[Free Article] The Q1 2010 Vintage Earnings and Market Report

[Killane]

Most decks aren 't sbing for TPS right now.      I definitely think that Shops are TPS's hardest matchup, but it's not unwinnable.   Two maindeck Hurkyl's Recall, a maindeck Chain, and 14 lands maindeck should be enough to give you a chance game 1 and more hate comes in post board. 

Is this what you are advocating in today's meta?
I am assuming that 1 of the Hurkyl's would replace rebuild, but what would you cut for #2 and 2 more lands without hurting your other matchups?

Misdirection is a fine thing to cut- it is the nut low vs shops and the added utility of stealing Ancestral in good matchups is not worth junking up the Shops match. As far as a second choice, I've never been a huge fan or Merchant Scroll. Grim Tutor is also an ok cut- it's quite powerful but the deck does function without it (I've won several local events without it due to proxy limitations).

[quicksilvervii]

Most decks aren 't sbing for TPS right now.      I definitely think that Shops are TPS's hardest matchup, but it's not unwinnable.   Two maindeck Hurkyl's Recall, a maindeck Chain, and 14 lands maindeck should be enough to give you a chance game 1 and more hate comes in post board. 

Is this what you are advocating in today's meta?
I am assuming that 1 of the Hurkyl's would replace rebuild, but what would you cut for #2 and 2 more lands without hurting your other matchups?

Misdirection is a fine thing to cut- it is the nut low vs shops and the added utility of stealing Ancestral in good matchups is not worth junking up the Shops match. As far as a second choice, I've never been a huge fan or Merchant Scroll. Grim Tutor is also an ok cut- it's quite powerful but the deck does function without it (I've won several local events without it due to proxy limitations).

I do like the Hurkyl's over the misdirection call.  I think you are absolutely right.

So far the 2 Hurkyl's found their way into the MD no problem.  I have a hard time justifying adding the extra land still for some reason.

[Smmenen]

I was waiting for the forum reorganization to happen to answer your questions, but it's been almost three weeks, so I'll just post my latest TPS list here


The Perfect Storm
By Stephen Menendian
6/1/10

1 Flooded Strand
1 Bloodstained Mire
3 Island
4 Polluted Delta
2 Swamp
1 Tolarian Academy
2 Underground Sea
1 Black Lotus
1 Lotus Petal
1 Mana Crypt
1 Mana Vault
1 Mox Emerald
1 Mox Jet
1 Mox Pearl
1 Mox Ruby
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Sol Ring
4 Dark Ritual
1 Cabal Ritual

1 Memory Jar
4 Duress
1 Necropotence
1 Yawgmoth's Bargain
1 Yawgmoth's Will
1 Tendrils of Agony
1 Vampiric Tutor
1 Demonic Tutor
1 Imperial Seal

1 Ancestral Recall
1 Brainstorm
1 Ponder
1 Merchant Scroll
1 Fact or Fiction
1 Gifts Ungiven
4 Force of Will
1 Mind's Desire
1 Mystical Tutor
1 Chain of Vapor
2 Hurkyl's Recall
1 Time Walk
1 Timetwister
1 Tinker
1 Sphinx of the Steel Wind

Sideboard:
1 Yixlid Jailer
4 Leyline Of The Void
2 Tormod's Crypt
1 Chain Of Vapor
1 Hurkyl's Recall
1 Rebuild
1 Island
1 Swamp
1 Slaughter Pact
1 Inkwell Leviathan
1 Sadistic Sacrament

I cut Rebuild and Misd for two Hurkyl's.  Then, I cut grim Tutor and a Cabal Ritual for a Flooded Strand and a third Island.

I have been testing this against MUD with great success.   It plays out just like I hoped.  

Sideboarding with the deck is so smooth.

Against MUD:

- 4 Duress
- 1 Fact or Fiction
+ 1 Hurkyl's Recall
+ 1 Chain of Vapor
+ 1 Rebuild
+ 1 Swamp
+ 1 Island

Slaughter Pact is also good against Golem, and worth bringing in as well.

If you really want more to bring in against MUD, turn the two T. Crypts to Bogs and you can bring them in as well, cutting some off color moxen.  

Against Tez, you will cut the two extra lands for 2 T. crypts, and cut Sphinx for Inkwell.   You'll also want to cut a Hurkyl's for another Chain.   

