Article: Deconstructing the Flash Argument

[Akuma]

I agree with Steve's entire post.

From what I have read on various Vintage sites, it seems like Flash is bringing in some new players. I have read a lot of Vintage tournament reports with: "This is my first Vintage event, I decided to play Flash..." Seems like they want to see what the fuss is about.

We need to let this situation settle down to see if action is required. All of this press for Flash has a lot of the herd picking up the deck, which can lead to greater Top 8 representation which is then perceived as gross distortion. This distortion happens with every new top deck (see GAT, MUD, Tyrant Oath, etc.)

I want to see if Gigadrowse > All Flash hate. I want to see if Flash is truly the monster some claim it to be or if it is just another strong contender like Oath, GAT, Shops or Storm.

Aside/
Wasn't there another instant kill for Flash (beside Disciple kill) involving Kiki-Jiki before Revellairk. I could have sworn I saw that somewhere (it was more than 5 cards, 6 or 7 maybe?).

[nataz]

I'm pretty sure it somehow involves a cyclops card.

[dicemanx]

We talk about Deez Naughts destroying Flash because our pilots are experienced in doing just such. I hate to have to bring it up, but I'd strongly question whether your testing is running either correct lists or honestly if it's being competently piloted.

I respect the skills of the ICBM players, and I understand that they might have a blast beating up on Flash with their decks. However, the average player will not be as successful, and will quickly be disenchanted with a format that has a deck which allows for such little margin of error. It is one thing to play imprecisely and lose to a deck like GAT or Oath, where there is some semblance of a game, and one can be satisfied even in losing. It is another matter altogether where imprecise play, SBing, or deck construction is viciously punished by a deck like Flash.

Being highly skilled when it comes to deck construction and game play should not be a prerequisite to having fun playing in this format.

First of all, it isn't at all clear that from the perspective of new/outside players that Flash is a "bad thing."   There is alot of evidence (although not overwhelming) to suggest that Flash actually has the potential or actually is bringing in new players.

I would not disagree with this, but I don't think this point challenges the validity of Rich's arguments. For instance, I too enjoyed messing around with Flash and really enjoyed watching how it would generate ridiculously fast kills with disruption for back-up. Particularly thrilling were those hands where you combo off on the second turn with 3 counter-back-up. However, it gets boring very quickly. I can accept the idea that Flash initially attracts new players and even experienced players; however, the fun times are fleeting and things get very old very fast. In the long run Flash can seriously damage support from new players after they try T1, notice how it verifies their presuppositions that T1 is luck-oriented, and promptly exit the format. We've already had some anecdotal evidence of this in this thread.

I mean, in the past it was hard enough to attract new players and get them to overcome the (mis)conception that T1 is all about fast kills and dice rolls to determine outcomes. Now I'm not so sure that we can even call it a misconception anymore with decks like Ichorid and Flash in the format.

Secondly, while it is important to engage in these discussions, it is also important to remember that calls for restrictions should always be viewed critically.   The author of this article (and Diceman) emphatically called for the restriction of Crucible of Worlds in 2004.   There were many other calls for restrictions in the past that have now passed.

With all due respect Steve, this is irrelevant - any argument should be judged based on its own merits. A critical view of the restriction argument should be employed regardless of past history; it shouldn't be "more critically viewed" (which your paragraph implies) because of past random frequent calls for restriction. For instance, of what consequence is it that Rich and I proposed the restriction of CoW? Do you think that was some sort of strike against us when we focused our efforts on Trinisphere restriction? Did it all of a sudden mandate greater scrutiny of our arguments against Trinisphere? I imagine that the DCI made its decision because of the compelling arguments against the card (and the support we were able to rally).

Now, maybe I'm reading you wrong, because you do state that "calls for restrictions should always be viewed critically"; however, the follow-up evidence does not support this conclusion unless you aim to imply that past calls for restrictions mandate greater scrutiny. So either the evidence is wrong and is possibly meant to undermine or discredit the Flash restriction advocates in an underhanded way, or your conclusion is wrong.

We are currently in the heat of the "Flash" moment because of the discovery of the Morningtide Reveillark combo.   It has always been that once the heat of the moment passes, the calls for restriction fall away.

