So Few Insane Plays - The Vintage Apocalypse: Demolition Slated For 6/20/08

[Smmenen]

http://www.starcitygames.com/php/news/article/15964.html

blurb:

Yesterday saw the most sweeping changes to the Vintage Banned and Restricted list for a number of years, with a swathe of Blue tournament staples becoming mere one-ofs in future decklists. Today’s renamed So Many Insane Plays sees Vintage World Champion Stephen Menendian analyze the changes, and evaluate the disappearance of Brainstorm and pals…

My summary:

I knew that some big changes were coming, so I asked Craig if he could delay my article until they happened so that I could tackle them.   In today's article, I put these changes in their historical context, canvassing all restrictions over the last decade.  It turns out that this is the most radical and sweeping set of restrictions since 1999!   Secondly, I analyze the impact of the restrictions both in specifics and metagame shifts.   Finally, I discuss my feelings about these restrictions, pointing out where the DCI did well and where they may have gone too far. 

But that's not all: I discuss potential decks for the future.

My first innovation of the new Vintage metagame, a deck which I think could be a top tier deck in the near future:

Bazaar Oath:
http://sales.starcitygames.com/deckdatabase/displaydeck.php?DeckID=25011

I discuss the card choices and explain why this deck may be a huge threat in the new metagame!

[Shock Wave]

Great article Steve. I highly empathize and agree with the following statement:

I have long since given up allowing myself to become too emotionally connected to what I feel is correct policy or to the high point of managing the restricted list – the period from 2000 through 2006. I can tell now that the guard has changed in the DCI, that new voices have emerged. So long as Vintage continues to benefit in terms of popularity, it doesn’t matter to me whether I disagree in principle. My principles are based on the notion that a hands-off approach is the healthiest approach for the format as a whole, since bad restrictions can do more damage than no restrictions. I support restrictions on two grounds: obvious brokenness/format dominance (See the Scroll engine or Mind’s Desire) or simply unfunness that drives people from the format (see Trinisphere or Flash).

.. although I'm not so sure that bad restrictions are worse than no restrictions. Sometimes the format becomes so stagnant and boring (Trinisphere era) that to allow it to continue would be worse than to not make a move, even a bad one. Also, while you did comment on how you felt about the restrictions on an individual basis, you never specified how you felt about the decision as a whole (or did I miss that part?).

I, for one, agree with your individual assessment of each restriction, and feel that while Ponder was a mistake, that the move was good for the format overall. Whether that is actually true, we will have to wait and see.

[nataz]

I think you hit the nail on the head steve, and def mirror what I'm feeling right now. I'm excited about whats possible in the new format. Is careful study suddenly good? It draws 2 cards, discards 2 cards all for the price of U? With brainstorm and ponder, obv its not in contention, but now we have a whole new yardstick to measure goodness!

Oh, and simply the idea that CA could be good again makes me shiver with joy! With out gush in the format, Bazaar as a draw engine (and not simply a dredge enabler) becomes good again! 

[Smmenen]

Decklist:

Bazaar Oath
by Stephen Menendian

Artifacts
1 Black Lotus
1 Mox Emerald
1 Mox Jet
1 Mox Pearl
1 Mox Ruby
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Tormod's Crypt

Creatures
3 Tidespout Tyrant

Enchantments
4 Oath Of Druids

Instants
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Brain Freeze
1 Brainstorm
1 Chain Of Vapor
1 Fire / Ice
1 Flash Of Insight
4 Force Of Will
1 Gush
1 Krosan Reclamation
1 Mystical Tutor
1 Vampiric Tutor

Sorceries
4 Deep Analysis
1 Demonic Tutor
2 Duress
1 Imperial Seal
1 Merchant Scroll
1 Ponder
2 Thoughtseize
1 Time Walk
1 Yawgmoth's Will

Basic Lands
1 Island

Lands
4 Bazaar Of Baghdad
2 Flooded Strand
4 Forbidden Orchard
3 Polluted Delta
2 Tropical Island
2 Underground Sea

[bluemage55]

I have a few concerns with Bazaar Oath:

No Mana Drain
I'll venture a guess that you are not running Drain because of the awkwardness in setting up UU in a deck where Bazaar takes up land drops.  This does mean that the control package is running light, especially compared to ICBM Oath.  If we do see a resurgence of combo as some players have been predicting, will Duress x4 and FoW x4 be enough?