[Killane]

I was waiting for the forum reorganization to happen to answer your questions, but it's been almost three weeks, so I'll just post my latest TPS list here


The Perfect Storm
By Stephen Menendian
6/1/10

1 Flooded Strand
1 Bloodstained Mire
3 Island
4 Polluted Delta
2 Swamp
1 Tolarian Academy
2 Underground Sea
1 Black Lotus
1 Lotus Petal
1 Mana Crypt
1 Mana Vault
1 Mox Emerald
1 Mox Jet
1 Mox Pearl
1 Mox Ruby
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Sol Ring
4 Dark Ritual
1 Cabal Ritual

1 Memory Jar
4 Duress
1 Necropotence
1 Yawgmoth's Bargain
1 Yawgmoth's Will
1 Tendrils of Agony
1 Vampiric Tutor
1 Demonic Tutor
1 Imperial Seal

1 Ancestral Recall
1 Brainstorm
1 Ponder
1 Merchant Scroll
1 Fact or Fiction
1 Gifts Ungiven
4 Force of Will
1 Mind's Desire
1 Mystical Tutor
1 Chain of Vapor
2 Hurkyl's Recall
1 Time Walk
1 Timetwister
1 Tinker
1 Sphinx of the Steel Wind

Sideboard:
1 Yixlid Jailer
4 Leyline Of The Void
2 Tormod's Crypt
1 Chain Of Vapor
1 Hurkyl's Recall
1 Rebuild
1 Island
1 Swamp
1 Slaughter Pact
1 Inkwell Leviathan
1 Sadistic Sacrament

I cut Rebuild and Misd for two Hurkyl's.  Then, I cut grim Tutor and a Cabal Ritual for a Flooded Strand and a third Island.

I have been testing this against MUD with great success.   It plays out just like I hoped.  

Sideboarding with the deck is so smooth.

Against MUD:

- 4 Duress
- 1 Fact or Fiction
+ 1 Hurkyl's Recall
+ 1 Chain of Vapor
+ 1 Rebuild
+ 1 Swamp
+ 1 Island

Slaughter Pact is also good against Golem, and worth bringing in as well.

If you really want more to bring in against MUD, turn the two T. Crypts to Bogs and you can bring them in as well, cutting some off color moxen.  

Against Tez, you will cut the two extra lands for 2 T. crypts, and cut Sphinx for Inkwell.   You'll also want to cut a Hurkyl's for another Chain.   

Hey Steve,

I've been testing a similar list, basically the same cuts except that I cut Mana Vault instead of the Cabal Ritual and went with a 3rd Swamp instead of a 6th Fetch (which i conceed is likely the wrong choice).

I certainly understand why Vault is better than Cabal Ritual vs Shops, but in every other matchup it juts seems so very meh compared to the 2nd Ritual - there are really only 2 spells in the deck that it helps you cast, it doesn;t help you land bombs like Necropotence, and it doesn;t recurr with YawgWin. Cabal Rtual does all of this and vs Shops when you have Threshold it produces even more of a mana upswing that Vault, and a much more useful type of mana. I also find between Necropotence, Bargain, Fetching, and Crypt the extra life loss form Vault can get very annoying, and it's shut off by Null Rod.

Any thoughts on the matter?

While we're on the subject, I've been testing Spell Pierce in TPS as well. Basically I cut the 2nd Hurkyl's, the Merchant Scroll, and Fact or Fiction for 3x Spell Pierce. I've been supremely underwhelmed by Scroll recently. there's realy nothign in this list to get except Ancestral or in rare occaisions a seond FoW. Given that we are replacing it with a counterspell it really comes down to the value of Scroll-Ancestral in today's meta. Since we are rarely fighting anything with a real Draw engine I feel UU1 to draw 3 cards has quite a bit less value than it used to. Fact or Fiction is very hard to resolve vs Shops or Fish in the later stages of the game, and jut isn;t that great early on. The real reasoning behind all this though is that i've found Hurkyl's just not to be enough. Vs the modern takes on MUD/Stax it often costs 4 by the end of their turn 1 and just goes up from there.

Spell Pierce on the other hand is ridiculous against them since they can't use Workshop mana to pay the 2. Keeping early Spheres off the table has a huge amount of value, espeically since we can use Moxen to get around Golem issues.

Thoughts?