I think this is a little coincidental, but it does strengthen our case. I had these feelings about Flash before the Reveillark combo, and perhaps others were in the same boat. Doesn't really matter anymore though.

[Tha Gunslinga]

but DEEZ NOUGHTS still scoops to Gigadrowse.

I fail to see how "EOT, tap your Leyline" is relevant.

[Shock Wave]

Secondly, while it is important to engage in these discussions, it is also important to remember that calls for restrictions should always be viewed critically.   The author of this article (and Diceman) emphatically called for the restriction of Crucible of Worlds in 2004.   There were many other calls for restrictions in the past that have now passed. Take a look at this chart:
http://www.starcitygames.com/php/news/article/5980.html

Yes, it cannot be argued that in the early Crucible/Trinisphere days, I blew the restriction horn a little too early and ended up accusing the wrong party. I did argue that Crucible was a problem when part of a Trinisphere environment. I think that argument had some merit, considering that the players never had a chance to see Crucible in action with Trinisphere restricted. My conclusion might have been wrong, but I was willing to admit it when people suggested that Crucible would be far less of a problem if Trinisphere were restricted. Where I was not wrong, however, was in determining that there was a problem with the format. I may have pointed the finger at the wrong card, but I was on the right track and with a little discussion, the right decision was determined. In any case, I don't see what the relevance is, since the arguments for Flash have nothing to do at all with whatever was discussed 3 or 4 years ago. When your team brought MeandecK SX to Waterbury, you claimed that "Restrictions will have to be made following this event." You were wrong, but I haven't used that as a basis to judge your subsequent arguments regarding restriction. The arguments deserve consideration based on their own merit and don't lose any credibility as a result of arguments you or I have posed in the past.
 

We are currently in the heat of the "Flash" moment because of the discovery of the Morningtide Reveillark combo.   It has always been that once the heat of the moment passes, the calls for restriction fall away.

I don't think this is a situation where the community is overreacting because of a new threat. Flash has been violating the interactivity principle for quite some time now. It has been competitive for equally as long. The fact that the Reveillark combo makes it even stronger does not diminish its impact since its inception.

This was even true of Trinisphere which was not restricted at the 6 month mark, when most people thought it might be, or even the 9 month mark, but was restricted 12 months after Darksteel when few expected it.  Similarly, the calls to restrict Gifts seemed to have receded when it actually happened.  But the calls to restrict: Illusionary Mask, Bazaar of Baghdad, Mishra's Workshop, Dark Ritual, Goblin Welder, Academy Rector, Intuiton, Cunning Wish, and even, yes, Psychatog.

Sure, I've even heard people call for the restriction of Brainstorm or Mana Drain. There's a difference between a "call for restriction" and a clear movement for restriction. When someone makes a call for restriction, it's often analyzed, debunked, and then forgotten. It's hard to dismiss a large group that all feel the same way about a particular card. When the rationale for a restriction appeals to a large group of people, it's at least worth discussing.

Third, I take seriously the argument that Flash could drive players from Vintage.  While I don't think that Trinisphere deserved restriction from a metagame point of view, I now concede that Trinisphere was unfun in ways that made Vintage less played.  If Flash creates a similar impact, which I think it is now simply too early to tell, then it probably does deserve restriction.   

But if it does, I'll be the first to join the fray.  Until then, I'd caution patience.  Let's see what happens in the next few months.

What would you require to happen in the next few months that would suggest to you that Flash requires restriction? Are you looking for some sort of "dominance"? What about the fact that Flash violates the 4th criteria (and arguably more) that you've cited in your article? Does that not strike you as an important issue?

[Vegeta2711]

From what I have read on various Vintage sites, it seems like Flash is bringing in some new players. I have read a lot of Vintage tournament reports with: "This is my first Vintage event, I decided to play Flash..." Seems like they want to see what the fuss is about.

Honest question, how many of these players do you honestly think would want to continue playing after the first few Vintage events with Flash?

Let me put it this way, a decent number of people disliked / didn't play Extended this season because Dredge existed and Dredge was a hell of a lot easier to beat than Flash.

[Toad]

We talk about Deez Naughts destroying Flash because our pilots are experienced in doing just such. I hate to have to bring it up, but I'd strongly question whether your testing is running either correct lists or honestly if it's being competently piloted. Deez Naughts is not an easy deck to run, let alone in a matchup as intensive as Flash. If your theory doesn't match your results, generally there's some human error involved on one side of it.

