 land, mox (or lotus), flash, hulk usually requires mulligans as your hand can get filled with crap on the opening 7 sometimes.  Anyone who plays oath will see the same when orchard/mox/oath doesn't always happen in their opening 7.  Given that fact, counter backup becomes increasingly unlikely.
In response to the trinisphere arguement of "not allowing interactivity" -  g 2/3 u board in leylines (which you should run anyway as it kills all graveyard strategies) and just protect it when u mull into it.  Your opponent will be forced to find an answer and will not use a pact to force through his chain of vapor.  If he chains the leyline and forces your counter, he will highly unlikely have flash/hulk in that same hand.  In the time it takes for him to play around leyline, he has the same speed as GAT or tendrils, if that.  This shows that flash and trinisphere don't have the same game warping ability, as vs a 4x trini deck, there is NOTHING you can board in that will stop trini from hosing you.  G 2/3 are very important to take into consideration.  Trini will beat any artifact hate you board in just by being played with any decent hand.  It is game warping in 2 cards (shop/trini) vs 3 or 4 cards (lotus[land/mox]/flash/hulk).
To equate flash with other restricted cards, decks that use force and mana drain can dunp into gifts or fof (not sure fof warrants restriciton anymore) and go nuts.  Flash uses pact over mana drain, which not only doen't allow for broken next turns, but can cost you the game vs a competent control deck.  Necro and yawg bargain can draw you not just the win, but also the removal for whatever stands in your way...whereas flash provides a win, but is a dead card vs hate like leyline unless you have a way and the time to draw the removal.
It is a boring deck in my opinion because it USUALLY requires little skill...you win or lose based on your flash/pact gambit.  I don't think it warrants restriction though, as it isn't game warping, it doesn't cause a lack of interactivity throughout the whole set of 3 (g 2/3 are highly important to account for) and can become very weak given the right sb hate.
It may not be as fun to see in a tourney as opposed to a game that goes a half-hour and leaves you at 1 life when you win....but the yankees don't play in the World Series to "have fun" or because they "love baseball"...they want to win.  If you want every game to be as fun and interactive as "draft night at the local hobby shop," then stick to that scene or play on MWS and stay out of tourneys.  Anytime prize is up for grabs, play to win, not to get your jollies.

[hitman]

No one is complaining about doing broken things.  All the examples AngryPheldagrif gives for cards that cheat the rules are nice and all but those spells don't kill you.  No one is arguing that it can't be stopped, either.  Any deck can beat it if you fill it with cards to do so.  Not every deck supports Duress/Leyline very well.  Is it really this big of an issue?  The freakin' card costs two mana and wins at instant speed.  Why don't we take Time Walk off the restricted list?  Spell Snare/Mana Drain/Force of Will/Chalice at two/Red Elemental Blast/Pyroblast, etc. can stop it and you could extirpate it after the first one resolved as well.  This is one of the reasons people don't care about this format.  The fact that we're arguing about this is a joke. 

[Caboose]

I agree that this discussion is kind of sad. Flash hasn't experienced format-breaking dominance yet, and it should probably be left alone until it does. If we're calling for restrictions based on potential dominance, or the lack of playskill needed to win with a deck, I'll make a case that tapping Forbidden Orchard and casting Oath of Druids takes the intelligence of a chimp, and has put up better numbers than Flash in the last two months.

[SpaceGhost]

Personally, I think that Merchant Scroll is the much lethal card that needs to restricted (if any card does).  This is the card that makes flash (or almost any deck that runs blue) absurd.  It is easily as good as Enlightened, Vampiric, and Mystic Tutor.  Just a little worse than Demonic Tutor in that you are limited to blue and you have to announce it.  One can easily snag a pact of negation or FoW to protect the combo, just get flash to make it happen.

On the plus side, I have been working on a new deck and my play testing partner runs Sliver Flash.  I do not run Leylines in the main because they don't really go with the deck and I am on a toss up right now between Leylines and Planar Void for the SB.  Irrespective of that, I am going about 50/50 against him (9 - 11 to be exact), but I do run 4 FoW, 4 Durress, and 4 Mana Drain.  As in the argument above, the turn 1 kill is not near as frequent as perceived, it is just that when it happens it feels like a kick in the face.

