[Deck Discussion] G/W Beats

[Kowal]

Coming back to the format after a bit of a hiatus, I was looking at top eights on the east coast and saw this goofy pile of junk.  Having piloted it to back to back finals appearances, I decided it's worth starting a discussion here on TMD.  You'll notice this list is actually several slots off from the one I modeled after that appeared in the Worlds t8 at GenCon.


Green/White Beatz

4 Aven Mindcensor
4 Qasali Pridemage
3 Gaddock Teeg
3 Elvish Spirit Guide
2 Kataki, War's Wage
2 Jotun Grunt
2 Vexing Shusher
2 Ethersworn Canonist

4 Null Rod
3 Thorn of Amethyst
2 Choke
2 Enlightened Tutor
1 Seal of Cleansing

1 Black Lotus
1 Mox Emerald
1 Mox Pearl

1 Strip Mine
3 Wasteland
3 Horizon Canopy
4 Wooded Foothills
4 Windswept Heath
4 Savannah
2 Forest
1 Plains
1 Karakas

SB
3 Exalted Angel
3 True Believer
2 Samurai of the Pale Curtain
2 Wheel of Sun and Moon
2 Relic of Progenitus
1 Vexing Shusher
1 Seal of Cleansing
1 Swords to Plowshares


I really feel like this deck is one of the best options in the format right now.  The disruption it runs is good, solid disruption.  It plays much more like stax than fish, except instead of having to hardlock the world and win like a hundred turns later you just turn your lock pieces sideways and kill.

A couple changes I made from the original list:

1) Tarmogoyf has long ago been cut for doing exactly nothing every time I played him.  He fits fine in a deck where you can just sort of sit back and defend him, but I found him to be absolute garbage in this list.  Every man needs to change the game state somehow, and this guy was pretty much always a 2/3 with no abilities.  The only thing I ever liked about him was that he survived Pyroclasm, but that wasn't enough to warrant his inclusion.

2) Heartwood Storyteller was never relevant.  He was nearly impossible to cast most of the time, and even if I got him to stick he did absolutely nothing to impact the game.  If they bust your line of men (which is even easier when you're running two random green dudes who do nothing to stop them) they can just win in one turn and ignore your big grip of non-instants.

3) Cutting the 5th strip effect.  I know I might catch some flack for this, but there are two very real issues with the full boat of strips.  The first is consistently getting the right colors of mana - It's a lot harder than one might think because you have no abilities that mana-smooth.  In addition, you're not really a mana denial deck.  Yes you run Null Rod and strip effects and little men that benefit from your opponent being mana-screwed, but mostly the wastes are there to cut a single color or turn off an early Mana Drain. 

[Juggernaut GO]

aven mindcensor is definitely the mvp hands down. Jotun grunt seems really amazing to only be a 2 of however, I think having that guy on the board at all times is pretty much GG against a lot of decks.

[Bibendum]

Kataki wins games when dummies like me forget to pay for sphinx's lol.

But in all seriousness the deck is nasty, Shushers and Mindcensors were MVP's from what i saw and the Thorns are real scary in that deck, Grats on the finish and i hope it continues to  hold its own for you

[Stormanimagus]

@Kowal — As a long time TPS player I'm curious to know how you feel this deck plays against TPS. Is this a deck that TPS should be really afraid of? Seems like Waste/Strip + Null Rod are pretty dead against a Ritual deck and it also seems like you could have a decent amount of trouble Tinker—>Inkwell. How does this deck beat TPS with such a slow clock and exactly 0 cards that can reactive stop a threat that TPS plays (i.e- counters/stifle). I'd really like your thoughts on this one as master of the deck.

-Storm

[Kowal]

Waste and Strip are very not dead against TPS, because it actually cares about making its land drops.  Null Rod is very not dead against TPS because it runs around ten mana sources that don't function under it.  Sure, Tinker to Inkwell is a problem.  It's a problem for every other deck too, but the difference is that I can race Inkwell (and have, on several occasions...)

The list runs slots like Gaddock Teeg, Thorn of Amethyst, Ethersworn Canonist, and Aven Mindcensor for a reason.  The lattermost is extremely frustrating for TPS as it leans very heavily on its tutor effects, including the aforementioned Tinker play.  All three are solid plays for a deck that I honestly wouldn't expect to be paired with but wouldn't be too concerned if I were.

[RecklessEmbermage]

The list looks straight-forward and effective.

