The State of Gush

[Bongo]

I'm not able to accurately put my finger on the problem, but something is missing from this deck. After putting quite a few hours into playtesting the hell out of it, I'm left a bit disappointed. I'm going to post my list, explain a few changes I made to the original deck, and go into my experiences against the different decks.

The list I've used:

4 Scalding Tarn
3 Misty Rainforest
2 Underground Sea
1 Tropical Island
2 Volcanic Island
2 Island
1 Tolarian Academy
5 Moxen
1 Black Lotus
1 Sol Ring
1 Mana Crypt

1 Tendrils of Agony
1 Time Vault
1 Voltaic Key
1 Sphinx of the Steel Wind

1 Ancient Grudge
1 Lightning Bolt
3 Spell Pierce
3 Mana Drain
4 Force of Will

1 Ancestral Recall
1 Brainstorm
1 Ponder
3 Sensei's Divining Top
1 Thirst for Knowledge
4 Gush

1 Demonic Tutor
1 Vampiric Tutor
1 Merchant Scroll
1 Mystical Tutor
1 Gifts Ungiven

1 Fastbond
1 Tinker
1 Time Walk
1 Yawgmoth's Will
1 Timetwister

SB:
3 REB
1 Mountain
4 Ingot Chewer
2 Ancient Grudge
1 Ravenous Trap
4 Yixlid Jailer

The changes from Rico's list in the first post are:

Maindeck
-1 Regrowth, +1 Ancient Grudge
-1 Tropical, +1 Volcanic
-2 Mox Opal, +1 Lightning Bolt, +1 Timetwister
-1 Mana Vault, +1 Misty Rainforest
Sideboard
-3 Duress, +3 REB


These weren't some light-hearted changes, the arguments for the original list were quite convincing and I tried it many times. Mox Opal and Mana Vault were just sub-par overall. Sure, Opal can be great, but on the other hand, it can really leave you hanging when you desperately need Metalcraft but only have two artifacts (this is even more of a concern in postboard games, when Nature's Claim/Ancient Grudge/other artifact destruction is involved). Mana Vault felt like a one-shot colorless Dark Ritual. While underpowered, this isn't bad per se, but unlike Storm with Bargain/Desire/Jar, this deck only has Gifts/Will to really harness Vault's manaboost.
Regrowth was also mediocre, as it felt like an automatic mulligan when I drew it in my opener. Sure it was good when I've got the Gushbond engine going, but at that point I'd rather have Timetwister to end the game right away. Similar logic to the Hurkyl/Tinker issue.

The changes increased my winning percentages, but still not to a point where I'd like it to be. Interestingly, despite cutting two mana-sources, I was still flooded more often than screwed. Like I mentioned before, the deck starts to peter out in the midgame after your business spells are used or countered. Twister was good in remedying this. In the end though, those are just some slight tweaks that don't change the way the deck works.
In goldfishing, everything went well, but when faced with competition, the deck started to crumble.

- Shops are just horrible. You pretty much lose g1, win g2 and hope your opponent does not have a good first turn g3. I do have to say that the Chewer/Grudge package is pretty good though.
- Fish got a lot better with my changes. Before, Null Rod just was a beating, switching off Opals, Tops and your combo. I couldn't even "trump" Rod with Tinker, because I was bottlenecked on mana and Pierce/Daze countered it, or my opponent simply had Swords. Bolt is good to handle Pridemage, Meddling Mage and Gaddock Teeg, which are otherwise disruptive enough to tilt the scales in my opponents favor.
- Storm is unfavorable, they were faster than me and Duress was a beating. Although it is by no means standard, sideboarded Extirpate were very rough.
- VaultKey seemed favorable, but only slightly. An early Confidant was always a huge problem. You're not able to take the control route anymore, because Confidant will outdraw you in the lategame. However, this deck felt like it needed a really good draw to be the "beatdown", to seal the deal before the window of opportunity closed. If my draw was average or my opponent had a lot of counters, that was game. Like against Storm, if my opponent had discard & Extirpate postboard, the matchup felt unfavorable.
- Dredge was pretty ok after boarding. Jailer harmonizes nicely with Gush, as you can float 1B, Gush and then cast the Jailer you drew in the Gush.  Still, you need multiple hatepieces real quick, otherwise you're toast (I guess that's true for all decks). The old version had difficulties with Chalice, as its hand were more reliant on Moxen. Like Shops, you tend to lose g1, win g2, and hope he doesn't have a good draw for g3.