[Tha Gunslinga]

You guys do realize that Reveillark Flash auto-loses to Extirpate, right?  Let's not even talk about the infinite pieces of splash hate that kill it that can't kill Sliver Flash, cards such as Pithing Needle, Krosan Reclamation, Extract, and many more.  The sky is not falling.  Vintage is doing fine.  I find it amusing that people are terrified of an easily-managed deck, but have no comment to make on the incredible paucity of Vintage tournaments in the last year or so.

[Moxlotus]

Would everyone who doesn't think Flash deserves something to be restricted think Trinisphere should come off the restricted list?  If not, I would love to hear that reasoning.

[GrandpaBelcher]

We've already got 9 spheres.  What's another three?  Bring on the 3Balls!

Why has Flash gotten this attention all of a sudden?  Is it just because the Reveillark combo showed up?  Flash has been a two-mana, two-card, win-the-game combo since it got errataed and it was hardly played until now.  At this point I think we're just going to have to wait and see how much it will be played and how the metagame adapts.

[Shock Wave]

We've already got 9 spheres.  What's another three?  Bring on the 3Balls!

Why has Flash gotten this attention all of a sudden?  Is it just because the Reveillark combo showed up?  Flash has been a two-mana, two-card, win-the-game combo since it got errataed and it was hardly played until now.  At this point I think we're just going to have to wait and see how much it will be played and how the metagame adapts.

The principles of why Flash deserves attention have roots that go further back than the initial point of its errata. This is not an argument about metagame dominance or metagame adaptation. This revolves around the reasoning behind why Trinisphere was restricted. The DCI agreed that Trinisphere reduced the interactivity of the game to a point where it was resembling a coin flip. They agreed with the players who felt that it made the game "unfun". Many players also feel that Flash pushes the game in the same direction as Trinisphere. It is an early, game ending combo which leaves your opponent with very little recourse (besides Leyline, which is just a horrible maindeck card).

There is some good food for thought in this thread, although it is somewhat discouraging to hear the old "This is Vintage! Broken thing happen!" train wreck of logic rear its ugly head again. -sigh-

[diopter]

We've already got 9 spheres.  What's another three?  Bring on the 3Balls!

Why has Flash gotten this attention all of a sudden?  Is it just because the Reveillark combo showed up?  Flash has been a two-mana, two-card, win-the-game combo since it got errataed and it was hardly played until now.  At this point I think we're just going to have to wait and see how much it will be played and how the metagame adapts.

The principles of why Flash deserves attention have roots that go further back than the initial point of its errata. This is not an argument about metagame dominance or metagame adaptation. This revolves around the reasoning behind why Trinisphere was restricted. The DCI agreed that Trinisphere reduced the interactivity of the game to a point where it was resembling a coin flip. They agreed with the players who felt that it made the game "unfun". Many players also feel that Flash pushes the game in the same direction as Trinisphere. It is an early, game ending combo which leaves your opponent with very little recourse (besides Leyline, which is just a horrible maindeck card).

There is some good food for thought in this thread, although it is somewhat discouraging to hear the old "This is Vintage! Broken thing happen!" train wreck of logic rear its ugly head again. -sigh-

Rather than advocate restricting Flash, why not advocate unrestricting Trinisphere? A large part of your argument is that the DCI has to restrict Flash by the same principles that they restricted 3Sphere. My response is to question the principles behind restricting 3Sphere. I don't know if it was Smennen or Stanton who showed that the 3Sphere Shop metagame was actually more diverse than the post-restriction metagame. In any case I question the claim that Trinisphere and Flash make Vintage unfun to play. If anything I think it is the opposite...