Racing inkwell shouldn't be too much of a problem, but either sphinx or (to a slightly lesser degree) robot is hard. Those two are easily answered by path to exile, though. If inkwell is the only tinker target in your meta, then by all means, drop path (or stp -you do run one). Thankfully, this deck is very flexible when it comes to metagaming.

To save deck space, taking the tutors into consideration: Have you thought about o-ring and/or journey to nowhere? They should be both good and amusing answers to marit lage, among other things.

The true believers in the board look very appealing. Have you considered maindecking a few?

Angel is great vs badly built aggro decks or bad pilots, but getting it removed after you just spent 7 mana on trying to turn it on is such a blow-out. Have you been happy with them?
I have found clamp to be a great answer to aggro. 3 for 1's is good.

I would love reading some kind of tournament report or match-up walk-through, if you should find the time for that.

[CowWithHat]

The sideboard is confusing me a little.  I had a couple questions about it.

Why do you run two samurai and two wheels as opposed to a full suite of one or the other? Also, I mentioned Baneslayer Angel as opposed to Exalted Angel to you personally.  You were in the middle of a match so you just brushed it off with "its not as good", do you have a a more thought out explanation than that?

I would also suggest at least one copy of Aura of Silence as a strong answer to chalice at 2.

[Smmenen]

Jon Donovan, who made top 8 at the ICBM Open and Vintage worlds with G/W beats (the list you referenced) told me that he was playing the deck I designed in this article: http://www.themanadrain.com/index.php?topic=37871.0  (article is free)

He cut two cards, I think for the E. Tutors, which were just unrestricted when the ICBM open was held.   

In the article I explored almost every single card in the Vintage card pool in Green, White, and artifact as options, and I analyze them within.

However, more recently I've preferred GWB, which I've called Meandeck Beats.   The new fetchlands allow you to run 3 basics comfortably.   The deck is really good.    I like the black splash because you can play 3-4 Diabolic Edicts main, on top of Duress effects + Bob.   Anti-Ichorid options are also superior. 

[Stormanimagus]

Waste and Strip are very not dead against TPS, because it actually cares about making its land drops.  Null Rod is very not dead against TPS because it runs around ten mana sources that don't function under it.  Sure, Tinker to Inkwell is a problem.  It's a problem for every other deck too, but the difference is that I can race Inkwell (and have, on several occasions...)

The list runs slots like Gaddock Teeg, Thorn of Amethyst, Ethersworn Canonist, and Aven Mindcensor for a reason.  The lattermost is extremely frustrating for TPS as it leans very heavily on its tutor effects, including the aforementioned Tinker play.  All three are solid plays for a deck that I honestly wouldn't expect to be paired with but wouldn't be too concerned if I were.

I agree that cards like Thorn and Mindcensor and Canonist are a pain (haven't had to try to play around them enough as the TPS player to know exactly HOW much of a pain, but only testing will tell I suppose), but I totally disagree on Waste/Strip + Null Rod. I've played against Null Rod AND Chalice in Shop decks + Waste/Strip + Crucible and anything short of Strip lock with Crucible is pretty easy to play around. Post SB most good TPS lists run 3 Swamp and 3 Island so 6 basics. And most of the time I'll just side out some off-colored moxen to take down the power of Rod against me. Those 2 sets of mana disruption I've found very easy to play around in the past. It is, however, really REALLY hard to play around a resolved Mindcensor or Canonist. The one thing I'll say against Canonist is that I usually do side in 2-3 Hurkyl's post SB and if I saw Canonist Game 1 I'd probably bring them in here too. Then I'd have 2 Hurkyl's, 1 Rebuild AND 1 Chain to deal with the Canonist. Odds are that I'll see one of those in a timely fashion with just playing 1 spell a turn. Mindcensor is FAAAAR more tricky to get rid of and makes me reconsider running a singleton SB darkblast.

-Storm

[scipio]

Like the deck - thanks for posting

1) Tarmogoyf has long ago been cut for doing exactly nothing every time I played him.  

The argument I always hear for this $40 card is that he's key in mirror-type matches, i.e. - the aggro prison deck with goyf beats the one without.  Do you find grunt to be a large enough foil to goyf, or do you have other answers to it?  Also, can you talk a little about match-ups.  Does exalted come in for those aggro battles?

[SadDubs]

I have to agree with scipio, without goyf, you basically lose the mirror match. Goyf will definately grow bigger than a 2/3 with all the enchantments you are running. I find that jotun grunt is a little too slow to fight goyf.

[credmond]

How many mirrors are you expecting to have to fight? I would think that the sideboard is a better place to be dealing with the unlikely mirror match.