Bazaar Dependency
It would appear that this deck critically depends on Bazaar for its draw engine.  Bazaar, and thus your draw engine, is vulnerable to certain cards:

Wasteland: Meadbert has been predicting an increase in Wastelands.  With no Loam maindeck, can early Wasteland -> Bazaar cause trouble for this deck?

Pithing Needle: Needle -> Bazaar is even worse.

Leyline of the Void/Tormod's Crypt: They don't stop you from filtering dead cards, but they also have the bonus of shutting down any Deep Anals you might manage to hardcast.

Can this deck recover if Bazaar is attacked early on?

Tormod's Crypt
Is this a meta call, or is Bazaar Oath particularly susceptible to graveyard-based strategies?

Removal
I asked this on the ICBM oath thread as well, but are Chain of Vapor x1 + Fire/Ice x1 sufficient removal without access to Scroll, especially given that you're playing a deck that has a reasonable probability of sticking those in the graveyard when you need them?

Also, why CoV over E. Truth, considering your opponent gets the chance to bounce your Tyrant and potentially buy a turn?

[Smmenen]

A Loam can easily be maindecked.  that would address your concerns regarding Wasteland and even get at Oath mirror, orchard wars. 

This deck does use Bazaar, but it is not dependent upon it, at least no more than Worldgorger Dragon.  There happen to be a number of other opening draws that are relevant:  Brainstorm, Ponder, Scroll, DT, Vampiric Tutor, Mystical Tutor,  Imperial Seal, AND Four Oaths.    When you add those 11 cards to your 4 Bazaars, that's 15 possible openings that can get you to something you can use or to get your game plan going.   

As for Mana Drain lacking, this deck is not designed to get into control wars.  It's intended to force an Oath into play and then win the game or at least bounce the opponent's permanents with Tyrant and protect itself until it can go off with Will.   If someone does play Tormod's Crypt, it's not that big of a deal.  Just win with Tyrant or bounce the Crypt with the Tyrant.   

[Tiki Walker]

I have a few concerns with Bazaar Oath:

Also, why CoV over E. Truth, considering your opponent gets the chance to bounce your Tyrant and potentially buy a turn?

It is possible that Mr. Stephen might want to include the Chain of Vapor not primarily to bounce opponent's permanents, but to use it on his own board position to generate storm count for the brain freeze, or to bounce relevant opponent's permanents at the cost of a few of his lands when his Tidespout Tyrant is already in play...

[bluemage55]

A Loam can easily be maindecked.  that would address your concerns regarding Wasteland and even get at Oath mirror, orchard wars.   

Indeed, I see a lot utility to be had out of a singleton Loam.

This deck does use Bazaar, but it is not dependent upon it, at least no more than Worldgorger Dragon.  There happen to be a number of other opening draws that are relevant:  Brainstorm, Ponder, Scroll, DT, Vampiric Tutor, Mystical Tutor,  Imperial Seal, AND Four Oaths.    When you add those 11 cards to your 4 Bazaars, that's 15 possible openings that can get you to something you can use or to get your game plan going.   

My main concern is that when you don't have Bazaar, you're gonna run out of steam really quickly if you are unable to power an Oath through Disruption/Removal (which has significant problems as you don't have enough disruption to win control/disruption wars.  I suppose as a Drain player I'm just skeptical of situations where you don't have a long-term plan.

As for Mana Drain lacking, this deck is not designed to get into control wars.  It's intended to force an Oath into play and then win the game or at least bounce the opponent's permanents with Tyrant and protect itself until it can go off with Will.   

