[Premium Article] Getting Your Eyelids out of the Way

[voltron00x]

http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/misc/19885_Innovations_Getting_Your_Eyelids_Out_of_the_Way.html

In which Pat Chapin writes as only he can, about a variety of topics.  About 4/5 of the way down you'll find a brief section about Workshops in Vintage which I found interesting.

[Prospero]

I won't be able to read this until I get home.  I just hope that I don't come across another writer bashing Workshops.  Getting tired of that.

[Smmenen]

I won't be able to read this until I get home.  I just hope that I don't come across another writer bashing Workshops.  Getting tired of that.

don't bother reading it then.  That's allhe does. It's pretty thoughtless, stereotypical anti- workshop ranting

[voltron00x]

The premise is strange to me, given that the decks that were battling each other for format supremacy are both seriously hurt by Nature's Claim and Trygon Predator, but if either of those decks were so bad, why did Tezz need to change so much to become relevant again?  Obviously incidental Shop hate wasn't getting the job done previously.

I'm just not sure that I take those comments at face value.  I responded on the SCG forums as if he was serious, but I have some doubts.

[Juggernaut GO]

Coming from the guy that thought flash was the best deck, statements bashing workshops don't really hold much worth.  He's probably one of the "best" players that always play the "best" deck.  When in reality, the "best" deck is just the easiest deck that any mouthbreather can pilot to a top 8.

Case in point, I went undefeated with 4c tezz this past weekend, and lost in top8.  The deck is so easy to play, a retarded monkey beating off constantly and throwing his own shit around the room could make top8 with it.  Oh wait, he did!

[Bibendum]

Its so amazing that someone who is as well known for his "innovation" and deck building prowess can be so short sighted and wrong about such a large chunk of vintage. To say  an entire archetype sucks while it is top 8ing in multiples everywhere is just blatant and ignorant bashing.

[CorwinB]

I find his statements about Workshop rather puzzling, as he generally seems much more open-minded in his writings and interviews (in this extraordinary M11 interview, for example, where you could see he was always trying to make a case for each card that was named to him), and he is usually no slave to things such as casting cost preconceptions.

[chrispikula]

Coming from the guy that thought flash was the best deck, statements bashing workshops don't really hold much worth.  He's probably one of the "best" players that always play the "best" deck.  When in reality, the "best" deck is just the easiest deck that any mouthbreather can pilot to a top 8.

Case in point, I went undefeated with 4c tezz this past weekend, and lost in top8.  The deck is so easy to play, a retarded monkey beating off constantly and throwing his own shit around the room could make top8 with it.  Oh wait, he did!

This statement is just absurd. i've been playing 4 color Tezz for months and I think the deck is actually quite difficult to play (although I admit that the Ochoa list that has fewer tutors and more creatures is quite a bit easier).  Most Shop decks are extremely easy to play. I strongly believe that the reason Oath, MUD, Stax, and Dredge do so well is that the decks are simply not very difficult to play. The cards do all the work, not the player. 

[Troy_Costisick]

Coming from the guy that thought flash was the best deck, statements bashing workshops don't really hold much worth.  He's probably one of the "best" players that always play the "best" deck.  When in reality, the "best" deck is just the easiest deck that any mouthbreather can pilot to a top 8.

Case in point, I went undefeated with 4c tezz this past weekend, and lost in top8.  The deck is so easy to play, a retarded monkey beating off constantly and throwing his own shit around the room could make top8 with it.  Oh wait, he did!

This statement is just absurd. i've been playing 4 color Tezz for months and I think the deck is actually quite difficult to play (although I admit that the Ochoa list that has fewer tutors and more creatures is quite a bit easier).  Most Shop decks are extremely easy to play. I strongly believe that the reason Oath, MUD, Stax, and Dredge do so well is that the decks are simply not very difficult to play. The cards do all the work, not the player. 

Give me a break.  All decks have their difficulties.  Try playing Dredge post-board.  That's something that's hard.  I'll concede that TPS might be the hardest, but your analysis is way off base.

[Demonic Attorney]

Let me just interject and remind everyone of Travis' penchant for trolling, so it's probably wise to take his comments with a grain of salt.  I have no comment on which decks are hard and which decks are easy to play, but I do question whether arguing about that is a fruitful exercise.  But as long as it can be done without flaming each other, knock yourselves out.