[Smmenen]

I was waiting for the forum reorganization to happen to answer your questions, but it's been almost three weeks, so I'll just post my latest TPS list here


The Perfect Storm
By Stephen Menendian
6/1/10

1 Flooded Strand
1 Bloodstained Mire
3 Island
4 Polluted Delta
2 Swamp
1 Tolarian Academy
2 Underground Sea
1 Black Lotus
1 Lotus Petal
1 Mana Crypt
1 Mana Vault
1 Mox Emerald
1 Mox Jet
1 Mox Pearl
1 Mox Ruby
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Sol Ring
4 Dark Ritual
1 Cabal Ritual

1 Memory Jar
4 Duress
1 Necropotence
1 Yawgmoth's Bargain
1 Yawgmoth's Will
1 Tendrils of Agony
1 Vampiric Tutor
1 Demonic Tutor
1 Imperial Seal

1 Ancestral Recall
1 Brainstorm
1 Ponder
1 Merchant Scroll
1 Fact or Fiction
1 Gifts Ungiven
4 Force of Will
1 Mind's Desire
1 Mystical Tutor
1 Chain of Vapor
2 Hurkyl's Recall
1 Time Walk
1 Timetwister
1 Tinker
1 Sphinx of the Steel Wind

Sideboard:
1 Yixlid Jailer
4 Leyline Of The Void
2 Tormod's Crypt
1 Chain Of Vapor
1 Hurkyl's Recall
1 Rebuild
1 Island
1 Swamp
1 Slaughter Pact
1 Inkwell Leviathan
1 Sadistic Sacrament

I cut Rebuild and Misd for two Hurkyl's.  Then, I cut grim Tutor and a Cabal Ritual for a Flooded Strand and a third Island.

I have been testing this against MUD with great success.   It plays out just like I hoped.  

Sideboarding with the deck is so smooth.

Against MUD:

- 4 Duress
- 1 Fact or Fiction
+ 1 Hurkyl's Recall
+ 1 Chain of Vapor
+ 1 Rebuild
+ 1 Swamp
+ 1 Island

Slaughter Pact is also good against Golem, and worth bringing in as well.

If you really want more to bring in against MUD, turn the two T. Crypts to Bogs and you can bring them in as well, cutting some off color moxen.  

Against Tez, you will cut the two extra lands for 2 T. crypts, and cut Sphinx for Inkwell.   You'll also want to cut a Hurkyl's for another Chain.  

Hey Steve,

I've been testing a similar list, basically the same cuts except that I cut Mana Vault instead of the Cabal Ritual and went with a 3rd Swamp instead of a 6th Fetch (which i conceed is likely the wrong choice).

TK ran 3 C. Rits and no Mana vault at the Vintage champs two years ago.  I, however, think that Vault is better.

Vault is better, first of all, against MUD, since most MUD lists don't run Null Rod, but they run plenty of Spheres.   Mana Vault can be played on turn one and evade Spheres.  Granted, it taps down to Tangle Wire, but it's still better overall.  Also, it helps you play Tinker even when you've been Chaliced at 0.   Only other card that can do that is Sol ring.

While we're on the subject, I've been testing Spell Pierce in TPS as well. Basically I cut the 2nd Hurkyl's, the Merchant Scroll, and Fact or Fiction for 3x Spell Pierce. I've been supremely underwhelmed by Scroll recently. there's realy nothign in this list to get except Ancestral or in rare occaisions a seond FoW.

Scroll is more important than ever in the MUD metagame.   Against MUD, you will Scroll up Hurkyl's and play it on the very next turn, ad win the game.  

 Given that we are replacing it with a counterspell it really comes down to the value of Scroll-Ancestral in today's meta. Since we are rarely fighting anything with a real Draw engine I feel UU1 to draw 3 cards has quite a bit less value than it used to. Fact or Fiction is very hard to resolve vs Shops or Fish in the later stages of the game, and jut isn;t that great early on. The real reasoning behind all this though is that i've found Hurkyl's just not to be enough. Vs the modern takes on MUD/Stax it often costs 4 by the end of their turn 1 and just goes up from there.

Yes, Hurkyl's will often cost 4.   but it's the only -- and best -- answer to MUD.

Spell Pierce on the other hand is ridiculous against them since they can't use Workshop mana to pay the 2. Keeping early Spheres off the table has a huge amount of value, espeically since we can use Moxen to get around Golem issues.