What I see Flash (and also Ichorid) doing is the same thing that 3Sphere did - keep decks honest. Back then, you actually had to run a real manabase if you didn't want to get boned by Shops. Now, you actually have to run relevant disruption on turn 1 and 2 to not get boned by Flash, and you have to sideboard accordingly to net get boned by Ichorid. Players can no longer pick up a Drain deck and run it to top 8 in any metagame - they have to actually analyze their expected metagame, anticipate whether or not they are going to need to combat Flash or Ichorid, and choose a deck accordingly. This really opens up the metagame, because it is no longer the case that the top tier is static in any given metagame. I see this as a really good thing, and a previous poster really hit the nail on the head:

I think that most of the players who hate Flash and Ichorid don't really hate it due to brokenness, but because it causes them grief that their beloved archetypes get blow out of the water and cannot find viable ways to adapt to fight these 2 decks without totally switching decks

[SpaceGhost]

@Shock Wave:  Are you in favor of fully restricting Flash, or do you think that restricting Merchant Scroll would be a reasonable solution (perhaps first) to slow the deck down without cutting it off at the knees, with the benefit of also balancing out the power of the colors?  Also, I think that the point you made about interaction is interesting.  I definitely am a fan of more interactive games, but I don't know how to define interaction.  Almost any combo deck tries to race the opponent while minimizing interaction with the opponent that is beyond counters.  Granted, the majority of cards in the classic combo decks are more difficult to play and most of the cards are restricted -- are those two conditions enough to leave them be even though they don't really interact.  I see the same lack of interaction problem with Ichorid and to some degree Oath.  It just seems like interaction is a nebulous term to figure out how to start banning types of cards. 

@diopter:  I think the underlying argument of "pet deck getting blown out of the water" is really about the division of whether you should try to create/play a deck that you are fond of and tweak it to your metagame or if you should just lay out the five best Tier 1 decks and choose the one that is best positioned for the tournament/event you plan on attending.  Personally, the second choice is less appealing to me because it feels like I am no longer in control, just piloting an already well-tuned deck.  The difference is going from a true master of a certain archetype (which is maybe undesirable) or a jack of all trades (perhaps a master of all, but that is a much higher bar to hit).  I think that it some of the unfun comes from some people feeling they have to choose either to build a deck designed to beat Flash/Ichorid or play Flash/Ichorid. 

[diopter]

@diopter:  I think the underlying argument of "pet deck getting blown out of the water" is really about the division of whether you should try to create/play a deck that you are fond of and tweak it to your metagame or if you should just lay out the five best Tier 1 decks and choose the one that is best positioned for the tournament/event you plan on attending.  Personally, the second choice is less appealing to me because it feels like I am no longer in control, just piloting an already well-tuned deck.  The difference is going from a true master of a certain archetype (which is maybe undesirable) or a jack of all trades (perhaps a master of all, but that is a much higher bar to hit).  I think that it some of the unfun comes from some people feeling they have to choose either to build a deck designed to beat Flash/Ichorid or play Flash/Ichorid. 

Your point would hold much more water if Flash and Ichorid showed up with greater frequency at tournaments. Steve's latest article showed that Flash and Ichorid are still behind both Gush and Shop decks in terms of top 8 performances (although Flash increased from 3 months ago so it'll have to be watched). If 3 players out of 30 are playing Flash in a tournament, what are the odds that you are paired against it in the Swiss? Probably once? If you brought a deck that has great matchups across the board except for Flash, you still have an excellent chance at making top 8, even if you lost to Flash.

When I look at the healthier rotating formats (especially Extended as it is the largest), and then I look at Vintage, I think to myself that this is the best Vintage has ever been, precisely because players can just tweak archetypes to the metagame. The Gifts/Slaver/PitchLong period of Vintage was like that, and while I personally liked it, many other players did not. Now the top tier is rotating more rapidly (witness the fall of GAT and the rise of Shop). Instead of just the Drain/Ritual players being interested in Vintage, you get the GAT/TTS/Shop/Goyf-aggro, and yes, Flash/Ichorid players interested in Vintage. A big part of this is Flash and Ichorid forcing decks to either expose weaknesses to them, or weaknesses to other parts of the meta.