I guessed as much, but I'm asking what the game plan is against an opposing combo deck against whom having only FoW x4 and Duress x4 may be problematic.  Just going off faster with Oath seems unreliable as Oath requires until turn 2 IF you manage to drop it on turn 1 with Orchard, and will more likely take until turns 3-4 to activate reliably.

If someone does play Tormod's Crypt, it's not that big of a deal.  Just win with Tyrant or bounce the Crypt with the Tyrant.   

I apologize for being unclear, but I was actually asking about your choice of one maindeck Crypt.

[bluemage55]

It is possible that Mr. Stephen might want to include the Chain of Vapor not primarily to bounce opponent's permanents, but to use it on his own board position to generate storm count for the brain freeze, or to bounce relevant opponent's permanents at the cost of a few of his lands when his Tidespout Tyrant is already in play...

CoV doesn't work like that.  You cannot sacrifice multiple lands to bounce multiple relevant opposing permanents unless your opponent is willing to sacrifice their own lands and trade with you.

[Moxlotus]

It is possible that Mr. Stephen might want to include the Chain of Vapor not primarily to bounce opponent's permanents, but to use it on his own board position to generate storm count for the brain freeze, or to bounce relevant opponent's permanents at the cost of a few of his lands when his Tidespout Tyrant is already in play...

CoV doesn't work like that.  You cannot sacrifice multiple lands to bounce multiple relevant opposing permanents unless your opponent is willing to sacrifice their own lands and trade with you.

re-read what you quoted.  He would be targeting his own stuff with the Chain and targeting his opponent's cards with Tyrant.

Also, why CoV over E. Truth, considering your opponent gets the chance to bounce your Tyrant and potentially buy a turn?

Chalice of the void at 2.

[bluemage55]

re-read what you quoted.  He would be targeting his own stuff with the Chain and targeting his opponent's cards with Tyrant.

Ahh.  Missed the end.

Chalice of the void at 2.

Is not Chalice at 1 more likely?

[Xyre]

I can appreciate the value of innovation, Steve, but I believe that singleton Brainstorm and Ponder does not an engine make. What drove the blue decks of old was the fact that you could chain these cards together, not just that Brainstorm is a draw 3. Without anything beyond Bazaar as a large draw engine, I worry that this deck will run out of gas too fast.

This banning doesn't mean we can simply recycle the old decks and find new solutions. I think this requires a paradigm shift.

[Moxlotus]

re-read what you quoted.  He would be targeting his own stuff with the Chain and targeting his opponent's cards with Tyrant.

Ahh.  Missed the end.

Chalice of the void at 2.

Is not Chalice at 1 more likely?

Why would you cast Chalice for 1 instead of Chalice for 2 against Oath?

Without anything beyond Bazaar as a large draw engine, I worry that this deck will run out of gas too fast.

Did you look at the decklist?  Deep Analysis was a 4-of.  In a deck with 4 Bazaars.

[Smmenen]

I can appreciate the value of innovation, Steve, but I believe that singleton Brainstorm and Ponder does not an engine make. What drove the blue decks of old was the fact that you could chain these cards together, not just that Brainstorm is a draw 3. Without anything beyond Bazaar as a large draw engine, I worry that this deck will run out of gas too fast.

This banning doesn't mean we can simply recycle the old decks and find new solutions. I think this requires a paradigm shift.

It is a paradigm shift.  The engine is not singletone B-storm and Ponder, it's Bazaar and Deep Analysis.  Bazaar gives you early dig and late game search.  Deep Analysis is a late game and early game draw engine.  The deck is also packed with enough "junk" that early bazaar usage doesn't hurt.  You have extra Tyrants, additional bazaars, and flashback spells that each activation of bazaar is meant to be productive. 

I think the metagame will be:

Workshop decks, Ichorid, and Control Slaver decks at the top.  In that metagame, I see this deck as a big solution.  You have a trump to the Workshop and aggro side of the metagame and should have enough power to fight Slaver while even being able to race Ichorid.  I think its overly simplistic to say that this is simply an old solution to an old problem.  I think that its a revised solution to a mix of old and new problems. 

[bluemage55]

Why would you cast Chalice for 1 instead of Chalice for 2 against Oath?