Thoughts?

Spell Pierce is fighting a losing battle.  It's better to just make land drops, Hurkyl's them, and then win the game.  

[FlyFlySideOfFry]

I've never really liked FoF in TPS and it is pretty horrendous against Shops so I was wondering what the thought process was in keeping it. I'm so happy to see that Grim Tutor is out because I disliked it for pretty much the same reasons as FoF. Is it simply a lack of a better substitute in your opinion?

[Rico Suave]

Replace "Oath" in the second sentence with "TPS" and that's my argument.  In this article I documented a trend in Tezzeret away from Bob lists because of Oath.   I don't think that Bob Tendrils is a better metagame choice than TPS, properly built. 

I will admit, it seems counter-intuitive to play Dark Confidant when the opponent is playing Oath of Druids.  In fact, it feels downright wrong.

There seem to be two main things here that rub me the wrong way though.  The first is you seem to imply Oath is the only reason Tezz is moving away from Bob.  The second is you draw an unfair comparison that if Bob Tezz is bad against Oath, then Bob Tendrils is also bad against Oath.

1) I don't think Oath is the only reason Tezz is moving away from Bob.

If I were choosing a draw engine for my Tezz deck, I would want to look at the metagame.  At the last tournament I was in, the top 8 looked like this:
2 Workshops
1 Fish
1 Oath
1 Tezz
1 TPS
2 Drain Tendrils

Now sure, Oath is present here, and I would much rather be playing Remora Tezz over Bob Tezz against Oath.  But I'd also rather be playing Remora against Tezz, TPS, and the 2 Drain Tendrils decks too.  Judging from this sample, which I will admit is biased to prove my point, I can see 5 decks where Remora is better than Bob but Oath makes up only 20% of those decks. 

So while Oath is a reason, and it's probably the strongest reason in reality, I feel it is far from the only reason for Tezz to move away from Bob. 

2) Bob Tendrils and Bob Tezz are not the same deck.

Let's assume for a minute that Oath is the sole reason Tezz is moving away from Bob.

You mentioned that a major reason you feel TPS is in a good position right now is because it kills on turn X, and turn X is just fast enough to beat Oath most of the time.  Bob Tezz is not anywhere close to that turn X.  But Bob Tendrils is a far more explosive deck than its Tezz friend.  It seems like you are dismissing Bob Tendrils as not being able to approach that turn X. 

In short, it looks like you are concluding that if Bob Tezz performs poorly against Oath, then Bob Tendrils must also follow suit.

3) Bob or No?

Is Bob bad against Oath?  Well, it can be.  But in order for Bob to be a liability there is a pretty lengthy set of requirements:
-The Oath player must have Oath, and resolve it
-The Bob player must have Bob, and play it
-The Oath must must not have Orchard
-The Oath player must survive until he/she achieves a game-ending monster off an Oath trigger

If any of those are out of place, then Dark Confidant being a creature isn't a drawback. 

You say that you don't feel Bob Tendrils is a better metagame choice than TPS.  But really, what is this based on?  It would be nice to see more substance behind this, since I haven't found the reasoning here to be very satisfying for me and I feel that Bob is a very strong choice for a Tendrils deck at the moment. 

For the record, I don't think Oath has a good match-up against Bob Tendrils at all.  In fact, I would go so far as to say that Bob makes the deck better against Oath.

[Killane]

TK ran 3 C. Rits and no Mana vault at the Vintage champs two years ago.  I, however, think that Vault is better.

Vault is better, first of all, against MUD, since most MUD lists don't run Null Rod, but they run plenty of Spheres.   Mana Vault can be played on turn one and evade Spheres.  Granted, it taps down to Tangle Wire, but it's still better overall.  Also, it helps you play Tinker even when you've been Chaliced at 0.   Only other card that can do that is Sol ring.

While we're on the subject, I've been testing Spell Pierce in TPS as well. Basically I cut the 2nd Hurkyl's, the Merchant Scroll, and Fact or Fiction for 3x Spell Pierce. I've been supremely underwhelmed by Scroll recently. there's realy nothign in this list to get except Ancestral or in rare occaisions a seond FoW.

Scroll is more important than ever in the MUD metagame.   Against MUD, you will Scroll up Hurkyl's and play it on the very next turn, ad win the game.  