This could actually be rewritten :

We talk about Flash destroying Deez Naughts because our pilots are experienced in doing just such. I hate to have to bring it up, but I'd strongly question whether your testing is running either correct lists or honestly if it's being competently piloted. Flash is not an easy deck to run, let alone in a matchup as intensive as Deez Naughts. If your theory doesn't match your results, generally there's some human error involved on one side of it.

Point is : playskills arguments are pointless. And the players I was testing against were playing Dreadnoughts and Tarmogoyfs decks before the deck got named "Deez Naught". They also play Counterbalance and Sensei's Divining Top, and these make the deck even stronger against Flash because you can hard lock them.

Anyways, let's assume DeezNaught truely destroys Flash. In the end metagame should become Flash + DeezNaught, and basically nothing else since everything else loses to Flash or DeezNaught. Your argument "Play DeezNaught it beats Flash" means that the deck is extremely format warping to me ... Flash limits deck choices to like, 1 option?

I fail to see how "EOT, tap your Leyline" is relevant.

Well if you think Leyline of the Void is a relevant card against Flash, you can surely expect to lose to Flash "being competently piloted". Leyline of the Void makes them unable to win through the Reveillark Combo if they kept it, and only if they cannot find Chain of Vapor. Poisonous Slivers, Tinker or Oath of Druids are fairly immune to these plans. Once again, whenever ICBM people mentions how DeezNaught beats Flash, the arguments are usually Leyline of the Void, Extirpate, Spell Snare ... Did you guys actually test SB games where the Flash players actually had a real SB plan involving cards that do not die to what can be aimed at their MD? I seriously doubt so. While the matchup against DeezNaught is hard for Flash if Flash only brings in solutions to DeezNaught threats, it is very different if Flash has a B-Plan in the SB.

Flash can actually run 4 Poisonous Slivers, 1 Heart Slivers and Tinker + Robot in the SB while still keeping enough SB slots for standard SB cards. That's 2 distinct ways of beating a lot of your hate.

[Tha Gunslinga]

Well if you think Leyline of the Void is a relevant card against Flash, you can surely expect to lose to Flash "being competently piloted". Leyline of the Void makes them unable to win through the Reveillark Combo if they kept it, and only if they cannot find Chain of Vapor. Poisonous Slivers, Tinker or Oath of Druids are fairly immune to these plans.

Leyline shuts down the Protean Hulk trigger, making Flash unable to win.  It sounds like you didn't know that.  Now you do.

Leyline is the best plan against Flash, because it kills both versions, is uncounterable, and comes down before the Flash player can go off.

[dicemanx]

Well if you think Leyline of the Void is a relevant card against Flash, you can surely expect to lose to Flash "being competently piloted". Leyline of the Void makes them unable to win through the Reveillark Combo if they kept it, and only if they cannot find Chain of Vapor. Poisonous Slivers, Tinker or Oath of Druids are fairly immune to these plans.

Leyline shuts down the Protean Hulk trigger, making Flash unable to win.  It sounds like you didn't know that.  Now you do.

Slivers can be hardcast to get around Leyline if you don't find your bounce spell/enchantment removal. That's how I interpreted his comment.

[Toad]

Leyline shuts down the Protean Hulk trigger, making Flash unable to win.  It sounds like you didn't know that.  Now you do.

It actually sounds like you didn't read what I wrote. When I'm referring to "these" plans, I'm obviously talking about all the plans DeezNaught can have against Flash, not about Leyline of the Void only, in which case I would have had used the singular form "this" instead. This is what plural means, you should be better at English than me.

"These" included Tormod's Crypt (which Trinket Mage can fetch and is often run in the maindeck), Spell Snare (which was mentionned previously and has hard times dealing with Tinker), or Extirpate (which does nothing against Slivers, which is the reason I mentionned them).

You are good at flaming for no reasons, so you might want to focus on your reading skills.
I even posted what "these" were referring to :

Poisonous Slivers, Tinker or Oath of Druids are fairly immune to these plans. Once again, whenever ICBM people mentions how DeezNaught beats Flash, the arguments are usually Leyline of the Void, Extirpate, Spell Snare ...