[playkenny]

Would everyone who doesn't think Flash deserves something to be restricted think Trinisphere should come off the restricted list?  If not, I would love to hear that reasoning.

I’ll have a crack at this:

If trinisphere came off the list, the format would still be fine. Flash would still do fine. A new Ichorid would be awesome, and drain decks are the only decks which would be hit badly. Fish decks would then step up to the plate. The meta would solidify into: Stax, Flash, Ichoird, meaning drains are out of the picture leaving fish to deal with a narrow field of weakness to exploite – artifacts and graveyard. Not 100% sure, but don’t think Kataki was around when before Trini got the axe which may make a big difference cos WW (yes laugh) would/could deal in a field of shops and flash on the backs of kataki and samurai (splash blue/black if required).

So basically, I think Vintage would still be fine, just with less islands and *gasp* more plains. With that said however, I think there would be a huge drop in vintage turnouts and popularity because the key aspect format – going broken – is lost. Vintage looses that appeal to playing with multiple spells in a turn, playing Will and Drains, able to cast Moxes (and not pay 3) which I believe to be what vintage is all about – the fun going broken and playing with the vintage staples. So no, I don’t think Trini should come off the list.

Flash is a funny deck and does two things – new players feel that they can enter a format, rather cheaply, and have a real chance at winning, OR, flash can discourage new plays from playing due to the “omg, didn’t get to play a spell and I’m dead”. But people already have the mentality of the latter from watching long/strom go off, GAT and fastbond, Metal Worker/Staff etc etc. The main complaints come from players who are already established players. We all heard the same complaints when Ichorid came out, or the outcry of many when gush was unrestricted - “It breaks the format, should be banned” but look what has happened? Ichorid has gotten more powerful since then, why aren’t we restricting bridge? Unrestricting Gush should have destroyed the format, but did it? I think it’s brought more players to the format. I have friends who entered the format because of flash – basic fact is they can play against the best and have a chance. Same with Ichorid (just gets less love cos its such a "non-magic" deck).

Is it us? The established players not liking flash because we loose to noobs? Is it because there is more competition going for that mox prize? We should just get over it and just use your vintage experience to out play flash. Honestly, I have played against flash in tourneys numerous times, and because I tweaked my deck for my meta (semi flash heavy – and I played no leylines), I never lost to flash (yet) – even against god hands of flash w counter backup. Vintage is just like another format, just that you do more things in a turn…well, playing against flash is just like squeezing and maximising more things you do in your turn.

[AngryPheldagrif]

No one is complaining about doing broken things.  All the examples AngryPheldagrif gives for cards that cheat the rules are nice and all but those spells don't kill you.  No one is arguing that it can't be stopped, either.  Any deck can beat it if you fill it with cards to do so.  Not every deck supports Duress/Leyline very well.  Is it really this big of an issue?  The freakin' card costs two mana and wins at instant speed.  Why don't we take Time Walk off the restricted list?  Spell Snare/Mana Drain/Force of Will/Chalice at two/Red Elemental Blast/Pyroblast, etc. can stop it and you could extirpate it after the first one resolved as well.  This is one of the reasons people don't care about this format.  The fact that we're arguing about this is a joke.

Actually, the 'broken things' of Flash were specifically cited earlier in the thread. And to clarify my point on the issue of rules-breaking, while none of those cards in and of themselves win the game, neither does Flash. I'm not sure where you're going with the Duress/Leyline issue, since it is a little awkward to argue that any deck has serious issues supporting a card that automatically can come into play at the beginning of the game at no cost and no penalty to yourself, and I'm sure most decks that can't afford a single black mana sorcery have other options available. I'd love some clarification on those issues. If you seriously think that Flash requires such a horribly warping quantity of hate pieces to beat, I'll be happy to ship you some decklists I have that take care of Flash rather handily. My Empty Gifts list from SCG Chicago Day 2 absolutely dominates it, and it certainly has game against the rest of the field, though the sideboard needs a tad bit of tweaking due to the rise of GushOath.