The Shop deck may not be aware of their opponent in game 1, and/or has Sphere in play and is attempting to lock the blue deck out of the game.

Did you look at the decklist?  Deep Analysis was a 4-of.  In a deck with 4 Bazaars.

The context of that statement was if Bazaar gets attacked.

[Hydra]

With the death of Ponder, Merchant Scroll and especially Brainstorm I'm a bit curious as to why you'd be in a rush to drop a "blind" Chalice to begin with.  You can no longer count on the fact that 75-80% of the format is running the same draw engine that you can disrupt with cutting them off Brainstorm or Merchant Scroll, so you run an increased risk of playing a dead card and cutting yourself off Goblin Welders or Spheres.  With 9 Spheres available to you as "run out there blind" threats and the format no doubt going to be diversifying their own threats it seems more likely that the smart Stax players are going to hold back Chalices till they know they can bring the hammer down with them.  Perhaps once the metagame stabilizes you'd have enough information to make a "blind" decision in regards to Chalice, but as it stands with the meta in total flux it's a complete crap shoot, and you should almost always have a play that's better than "total crap shoot" available to you.

[LordHomerCat]

Why would you cast Chalice for 1 instead of Chalice for 2 against Oath?

The Shop deck may not be aware of their opponent in game 1, and/or has Sphere in play and is attempting to lock the blue deck out of the game.

Did you look at the decklist?  Deep Analysis was a 4-of.  In a deck with 4 Bazaars.

The context of that statement was if Bazaar gets attacked.

If they play Chalice at 1 against your Oath deck, then I think you just cast oath and your 1cc spells don't matter anymore.  So who cares about bouncing chalice 1?

[bluemage55]

If they play Chalice at 1 against your Oath deck, then I think you just cast oath and your 1cc spells don't matter anymore.  So who cares about bouncing chalice 1?

That makes great sense.  Thank you for the insight.

[Mantis]

Looks really powerful, especially against disruption light decks. The Bazaar engine is really prone to disruption nevertheless (Wasteland, GY removal, Needle etc.), but it's not hard to find Oath in any case. I thought Oath would see a decline in popularity, but after seeing this deck I believe it will become one of the dominant forces in T1.

One point of criticism though, with 4 Orchard, 4 Bazaar and no Fastbond, is Gush really worth it?

[brianpk80]

Although it's difficult to discern from the raw decklist, this, in practice, is a Suicide deck that will have a terrible Fish/aggro match-up barring God draws.  Between Orchard tokens, Deep Analysis x4, and 2 Thoughtseizes, one would have to expect an average sacfirice of approx. 8-10 life in any given game that lasts more than five turns.  I don't get the use of Bazaar without some way of reaping some serious card advantage beyond Deep Analysis.  The absence of Life from the Loam and Intuition is troubling.  The deck has five islands total and uses a singleton Gush.  Why?

Credit given for innovation, but it seems the proper direction for this deck is towards a Dragon/Oath hybrid, using Animates as well as Oath of Druids to exploit the raw power of the Tyrant.  In my experience, Bazaar + Oath of Druids is an awkward match, but perhaps someone can tweak it to fit the Tyrant objective.     

[hvndr3d y34r h3x]

I've noticed that some people really dislike the singleton gush. personally I've had a lot of luck running gush as a 4 of with 5 island 5 fetch, the island count seems fine. I do agree with brian though, as cute as bazaar + deep analysis is, I don't think it is particularly over powered in an oath shell. In other oath shells, people constantly suggest running deep analysis. I've tested it, and have never been happy with it, as brian stated, between the tokens, thoughseize, fetch lands, and fow, it can sometimes feel like your opponent's game is to just deal you 5.

If this deck does take a turn towards the dragon/oath hybrid, I suggest running bogarden hellkite over tyrant, it removes things like bobs, welders, and other problem aggro, easily hard casted, and can be reoccurred in the drsgon engine for an instant win (eliminating other targets that are situationally terrible to oath out in certain game states)

[Implacable]

...while even being able to race Ichorid.