So in summary, I don't see that many good matchups with Gush. There are quite a few cards that are strong against Gush, like:

- REB
- Wasteland
- Duress/Thoughtseize
- Extirpate
- Gaddock Teeg
- Sphere effects

Those things are often seen at tournaments, so I feel like Gush is currently not an optimal choice. Somehow there is a tension within the deck. On one side, you want to wait as long as possible to use your Gushes optimally. On the other hand, you're often forced to act right away, which strains the deck enough that it can't properly execute its gameplan. Granted, it might be that I played suboptimally, but I think I can still judge a deck's characteristics pretty well after playing 100+ games with it. When it works, the deck is amazing. However, quite a few times you just Gush into basically dead cards like Tendrils and Sphinx. Or you look into your top and see something like Spell Pierce, land and a Mox.

If anybody has ideas on how to improve this deck or remedy the problems I've encountered - I'm all ears.

[heiner]

Control needs to play MD Welder or Oath to stand a chance game 1 vs stax

[vassago]

Control needs to play MD Welder or Oath to stand a chance game 1 vs stax

Good job explaining yourself while staying on topic lol

[Rico Suave]

Some Gush combo builds appear to rightly omit Tinker and Time Walk.  Ie. Emidln's current Doomsday list.

I wasn't trying to say that Tinker or Time Walk absolutely must be in every deck that can support them.  I just wanted to differentiate between Tinker as a card that is not necessary vs. Tinker as a card that is ridiculously broken and we should strive to include in our decks if possible. 

Both Hurkyll's and Tinker/Bot can be pitched to FoW

So does Evermind, but I would still consider this a dead card.

Control needs to play MD Welder or Oath to stand a chance game 1 vs stax

The blue deck with the best game 1 percentage against Stax, at least from what I've seen, has neither of those cards in the entire 75.

I've played MD Welder and Oath in game 1 situations vs. Stax.  Neither is impressive.  Including Oath in one's deck isn't going to change the fact that the opponent can still prevent us from ever casting it.

The biggest problem facing a blue deck right now, at least in regards to Game 1 against a Workshop deck, is that the cards we use to fight Workshops are entirely different from the cards we use to fight other decks.  It is like Dredge: this is a deck that can traditionally ignore our counters and discard, and the cards we need to fight Dredge are remarkably poor against the rest of the field.  Well, the same thing applies to Workshops too in my opinion.  Countermagic and discard are very poor against a deck trying to resolve early threats, but artifact removal is extremely effective.  The problem is that the cards we want to fight Workshops are just bad against everything else. 

If we were to gear ourselves to beat Workshops in Game 1, we will heavily sacrifice large chunks in every other match in the process.  Sure we can crush Workshops in a match if we should choose to do so, but at what cost?  There are three main strategies to take in Vintage right now and each one requires radically different answers in order for us to properly interact with them.

In goldfishing, everything went well, but when faced with competition, the deck started to crumble.

I understand much of what you mean.  I understand you were making changes to suit your own play, and that I can understand.

On the other hand, some of the changes seemed to produce problems.  For example you cut Duress for REB, then go on to express that you have trouble against Storm (and particularly Extirpate).  Well, Duress is a very key card for me against Storm.  And it also happens to pay dividends against cards like Extirpate.  So I'm a little confused about some things like that.

That being said, I also understand where you are coming from in other areas and in some ways I agree.

"- Shops are just horrible. You pretty much lose g1, win g2 and hope your opponent does not have a good first turn g3. I do have to say that the Chewer/Grudge package is pretty good though."

The Chewer/Grudge package was largely chosen because it produces good results even when the deck is on the draw.  Sometimes they will open with Trinisphere or Golem + ridiculousness when we don't have a Force, but this is just a matter of the die roll.  We are just as able to open with a slew of broken cards that never allow them into the game either.

But in most instances, Chewer/Grudge allow the deck to fight from very little resources, build slowly, and get back into the game even on the draw.  At least from my experiences.  I haven't seen another plan (besides overwhelming hate) that worked even when on the draw.

[Bongo]

On the other hand, some of the changes seemed to produce problems.  For example you cut Duress for REB, then go on to express that you have trouble against Storm (and particularly Extirpate).  Well, Duress is a very key card for me against Storm.  And it also happens to pay dividends against cards like Extirpate.  So I'm a little confused about some things like that.