The principles of why Flash deserves attention have roots that go further back than the initial point of its errata. This is not an argument about metagame dominance or metagame adaptation. This revolves around the reasoning behind why Trinisphere was restricted. The DCI agreed that Trinisphere reduced the interactivity of the game to a point where it was resembling a coin flip. They agreed with the players who felt that it made the game "unfun". Many players also feel that Flash pushes the game in the same direction as Trinisphere. It is an early, game ending combo which leaves your opponent with very little recourse (besides Leyline, which is just a horrible maindeck card).

I hate to Smmenenize the arguments here, but I strongly feel that using the Trinisphere comparison is a complete straw man attack against Flash. Trinisphere is a one card combo that defends itself against the fast majority of the nominal hate. Flash is a two card combo that is vulnerable to the whole gamut of disruption. From both functional and theoretical standpoints, those two differences are enormous.

[SpaceGhost]

@diopter:  I think the underlying argument of "pet deck getting blown out of the water" is really about the division of whether you should try to create/play a deck that you are fond of and tweak it to your metagame or if you should just lay out the five best Tier 1 decks and choose the one that is best positioned for the tournament/event you plan on attending.  Personally, the second choice is less appealing to me because it feels like I am no longer in control, just piloting an already well-tuned deck.  The difference is going from a true master of a certain archetype (which is maybe undesirable) or a jack of all trades (perhaps a master of all, but that is a much higher bar to hit).  I think that it some of the unfun comes from some people feeling they have to choose either to build a deck designed to beat Flash/Ichorid or play Flash/Ichorid. 

Your point would hold much more water if Flash and Ichorid showed up with greater frequency at tournaments. Steve's latest article showed that Flash and Ichorid are still behind both Gush and Shop decks in terms of top 8 performances (although Flash increased from 3 months ago so it'll have to be watched). If 3 players out of 30 are playing Flash in a tournament, what are the odds that you are paired against it in the Swiss? Probably once? If you brought a deck that has great matchups across the board except for Flash, you still have an excellent chance at making top 8, even if you lost to Flash.

When I look at the healthier rotating formats (especially Extended as it is the largest), and then I look at Vintage, I think to myself that this is the best Vintage has ever been, precisely because players can just tweak archetypes to the metagame. The Gifts/Slaver/PitchLong period of Vintage was like that, and while I personally liked it, many other players did not. Now the top tier is rotating more rapidly (witness the fall of GAT and the rise of Shop). Instead of just the Drain/Ritual players being interested in Vintage, you get the GAT/TTS/Shop/Goyf-aggro, and yes, Flash/Ichorid players interested in Vintage. A big part of this is Flash and Ichorid forcing decks to either expose weaknesses to them, or weaknesses to other parts of the meta.

I am actually not too troubled by Flash....I tried to portray that in my first post.  It really is a challenge to play against and I think it does make players consider more protection for their combo (if they are flash) and more disruption against flash.  At some level, this can be considered interacting with each other.  I really think that Merchant Scroll is a lot of the fuel right now.  For instance, it can tutor up Gush and draw two cards off just two mana--add fastbond to the mix and that is when everything reaches new levels of ridiculousness.  While it is a separate discussion, Merchant Scroll seems to go against some of the principles of restricting other tutor cards.

I do like diversity and it is nice to see something new once in awhile.  I agree that it hasn't reached dominating levels yet, and if you aren't prepared for it, then woe be to you.  The same principle with Ichorid.  It requires more thought to how to build your deck to account for what advantage it is trying to exploit.  However, I don't think everything is quite as diverse as you portray.  We still have only a few big time players.  From Steve's article:

Workshop (25%)
Gush (25%)
Flash/Ichorid (16%)

That is 3 archetypes (if I count Flash and Ichorid being the same type of Archetype as the same type of Hate will get rid of them and they both use the graveyard for the their business) dominating 2/3 of the field (65.6%) to be exact.  Furthermore, the number of flash decks increased from 5 to 11 -- which is 120%.  Perhaps this is only a coincidence and will be evened out during the next sample, but it might be a trend and we will have to see.