Steve, I really like your new deck, blah blah blah, but what I really wanted to do was address this little statement here: it's false.  Oath is not a Turn 2 deck, whereas Ichorid is, and Ichorid furthermore has a good deal of disruption in those first few turns.  Your matchup, with board, probably is positive against Ichorid, but you cannot 'race' Ichorid Game 1 except with a truly extraordinary opener.

[Smmenen]

If you have a turn one or two Oath, you can race them.  Although Ichorid often wins on turn two, it's not always the case.  Therefore, it could be a race. 

[Implacable]

If you have a turn one or two Oath, you can race them.  Although Ichorid often wins on turn two, it's not always the case.  Therefore, it could be a race. 

I think it's fair to say that it's highly unlikely for you to play an Oath on Turn 1 - there's about a 16% chance - and that a Turn 2 Oath is almost always too late (because Ichorid usually kills by Turn 2 or at the latest Turn 3, so any Oath player who has a Turn 2 Oath on the draw loses and on the play they still loses half the time or so).  So sure, it could be a race, just as Drain Tendrils could race GWx Tendrils, or whatever, but is unlikely to.  Any deck that doesn't kill with an instant and rapid combo has to rely on hate to consistently beat Dredge, and that's what your Oath deck can do.  To say otherwise - to claim, as we like to, that your deck HAS NO UNFAVORABLE MATCHUPS, JUST LIKE MY LAST ONE - is misleading. 

But your Oath list can still beat Dredge, so we're good.

[brianpk80]

I think it's fair to say that it's highly unlikely for you to play an Oath on Turn 1 - there's about a 16% chance - and that a Turn 2 Oath is almost always too late (because Ichorid usually kills by Turn 2 or at the latest Turn 3, so any Oath player who has a Turn 2 Oath on the draw loses and on the play they still loses half the time or so).  So sure, it could be a race, just as Drain Tendrils could race GWx Tendrils, or whatever, but is unlikely to.  Any deck that doesn't kill with an instant and rapid combo has to rely on hate to consistently beat Dredge, and that's what your Oath deck can do.  To say otherwise - to claim, as we like to, that your deck HAS NO UNFAVORABLE MATCHUPS, JUST LIKE MY LAST ONE - is misleading. 

All true.  Ichorid is not a favorable Game 1 for Tyrant Oath and the match-up depends on the Oath player's board.  Fish & Stax variants are also pretty engaging; not easy wins by any stretch. 

[ix-ir]

Smmenen - are you really happy with the restriction of Brainstorm? I get the sense that you're agreeing with the restriction in your head and to take a moderate position in disagreeing with the changes over all while not agreeing in your heart, sorry I can't really put it better than that. As the Brainstorm restriction doesn't seem to do the slightest thing to the dominance of blue it seems pointless. Decks that run fairly smoothly are good, Brainstorm increases the choices available and the likely-hood that players can find answers so I think rewards skill. It seems strange to feel so determined to shake the format up when it seemed to be doing so well.

[Implacable]

As the Brainstorm restriction doesn't seem to do the slightest thing to the dominance of blue it seems pointless.

Really?  You really don't think that Shop decks, and Dredge, and all aggro decks, didn't get better with the restriction of Brainstorm?  'Cause, err, it seems to me like they did.

Decks that run fairly smoothly are good, Brainstorm increases the choices available and the likely-hood that players can find answers so I think rewards skill.

Actually, making the game easier and making decks run more smoothly does not reward skill.  A skilled deck designer, in fact, attempts to defy impositions that the format places on what they can do; what Brainstorm did was promote laziness by making it possible to win with bad manabases and suboptimal, more random scatterings of cards (1-ofs). 

[Moxlotus]

Really?  You really don't think that Shop decks, and Dredge, and all aggro decks, didn't get better with the restriction of Brainstorm?  'Cause, err, it seems to me like they did.

No, because Workshop preyed upon those decks.  And dredge loses to cards not decks.  And BS wasn't one of the cards it lost to.  Plus with the uproar about Dredge, it will probably face more hate.  Read Steve's latest article.