Yeah, I was expecting a worse Storm matchup when I made those changes. However, even with 3 Duress, my impression was that it's still an uphill climb for Gush. Same as with Dredge and Shops, I think you need a more dedicated package to hate Storm (something like Remora & Mindbreak Trap). The REBs were golden against control, in the mirror and against Fish. In the current metagame, I wouldn't play less than 3 REB in any deck that contains red. I did test your list from the first post rather extensively, and I had problems against a lot of decks, especially Noble Fish. I can't see how your initial version beats Noble.

The Chewer/Grudge package is pretty good though, I have to commend you on that. I think any deck that wants to have a decent chance against Shops needs to have a similar package.
Still, that's not answering the fundamental problem the deck has - it just isn't working good enough against the field. It seems that you understand my concerns, what do you think is the reason for the apparent flimsiness of Gush? What would you recommend?

[Smmenen]

The blue deck with the best game 1 percentage against Stax, at least from what I've seen, has neither of those cards in the entire 75.

And, which would that be? 

[emidln]

Let's just be clear that the only reason I don't play Tinker and Time Walk (I play one if I play the other) in my current builds is that I don't maindeck enough artifacts to support Tinker. Right now, I maindeck 1 Black Lotus, 1 Lotus Petal, 1 Mox Jet, 1 Mox Sapphire, 1 Mana Crypt. I have Sol Ring in the sideboard for the extra help against Workshops and to enable pass the turn doomsday piles for 2 mana against everything else (also, it's pretty fucking terrible if you're not playing vs a sphere deck or tinkering it away). In builds where I run some number of SDT or extra moxen, Tinker immediately finds its way in because Tinker->Battlestation is just that good. I'm not even sure what I have now is correct because it lacks Tinker->Battlestation.

What I play is definitely a Gush deck. It doesn't run Fastbond, but only because I couldn't make Fastbond work reliably on less land and still keep the bombs I had in place (Preordain, despite what the rest of the format says, is pretty bad in a semi-fast combo deck, particularly worse against Workshops than Street Wraith). If someone wants to have that argument, I'll go for it (even though this thread might not be the right place). I win a lot of games via Doomsday but I win a lot more because I play a mountain of protection and simply outdraw and outthreat my opponents who are busy spending mana while I sculpt into bomb after bomb.

[Rico Suave]

The blue deck with the best game 1 percentage against Stax, at least from what I've seen, has neither of those cards in the entire 75.

And, which would that be? 

I'd say traditional builds of Trygon Tezz.  Oath isn't bad by any means, though I do find it struggles a lot with the card Smokestack (while performing much better against builds without Smokestack).

More importantly, I wanted to stress that I disagreed with the original line that we must have Welder or Oath to have a chance.

Still, that's not answering the fundamental problem the deck has - it just isn't working good enough against the field. It seems that you understand my concerns, what do you think is the reason for the apparent flimsiness of Gush? What would you recommend?

Everything in this thread is assuming from the start that Gush is the engine of choice.  Perhaps you have come to the conclusion that this assumption is wrong, and you should look at other decks to play. 

I'm a firm believer that people should trust their testing and go with it.  If your testing is leading you to believe that Gush is not the deck to play, then don't play it.  Perhaps you have tested against better Workshop lists or pilots than I have.  Maybe your Fish decks were more tuned with Gush in mind.  Or it might be variance.  Or maybe I'm just completely way off base.

If I were to attend a tournament tomorrow I wouldn't feel ashamed to play a deck like Workshop Aggro.  But I still feel that my best chance to win would be to play Gush. 

[znoyes]

A question that keeps coming to my mind with the gush deck is: why isn't counterbalance concidered a card in vintage? Vintage is all about controlling what goes on the stack and then winning big right? Doesn't counterbalance/top + win condition do just that?
The only reasons for the absense of cbalance I can see are: mishra's workshop, and no 4x brainstorms.
I see that you are shifting to more tops already. Gush seems like it would have a good interaction with the counterbalance engine, as it allows you to dig two cards deeper at a moment's notice so you can use top again to try to counter your opponent's spell.

[Grand Inquisitor]

counterbalance

1) It is slow at UU
2) Multiple Senseis DT are an ineffective use of deck space
3) The CC variance in T1 is high relative to Legacy
4) Even one key spell getting through can lose you the game
5) This is much better in homogenous metagames (I played CB GAT when Gush was last unrestricted to good finishes), right now that's not the case

[Rico Suave]

I'm going to update my thoughts here.