[Shock Wave]

Rather than advocate restricting Flash, why not advocate unrestricting Trinisphere? A large part of your argument is that the DCI has to restrict Flash by the same principles that they restricted 3Sphere. My response is to question the principles behind restricting 3Sphere. I don't know if it was Smennen or Stanton who showed that the 3Sphere Shop metagame was actually more diverse than the post-restriction metagame. In any case I question the claim that Trinisphere and Flash make Vintage unfun to play. If anything I think it is the opposite...

Well thankfully, you're not making decisions for the DCI. You seem to think losing before you get a chance to play makes the game more fun to play and "diversifies" the metagame by forcing people to "adapt". The irony of that statement is that these decks have the exact opposite effect on the metagame because they force the remainder of the field to hedge very strongly against them or have very little chance of interacting at all. What's worse is that the hate for decks like Flash and Ichorid revolve around Leyline of the Void, which is very difficult for a deck to both make use of and operate under simultaneously. It's not comparable to Force of Will, which is a useful card almost irrespective of the gamestate. Leyline causes you to mulligan heavily if you choose to use it, so that you are essentially at the mercy of whether your deck gives you Leyline or not. This is not the same from mulling into Force of Will against Pitch Long because you can generally survive a turn and have a chance to use disruption on your turn. Against decks like Ichorid and Flash, you must mulligan heavily and hope for the best. The premium that these decks place on the mulligan, and the speed at which they win the game has an awful effect on player interaction.

What I see Flash (and also Ichorid) doing is the same thing that 3Sphere did - keep decks honest.

What is honest about the effect of Trinisphere and Flash on the metagame? Have you considered the minimal recourse for the plays these decks make that people are complaining about? The shortage of answers to these powerful plays causes a gross distortion of the metagame. The multitude of answers that exist to fairly powerful spells (Oath of Druids, Tinker, etc.) is narrowed down to a paltry few when staring down a first turn Trinisphere or Flash. When you have a less viable card pool and consequently a lesser archetype pool to select from, you have a circumstance which translates to a concentrated, hedged metagame.

I think that most of the players who hate Flash and Ichorid don't really hate it due to brokenness, but because it causes them grief that their beloved archetypes get blow out of the water and cannot find viable ways to adapt to fight these 2 decks without totally switching decks

If you support this statement, then you haven't understood a grain of the argument that has been presented ad infinitum. It's easy to dismiss the side of the argument that you disagree with as a bunch of whiny, prepubescent children who care for nothing more than to contaminate your intelligence with their vapid, puerile attempts at reasoning. However, contrary to what is insinuated above, there is a lot more consideration and logic involved on both sides of this argument than just the whimsy of some 13 year old zithead who wants to play with his toys.

Are you in favor of fully restricting Flash, or do you think that restricting Merchant Scroll would be a reasonable solution (perhaps first) to slow the deck down without cutting it off at the knees, with the benefit of also balancing out the power of the colors?  Also, I think that the point you made about interaction is interesting.  I definitely am a fan of more interactive games, but I don't know how to define interaction.  Almost any combo deck tries to race the opponent while minimizing interaction with the opponent that is beyond counters.  Granted, the majority of cards in the classic combo decks are more difficult to play and most of the cards are restricted -- are those two conditions enough to leave them be even though they don't really interact.  I see the same lack of interaction problem with Ichorid and to some degree Oath.  It just seems like interaction is a nebulous term to figure out how to start banning types of cards.

Well, now we're getting back to the meat of the argument. I think hitting Merchant Scroll, Flash, or both would be ideal. Let's put that discussion on hold for a second and talk about your second question regarding interaction. What exactly is interaction? What is a "fair" clock for combo? You're definitely right about the whole purpose of combo being to minimize interaction with the opponent and blow them out of the water. The crux of this issue lies in determining, and agreeing upon, what is a fair clock for a combo deck. Now, I'm not going to post numbers, but I've long stated that the "fairness" benchmark for a combo deck should be the consistency/frequency at which GrimLong or PitchLong were able to kill their opponent. Yes, they could do it on the first turn, but it was improbably enough that it was acceptable, and it was nigh impossible to do it accompanied by disruption. Here's the key point about those decks: They generally give you at least a turn. They don't force you to mulligan to 4 or 5 cards to find some silly enchantment that is only playable in your first hand. They give you a chance to interact, that is, by making an actual decision about what spells to play.