[Smmenen]

If you have a turn one or two Oath, you can race them.  Although Ichorid often wins on turn two, it's not always the case.  Therefore, it could be a race. 

I think it's fair to say that it's highly unlikely for you to play an Oath on Turn 1 - there's about a 16% chance - and that a Turn 2 Oath is almost always too late

Let's be clear-eyed about it.  I'm not saying that Oath has a favorable game one, but relative to the field, it's a much higher game one percentage.   A turn one Oath, particularly Orchard Oath, is likely to result in an Oath victory.   

Secondly, although I agree with your first statement, I don't agree with your second.  A turn two Oath is "almost always too late"?  I suppose it depends on what is meant by "almost always," but I read that as basically 98% of the time or so.   I don't agree with that.  I think that a turn two Oath is probably at least a 20% - and probably higher - chance of Oath winning. 

Smmenen - are you really happy with the restriction of Brainstorm? I get the sense that you're agreeing with the restriction in your head and to take a moderate position in disagreeing with the changes over all while not agreeing in your heart, sorry I can't really put it better than that. As the Brainstorm restriction doesn't seem to do the slightest thing to the dominance of blue it seems pointless. Decks that run fairly smoothly are good, Brainstorm increases the choices available and the likely-hood that players can find answers so I think rewards skill. It seems strange to feel so determined to shake the format up when it seemed to be doing so well.

You have perceptively read my conflicted impulses on Brainstorm.  At an emotional level, at a visceral level, as a Vintage fanatic, I'm opposed to it.  But a big part of my conflict is that there are conflicting values at play.   Depending on which value we think is more important depends upon whether we think it was the right decision. 

It's interesting.  I sometimes go back through my archive to look for things, but last week I wanted to re-read some past articles just to see what sort of themes I'd been hitting on.   It seems like a few weeks after I write any given article, I've pretty much forgotten everything I've written! 

I was re-reading my Vintage Championship report from last August, and came across this excerpt on Brainstorm:
http://www.starcitygames.com/php/news/article/14640.html

DCI Action?

One of the challenges the DCI has now is to consider what to restrict, unrestrict, or whether to do anything at all. Part of the mess in the Vintage metagame is a consequence of previous interventions by the DCI. If the DCI had not unrestricted Gush and restricted Gifts, I seriously doubt the metagame would look like this. Flash would be good, but GroAtog would not exist and Gifts and Pitch Long would be the other top two decks.

This is part of what I was getting at in a previous article this year when I said that DCI intervention has the potential to do as much harm as good. This is why, with respect to the DCI and Vintage, I’m pretty much a libertarian. Let the free market have its way. It is far more able to find solutions than the DCI is. Worse yet, when players see frequent and aggressive DCI intervention, they come to expect it. Equally troublesome, there is essentially no uniformity of opinion as to what should be done right now. Every person has their own opinion, which probably differs in some important respects from the next person.

Let me lay out the basic (relevant) options and walk you through them.

1 - The DCI does nothing
2 - The DCI restricts Brainstorm
3 - The DCI restricts Gush
4 - The DCI restricts Merchant Scroll
5 - The DCI restricts Flash
6 - The DCI restricts Gush and Flash
7 - The DCI restricts Flash and unrestricts Fact or Fiction

Concurrent with each of these options, the DCI should unrestrict Dream Halls, which is unplayable.

Just as a starting point, it seems to me that the DCI is probably least inclined to reverse decisions most recently made. That is, it would seem to me that if there is a tie between re-restricting Gush and restricting something else in its stead, I would see them doing the latter.

Let’s begin with Option 4: The most elegant and simple solution is to restrict Merchant Scroll. I can’t deny that. Restricting Merchant Scroll significantly slows GAT and Flash, addressing both decks with a single answer. It was probably the card that should have been restricted instead of Gifts Ungiven, since Merchant Scroll is the superior card and the better tutor.