[Grand Inquisitor]

Let me just interject and remind everyone of Travis' penchant for trolling

No, actually he's right.  I've been resolving Ancestral Recall since 2003, there's nothing to it.  On the other hand, you should have seen Travis punt this game against my friend Jeff...

article

I don't have premium, but if PC is really advocating that workshops are bad, he's either disingenuous or getting high on his own supply.  I think the last time I saw workshop's relative power level this high was when trinisphere was first printed and people hadn't adjusted yet.

[Troy_Costisick]

I don't have premium, but if PC is really advocating that workshops are bad, he's either disingenuous or getting high on his own supply.  I think the last time I saw workshop's relative power level this high was when trinisphere was first printed and people hadn't adjusted yet.

It was really strong during the 2nd Gush era too.

[Grand Inquisitor]

It was really strong during the 2nd Gush era too.

Yeah, but it could get hosed if it ran into the oddball metagamer running Bomberman, Slaver or even Gobbos.  Right now, it has a pretty viable 1st and 2nd strategy against most of the field.

[Oath of Happy]

Here's what I've gotten from discussion after Worlds: Many people are not too smart.  

Bashing Workshops?  Seriously?  Are these ideas coming from the result of Worlds?  Lets think about how relevent Worlds is.  First of all, not many people own power plus Shops, so Shops are already taking a hit in player base compared to that Stupid Trygon Deck.  Then, lets look at the Shop builds that top 8'd...they were horid, no Null Rods...instead shit like Staff, Karn?  Then if you look at Owens tourney report the Shop player obviously did not play well.  You take some competetent players playing the deck Menendian won with about 2 months back (4 rod, 4 chalice 4 jugg 4 lodes, 9 spheres, 4 tangle) and you'll have a much different outcome.  Worlds is a joke, Shops are brutal.  I'm not sure what happened to Menendian at worlds, but I know he said his deck had Smokestack, which i think is way to slow to be optimal in MUD.  I'd put bets on him playing his original build over anyone else playing JaceTrygon.dec

As far as All this F@#$ing hype about the mindsculptor goes, Yes, if you let this guy resolve and then you play draw go for 3 turns you will lose.  However, if my opponent pays 4 mana in there mainphase to cast this, I'm probably going to play a bomb eot using my counters to protect it, and win the next turn Via Vault/Key, or Yawgs Will.  As far as people like me having the problem of not seing Jace as "more than just a brainstorm effect" yea right.  In the control Mirror, what else are you going to do, fateseal me?  Bounce my sphinx that I sided out/pitched to Force?  I run one Jace, and thats because 2 Tezz is overkill and I need a backup win con so I can side out my sphinx and still be able to pitch my Tezz.

[Juggernaut GO]

Coming from the guy that thought flash was the best deck, statements bashing workshops don't really hold much worth.  He's probably one of the "best" players that always play the "best" deck.  When in reality, the "best" deck is just the easiest deck that any mouthbreather can pilot to a top 8.

Case in point, I went undefeated with 4c tezz this past weekend, and lost in top8.  The deck is so easy to play, a retarded monkey beating off constantly and throwing his own shit around the room could make top8 with it.  Oh wait, he did!

This statement is just absurd. i've been playing 4 color Tezz for months and I think the deck is actually quite difficult to play (although I admit that the Ochoa list that has fewer tutors and more creatures is quite a bit easier).  Most Shop decks are extremely easy to play. I strongly believe that the reason Oath, MUD, Stax, and Dredge do so well is that the decks are simply not very difficult to play. The cards do all the work, not the player. 

Funny, I thought the same thing about 4c tezz.  The deck does all the work, and barely any decisions were left up in the air.

There's a reason people like rich shay, gi, and others continue to play the same 45 card deck since 2003, + or - certain blue cards that may or may not have been restricted.

Just dismissing my comments as trolling is bullshit, I've had just as many if not more results then the majority of people that still post on this forum.

[Oath of Happy]

Coming from the guy that thought flash was the best deck, statements bashing workshops don't really hold much worth.  He's probably one of the "best" players that always play the "best" deck.  When in reality, the "best" deck is just the easiest deck that any mouthbreather can pilot to a top 8.

Case in point, I went undefeated with 4c tezz this past weekend, and lost in top8.  The deck is so easy to play, a retarded monkey beating off constantly and throwing his own shit around the room could make top8 with it.  Oh wait, he did!

This statement is just absurd. i've been playing 4 color Tezz for months and I think the deck is actually quite difficult to play (although I admit that the Ochoa list that has fewer tutors and more creatures is quite a bit easier).  Most Shop decks are extremely easy to play. I strongly believe that the reason Oath, MUD, Stax, and Dredge do so well is that the decks are simply not very difficult to play. The cards do all the work, not the player. 