[CowWithHat]

The mirror match, I think, means other disruptive creature decks.  Fish is a matchup you can definitely expect to see from time to time.  Tarmogofy is quite powerful against that strategy of deck.  That is where he shines.  However, I think Grunt plays this role just as well. 

The comment about the sloth of grunt when fighting goyf is one that doesn't make alot of sense to me. When the two critters face off Grunt is usually a better fighter after one upkeep trigger.  If Goyf hits play first he will get one good swing in before he is shrunk by the grunt, after two upkeeps the goyf is likely a 1/2 or a 2/3.  If grunt hits play first goyf will often never get a chance to be more then elvish warrior or squire.

[scipio]

When the two critters face off Grunt is usually a better fighter after one upkeep trigger. 

That is a really excellent point.  Makes me think extra grunts in the sideboard would serve well in the mirror.  Especially since the other aggro-control decks tend to run more spells to fill up their yard.  The G/W deck really won't do much to fuel goyf.  The potential to slow down Ichorid enough to have a chance in game one is a nice side-benefit.

[Kowal]

CowWithHat actually beat me to the reply on that one.  I'll bet on Grunt vs Goyf any day of the week.  And no, I don't anticipate many "mirrors" in the form of disruptive aggro.  However, the strategy I've been using to beat them that seems to work really well is to just cut a bunch of cards that don't attack, such as rod and choke, and replace them with whatever men I am running in my sideboard for other decks.  Sure, True Believer isn't exactly a bomb 2drop against BUG Fish, but when I'm drawing vanilla 2/2 beaters my opponent is drawing crummy cards like Daze.

Reckless Embermage makes some pretty good points I agree with.  I have not really considered maindecking True Believer though, because I don't find combo or oath players as commonly as I find Tezz and Workshop players.  He's a good man to have access to in game two though.
Exalted Angel is awesome, by the way.  I am very happy to see her in any matchup worth boarding her in.  Her spirit-linkingness is great but honestly just being a big fat flying monster is good enough in most aggro mirrors.  If I went the equipment route instead of the extra men route, I'd probably roll with Sword of Fire and Ice or Umezawa's Jitte over clamp.

In regards to baneslayer angel, as cool as she is she doesn't have too many advantages over regular angel for that one extra mana.  An extra point of power is really the only relevant bit, since I never find myself swinging past demons or dragons, and I don't think I've ever been involved in a combat where first strke in the air was relevant.  Exalted is easier to poop in to play so I'm sticking with her.
Aura of Silence is cute but I'd never board it in.  Vexing Shusher is the best answer to Chalice at 2 in the entire game of Magic.
Also, in regards to the split on graveyard hate cards:  It's harder to answer hate when you don't know what's coming.  If my opponent boards in Reverent Silence to stop my Wheel of the Sun and Moons, I'll be thankful when I topdeck Relic of Progenitus instead.  Samurai I have a special fondness for not just because he's a beating against Ichorid but because he's a pretty solid man against Dragon and Stax (shutting off Crucible and making Welder a little wimpier is big) and in addition when I bring men in against aggro mirrors he's a fantasic man.

However, more recently I've preferred GWB, which I've called Meandeck Beats.   The new fetchlands allow you to run 3 basics comfortably.   The deck is really good.    I like the black splash because you can play 3-4 Diabolic Edicts main, on top of Duress effects + Bob.   Anti-Ichorid options are also superior.

I've thought about splashing black, but I actually don't care much for Edict.  Seal of Cleansing does what I need to do in terms of answering tinker targets, because as I mentioned earlier racing Inkwell isn't actually all that hard and Sphinx is vulnerable to Seal (which I can run as just as a one-of as I can tutor for it.)  I know Duress and Bob are both very solid cards, but what they bring to the table isn't really enough to make me want to cut the weaker G/W slots like Canonist.

I've played against Null Rod AND Chalice in Shop decks + Waste/Strip + Crucible and anything short of Strip lock with Crucible is pretty easy to play around.

I'm not a shop deck, I'm an aggro deck.  The window of opportunity I give you is half the size of the one Stax gives you, and it's covered in spikes.

[Smmenen]

However, more recently I've preferred GWB, which I've called Meandeck Beats.   The new fetchlands allow you to run 3 basics comfortably.   The deck is really good.    I like the black splash because you can play 3-4 Diabolic Edicts main, on top of Duress effects + Bob.   Anti-Ichorid options are also superior.