 Given that we are replacing it with a counterspell it really comes down to the value of Scroll-Ancestral in today's meta. Since we are rarely fighting anything with a real Draw engine I feel UU1 to draw 3 cards has quite a bit less value than it used to. Fact or Fiction is very hard to resolve vs Shops or Fish in the later stages of the game, and jut isn;t that great early on. The real reasoning behind all this though is that i've found Hurkyl's just not to be enough. Vs the modern takes on MUD/Stax it often costs 4 by the end of their turn 1 and just goes up from there.

Yes, Hurkyl's will often cost 4.   but it's the only -- and best -- answer to MUD.

Spell Pierce on the other hand is ridiculous against them since they can't use Workshop mana to pay the 2. Keeping early Spheres off the table has a huge amount of value, espeically since we can use Moxen to get around Golem issues.

Thoughts?

Spell Pierce is fighting a losing battle.  It's better to just make land drops, Hurkyl's them, and then win the game.  

Recent MUD lists have been running 4xGolem4XSphere 2-4Thorn, and 0-1 Trini. That's 10 Spheres, minimum, and some with the full 13. add in tanglewire and Smokestck and you have a real issue.  I'v had games wherein I've made every land drop, cast moxen,etc... at the first opportunity, and still not been able to resolve Hurkyl's until turn 6 or 7 - the problem is after a turn 1 or 2 Golem you can't make six land drops because it kills you in 4 hits. Scrolling for Hurkyl's makes the problem worse- now you have to resolve two spells against them prior to killing them. Several of our tutors and two of our best engine cards cost significant life to use- there reaches a point where the Storm win becomes downright impossible as it takes so many resources to cast the darn bounce spell that we don't have enough to storm them out and win. On the other hand, Inkwell is not fast enough to race Golems and DSC/Sphinx are both easy removal targets for Duplicant, meaning we need to not only Tinker, but do so with countermagic back-up in order to win that particular battle.

Spell Pierce pro-actively attacks the issue. Keeping spheres off the table, allowing easier casting of Hurkyll's, and providing additional solutions apart from FoW to Duplicant makes the Tinker plan better AND increases the ability to Storm-kill. I'm not suggesting that countering everything they do is the way to go- I'm suggesting that 1-2 Time Walks is JUST what this matchup needs, bringing us closer to our fundamental turn and allowing us to execute the bounce plan. If we can keep Spheres off the table then Golem is a much smaller problem since it doesn't impede our moxen, allowing us to cast Hurkyl's before being beaten to death, and then go crazy.

[FlyFlySideOfFry]

TK ran 3 C. Rits and no Mana vault at the Vintage champs two years ago.  I, however, think that Vault is better.

Vault is better, first of all, against MUD, since most MUD lists don't run Null Rod, but they run plenty of Spheres.   Mana Vault can be played on turn one and evade Spheres.  Granted, it taps down to Tangle Wire, but it's still better overall.  Also, it helps you play Tinker even when you've been Chaliced at 0.   Only other card that can do that is Sol ring.

While we're on the subject, I've been testing Spell Pierce in TPS as well. Basically I cut the 2nd Hurkyl's, the Merchant Scroll, and Fact or Fiction for 3x Spell Pierce. I've been supremely underwhelmed by Scroll recently. there's realy nothign in this list to get except Ancestral or in rare occaisions a seond FoW.

Scroll is more important than ever in the MUD metagame.   Against MUD, you will Scroll up Hurkyl's and play it on the very next turn, ad win the game.  

 Given that we are replacing it with a counterspell it really comes down to the value of Scroll-Ancestral in today's meta. Since we are rarely fighting anything with a real Draw engine I feel UU1 to draw 3 cards has quite a bit less value than it used to. Fact or Fiction is very hard to resolve vs Shops or Fish in the later stages of the game, and jut isn;t that great early on. The real reasoning behind all this though is that i've found Hurkyl's just not to be enough. Vs the modern takes on MUD/Stax it often costs 4 by the end of their turn 1 and just goes up from there.

Yes, Hurkyl's will often cost 4.   but it's the only -- and best -- answer to MUD.

Spell Pierce on the other hand is ridiculous against them since they can't use Workshop mana to pay the 2. Keeping early Spheres off the table has a huge amount of value, espeically since we can use Moxen to get around Golem issues.

Thoughts?

Spell Pierce is fighting a losing battle.  It's better to just make land drops, Hurkyl's them, and then win the game.  