Lately, I have not been very happy with Spell Pierce.  It is certainly a fine card, but I'm not sure it fits into what I'm trying to accomplish here.  So a possibility that I have been trying, and enjoying, has been to take Spell Pierce out of the maindeck and replace them with Thoughtseize. 

Against Workshops a Spell Pierce is better than a Thoughtseize.  And it seems odd to weaken ourselves against Workshops.  However I'm not so sure that Spell Pierce is that effective for this deck against Workshops.  On the draw the card is very under performing, and in times past I have frequently boarded this card out when on the draw.  Workshops are also moving towards a more creature heavy approach with Metalworkers and Hellkites and other beatdown, and of course Spell Pierce doesn't stop creatures.  And when we get to post-SB games which are a battle of attrition once all the artifact removal comes in, I don't feel that Spell Pierce plays well in this battle because we're playing for a long game and Pierce is not so hot in long games.  A card like Annul would be much better, but that card is also quite narrow in the maindeck (and I'd rather just play direct artifact removal before playing Annul).

Losing Pierce also cuts off an option in the Dredge match.  Specifically I'm talking about the option of playing a hate card and protecting it with Pierce.  On the flip side, the Pierce is really bad without that hate card in place and with mana to spare...

And in any control or combo matchup, since Spell Pierce is "good but not necessary" while a Duress effect is "critical" to my plans, I would much rather have a Thoughtseize effect somewhere in my 75 before having a Spell Pierce. 

The addition of Thoughtseize brings a few main advantages and disadvantages. 

Pros:
-Slightly better control/combo match
-Better equipped to handle Fish decks
-More SB space available

Cons:
-Less blue cards for Force
-Less stable mana

Playing less blue cards in my blue decks is important to me.  I don't take it lightly as a drawback. 

The Fish match improves for 3 reasons: 1) Thoughtseize can remove creatures which Pierce cannot, 2) Discard allows us to remove their disruption and then untap to play our bombs, as opposed to needing an extra mana on our critical turn, 3) The cards like StP on our giant Robot are often done when we're trying to stabilize, at which point the Fish player has already finished deploying his creatures and has tons of untapped mana to negate our Pierce.  Yes, we do risk getting blown out by Wasteland from time to time.  On the other hand, I feel like stopping Null Rod is easier.

Also, for those people who were concerned with Dark Confidant earlier in this thread, now you have a tool to better fight that card.

Ultimately, the real kicker here is the SB space available.  That is the reason to pursue this change.  So for the purposes of this thread, here is what the maindeck would look like:

Mana (25)
4 Scalding Tarn
2 Misty Rainforest
2 Underground Sea
2 Tropical Island
1 Volcanic Island
2 Island
1 Tolarian Academy
5 Moxen
1 Black Lotus
1 Sol Ring
1 Mana Crypt
1 Mana Vault
2 Mox Opal

Win (4)
1 Tendrils of Agony
1 Time Vault
1 Voltaic Key
1 Sphinx of the Steel Wind

Control (10)
3 Thoughtseize
3 Mana Drain
4 Force of Will

Draw (11)
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Brainstorm
1 Ponder
3 Sensei's Divining Top
1 Thirst for Knowledge
4 Gush

Tutors (5)
1 Demonic Tutor
1 Vampiric Tutor
1 Merchant Scroll
1 Mystical Tutor
1 Gifts Ungiven

Broken (5)
1 Fastbond
1 Regrowth
1 Tinker
1 Time Walk
1 Yawgmoth's Will

This is, once again, a direct copy of the list in the opening post but with Thoughtseize replacing Spell Pierce.

Here is an example SB:

SB:
1 Timetwister
3 Yixlid Jailer
2 Pithing Needle
1 Mountain
4 Ingot Chewer
4 Ancient Grudge

And here are a few sample sideboarding guidelines, with some notes.

Vs. Control/Combo

-1 Sphinx of the Steel Wind
+1 Timetwister

Let's be honest here.  Aside from the Robot, the entire 59 remaining cards in the maindeck are already legit against any sort of control or combo.  While it might be possible to stuff some REBs in the SB, and maybe take out Mystical Tutor to fit in those REBs, the simple truth for me is that I'm replacing a perfectly fine card with a card that is at best only a little bit better.  And personally, I'm not even sure that giving up key combo pieces like tutors is the right thing to do anyway because it means I can't be aggressive if I want to be.  Timetwister is used partially because it's serviceable and partially because it overlaps with Dredge hate.