Funny, I thought the same thing about 4c tezz.  The deck does all the work, and barely any decisions were left up in the air.

There's a reason people like rich shay, gi, and others continue to play the same 45 card deck since 2003, + or - certain blue cards that may or may not have been restricted.

Just dismissing my comments as trolling is bullshit, I've had just as many if not more results then the majority of people that still post on this forum.

I absolutly agree with Travis that Tezz is mostly brainless.  I'd give it a 3 on a 10 point scale of difficulty.  Id give MUD and Oath 1's

[voltron00x]

This is an absurd conversation.

I played Bob Tendrils for the first time ever last weekend and found it to be incredibly easy.  I had a much easier time determining decision trees with that deck than I did the first time I played MUD.  Bob Tendrils served up wins on a platter all day.  I just bumbled and fumbled around and the cards were so good I won anyway.

I had to scratch and claw with MUD in a lot of games, and bring my "A" game to get there.  Maybe I'm just slow, though.  I'm sure everyone playing MUD catches the "know my opponent is going to set up Key/Vault so I will  sculpt my turn to let them go that route, and then use Karn to animate Vault in response to Key so that Vault has summoning sickness play" play - that old thing is so inherently obvious and easy.

People experience different levels of difficulty related to various decks, any statement about how easy a deck is to play compared to another is simply opinion, as is true when people want to say a format is more difficult or complex than another.

[Rico Suave]

Every deck is difficult to play when sitting across from a strong player.

[Oath of Happy]

This is an absurd conversation.

I played Bob Tendrils for the first time ever last weekend and found it to be incredibly easy.  I had a much easier time determining decision trees with that deck than I did the first time I played MUD.  Bob Tendrils served up wins on a platter all day.  I just bumbled and fumbled around and the cards were so good I won anyway.

I had to scratch and claw with MUD in a lot of games, and bring my "A" game to get there.  Maybe I'm just slow, though.  I'm sure everyone playing MUD catches the "know my opponent is going to set up Key/Vault so I will  sculpt my turn to let them go that route, and then use Karn to animate Vault in response to Key so that Vault has summoning sickness play" play - that old thing is so inherently obvious and easy.

People experience different levels of difficulty related to various decks, any statement about how easy a deck is to play compared to another is simply opinion, as is true when people want to say a format is more difficult or complex than another.

Huh?  What kind of sculpting does MUD have?  There is no deck maipulation whatsoever.  Heres the Strategy:

Play as Many Sphere effects, chalices, Rods, and Wires to disrupt your opponent as you can, then play a Juggs or a Lodestone if you havent already done so in this process and attack.  The only card that takes skill is Sculpting Steel, which any competent player should know how to use.  If your opponent is really struggling with mana, use it as another sphere to lock them out for the next 3 turns while juggs or lodestone deals them the final 15 damage, or, attack with juggs/loestone, and hold it back in case they are setting up a tinker for sphinx.  It should be pretty obvious which way the game is going

[chrispikula]

This is an absurd conversation.

I played Bob Tendrils for the first time ever last weekend and found it to be incredibly easy.  I had a much easier time determining decision trees with that deck than I did the first time I played MUD.  Bob Tendrils served up wins on a platter all day.  I just bumbled and fumbled around and the cards were so good I won anyway.

I had to scratch and claw with MUD in a lot of games, and bring my "A" game to get there.  Maybe I'm just slow, though.  I'm sure everyone playing MUD catches the "know my opponent is going to set up Key/Vault so I will  sculpt my turn to let them go that route, and then use Karn to animate Vault in response to Key so that Vault has summoning sickness play" play - that old thing is so inherently obvious and easy.

People experience different levels of difficulty related to various decks, any statement about how easy a deck is to play compared to another is simply opinion, as is true when people want to say a format is more difficult or complex than another.

Nobody "sculpts" that chain of events. It just happens sometimes, and you make the best play when it presents itself. 

[voltron00x]

Chris, I'm surprised you would say that, being as good a player as you are.  Every deck gives you opportunity to lead your opponents in certain ways, based on what you play, when you play it, how you play it, and the body language and verbal cues you use.

In this specific instance, it was obvious from the way my opponent was playing, with Key in play already, and the resistors that I had, that he was going to try to set up Key/Vault by tutoring for Vault or potentially having it in hand already.  My job was to bait him into making that play by making sure Karn resolved.  To that end, I led with a Tangle Wire I believed he would counter to have the mana to play Time Vault, which he did, and then played Karn, which would now resolve.  With the artifacts I had in play, if he went for Time Vault the next turn, I would have lethal on-board.  That is exactly what ended up happening, opponent plays tutor for Time Vault and plays Vault, I use Karn, untap and bash for lethal.