Recent MUD lists have been running 4xGolem4XSphere 2-4Thorn, and 0-1 Trini. That's 10 Spheres, minimum, and some with the full 13. add in tanglewire and Smokestck and you have a real issue.  I'v had games wherein I've made every land drop, cast moxen,etc... at the first opportunity, and still not been able to resolve Hurkyl's until turn 6 or 7 - the problem is after a turn 1 or 2 Golem you can't make six land drops because it kills you in 4 hits. Scrolling for Hurkyl's makes the problem worse- now you have to resolve two spells against them prior to killing them. Several of our tutors and two of our best engine cards cost significant life to use- there reaches a point where the Storm win becomes downright impossible as it takes so many resources to cast the darn bounce spell that we don't have enough to storm them out and win. On the other hand, Inkwell is not fast enough to race Golems and DSC/Sphinx are both easy removal targets for Duplicant, meaning we need to not only Tinker, but do so with countermagic back-up in order to win that particular battle.

Spell Pierce pro-actively attacks the issue. Keeping spheres off the table, allowing easier casting of Hurkyll's, and providing additional solutions apart from FoW to Duplicant makes the Tinker plan better AND increases the ability to Storm-kill. I'm not suggesting that countering everything they do is the way to go- I'm suggesting that 1-2 Time Walks is JUST what this matchup needs, bringing us closer to our fundamental turn and allowing us to execute the bounce plan. If we can keep Spheres off the table then Golem is a much smaller problem since it doesn't impede our moxen, allowing us to cast Hurkyl's before being beaten to death, and then go crazy.

I think you're running into the same problems I was when I initially started playing against modern MUD. The problem for me was the mentality that you have to cast your Hurkyl's and then untap->win. The problem is that waiting so long is essentially shooting yourself in the foot. I learned that you have to bounce before it is too late just to buy time to keep building your mana base. This is where Scroll shines because one bounce spell isn't always enough anymore. Thus Spell Pierce becomes sort of a waste of slots because just putting in additional bounce spells does what you want to do except 5 times better.

I think Smmenen is right and Spell Pierce is just fighting a losing battle. TPS isn't designed to use Spell Pierce properly. Sure you're probably going to counter a lock piece with it, but by leaving mana up you're not casting spells that advance your own game plan. This works in control decks because that Spell Pierce is going to lead into a Mana Drain which can seal the game for them while also stopping the MUD player. TPS can't do that.

[Killane]

that explanation really helped. Thank you.

[Smmenen]

Incidentally, I just realized this article is now free.

Replace "Oath" in the second sentence with "TPS" and that's my argument.  In this article I documented a trend in Tezzeret away from Bob lists because of Oath.   I don't think that Bob Tendrils is a better metagame choice than TPS, properly built. 

I will admit, it seems counter-intuitive to play Dark Confidant when the opponent is playing Oath of Druids.  In fact, it feels downright wrong.

There seem to be two main things here that rub me the wrong way though.  The first is you seem to imply Oath is the only reason Tezz is moving away from Bob.  The second is you draw an unfair comparison that if Bob Tezz is bad against Oath, then Bob Tendrils is also bad against Oath.

I don't think that Bob Tendrils is weak against Oath because Bob Tez is.  I think Bob Tendrils is weak to Oath because Bob is weak to Oath.    I also think it's weak to Oath because it doesn't have Force.

1) I don't think Oath is the only reason Tezz is moving away from Bob.

If I were choosing a draw engine for my Tezz deck, I would want to look at the metagame.  At the last tournament I was in, the top 8 looked like this:
2 Workshops
1 Fish
1 Oath
1 Tezz
1 TPS
2 Drain Tendrils

Now sure, Oath is present here, and I would much rather be playing Remora Tezz over Bob Tezz against Oath.  But I'd also rather be playing Remora against Tezz, TPS, and the 2 Drain Tendrils decks too.  Judging from this sample, which I will admit is biased to prove my point, I can see 5 decks where Remora is better than Bob but Oath makes up only 20% of those decks. 

I prefer Bob against Tez than Remora.   Remora is great agaisnt Stax and Combo, but weak, imo, against Tez and Fish.

So while Oath is a reason, and it's probably the strongest reason in reality, I feel it is far from the only reason for Tezz to move away from Bob. 

It may not be the only reason, but it's a darn good one.