Furthermore, if you think Leyline of the Void is the best plan against Flash, you probably did not test the matchup for real. Leyline of the Void is one of the lesser threats to Flash. It won't prevent Flash from casting Merchant Scroll or Brainstorm. Nor Tinker, nor Oath of Druids. Flash can actually be immune to graveyard hate G2 and G3.

[AngryPheldagrif]

Well if you think Leyline of the Void is a relevant card against Flash, you can surely expect to lose to Flash "being competently piloted". Leyline of the Void makes them unable to win through the Reveillark Combo if they kept it, and only if they cannot find Chain of Vapor. Poisonous Slivers, Tinker or Oath of Druids are fairly immune to these plans.

Leyline shuts down the Protean Hulk trigger, making Flash unable to win.  It sounds like you didn't know that.  Now you do.

Slivers can be hardcast to get around Leyline if you don't find your bounce spell/enchantment removal. That's how I interpreted his comment.

I really don't think putting down a 10 turn clock is abjectly frightening to, well, anything. You can also hardcast DSC to get around a Meddling Mage on Tinker but it's not exactly a relevant strategy. Toad's arguments seem to hinge on the idea that starting with a Leyline in play means the deck has nothing else to do except sit on its hands while Flash finds an answer and wins. I see many Flash lists these days not even sideboarding Reverent Silence. I think Toad is giving the deck far too much credit that it can reliably tutor up a solution AND find Flash/Hulk AND get around any other relevant disruption done in the meantime, all before the opponent does much of consequence to affect the game.

It is impossible to win this argument because Toad can reference any of Flash's dozen possible sideboards in argument. Of course Deez Naughts can win against a 100 card sideboard. That's why the DCI limits it to 15.  And according to his arguments Flash can operate with virtual impunity. Of course Leyline doesn't prevent Merchant Scroll or Brainstorm from being cast. What the heck does that have to do with anything? Do you expect us to sideboard in Meddling Mages to stop those or something?

[Demonic Attorney]

We have had several reports based on posts in this thread.  Please stop with the unnecessary personal attacks and snarky retorts.  They're not necessary and only serve to detract from the discussion.  Further problems will result in warnings.

[Toad]

I see many Flash lists these days not even sideboarding Reverent Silence.

I played Flash at a tournament with Reverent Silence in the board. I never brought them for the entiere tournament, and I'm still wondering why you would want to run Reverent Silence in the SB. That's something I don't understand.

Of course Leyline doesn't prevent Merchant Scroll or Brainstorm from being cast. What the heck does that have to do with anything?

Well the reasoning behind this is quite obvious if you have tested the matchup a bit, which I assumed (wrongly?) you did.
It depends on what Flash is doing Game 2 and Game 3.

1. Flash transformed. This makes your Leylines of the Void completely irrelevant (unless you aggressively mulliganed for it, in which case your opponent would thank you for playing Leylines) which could kinda end the discussion, but still ... Flash will usually go for Oath of Druids or/and Tinker, with Platinum Angel for target. This is the most common transformational sideboard plan for Flash. In this configuration, Flash's main plan will be to get a Platinum Angel on the board and then protect it, taking the Control route and forcing DeezNaught into Aggro role. It is pretty obvious that the key cards here are Merchant Scroll, either for finding Tinker with a Mystical Tutor chain or for grabbing Pacts of Negation to fight your answers, and Brainstorm to hide stuff from Thoughtseize and Duress, or to dig for more countermagic and sometimes mana sources.

2. Flash kept in Flash mode. Flash will be expecting hate coming, with Duress and Thoughtseizes as disruption. When expecting discard, it is pretty obvious that you do not want to sit with Flash into your hand. This is why Flash will rather want to cast Brainstorm in response to discard, or sit safe with Sensei's Divining Top on the board, with their key cards still in the deck. With Brainstorms and Sensei's Divining Top combined with the fetchlands, you will end up finding either a Flash, or a bounce for the Leyline of the Void. This is when Flash will want to cast Merchant Scroll, to grab the missing part of its equation, or sometimes a Pact of Negation or Gigadrowse when both are available. Once again, from Flash perspective, the key cards there are Merchant Scroll and Brainstorm, with Sensei's Divining Top being third.