I've thought about splashing black, but I actually don't care much for Edict.  Seal of Cleansing does what I need to do in terms of answering tinker targets, because as I mentioned earlier racing Inkwell isn't actually all that hard and Sphinx is vulnerable to Seal (which I can run as just as a one-of as I can tutor for it.)  I know Duress and Bob are both very solid cards, but what they bring to the table isn't really enough to make me want to cut the weaker G/W slots like Canonist.

Canonist is too hit or miss, imo.  I think the GWB list is just much better, partly because of the increased number of turn one plays with Thoughtseize (and Consult is insane).   Edict was actually the all star in testing against Bob Tez: http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/vintage/17949_So_Many_Insane_Plays_Meandeck_Beats_Revised_Running_Through_the_Champs_Gauntlet.html

It was frustrating because I was 4th in the swiss with the deck going into the final round of the Steel City P9 event, and I drew with Soly, thinking I was drawing into top 8, only to get 9th.   I would have torn apart that top 8!    My report is here: http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/vintage/17860_So_Many_Insane_Plays_Meandeck_Beats_The_Best_Deck_in_Vintage.html

Also, and I've tested alot against Fish, CowWithHat is flat wrong in his claim that Grunt is just as good as Goyf.    Goyf is the key to the Beats and Fish matchups.   

[CowWithHat]

I think this deck's lack of blue makes it necessitate a more controlling role from its critters.  You might be right about the mirror, I haven't tested this against fish, but I think it is hard to argue that goyf is more disruptive than grunt against Stax, Tez, TPS, or Ichorid.  I have found that grunt plays a fine beater in those matchups (admittedly from a UWB fish shell), not that he plays as good of one as goyf but I don't think an extra toughness or one extra swing outweighs the disruptive potential of grunt's upkeep trigger.

[Smmenen]

I think this deck's lack of blue makes it necessitate a more controlling role from its critters.  

That is a non responsive statement.    You have a tendency to say things that are either 1) obvious, or 2) irrelevant.    When I designed the GW Beats deck that Jon Donovan played at the ICBM open and Vintage worlds, as I said in the article, I placed a premium on disruptive creatures.    That said, Goyf serves a number of important roles.   And it's a mistake to think that it isn't disruptive.    Just as Gaddock Teeg is great against blue decks, Goyf is great against Fish and Workshop decks  In fact, Goyf is almost the best play you can make against a Workshop deck, and it is incredible disruptive.   

You might be right about the mirror, I haven't tested this against fish, but I think it is hard to argue that goyf is more disruptive than grunt against Stax, Tez, TPS, or Ichorid.

Goyf is better than Grunt against Stax.  But your claim was that Grunt is just as good as Goyf against Fish.   It's not.   End of story. 

 I have found that grunt plays a fine beater in those matchups (admittedly from a UWB fish shell), not that he plays as good of one as goyf but I don't think an extra toughness or one extra swing outweighs the disruptive potential of grunt's upkeep trigger.

We aren't talking about those matchups. 

[voltron00x]

I'm with Smmenen here, on basically all counts.

The list posted all the way up top suffers a lot from "2-of" syndrome.  Canonist is a good example - this is not a 2-of card.  You are either in a meta where you want 4 MD, or you're not.  Playing 2 is the worst of both worlds.  You could make the same argument for Choke in Steven's list, but Choke is a card where you almost never want to draw more than one (unlike a creature like Canonist, where a second provides additional beats, and as an artifact AND creature, the 1st is more likely to be destroyed).  Also you could say that Choke and Kataki (who makes some sense as a 2-of as it is legendary) fulfill similar mana-denial roles and therefore can almost slot into the same 4-of design space.

Having said that, I would say that if someone is in a pinch as far as budget and looking to play this deck on the cheap, Grunts could do a servicable impression of Goyfs.  However, Grunts are terrible in multiples, unlike Goyf - this is a huge difference.  I would hope we can at least agree on that.  Further, who cares about how fast this deck fuels up its own Goyfs ?  When you're not goldfishing, your opponent is going to be doing that for you.

The G/W/b version of this deck really is powerful, and I think its also extremely good against Iona Oath.  The number of viable Vintage decks is quite high right now:  Tezz, TPS, Stax, Meandeck Beats, Iona Oath, Ichorid, Minus 6, Noble Fish... its a shame that the US meta hasn't diversified to show how many options are really out there and viable.

[Gandalf_The_White_1]

The list posted all the way up top suffers a lot from "2-of" syndrome.  Canonist is a good example - this is not a 2-of card.  You are either in a meta where you want 4 MD, or you're not.  Playing 2 is the worst of both worlds.