It is my feeling that once you start introducing cards that enable you to kill your opponent before they have a chance to play, and such decks display the capability to win tournaments, the level of interactivity in the game is seriously damaged. Recall that Meandeck SX had a high turn one kill percentage. Well, why was that deck fair? It's actually simple. That deck was extremely difficult to play. You had to crunch numbers like a freak in order to get that deck to churn, and even then, it was extremely vulnerable to disruption and rolled to basically any form of it. Likewise, if your Grim/Pitch Long opponent has the nuts, he may note even know it, and if it occurs to them, it's very possible that they may end up screwing it up anyways. Why? The decks force their pilots to make decisions, and often they are very difficult ones. Ask Steve Menendian how many times he has screwed up a Doomsday stack, a Yawgmoth's Will, or even a Demonic Tutor. He's a great player, but storm combo decks cause you to think. Does anyone think a trained chimp could botch a Flash play?

Don't even get me started on Ichorid, which I feel is one of the most egregious offenders of interactivity in the history of this game. Oath, in my opinion, is a fair combo card. Yes, it can come down early, but it can't use silly things like Pact of Negation to back itself up, and it doesn't end the game immediately. It most likely will, but at least it gives you a chance to do something. It allows opponents the chance to make plays, and to me satisfies the minimum interaction criteria for allowing it to remain unrestricted. You're certainly right. The concept of interactivity is a somewhat ambiguous term. However, when your recourse for a high-frequency opening that ends the game is very limited, you can almost bet that interactivity is being held at ransom.

Back to Flash, I'm not really sure how I would deal with that deck. I really think Gush is too strong, but I feel that engine wouldn't be such a house if it didn't have Merchant Scroll fueling it. If it were up to me, Merchant Scroll and Serum Powder would go first. I would remove Serum Powder because I think the mechanic is awful and I can't think of a better way of damaging Ichorid. Why would I hose Ichorid? Well, I feel that if you're going to play a deck that is indifferent to what your opponent is doing or going to do, you shouldn't have the privilege of increasing your chances to get that critical card that you need. Serum Powder introduced a very random mechanic that really isn't useful outside of powering that monster of a deck. Speaking of Ichorid, the mana version seems a lot more fair to me. It has broken potential, but it is actually interested in what the opponent is doing. I don't think it would be fair to hose the archetype altogether, just the version that basically ignores the state of the game and requires very little decision making.

[Lemnear]

The argument of shifting Leylines form sideboard to mainboard or simply "loose game 1" is really stupid. sounds to me like former Trini-Staxx-Players I know: " Mull into Force or quit". The fact to be forced by a viable amount of decks to create a deck-core that contains cards that will only keep you in the game confuses me anyway, but we all get used to the FoW/Duress base disruption needed today (even followed by Thoughtseize or Misd.).

Now the Flash/Ichorid-Matchup nearly forces us to add Leylines and not only to restrict a Vintage sideboard to ~8 cards, even the "have-it-or-loose-aspect" comes back in mainboards. It is exactly like 3Sphere due to the needed mana and compared to the other cards needed to makes this cards "non-interactiv". 3Sphere does NOTHING without following Aggro/Smokestack/Wasteland-Crucible-Lock ... I should remind you that it needs 3-4 mana ... but Flash is a 2-card combo for 2 mana acompanied with a bunch of cheap tutors a la Merchant scroll, Summoners Pact. It also provides mass of protection and can win with instant speed. I will not ask all the former 3Staxx/Long.dec-Players how they feel about their decks gett'n the axe and hear such statements.

Obviously you can't argue (like many Flash/ichorid-Players I know) that Mull into Force is like mull into Leyline (MB). Force is good against almost every deck not only those ... but nearly both dodge FoW like no other deck ... think about it...