To even get to this board state, I had to replay Karn previously to attack artifacts into a Jace, and then watch as a second Jace bounced Karn, whom I needed to resolve a second time.

Note that this is no knock on my opponent, who I consider a friend and a good player.  I only took this course of action because something exactly similar came up the week before in testing, against an almost identical deck.

[serracollector]

against 90% of decks, jace fishes goal is Mox, land, Tinker I win.  Takes a lot of thought.

[voltron00x]

And apparently there's a 0% chance we can have any reasonable conversation about why certain players believe Workshops are such a poor choice for tournament play.  Well done, all.

[chrispikula]

Chris, I'm surprised you would say that, being as good a player as you are.  Every deck gives you opportunity to lead your opponents in certain ways, based on what you play, when you play it, how you play it, and the body language and verbal cues you use.

In this specific instance, it was obvious from the way my opponent was playing, with Key in play already, and the resistors that I had, that he was going to try to set up Key/Vault by tutoring for Vault or potentially having it in hand already.  My job was to bait him into making that play by making sure Karn resolved.  To that end, I led with a Tangle Wire I believed he would counter to have the mana to play Time Vault, which he did, and then played Karn, which would now resolve.  With the artifacts I had in play, if he went for Time Vault the next turn, I would have lethal on-board.  That is exactly what ended up happening, opponent plays tutor for Time Vault and plays Vault, I use Karn, untap and bash for lethal.

To even get to this board state, I had to replay Karn previously to attack artifacts into a Jace, and then watch as a second Jace bounced Karn, whom I needed to resolve a second time.

Note that this is no knock on my opponent, who I consider a friend and a good player.  I only took this course of action because something exactly similar came up the week before in testing, against an almost identical deck.

Almost all my games against MUD or Stax I've played in the past year have gone like this: either I'm locked out of playing spells the entire game, or I win.  Maybe because I'm not in their seat, I'm not seeing the subtlety.

[chrispikula]

And apparently there's a 0% chance we can have any reasonable conversation about why certain players believe Workshops are such a poor choice for tournament play.  Well done, all.

I think workshops are a good choice, but not the best choice if you are a strong player.

[2nd_lawl]

Here's what I've gotten from discussion after Worlds: Many people are not too smart.  

Bashing Workshops?  Seriously?  Are these ideas coming from the result of Worlds?  Lets think about how relevent Worlds is.  First of all, not many people own power plus Shops, so Shops are already taking a hit in player base compared to that Stupid Trygon Deck.  Then, lets look at the Shop builds that top 8'd...they were horid, no Null Rods...instead shit like Staff, Karn?  Then if you look at Owens tourney report the Shop player obviously did not play well.

This whole line of thinking is completely self-contradictory.  You claim on one hand that the players who made top8 at Wolds with shops were bad, and that their lists were bad, and yet you simultaneously claim that workshops are a brutal deck in the hands of a good player.  So then according to you why didn't any of those good workshop players make top8? Furthermore why did the bad ones make it instead?  Only 2 possible lines of reasoning explain this:
1)The players and lists were not bad (although there is strong video evidence to the contrary in at least 1 case)
2) workshops as an archetype simply rewards running good, winning die rolls, and opening up hands with lodestone Golem, and that among all of the shop players in a given tournament, as long as they understand basic workshop strategy, and have a serviceable list, Of them, whichever ones among them wins rolls, has good shuffles etc will make top8?  I mean why is it that that there are players who consistently top 8 with drains, with dredge, with oath, with storm etc, but no such players running MUD?  Menendian often claims that there are no good "workshop sensei" who are out there showing everyone else what to do.  How much of the "sensei problem" is the fault of workshop players, and how much is the fault of the archetype itself?
 
 I'm not saying I totally agree with this line of reasoning, but it is a much cleaner explanation of why nobody can even agree on the basic maindeck components of a workshop deck, let alone sideboarding etc.  If all that matters with any reasonable shop deck is running good, winning your die rolls, and opening up hands with mishra's workshop then it stands to reason that none of the players are going to agree about what version of the deck is the best- since it practically doesn't matter.

[chrispikula]

2) workshops as an archetype simply rewards running good, winning die rolls, and opening up hands with lodestone Golem, and that among all of the shop players in a given tournament, as long as they understand basic workshop strategy, and have a serviceable list, Of them, whichever ones among them wins rolls, has good shuffles etc will make top8?  I mean why is it that that there are players who consistently top 8 with drains, with dredge, with oath, with storm etc, but no such players running MUD?  Menendian often claims that there are no good "workshop sensei" who are out there showing everyone else what to do.  How much of the "sensei problem" is the fault of workshop players, and how much is the fault of the archetype itself?
 