Canonist is actually a bad example, because he runs 2 Enlightened Tutors.  Multiple Canonists are redundant, as are multiple Shushers.

As for Grunt and Kataki; these are both horrible in multiples.

[voltron00x]

The list posted all the way up top suffers a lot from "2-of" syndrome.  Canonist is a good example - this is not a 2-of card.  You are either in a meta where you want 4 MD, or you're not.  Playing 2 is the worst of both worlds.

Canonist is actually a bad example, because he runs 2 Enlightened Tutors.

As for Grunt, Shusher, and Kataki; these are all horrible in multiples.

Again, one of the reasons why Grunt is worse than Goyf.  Shusher may be bad in multiples but you really want to draw one in the matches where its good, hence Stephen's list running 4.  Kataki gets a pass as it is Legendary, as I mentioned.  This list also runs more artifacts, making Kataki more symmetrical (which is a bad thing), but obviously the effect after sticking a Choke is devastating.

And the point still stands re: Canonist, regardless of E. Tutors.  If he is an important piece of your strategy to beat certain decks, you want him out T1 / T2, just like Null Rod or Thorn, and should run 4.  If he isn't, then run one with the Enlightened Tutor package and pack more in the SB.  E. Tutor is much better applied to something like Choke to say you run a virtual 4-of.  

EDIT:  I'm not trying to be a hater here.  Its awesome that the G/W and G/W/b archetypes are under discussion and are seeing play.  I agree that Storyteller is suboptimal.  I also love the singleton Karakas!

[scipio]

However, more recently I've preferred GWB, which I've called Meandeck Beats.   

If I recall correctly, you explained that blue was not up for consideration as the 3rd color in order to keep the deck viable as a budget option.  That's in good company with your opinion that we should wean ourselves from proxies.  At this point, the impact is certainly positive, as seen from the variety of sui-black, r/g, and fish decks.  Most can be built with 5 proxies on the cheap.

So if blue is available as a choice, would you still consider black a superior 3rd color?  In particular, by adding blue, you can include force of will, ancestral, time walk, spell pierce, and brainstorm.  It gives you access to additional disruptive creatures such as meddling mage and gilded drake, and card advantage in the form of selkie/ophie/augury adept.  While it would be a significant overhaul to the deck, force in particular is the single best means of interacting on turn 1, and better than duress/thoughtseize.

About goyf, are there any matches in which you side him out?

[CowWithHat]

I think this deck's lack of blue makes it necessitate a more controlling role from its critters. 

That is a non responsive statement.    You have a tendency to say things that are either 1) obvious, or 2) irrelevant.    When I designed the GW Beats deck that Jon Donovan played at the ICBM open and Vintage worlds, as I said in the article, I placed a premium on disruptive creatures.    That said, Goyf serves a number of important roles.   And it's a mistake to think that it isn't disruptive.    Just as Gaddock Teeg is great against blue decks, Goyf is great against Fish and Workshop decks  In fact, Goyf is almost the best play you can make against a Workshop deck, and it is incredible disruptive.   

You might be right about the mirror, I haven't tested this against fish, but I think it is hard to argue that goyf is more disruptive than grunt against Stax, Tez, TPS, or Ichorid.

Goyf is better than Grunt against Stax.  But your claim was that Grunt is just as good as Goyf against Fish.   It's not.   End of story. 

 I have found that grunt plays a fine beater in those matchups (admittedly from a UWB fish shell), not that he plays as good of one as goyf but I don't think an extra toughness or one extra swing outweighs the disruptive potential of grunt's upkeep trigger.

We aren't talking about those matchups. 

Steve, I think you misunderstood that post.  It wasn't targeted at you and I didn't feel a need to be responsive to your points.  In fact I conceded that I was wrong and you were probably right about the fish matchup in that Goyf does more then grunt.  Regardless of that, I would like to assert that Grunt is a better maindeck card than Goyf in this deck.  That was the point in the previous post.  My evidence was that Grunt is more disruptive, (not that Goyf isn't) in the Stax, TPS, Tez and Ichorid.    I prefaced with the idea that this deck has no catchall blue cards to protect cards without as much disruptive power and that the most disruptive creature is probably more deserving of the slot.  In my experience against Stax, with creature based disruption decks, Goyf is only a huge guy where Grunt is a huge guy who makes welder and crucible worse.  He also does something even when locked down by tangle wire.  In addition to all of my evidence, there is also Kowal's point that Goyf is sometimes just a crappy small guy that doesn't really do anything.

And just because my feathers are ruffled you have a tendency to say things that are either 1) condescending or 2) ad hominem attacks that distract from the point.