2) Bob Tendrils and Bob Tezz are not the same deck.

Let's assume for a minute that Oath is the sole reason Tezz is moving away from Bob.

You mentioned that a major reason you feel TPS is in a good position right now is because it kills on turn X, and turn X is just fast enough to beat Oath most of the time.  Bob Tezz is not anywhere close to that turn X.  But Bob Tendrils is a far more explosive deck than its Tezz friend.  It seems like you are dismissing Bob Tendrils as not being able to approach that turn X. 

In short, it looks like you are concluding that if Bob Tezz performs poorly against Oath, then Bob Tendrils must also follow suit.

I think TPS is a good deck right now because of what it does, not necessarily because of its speed, although that is a part of what it does.   It also has a rock solid mana base and runs Force of Will.

3) Bob or No?

Is Bob bad against Oath?  Well, it can be.  But in order for Bob to be a liability there is a pretty lengthy set of requirements:
-The Oath player must have Oath, and resolve it
-The Bob player must have Bob, and play it
-The Oath must must not have Orchard
-The Oath player must survive until he/she achieves a game-ending monster off an Oath trigger

If both players have their 2 mana spell, Oath wins.   Bob is only good if you have it and your opponent doesn't have Oath.   

If any of those are out of place, then Dark Confidant being a creature isn't a drawback. 

You say that you don't feel Bob Tendrils is a better metagame choice than TPS.  But really, what is this based on?  It would be nice to see more substance behind this, since I haven't found the reasoning here to be very satisfying for me and I feel that Bob is a very strong choice for a Tendrils deck at the moment. 

Bob is not a good card against Oath.   

[matt_sperling]

3) Bob or No?

Is Bob bad against Oath?  Well, it can be.  But in order for Bob to be a liability there is a pretty lengthy set of requirements:
-The Oath player must have Oath, and resolve it
-The Bob player must have Bob, and play it
-The Oath must must not have Orchard
-The Oath player must survive until he/she achieves a game-ending monster off an Oath trigger

If both players have their 2 mana spell, Oath wins.   Bob is only good if you have it and your opponent doesn't have Oath.   

You've taken a somewhat nuanced analysis of the conditions necessary for Bob to be bad against Oath and responded with "Oath Wins."  The frustrating thing is that the counterarguments to your position are quoted right above what you said.  Admins should delete posts like this.  It is a complete non sequitur.  If I Bob and they Oath, I *NEVER* kill them with the extra card I drew?  Do they *NEVER* oath up their Tinker robot and die to my two extra cards?  Am I not playing TPS? 

Bob is not a good card against Oath.   

Rico posted a detailed and thoughtful analysis of when and why Bob is good against Oath, and he gets this one line in response.  Stephen's responses in other threads often go the opposite direction, unending rants that could be stated concisely except for the fact that doing so would reveal the weakness of Stephen's argument. 

TMD loses credibility as a serious forum for high-level discussion when one of the sites vocal leaders alternates between incomprehensibly long and confusing posts and dismissive one-liners that are contradicted by existing posts. 

When Stephen begins writing enough so that the reader doesn't have to guess at his reasoning, but not so much that the reader has to search for it like a needle in a hay stack, I might learn something from him in a forum. 

As for the substance of the Bob vs Oath discussion, think of the subset of all games played that the opponent Oathing off your Bob and killing you represents.  Remember that you can board out Bob, you can not cast Bob, the opponent doesn't always have Oath, the opponent sometimes has Orchard, and the opponent more often than not (by a wide margin) is not even playing Oath.  It is a small enough subset that I don't think it sits atop a Pros vs. Cons list regarding Bob in TPS or Tezz.  If you think Bob would be optimal in TPS or Tezz if Oath didn't exist, you'd be well served to play Bob in the world we presently live in.  It could be wrong if Bob was only very slightly correct in a no-Oath world, so use your judgment as to how good you think Bob would be if Oath didn't exist.  You're likely overcompensating for a perceived weakness if you cut Bob simply by virtue of it triggering Oath or because Stephen Menendian has stated "Bob is not a good card against Oath" without regard to why this is or how often it matters. 

[voltron00x]

Sperling - grats on the pt finish and glad to have you on TMD


Edit:  Brad are you playing tomorrow and/or Sunday?

[tezzajw]

Yes, Hurkyl's will often cost 4.   but it's the only -- and best -- answer to MUD.