Vs. Dredge

-3 Thoughtseize
-3 Mana Drain
+1 Timetwister
+3 Yixlid Jailer
+2 Pithing Needle

The plan here is simple.  We get to replace cards that do not stop them for cards that do stop them.  Racing Dredge is a common line of attack for Gush, which is not so common with Bob-based control, so we are less reliant on hate cards and better able to take advantage of the turn that a hate card might buy before our opponent answers it.

Vs. Workshops

-3 Thoughtseize
-1 Tendrils of Agony
-4 Gush
-1 Fastbond
-1 Gifts Ungiven
-1 Regrowth
+1 Mountain
+4 Ingot Chewer
+4 Ancient Grudge
+2 Pithing Needle

There is a lot of action here.  For starters, we need to identify what our opponent is doing.  Most of the time our opponent's goal is to stop us from casting spells, and then once we are locked they will play a "pressure" card - aka a card that will end the game if left unanswered like Smokestack, Hellkite, or Golem.  As such, our most important goal is to try and cast spells.  This involves building a mana base, and other cards like Sensei's Divining Top can help us to build one.  The basic Mountain is arguably the most important card in the entire match, with the possible exceptions of Strip Mine and Trinisphere.  Once we are able to cast spells, which should not be taken for granted because sometimes we never get to that point, our next goal is to eliminate our opponent's pressure cards.  We want to use spot artifact removal on those cards that will kill us if left unanswered.  This is where 4 Chewer and 4 Grudge really shines, because even if our opponent has a threat heavy draw we will still be able to stop it and even if we are only able to cast 1 mana spells.  In many games we will have so much artifact removal that our opponent will have trouble keeping any artifact to stay on the board.

Once we have eliminated our opponent's pressure, half the battle is already won.  We can build our mana base, begin casting other spells like Mana Drain, hardcast Ingot Chewer instead of Evoke it, tutor up and cast our Ancestral to get too far ahead, and eventually seal the deal with whatever seems most convenient. 

Pithing Needle is partially for things like Welder, which can help overcome mass artifact removal, and partially for quick combos like Metalworker/Staff.  It also helps deal with other annoying cards like Rishadan Port, Mishra's Factory, or Wasteland.  At worst it is a cheap artifact that taps to Tangle Wire or helps us achieve Metalcraft for our Opal.  And it seems generally better than Gifts or Regrowth in this particular match, while also doubling as Dredge hate.

Overall, the act of boarding in 11 cards may seem excessive for one match.  But it works.  It works on the play or on the draw, and it works regardless of what style of Workshops your opponent might be playing.  Frankly, with the way Workshops have been performing lately, anything short of overwhelming hate is probably a losing plan.

I can't say for sure that putting Thoughtseize into the maindeck is better or worse than what was there before, but it's certainly interesting enough that I wanted to share it here.

[Blovdek]

GushBond v.02

1 Fastbond
(1)

1 Ancestral Recall
1 Brainstorm
1 Mystical Tutor
1 Vampiric Tutor
1 Chain of Vapor
1 Hurkyls Recall
1 Rebuild
1 Gifts Ungiven
1 Misdirection
4 Force of Will
4 Spell Pierce
4 Gush
(21)

4 Preordain
1 Ponder
1 Imperial Seal
1 Time Walk
1 Merchant Scroll
1 Demonic Tutor
1 Regrowth
1 Wheel of Fortune
1 Timetwister
1 Yawgmoths Will
1 Tendrills of Agony
1 Empty the Warrens
(15)

1 Black Lotus
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Mox Jet
1 Mox Emerald
1 Mox Ruby
1 Mox Pearl
1 Lotus Petal
1 Mana Crypt
1 Sol Ring
(9)

1 Library of Alexandria
1 Tolarian Academy
1 Flooded Strand
4 Polluted Delta
1 Island
1 Volcanic Island
2 Tropical Island
3 Underground Sea
(14)

((60))

Although this deck is a combo deck, i thought ill post it here. As its a lot more focused than the decks previously mentioned and in fact a powerfull deck indeed. Why not just let gush do what it does best and combo out? The list might look a bit clunky at first, but i assure you that it is really powerfull. The inclusion of draw 7s has just been awsome, as it justifies to play all the mana artifacts and tolaria and empty the warrens as a powerfull storm alt. condition. The draw 7s also work well with bounce spells and are great once you have fastbond. While that might actually seem like an overkill i assure you its not, since there is no more merchant scroll and brainstorm to find infinite gushes in a turn .