[Guli]

I used this list pre Zendikar. Didn't had the time to play/update a lot last couple months. It was tweaked back then, maybe it can be a source of inspiration. One thing though. With this kind of GW beatz I advise to use consistency which means mostly 4x and less tutoring.

4     Aven Mindcensor
4    Noble Hierarch
4    Qasali Pridemage
4    Tarmogoyf

Anti control
3    Xantid Swarm
3    Gaddock Teeg

Creature removal
4    Swords to Plowshares

Acceleration
4    Elvish Spirit Guide
1    Black Lotus
1    Mox Emerald
1    Mox Pearl
4    Null Rod
4    Thorn of Amethyst

Lands
1    Forest
1    Plains
4    Savannah
1    Strip Mine
4    Wasteland
4    Windswept Heath
4    Wooded Foothills

Sideboard:
3     Children of Korlis
3    Kataki, War's Wage
3    Tariff
3    Pithing Needle
3    Ghost Quarter (shop, dredge -> works well)

[Kowal]

Just as Gaddock Teeg is great against blue decks, Goyf is great against Fish and Workshop decks  In fact, Goyf is almost the best play you can make against a Workshop deck, and it is incredible disruptive.   

Oh no doubt Goyf is a fine man against Fish and Workshop.  I just feel that the fish matchup is strong enough already I don't need to run Goyf to win consistently, and that against workshops really any man is almost as effective.  His size only occasionally reduces the clock speed of the deck by one, maybe two if they stack their yard heavily.  I prefer to have Grunt here to make Crucible less effective and to help prevent the primary way I have found to lose to workshop decks, which is recurring tangle wires.

The list posted all the way up top suffers a lot from "2-of" syndrome.  Canonist is a good example - this is not a 2-of card.  You are either in a meta where you want 4 MD, or you're not.  Playing 2 is the worst of both worlds. 

I feel you’re completely wrong.  Cards that are 2-ofs in this deck are cards you don’t want to see multiples of.  This deck wins by drawing a diversity of threats, making it difficult to answer any one thing and still fight back.  I can understand your reasoning, but the obvious decision is made in this fashion – If I see an opening hand with four men that have nothing in common, I am in fantastic shape to win.  If I pull up seven cards with three Vexing Shushers, my hand is awful against everything but monoblue control. 

You could make the same argument for Choke in Steven's list, but Choke is a card where you almost never want to draw more than one (unlike a creature like Canonist, where a second provides additional beats, and as an artifact AND creature, the 1st is more likely to be destroyed).  Also you could say that Choke and Kataki (who makes some sense as a 2-of as it is legendary) fulfill similar mana-denial roles and therefore can almost slot into the same 4-of design space.

My list also runs Choke, so you don’t have to point at Steve’s list.  Canonist being a creature doesn’t make drawing multiples of him any better than drawing drawing some other disruptive beater though.  The point about removal is pretty much irrelevant, and is actually another reason running 4 is a mistake.  The removal spells he’ll get hit with, more than anything else in magic, are Rack and Ruin (meaning if you double up on them they get to two for one you) and Hurkyl’s effects (which make multiples irrelevant.)

Having said that, I would say that if someone is in a pinch as far as budget and looking to play this deck on the cheap, Grunts could do a servicable impression of Goyfs.  However, Grunts are terrible in multiples, unlike Goyf - this is a huge difference.  I would hope we can at least agree on that.  Further, who cares about how fast this deck fuels up its own Goyfs ?  When you're not goldfishing, your opponent is going to be doing that for you.

In almost every single one of the games testing this deck before running it in tournaments, Goyf was ¾ or smaller.  The only times he was any bigger than Grunt, it was completely irrelevant and I could have gone the distance with Squire.  So sure, seeing multiple grunts is unpleasant (usually) and multiple goyfs don’t make each other worse – However, drawing multiple goyfs would mean that I had to run multiple goyfs, who is crummy against most of the field.

The G/W/b version of this deck really is powerful, and I think its also extremely good against Iona Oath.  The number of viable Vintage decks is quite high right now:  Tezz, TPS, Stax, Meandeck Beats, Iona Oath, Ichorid, Minus 6, Noble Fish... its a shame that the US meta hasn't diversified to show how many options are really out there and viable

Actually, the meta is pretty diverse in the states.  Three to six months ago, I’d agree with you. 

I also love the singleton Karakas!

It was a superstar in testing, but it hasn’t come up in tournament play yet other than to save Gaddock Teeg from certain death.  I’ve been happy with it, though.