Unfortunately, there are important consequences that flow from this possible decision. First of all, had the DCI not unrestricted Gush, it is far from clear that this would have been necessary. The DCI may be trying to clean up a mistake by making a potentially worse one with unknown consequences. One of those consequences may be the fact that you are creating a critical mass of restrictions in Vintage. It is certainly foreseeable that every Blue deck would then begin deck design as: 1 Ancestral Recall, 1 Time Walk, 1 Merchant Scroll, etc. As you restrict key components in Vintage, especially design components, decks become less consistent, internally synergistic, and more random and less fun to build and play with. They become less internally coherent.

With respect to GroAtog, it isn’t clear to me how effective restricting Merchant Scroll will be. I think it would probably take GAT off the uber-power tier, but GAT could theoretically remain the best deck. After all, GAT in 2003 basically ran 1-2 Merchant Scroll, a design error almost certainly, but that deck was even more dominant in 2003 than GAT is now.

If Merchant Scroll were restricted, here’s the changes I would make to my GAT list:

- 3 Merchant Scroll
+ 1 Imperial Seal
+ 1 Regrowth
+ (unsure of what the third card would be)

From a consideration of those changes, it isn’t at all clear that restricting Merchant Scroll actually addressing GroAtog. It will undoubtedly make it less explosive, but by a margin that is not readily knowable.

Option 2 is actually the most logical, from a perspective of pure logic. Brainstorm is the best unrestricted card in Vintage. It is, tempo-wise, Ancestral Recall. It says "draw three cards for one Blue mana." Sometimes, it is actually better (when you need to hide or shuffle back cards — which many, if not most Vintage decks, seek to do from time to time). Brainstorm helps make GAT and Flash what they are. Without Brainstorm, I’m not sure how viable a deck with the light manabase of GAT would become. You’d have to play probably four Opts, at a minimum. Without Brainstorm, Flash loses its best card drawer. I was talking with Patrick Chapin and we discussed what decks would take if they had the option of playing either four Brainstorms or one Ancestral Recall, but not both. Flash would play three Brainstorms over one Ancestral, that’s how good Brainstorm is in Flash. In fact, I imagine Patrick might even take two Brainstorms over one Ancestral, if push came to shove. Brainstorm, theoretically, could have been restricted and should have been restricted years ago. It would have crippled the Grim Long and Pitch Long decks from last year’s Vintage champs and actually probably just transformed the Vintage metagame, making Gifts not really a problem.

The problem is that Brainstorm is viewed as a "nuts and bolts" card. Without it, deck construction in Vintage changes dramatically. Much as I was saying with the restriction of Scroll — Vintage decks become less "coherent" and we lead to a restricted list that essentially becomes the backbone of deck design more than it should be.

With respect to option 3, the restriction of Gush kills GroAtog and leaves the rest of the format undisturbed. While I do not think Gush should have been unrestricted, I think re-restricting it is the wrong move. Here’s why: first of all, it isn’t even clear that GAT is dominant, yet. That may change with the results of this tournament. But there weren’t very many GAT decks in the Champs. I’d like for the DCI to count them up, but I’m betting that it was probably less than 10 total decks in a field of 130, and probably closer to 8 or so. I’m also willing to bet that only the most expert GAT players did well. TK, myself, Scott Limoges, and Rich Shay were all in contention in the final rounds with GAT (although TK didn’t run Dryads, he had Empty the Warrens and Togs only). Scott beat me in the mirror in the swiss and, after going 5-0, lost the next two matches. I took TK out of the tournament and then Rich. By some measure, you have to wonder if this isn’t the very definition of fair: the very best players seem to be performing the very best, while everyone else who plays GAT seems to falter badly. I admit that I am surprised by this. I find GAT much easier to play than essentially any top Vintage deck... well, basically ever. Keeper, BBS, Long, TriniStax, Control Slaver, and especially Gifts and Grim/Pitch Long, are all more difficult decks to pilot. The only trick with GAT is knowing which role to adopt, which is essentially a hand-by-hand and matchup by matchup decision. Everything is not a skill that is GAT specific (for example, knowing how to use Mana Drain, knowing when to Brainstorm, which lands to fetch, how to use Yawgmoth’s Will effectively, etc). The fact that Gush rewarded the best players seems to be, from the view of some players (especially Rich), a good thing.