PM or ask here if you have any improovements, im always hapy to get some

[Rico Suave]

We can all post decklists.  But I think it's more important to understand the why, rather than the what.

For example, why do you feel a draw7 approach is superior?  You've done a good job explaining what draw7s do, and how they have synergy with cards like mass bounce or Fastbond.  But you have not explained why this is better than the alternatives.  Why is playing with draw7s better than if I were to replace those two slots with, say, 2 Jace?

Why do you choose to play without Vault/Key? 

Why do you play without Tinker-Robot?

Why do you play specific cards in your list that are not present in other people's lists, such as Library, Misdirection, and Imperial Seal?

Why do you feel your approach is worth playing compared to the dozens of other possible Gush decks?

[emidln]

For example, why do you feel a draw7 approach is superior?  You've done a good job explaining what draw7s do, and how they have synergy with cards like mass bounce or Fastbond.  But you have not explained why this is better than the alternatives.  Why is playing with draw7s better than if I were to replace those two slots with, say, 2 Jace?

Further, what makes the Draw7 approach better than Doomsday. Some Gush storm decks already play it, and with a minimum of Rituals, Mana Crypt, Lotus Petal, Black Lotus, Mox Jet, Mox Sapphire (other stuff like CRit/offcolor moxen are helpful in certain matchups but not required) you have the necessary accelerants. You're running Preordain, Gush, Brainstorm, Ponder, Recall, Time Walk (some even have SDT) for draw as well as one of the useful pass the turn piles (Timetwister is a U next turn pile, with Desire+RnD being the other at UB (Rit) or UU (Crypt)). If your gush deck has done the job and you're going to draw7, why not upgrade an actually win the game right now?

From my own testing with Gush, I've been happier with extra Misdirections than I have with Spell Pierce or Thoughtseize lately. I've found that my deck's lategame is much worse than other Gush decks due to a focus on Rituals and need more early-game countermagic. The card disadvantage isn't felt as much since the spell I'm protecting wins the game outright (DD or Necro). Dispel is almost an option over Spell Pierce due to Pierce being unreliable, even in the early game (e.g. needing Pierce to protect a t2 kill and the enemy has force, land, mox).

[Blovdek]

@ Rico Suave

Draw 7s are superior in this deck since they have an instant "great" effect in the game and are cheaper compare to cards like Jace and can utilize the artifact mana a little better since, there is only 1 colored simbol in them. I have tested this deck and this deck just ignores the Jace, because Jace will give you long time card advantage, but gush combo decks really need short time card advatage, to keep storming and playing spells. Also with timetwister in the deck you have about infinite win conditions, betwee y will, twister, regrowth, tendrill and empty the warrens. All thoose draw 7s
work better with the deck as a whole.

I play without time vault (i own beta signed one ), because it takes slots in you deck and you have 2 do nothing cards. You also open yourself to artifact and null rod hate which is really not the right decision in my opinion.

I choose to play without a tinker robot since this decklist is very thight and it would take at least 2 precious slots and because the clock they present isnt usually fast enough. I think it should be run in sideboard vs shop decks as an alt. win condition.

I play library since it is absolutey insane with gush, since you can alway

[Blovdek]

Since you can always get it online with a help of single gush. Misdirection is just here for extra protection and since this deck runs 28 blue cards i think it should be there to help vs other blue decks.
Imperial seal is a very good card, but only if you are playing 4 preordain and 4 gush, otherwise i hate the card ...

I feel my approach is just more powerfull and more streamlined as well. This deck is a combo deck and in this deck gush shines more then anywhere else. I was running duress in the deck a while ago,
but i have found that spell pierce is just more powerfull and they work better with draw 7s and library. I might add some discards back in the deck if i will have problems with specific mathups.

[Bongo]

This discussion is really interesting, and I think I have some food for thought.