Leyline of the Void thus has a marginal use in case 2, and is completely irrelevant in case 1. In both examples, Merchant Scroll and Brainstorm are the most important cards for Flash. Against DeezNaught I will always go for the Control role when playing Flash, which basically makes all your solutions to address the card Flash rather weak. I would pretty much compare this to casting Engineered Plague against Slaver, or naming Exalted Angel with your Meddling Mage a few years ago when playing against 4CC. It has no impact on these decks main game plans.

Do you expect us to sideboard in Meddling Mages to stop those or something?

I would seriously care more about Meddling Mage naming Merchant Scroll than about Leyline of the Void being in play. This seems to be a very good SB plan for DeezNaught in the Flash matchup, assuming you can support the White splash. Good idea overall.

[Anusien]

To the people who have witnessed Flash making Vintage unplayable/not fun for Vintage players:
Why do you think Flash is doing this in greater numbers than Ichorid?

[Shock Wave]

To the people who have witnessed Flash making Vintage unplayable/not fun for Vintage players:
Why do you think Flash is doing this in greater numbers than Ichorid?

This is probably because Flash is played in greater numbers. I'm not sure I understand the relevance of this question. Can you please elaborate?

[Moxlotus]

To the people who have witnessed Flash making Vintage unplayable/not fun for Vintage players:
Why do you think Flash is doing this in greater numbers than Ichorid?

Ichorid doesn't kill on turn 1 with counter backup.  It kills turn 2 less often than Flash.  Its sideboard options are much more limited than Flash's are.

[dicemanx]

I really don't think putting down a 10 turn clock is abjectly frightening to, well, anything.

Two slivers reduces it into a 3 turn clock. Furthermore, you'll be mulling hands 60% of the time to find Leyline, and along with any other inconsequential board hate you bring in it is very possible to get beat down before getting your own gameplan going. This is the problem with Leyline - even if the Flash opponent elects not to transform out of the Flash kill you still have to get lucky and find Leyline (if that is your principal hate card) without crippling your opening hand in he process. Even if you get Leyline down and have an otherwise decent hand they will have outs (2-3 bounce) with 7 tutors and 7-8 BS/Ponder/Top to find the outs. It is still a game with chances for both sides, not a rout.

I'm always wary of any claims that SBing in powerful hate cards automatically makes for a favorable match-up. I've been dealing with this for the past 3-4 years with WGD, where people used to make outrageous claims how their decks "crushed" WGD just because they added some Crypts and bounce to their SB. Flash is much more resilient than WGD (due to the superior draw/search power and lower mana curve) and I just can't see any deck claiming a favorable match-up regardless of what they have in the SB apart from those that are stacked against Flash maindeck to begin with (like Landstill).

[Anusien]

To the people who have witnessed Flash making Vintage unplayable/not fun for Vintage players:
Why do you think Flash is doing this in greater numbers than Ichorid?

This is probably because Flash is played in greater numbers. I'm not sure I understand the relevance of this question. Can you please elaborate?

Ichorid is in many ways more non-interactive than Flash.  It kills slower, but it's more resistant to the types of that that Flash loses to.  Flash is counterable, but the Ichorid spells are not and they have Therapies.  Before Flash made it "big", it was Ichorid that was supposedly driving people away.  So I'm curious.

[Zherbus]

It kills slower

By 1-2 turns unmolested. Giving people turns is a pretty neat thing.

I can't pretend to have the right answers for this, though I have my opinions. But there's no question in my mind why there's a fundamental difference.

[Shock Wave]

To the people who have witnessed Flash making Vintage unplayable/not fun for Vintage players:
Why do you think Flash is doing this in greater numbers than Ichorid?

This is probably because Flash is played in greater numbers. I'm not sure I understand the relevance of this question. Can you please elaborate?

Ichorid is in many ways more non-interactive than Flash.  It kills slower, but it's more resistant to the types of that that Flash loses to.  Flash is counterable, but the Ichorid spells are not and they have Therapies.  Before Flash made it "big", it was Ichorid that was supposedly driving people away.  So I'm curious.