 

Nailed it.

[voltron00x]

Raf and Vin 4ino were both running pretty hot with ESPRESSO STAX (edit: not related to NYSE, duly noted) in the month leading up to Champs.  

There should also be a distinction between the Workshop decks.  There, at least, 4 modern/updated versions operating (MUD w/out Rod, MUD w/ Rod, MUD w/out Rod + Metalworker / Staff, Espresso Stax) plus some holders-on (Mono-red Stax, 5C Stax, Mono-Red Workshop Aggro).  

To suggest these are all terrible decks pre-Champs flies in the face of a huge amount of tournament results one can review on Morphling.  It seems more likely to me that, given the results of these MUD decks (and Oath), Champs lists were designed to beat them.  That very respect for the power of MUD suggests the deck isn't terrible and Lodestone isn't the nut low of Vintage, etc.

I don't think that Workshops are a "bad player" deck any more than Dredge is.  Good players who play those decks to their maximum potential achieve sustained success that can't be attributed to luck.  

There are, quite obviously, Workshop specialists.  Have been for years.  

[voltron00x]

2) workshops as an archetype simply rewards running good, winning die rolls, and opening up hands with lodestone Golem, and that among all of the shop players in a given tournament, as long as they understand basic workshop strategy, and have a serviceable list, Of them, whichever ones among them wins rolls, has good shuffles etc will make top8?  I mean why is it that that there are players who consistently top 8 with drains, with dredge, with oath, with storm etc, but no such players running MUD?  Menendian often claims that there are no good "workshop sensei" who are out there showing everyone else what to do.  How much of the "sensei problem" is the fault of workshop players, and how much is the fault of the archetype itself?
 
 

Nailed it.

This is demonstrably false, though.  Come the f on, guys.  There is a resource called "the internet".  Use it to look at tournament results in any given area and you'll find people repeating top 8s with MUD just like you find Chris Pikula repeating with top 8s with Tezz, or Max Brown occasionally making top 8s with Dark Times. 

Ever heard of Raf Forino, or Ashok, or Mike Eisenhauer, or Joseph Brown?

[2nd_lawl]

Raf and Vin 4ino were both running pretty hot with NYSE Stax in the month leading up to Champs.  

There should also be a distinction between the Workshop decks.  There, at least, 4 modern/updated versions operating (MUD w/out Rod, MUD w/ Rod, MUD w/out Rod + Metalworker / Staff, Espresso Stax) plus some holders-on (Mono-red Stax, 5C Stax, Mono-Red Workshop Aggro).  

I disagree with this, I think the distinction between mud and stax is reasonable, but within those 2 broad distinctions is 1 deck that nobody can agree on what the best version is.  If they weren't one deck, then why is every workshop thread about null rod or no, etc. Its not like tez players come into the oath threads and tell oath players not to play that crappy card oath, and play Bobs instead. In this very thread you have people bashing different versions of MUD.   No other deck in the format has people disagreeing about 15-20 cards.  If they all claim good results with their configuration, then the obvious conclusion is that it barley even matters what version you play, as long as you can open up hands with workshops + action.  

To suggest these are all terrible decks pre-Champs flies in the face of a huge amount of tournament results one can review on Morphling.  It seems more likely to me that, given the results of these MUD decks (and Oath), Champs lists were designed to beat them.  That very respect for the power of MUD suggests the deck isn't terrible and Lodestone isn't the nut low of Vintage, etc.

Oh workshops are obviously good, I believe the deck is practically unbeatable on the play with a good draw.  But its 99% as unbeatable with an average player holding the cards as a good one.

I don't think that Workshops are a "bad player" deck any more than Dredge is.  Good players who play those decks to their maximum potential achieve sustained success that can't be attributed to luck.  

Once again, just because you dont have to be a master to win with shop doesn't mean that masters dont play shops.  My contention is that difference between the win% of a master playing shops and the win% of an average players playing shops is smaller then with other decks.  That's not to say you cannot play the deck well, just that most of the time it doesn't matter if you do.

There are, quite obviously, Workshop specialists.  Have been for years. 

Well according to menendian, and what sounds like the prevailing wisdom outside of the NY/Philly meta(based on recent articles) is the opposite.  And even if they are "wrong" there must be some kind of true information to underlie their reasoning.