Basically, the differences in the decklists above result from the differing opinions about the placement of the Gush deck in a speed/resiliency spectrum. What I mean by that is there is a trade-off between speed and resiliency: the quicker you are, the more vulnerable you are, particularly with Workshops in mind.

For example, Rico's list is more on the controllish side. Cards like Mana Drain and the various disruption spells indicate that he wants to defend himself into the midgame, where he thinks the superior velocity of Gush over other draw-engines will win him the game.
On the other hand, Blovdek tries to be more on the faster side, focusing more on the combo. He eschews some defensive measures in exchange for Draw7, which combine better with the Storm mechanic. Under this perspective, it becomes understandable that he doesn't play VaultKey, because he wants as few dead draws as possible to storm the opponent out and he needs the extra slots. That's why he likes Pierce better than Rico.
On the other end of the spectrum, I see emidln. Combining Gush with Rituals and Doomsday, he tries to leverage the mana and draw immediately to end the game with Tendrils. That explains why he likes Misdirection over Pierce or other defensive measures - mana is at a premium in the early game, and card disadvantage doesnt matter when he immediately wins the game.

Yeah, these are all guesses and not backed by evidence by any means, but I'm trying to understand why there is such a huge divergence in the Gush archetype and players have so radically different versions. I don't want to judge these approaches, as the "optimal" version largely depends on the metagame. It also shows just how flexible Gush is and the broad space it occupies on the speed/resiliency continuum.

As for my opinion, I see Gush as a strategy that lies between traditional blue-based control and ritual-based combo. I haven't found success with Rico's list, which in my opinion is a little too close to the control spectrum. Cards like Drain and especially Top are better suited for Tez-style decks in my opinion. After reflecting on my past games, I think the reason for my problem of "petering out" in the midgame stems from the fact that Gush is not a steady card-advantage engine like Confidant, but rather a short burst of action. If you don't find a game-winning combination within those bursts, you tend to lose against more controllish versions, who gladly make 1-for-1 trades until their superior card advantage takes over in the long-term. I'm a big fan of Top, but in a Gush deck, looking into a Top, not liking the three cards, cracking a fetch, and then looking again is too mana-intensive. I want that mana to cast my threats.
Despite their sexy appeal of winning a game asap, I feel that ritual-based approaches to Gush do not perform well in this Shop-dominated metagame. In the first page of this thread, it is nicely illustrated why. Without Shops, this option immediately becomes more attractive for me.

Blovdek's approach intrigues me, although I feel that VaultKey wins to many games to omit and there are a few cards I wouldn't play. The Preordains are what makes me think that this approach might be best suited to capitalize on the short bursts of card-advantage that Gush offers. Although Preordain might seem weaker than Top, it is more economical mana-wise, and chaining them together gets you to the needed cards much better than Top, fetch, Top. So my version is between the controllish version of Rico and the slightly combo-ish version of Blovdek. I feel that this is the place on the speed/resiliency continuum where I can best leverage Gush. I don't think I'm theorizing in a vacuum here, my results are getting better.

Thoughts would be greatly appreciated!

[Blovdek]

I totally agree on most points that you made Bongo. Because gush gives you fast streams of card advantage i think its best suitable for combo, as in metagame with confidants and jaces you just dont want to play a long game usually. I also dont think that my deck is particulary weak to workshop as i have a lot of mana sources, eary disruption and bounce. Im also quite wasteland proove, since that what gush does besides everything else to. Also a lot of library manipulation gives me more ways to find all the lands and bounce. I really dont like rituals in gush style decks for now, as than you are trying to get even more flooded when you chain a couple of gush and that is the reason i like the agressibe draw 7s as well. I was thinking about playing cards like mana drain, but that card just does completely nothing for my deck strategy since the stuff i want to accell in is really cheap anyway and i have artifact mana to support that. I also feel mana drain just got a lot weaker since printing of spell pierce.

Here is something i want to know what do you think; i wanna know if you as well like me think that spell pierce is just superieor with gush vs a card like duress or thoughtseize? Maybe a splitt would work for the best? But for now i have been extremely happy with the configuration. Deck is presented with constant decisions and i imagine that with time playing the deck preformance should only get better, since the decks with the most decisions shine in the hands of good experienced pilots even more.