Damn edits!  I need to preview before I post.  I'm assuming that you're stating the above, with regards to TPS decks, right?  Cool.

Hurkyl's Recall is usually only a blowout if you have the win for the same/next turn.

Don't let that MUD player back in the game!

[Smmenen]

But Matt!   Did you like the article ?  

I apologize if you feel like I'm trying to hide the ball.  I'm not.   First, the list of conditions strike me as irrellevant.  I could add more, such as the oath player having mana.  With Oath such a substantial portion of the field, particularly among top players, it is a deterrent to bob.   I think your being too reductionist.  Oath alone may not be enough not to play a bob deck, but it is a contributory factor.  the straw that broke the camelsback.  Also, I think your being too essentialist.  Decks and cards in them  are good in a context.  If that context has oath, it should make you question bob.  

[Rico Suave]

I don't think that Bob Tendrils is weak against Oath because Bob Tez is.  I think Bob Tendrils is weak to Oath because Bob is weak to Oath.    I also think it's weak to Oath because it doesn't have Force.

...

I think TPS is a good deck right now because of what it does, not necessarily because of its speed, although that is a part of what it does.   It also has a rock solid mana base and runs Force of Will.

And if a Bob Tendrils list were to include both a rock solid mana base and Force of Will, would that eliminate these concerns? 

Now as for Bob against Oath...

Is Bob vulnerable to Oath?  Yes.  But this is the wrong way to approach the problem because it is analyzing one card against one card. 

Is Bob going to stop a Tendrils deck from being good against Oath?  No. 

[Smmenen]

I don't think that Bob Tendrils is weak against Oath because Bob Tez is.  I think Bob Tendrils is weak to Oath because Bob is weak to Oath.    I also think it's weak to Oath because it doesn't have Force.

...

I think TPS is a good deck right now because of what it does, not necessarily because of its speed, although that is a part of what it does.   It also has a rock solid mana base and runs Force of Will.

And if a Bob Tendrils list were to include both a rock solid mana base and Force of Will, would that eliminate these concerns? 

Now as for Bob against Oath...

Is Bob vulnerable to Oath?  Yes.  But this is the wrong way to approach the problem because it is analyzing one card against one card. 

Is Bob going to stop a Tendrils deck from being good against Oath?  No. 

Now we get into semantics.  If a Bob Tendrils deck includes Force of Will, is it still Bob-Tendrils, or just a TPS variant?   

[Killane]

I don't think that Bob Tendrils is weak against Oath because Bob Tez is.  I think Bob Tendrils is weak to Oath because Bob is weak to Oath.    I also think it's weak to Oath because it doesn't have Force.

...

I think TPS is a good deck right now because of what it does, not necessarily because of its speed, although that is a part of what it does.   It also has a rock solid mana base and runs Force of Will.

And if a Bob Tendrils list were to include both a rock solid mana base and Force of Will, would that eliminate these concerns? 

Now as for Bob against Oath...

Is Bob vulnerable to Oath?  Yes.  But this is the wrong way to approach the problem because it is analyzing one card against one card. 

Is Bob going to stop a Tendrils deck from being good against Oath?  No. 

Now we get into semantics.  If a Bob Tendrils deck includes Force of Will, is it still Bob-Tendrils, or just a TPS variant?   

Agreed, especially given that some (Marske, Myself, etc...) have run Bobs in the TPS sideboard vs (pre lodestone) MUD and they work quite well. I can't speak intelligently about Bobs vs Lodestone MUD since I haven't had the displeasure, but attacking was the least of their benefits in that matchup (though still highly relevant in reducing the lethal storm count needed).

Maybe a hybrid of the two archetypes is what's needed. GWSx with FoW and 4+ basics is only a few cards off TPS anyways.

[Smmenen]

Yeah -- I ran Bobs in my 2008 Vintage Worlds TPS SB, too.   

[Rico Suave]

Either way you look at it, I fail to see how Bob can be so quickly excluded from consideration for a Ritual deck when Workshops are apparently the deck to beat. 

[Smmenen]

Either way you look at it, I fail to see how Bob can be so quickly excluded from consideration for a Ritual deck when Workshops are apparently the deck to beat. 

Because Oath is also a deck to beat, and because Bob doesn't shore up a weak matchup as strongly as other cards/tactics do.  That's my view.