Ichorid and Flash violate different principles of interactivity. Flash prevents interactivity by killing an opponent before they get a chance to play. Ichorid (moreso the Manaless version) violates interactivity by attempting to execute a very linear game plan that is indifferent to anything the opponent may be doing.

I'm not arguing that Ichorid is any more or less interactive than Flash, but as Zherbus indicated, the fact that you're almost certain to get a turn against Ichorid is a very fundamental difference from Flash in the degree of interactivity violation. I really don't want this thread to turn into an Ichorid debate, as that is a whole other can of worms, so let's try to leave that topic out of this discussion.

[Shock Wave]

Yesterday, 27 players gathered at a Vintage event in Barrie, about 1 hour north of Toronto. Flash was the archetype played in the highest numbers of all other archetypes, comprising 6 of the 27 decks. Half of the Top 8 was comprised of Flash decks, and Flash split in the finals. The overwhelming majority of the field agreed that Flash was horrible for Vintage and that it is awful to play in a Flash metagame.

Edit: Thanks for clarifying Steve.
Edit: There were 6 confirmed Flash decks in the field.

[Smmenen]

Yesterday, 27 players gathered at a Vintage event in Barrie, about 1 hour north of Toronto. Flash comprised the majority of the field with 5 (6?) appearances. Half of the Top 8 was comprised of Flash decks, and Flash split in the finals. The overwhelming majority of the field agreed that Flash was horrible for Vintage and that it is awful to play in a Flash metagame.

5 or 6 is a majority of 27?   

[Akuma]

Flash was the archetype played in the highest numbers of all other archetypes, comprising 5 (6?) of the 27 decks. Half of the Top 8 was comprised of Flash decks, and Flash split in the finals.

Were the players playing Flash some of the best in the room or were they average players who did not deserve to be there?

[Shock Wave]

Flash was the archetype played in the highest numbers of all other archetypes, comprising 5 (6?) of the 27 decks. Half of the Top 8 was comprised of Flash decks, and Flash split in the finals.

Were the players playing Flash some of the best in the room or were they average players who did not deserve to be there?

Edit - Quoting James Harris who played Flash to a T8 finish: "I fully believe I did not deserve to T8 as I played poorly all day long." James played 13 games and won 4 on his first turn. That's rather obscene.

I played Flash and made the T8. I didn't make very many important decisions on my way to the quarter-finals, and from watching the other Flash players, neither did they.

R1: Bye (I watch two other Flash players [Dave and Ben] win on turn 1 with protection)

R2: White Weenie (filled with hate and beat Flash in R1)

G1: I win on Turn 1 with multiple counter backup.
G2: He resolves a Samurai thingy, and plows my tinkered Collosus, but that gives me the time to build up the mana to play Hulk + protection. He holds off the beaters for a few turns, and eventually I play Angel with three Pacts backing it up.

R3: RB Goblins

G1: I win on Turn 1 with FoW backup.
G2: He boards in Leylines, Extirpates, REB, blah blah. He plays Leyline, I FoW his Lackey. I play Top on my turn, and he has no further threats. I Top, work around his hate, and beat him down with Hulk + Angel.

R4: I ID, because I can't knock out my opponent and it won't benefit anyone if I win or lose. Otherwise, I would have played.

T8: Counterbalance

G1: I have a Turn 2-ish hand, but my opponent has Duress, FoW, Lotus, Scroll in his opener. I Brainstorm in response to his Duress, but I have to let him take my FoW and hide my combo pieces instead. He resolves Ancestral and I'm unable to get back in the game.

G2: I know that postboard, he has Leyline, Duress, REB, FoW. I transform, but he opts not to side in the Leyline, which really hurts my chances to win. As a result, he is better equipped to play the control role and locks me quickly.

I think that was probably the worst matchup I've had with Flash, primarily because I had to play against my teammate in the T8 and he has extensive experience playing against my list and knows exactly what to expect post sideboard.

I played only 6 actual games of Magic, and two of those were won on Turn 1 (and both with backup!). I'm not surprised that the number of times this happened falls in the 20% range. Several other Flash players enjoyed multiple first turn kills (with or without backup?).

[AngryPheldagrif]

We had 45 people show up for a highly successful ICBM Open #3. Of those, 5 were Flash (11% of the metagame) and a single one of those made T8 where it was promptly beaten.