Related to that point, Gush didn’t really "dominate" the tournament in any sense except that two Gush decks made the finals. By my estimation, this was the most diverse Vintage Worlds Top 8 ever. Generally the breakdown is 3-5 major archetypes. This time it was six. In addition, the unrestriction of Gush actually helped bring other decks back into the metagame, specifically Stax. If GAT decks actually begin to dominate, then I think some specific action should be taken.

Finally, I think that unrestricting Fact or Fiction could help produce a natural metagame competitor for GAT. In my battle of the banned article (The Banned Played On), GAT and BBS (the 4 Fact or Fiction deck) were essentially evenly matched. Fact or Fiction would open a huge hole in the Vintage metagame and lessen the influence of GAT. I think we’d see BBS return and perhaps Control Slaver with Facts as well. I think this would actually strengthen the hand of Stax and make Aggro Workshop better.

With respect to options 5, 6, and 7, the restriction of Flash is something I reluctantly endorse on the Trinisphere principle. I do not think Flash would ever really dominate Vintage, as people will get better at handling it. The first reason is that there is going to be a large portion of the field that would refuse to play it, for good and bad reasons. The second reason is that Flash isn’t actually a doing that well in tournaments. It’s doing well enough, but not good enough to even remotely justify restriction. Flash was probably the most popular deck at the Vintage Champs with Patrick Chapin, Gadiel Szliefer, and other excellent players piloting it. Yet not a single one made Top 8. They could have, had things gone just a bit differently. But once there, I wouldn’t put them on having favorable matchup odds against either Rich or myself, let alone the Ichorid deck which had maindeck Leyline of the Void, Chalice, and Unmask (see my article on Flash versus Ichorid (the Leyline Wars)).

On the other hand, I want Vintage to get good turnouts in tournaments. I think Flash is worse than Trinisphere. It’s even harder to beat. It wins games on turn 1 with an astonishing degree of frequency and with multiple counter-backup. It’s the most powerful deck in Vintage. To make matters worse, it’s incredibly hard to play at an expert level, so it’s not a deck that people can just pick up and win with.

I hate to advocate restrictions based upon the Trinisphere principle, because it is a principle I did not really like to see emerge, but it is, upon careful reflection of the health and growth of this format, a necessity. Flash must be dealt with. Winning on turn 1 should be a part of Vintage, but it should be something that happens infrequently and only after great energy and effort has been put into pulling it off, as is the case with most Grim Long turn 1 kills. Flash makes it far too easy to do.

So, after all of that, here is my preference for DCI action, in order:

Restrict Flash and Unrestrict Fact or Fiction
Restrict Flash
Unrestrict Fact or Fiction
Do Nothing
Restrict Merchant Scroll and Unrestrict Fact or Fiction
Restrict Merchant Scroll

Concurrent with each of these options, the DCI must unrestrict Dream Halls. I have articulated, as best I can, the reasons why these options are the best options and this is my order of preference. I believe that despite my clear bias in favor of GAT, this is an objective evaluation of the format.

That passage was very interesting to me for a host of reasons.    Firstly, I described the restriction of Brainstorm as "the most logical" restriction because of its hyper utilization, and the fact that its restriction would have neutered not only GAT and Flash, but also possibly made Gifts an unnecessary restriction *and* neutered Grim Long and Pitch Long decks.   The reasons I listed for restricting Brainstorm in that excerpt are quite compelling.

Secondly, I seemingly supported the restriction of Flash as far back as last August, even though I pretty much opposed it - unless the DCI decided it was seriously hurting the tournament scene.

The most important point though is that I was advocating or at least showing the DCI the way out of the potential dangers they opened with the restriction of Gifts and unrestriction of Fact: restrict Scroll.  It's too bad they didn't listen to my advice last year.   

[MarriedW/Children]

There is a reason why Stephen Menendian is the Vintage Worlds Champion!  All Hail Smmenen!