So if blue is available as a choice, would you still consider black a superior 3rd color?  In particular, by adding blue, you can include force of will, ancestral, time walk, spell pierce, and brainstorm.  It gives you access to additional disruptive creatures such as meddling mage and gilded drake, and card advantage in the form of selkie/ophie/augury adept.  While it would be a significant overhaul to the deck, force in particular is the single best means of interacting on turn 1, and better than duress/thoughtseize.

Why do you feel the third color is necessary?  I’m not arguing that Walk, Ancestral, etc are bad, just that I don’t think the splash benefits the deck that much.  The manabase, as consistent as it seems like it should be, is not.  Further, running Force necessitates running a large number of blue cards to feed to it.  The blue men you’d add to the deck to fuel it are really awful men, which is why I strongly dislike Noble Fish’s approach – most of the men don’t actually impact the game in any meaningful way.

[voltron00x]

I feel you’re completely wrong.  Cards that are 2-ofs in this deck are cards you don’t want to see multiples of.  This deck wins by drawing a diversity of threats, making it difficult to answer any one thing and still fight back.  I can understand your reasoning, but the obvious decision is made in this fashion – If I see an opening hand with four men that have nothing in common, I am in fantastic shape to win.  If I pull up seven cards with three Vexing Shushers, my hand is awful against everything but monoblue control.  

My list also runs Choke, so you don’t have to point at Steve’s list.  Canonist being a creature doesn’t make drawing multiples of him any better than drawing drawing some other disruptive beater though.  The point about removal is pretty much irrelevant, and is actually another reason running 4 is a mistake.  The removal spells he’ll get hit with, more than anything else in magic, are Rack and Ruin (meaning if you double up on them they get to two for one you) and Hurkyl’s effects (which make multiples irrelevant.)

Fire/Ice would like to have a few words with you.

Drawing 2 Canonist is clearly better than drawing 2 Choke or 2 Gaddock Teeg or 2 Jotun Grunt or 2 Kataki or probably even 2 Mindcensor, since it costs one less and isn't 2-for-1'ed by a single Fire/Ice and can't be killed by Darkblast.  

In almost every single one of the games testing this deck before running it in tournaments, Goyf was ¾ or smaller.  The only times he was any bigger than Grunt, it was completely irrelevant and I could have gone the distance with Squire.  So sure, seeing multiple grunts is unpleasant (usually) and multiple goyfs don’t make each other worse – However, drawing multiple goyfs would mean that I had to run multiple goyfs, who is crummy against most of the field.

Somewhere here there's a disconnect... Goyf is probably the best beater in the history of Magic.  If Goyf is a 3/4 or smaller, that means you're probably winning the game b/c your opponent is losing to your hate pieces and unable to cast anything.  If your hate pieces haven't been effective and they're casting spells, Goyf will help you end the game and you can play multiples and race.  If you did end up in a quasi-mirror against another Null Rod deck, them having 4 Goyfs to your 2 Grunts gives them a huge advantage b/c they're likely to have Goyf while you're unlikely to draw your 2-of Grunts that you can't tutor for.

Actually, the meta is pretty diverse in the states.  Three to six months ago, I’d agree with you.  

I don't think this is really true in the northeast.  Most of our events are still dominated by the same old archetpes - Tezz, Shops, some TPS, occasional Ichorid.  Fish, and Null Rod strategies in general, are woefully underrepresented.  Most of the developments from this summer, reflected at the ICBM and Vintage Champs, went completely unnoticed in our events.  The best players still play Tezz, TPS, and 5C Stax almost exclusively.

EDIT:  Just to be clear on something, I am NOT stumping for you to play 3 or 4 Canonist, but rather suggesting that you'd probably want 4 Canonist, or 1 Canonist (or even 0), and not 2.  I have no idea how good Canonist is in the deck, but conceptually understanding what the card does, 2 is an odd number and suggests you haven't really made a decision on whether or not its important to the deck's strategy.

[Kowal]

If Goyf is a 3/4 or smaller, that means you're probably winning the game b/c your opponent is losing to your hate pieces and unable to cast anything.  If your hate pieces haven't been effective and they're casting spells, Goyf will help you end the game and you can play multiples and race.  If you did end up in a quasi-mirror against another Null Rod deck, them having 4 Goyfs to your 2 Grunts gives them a huge advantage b/c they're likely to have Goyf while you're unlikely to draw your 2-of Grunts that you can't tutor for.