We took an informal straw poll and found that while Flash had figured into the consideration of most of those present, the strongly overwhelming majority (see: 90% or more) felt that Flash was just another deck to them and not at all restriction-worthy. A handful considered Merchant Scroll a bit over the top, but most were perfectly fine with the metagame as it was. According to the metagame breakdown, there were no decks with more than 5 present out of the field (Empty Gush was represented equally with Flash) and the top 8 was in fact 8 distinct decks, with Goblins and Tyrant Oath splitting in the finals.

I saw at least one turn 1 kill by Flash, however I also saw turn one kills by Mana Ichorid (by my first round opponent in game 1 to open up a depressing day), Long, even my own Empty Gush had a turn 1 kill. I also saw plenty of miserable Flash players mulliganing into oblivion and getting trounced by everything from Meddling Mage to bread-and-butter Leylines of the Void. I watched them utilize all the different boards (Oath, Slivers, Tinker, anti-hate) and still get beaten up on.

Maybe the Midwest is just an isolated island of calm in the middle of a Flash-boiled sea, but I certainly didn't notice anything to change my opinion on the matter. 11% of the metagame, 12.5% of the T8, and zero complaints by the players.

[Tha Gunslinga]

Oh, and Flash lost in the top 8.  It's nice to finally see some data that the sky is indeed not falling.

[dicemanx]

Oh, and Flash lost in the top 8.  It's nice to finally see some data that the sky is indeed not falling.

Can you clarify how Flash losing in the top 8 supports the argument that Flash isn't a problem in this format with specific reference to the arguments made in the article and echoed in this thread. Can you also point out who has implied that the "sky is falling" that this tidbit of evidence was supposed to contribute towards countering?

Maybe the Midwest is just an isolated island of calm in the middle of a Flash-boiled sea, but I certainly didn't notice anything to change my opinion on the matter. 11% of the metagame, 12.5% of the T8, and zero complaints by the players.

How many people have to find Flash a problem for it to be a problem? The arguments put forth in the article and in this thread are not contingent on a 100% consensus on the matter. It is clear that an archetype will not be a problem everywhere, because players vary in terms of their threshold of tolerance. All your poll indicates is that the local players have a higher threshold; however, it doesn't address the question of whether the deck's existence does more harm than good.

See, it isn't enough to ask whether Flash is a problem specifically for a particular person. What needs to be asked are questions such as the following:

1) Do you understand the arguments against Flash, and how it impacts their enjoyment of the game?

2) Do you accept the fact that many individuals consider Flash a problem because they have lower thresholds of tolerance? (Are the anti-Flash advocates "wrong" in this debate?)

3) Do you believe that such individuals (whether newer or older players) could be pushed away from the T1 format, thus negatively impacting you down the line?

4) If you believe that Flash isn't a problem, but you see individuals around you who are growing dissatisfied with the current state of affairs, what efforts are you making in ensuring that we retain and encourage participation in T1:
   a) I make no efforts
   b) I disparage those making anti-Flash arguments (by calling them whiners and twisting their argument into one of a problem stemming from dominance)
   c) I attempt to address the arguments against Flash by focusing on the issues of game quality and distortion by demonstrating with evidence that this isn't an actual problem
   d) I attempt to push Flash out of the format because I believe that adding hate cards to any archetype will automatically generate a favorable match up for me against the archetype I'm hating
   e) <insert any other argument here, whether rational or irrational>

5) Do you believe that Flash contributes so positively to the format that you would contemplate leaving the format if Flash was neutered via restrictions?

6) If you are ambivalent on the issue and would continue enjoying the format regardless of the stance the DCI takes on Flash during the next round of B/R restrictions, what do you think about the argument that something should be done because of the dissatisfaction expressed by a significant number of your peers?