The ways you lose the game, however, rarely have to do with your opponent casting things in the early game.  You lose to things like tutor->tinker, or a combo player going off in one turn, or a stax player who never gives you any better than land and artifact to grow from, or Ichorid being Ichorid (which you can't race even if you draw four goyfs and lotus.)  Admittedly, if I got paired up with someone running an older G/W build with four goyfs, it would be more difficult than a true mirror match.  However, that's one of the most extraordinarily unlikely pairings in the current environment, and after sideboard I'd rather be drawing Exalted than Goyf anyway.

I don't think this is really true in the northeast. Most of our events are still dominated by the same old archetpes - Tezz, Shops, some TPS, occasional Ichorid. Fish, and Null Rod strategies in general, are woefully underrepresented. Most of the developments from this summer, reflected at the ICBM and Vintage Champs, went completely unnoticed in our events. The best players still play Tezz, TPS, and 5C Stax almost exclusively.

To be fair, the alternative fish/null rod decks people could be playing are mostly terrible, so I can't fault the solid players for not representing them.  This G/W list is the first list I've found that I'm confident is a good null rod style deck since the days of Gay/Red vs Tog.

And lastly, in regards to Fire/Ice - I just looked up both of the most recent tournament results for New England and, including sideboards, both events combine for a total of two Fire/Ices.  I'm actually more in danger of losing one to Duplicant than Fire/Ice...

[voltron00x]

If Goyf is a 3/4 or smaller, that means you're probably winning the game b/c your opponent is losing to your hate pieces and unable to cast anything.  If your hate pieces haven't been effective and they're casting spells, Goyf will help you end the game and you can play multiples and race.  If you did end up in a quasi-mirror against another Null Rod deck, them having 4 Goyfs to your 2 Grunts gives them a huge advantage b/c they're likely to have Goyf while you're unlikely to draw your 2-of Grunts that you can't tutor for.

The ways you lose the game, however, rarely have to do with your opponent casting things in the early game.  You lose to things like tutor->tinker, or a combo player going off in one turn, or a stax player who never gives you any better than land and artifact to grow from, or Ichorid being Ichorid (which you can't race even if you draw four goyfs and lotus.)  Admittedly, if I got paired up with someone running an older G/W build with four goyfs, it would be more difficult than a true mirror match.  However, that's one of the most extraordinarily unlikely pairings in the current environment, and after sideboard I'd rather be drawing Exalted than Goyf anyway.

I don't think this is really true in the northeast. Most of our events are still dominated by the same old archetpes - Tezz, Shops, some TPS, occasional Ichorid. Fish, and Null Rod strategies in general, are woefully underrepresented. Most of the developments from this summer, reflected at the ICBM and Vintage Champs, went completely unnoticed in our events. The best players still play Tezz, TPS, and 5C Stax almost exclusively.

To be fair, the alternative fish/null rod decks people could be playing are mostly terrible, so I can't fault the solid players for not representing them.  This G/W list is the first list I've found that I'm confident is a good null rod style deck since the days of Gay/Red vs Tog.

And lastly, in regards to Fire/Ice - I just looked up both of the most recent tournament results for New England and, including sideboards, both events combine for a total of two Fire/Ices.  I'm actually more in danger of losing one to Duplicant than Fire/Ice...

Noble Fish with Spell Pierce is actually pretty good.  It won last month's Blue Bell - admittedly 32 players, but Mike Noble did go 6-0-2 in the rds he played including T8.  The deck does have some soft match-ups but it is incredibly irritating to play against with most top-tier decks.

Fire / Ice is a factor with Tezz where I play... that and Darkblast were on everyone's radar after this summer, I assume mostly to kill Confidants, but conveniently good against some creatures in G/W.

Also, doesn't the addition of black that Stephen mentioned help address the entire Tinker issue?  Adding Thoughtseize is also a convenient way of assuring that Goyfs "power up" more quickly, since that seems to be a concern of yours.

[Juggernaut GO]

Tarmogoyf sucks some serious balls.  It's not like your dropping a tarmogoyf then riding it to victory backed with 4x fow and other counters.

Grunt is a beater, that actually has an impact on the game state.  While yawg will isn't really the go to strategy in vintage at this moment in time, there are still plenty of decks that rely on graveyard.

[GrandpaBelcher]

Grunt is a beater, that actually has an impact on the game state.  While yawg will isn't really the go to strategy in vintage at this moment in time, there are still plenty of decks that rely on graveyard.

I agree with this and like to play Grunt as a four-of.  I want them early and often, and when one starves, I want his corpse to feed the next.  It's a two-mana 4/4 with a situational but still disruptive every time; what's not to like?