[Tha Gunslinga]

4) If you believe that Flash isn't a problem, but you see individuals around you who are growing dissatisfied with the current state of affairs, what efforts are you making in ensuring that we retain and encourage participation in T1:
   a) I make no efforts
   b) I disparage those making anti-Flash arguments (by calling them whiners and twisting their argument into one of a problem stemming from dominance)
   c) I attempt to address the arguments against Flash by focusing on the issues of game quality and distortion by demonstrating with evidence that this isn't an actual problem
   d) I attempt to push Flash out of the format because I believe that adding hate cards to any archetype will automatically generate a favorable match up for me against the archetype I'm hating
   e) <insert any other argument here, whether rational or irrational>

F.  I got 45 people out to play Vintage yesterday.  Flash clearly wasn't an issue for THEM, and I would have gotten even more people had I held the tournament on a Saturday.  This is a record turnout, and I don't see Flash pushing anyone away from Vintage.  Yes, a few people claim that they're not playing because of it, but these are quitters who would find another reason not to play anyway.  There have always been good decks.  After yesterday I wouldn't call Flash a tier 1 deck.  Tyrant Oath has won the last two ICBM Opens, which are 40-person tournaments with extremely good players.  Why is Flash worth worrying about but Oath not?  Oath is winning.  Flash is not.  Eudemonia was split by Tyrant Oath (see a pattern?) and Gush Tendrils.  Hey, look what won Blue Bell!  Tyrant Oath!  ELD's Lotus top 4 had 1 Flash and...one Tyrant Oath!  The Wizard's Tower tournament in Canada was split by...9Ball and Bomberman!  The Colorado Black Gold tournament was won by...Ichorid!

So yeah, clearly we can justify restricting Flash.  Because it's not winning.  At all.

You asked why I would want to infringe on people's enjoyment of Vintage by supporting Flash's legality.  Why do you want to ruin Vintage for me by adding a card to the restricted list that doesn't belong on there?  You want to KILL a deck that doesn't deserve it.  Flash is the ONLY deck holding Tyrant Oath back.  You need to leave well enough alone and let the metagame work itself out, which it's doing.

[dicemanx]

So let me get this straight. Flash is the "only" deck holding Tyrant Oath back, and yet it isn't winning and isn't a top tier deck in your opinion. How exactly is it managing this feat then? The issue with Tyrant Oath that you seem to have has nothing in common with the issue surrounding Flash itself. You also continuously perpetuate the idea that restriction arguments are based on a dominance criterion. You have yet to demonstrate that you understand what people are actually complaining about, because your contributions in this thread and other threads have been consistently off the mark in that regard. Even if Flash did not make any top 8s the arguments against it wouldn't be any less valid.

Also, explain what you mean by claiming that Flash restriction proponents would "ruin" vintage magic for you if we added a card to the restricted list. If Flash isn't even on your radar as far as top tier archetypes are concerned, what exactly would be "ruined"?

Basically, your argument is that Flash does more good that offsets the bad (by holding Tyrant Oath in check) and yet no shred of evidence is presented supporting this assertion.

[Methuselahn]

First off, I couldn't care less if Flash is restricted anymore.  There will always be some busted deck out there sitting at the top.

Personally, I like the fact that Vintage feels like playing Blackjack.  I like games that are decided by the opening draw.  Little interaction is what it's all about.  Heck, I'd say this is the very soul of Vintage.  From day 1, Moxen and Lotus have been at the epicenter of this format, promoting broken plays and non-interaction.  Their very existence fuels this stupid format with unfair play.  Is it even possible to make an interactive format when the core cards themselves do nothing but create unfair, broken plays?  The last 6 years or so that I've been playing suggest a big fat No.   

Vintage, like the other formats with large card pools, always runs the risk of becoming non-interactive, meaning the games are little more than both players "goldfishing" to see who can win first. Trinisphere adds to that problem by literally preventing the opponent from playing spells. We don’t want Magic to be about that, especially not that easily. If combo rears its head, we’ll worry about it later. But for now, we want to people to play their cards. Really.”

-Aaron Forsythe

 
The problem with this flapping of the gums is that he assumes non-interaction is a bad thing.  Refer to what I said above regarding Moxen and insert the argument that people play Vintage because they like jewelry, which are busted.

So yea, I'm not in the same camp as Rich, who has written a great article, btw.  I have to be honest, I didn't read the games that were played out.  Personally, I absolutely loathe reading play-by-matches because it will always be a limited sample, and also, I've played the decks in testing before and so I have a pretty good idea how hands pan out.  *shrug*

I'm definitely not trying to troll here, but the issue seems to all boil down to what is fun.  My opinion is that Vintage and Flash are fine bedmates.