Have fun and enjoy

[PETER FLUGZEUG]

well put, bongo. I'd like to add one comment regarding blovdecks list however:
While he tries to play quicker, the library really strucks me as odd. It has to be noted that it will dure until turn 3 where you are able to refill your hand with gush, then activate library, which would mean he would bounce the lands directly put into play. I have tried library in gush decks over and over, but I'm very sceptical. I lost too many games with it, and it is (at least for me) scratching the streamlinedness of the deck, wanting to be a gush deck and hence always be able to cast that spell.
I think even tolarian is borderline, but at least this card generates blue mana, which is a nice "alternate mana base" together with moxen, because islands wont always be many on the table.
I do like twister though, it's not only a broken card overall, it allows for a reset when needed if you should burn too much of your deck once in a while, or if you are getting behind on card advantage, as well as all those bounce tricks to gain board advantage.
I am unsure about regrowth: I think a good player shouldn't need it, but maybe I still have to. It's just so bad in the opener.

[Blovdek]

Its true about library, but i started testing with it in and ive been very happy with it. Although i agree islands are at most importance. I think regrowth is a MUST, since merchant got banned.
It helps with gifts piles and helps to return fastbond if needed. Its great with fastbond in play as well.

I have to say this deck is still ready for changes. The cards that i have not been to impressed with are sol ring and mox pearl, but i figure they are good at helping vs spell pierce and workshop decks.
If you choose to remoove thoose two tolarian academy becomes unplayable and all the bounce spells become worse also and as a consequence empty the warrens become a poor secondary kill condition.
It might be for the best to just remove library from the main and add something like 2 duresses or thoughseize into the main instead of library and misdirection/spell pierce.

[Rico Suave]

Let me do a comparison, and maybe this will better explain my thinking.

Allow me to compare Blovdek's list to the one I just recently shared.  Many of the cards are very similar, such as our choices to play a number of broken cards, restricted tutors, accelerants, Gush, Fastbond, etc.

Where do our builds differ?

Tendrils, Time Vault, Key, Sphinx + 10 control
vs.
Tendrils, Empty, Chain of Vapor, Hurkyls, Rebuild, + 9 control

The difference between the control packages is really minimal for the purposes of this comparison.  Sure Mis-D is terrible against Workshops, but for right now that slot functions as a control card (which is sort of what bounce spells do too).

The real problem here is that you see someone state that he doesn't want to run "do nothing" cards like Vault or Key, yet he is forced to run a trio of "do nothing" cards in Chain of Vapor, Hurkyls, and Rebuild.  This isn't unique to his deck but I'm just using this as an example.  This is a problem for any Gush deck that does not run Vault/Key.  I always see "but I don't want to play dead cards" as if the alternative was any better.  Without Vault/Key you *must* run bounce spells and they are arguably worse than Vault or Key are on their own. 

And, of course, you will never win a game because you randomly drew 2 bounce cards.  In fact I'll bet you lose those almost every single time.  But that does not apply to Vault/Key.

The other notable difference is that Blovdek's deck has 2 more business spells in total than mine, but at the expense of his mana base where I have 2 more cards.  This is just my personal preference to run a healthy mana count, because it goes beyond just casting spells but also casting our spells on time and quickly. 

I don't think Vault/Key should be dismissed as lightly as a "do nothing" card.  It is critical to winning with Gush, in my opinion.

[Ten-Ten]

@Rico:  Have you considered Spell snare instead of Thoughtseize? I was actually in the process of testing Spell snare along side Spell pierce (2/2 Split/ -1SDT) before you posted your changes to the deck.  I knw thats one less permanent against stax& tangle wire but we get one more counter for their spheres & chalice@1 and the deck can still deal with BOB,fish,null rod, Time vault and Oath even better w/Snare in the main...  

[PETER FLUGZEUG]

Without Vault/Key you *must* run bounce spells and they are arguably worse than Vault or Key are on their own.  
...
And, of course, you will never win a game because you randomly drew 2 bounce cards.  In fact I'll bet you lose those almost every single time.  But that does not apply to Vault/Key.
...
Vault/Key should[n't] be dismissed as lightly as a "do nothing" card.  It is critical to winning with Gush, in my opinion.

I have to disagree, not fundamentaly but gradually. I would contest the statement that bounce spells on their own are worse then drawn single combo pieces. yes, with a tutor you can search for the other piece and try to push your win through, and it often works. Not always though, and it is mostly the argument that bounce spells are dead cards which isn't true in my opinion. Sure, bounce spells are not the best thing to have against a grip of duresses and draw. But those 3 bounce spells help accomplish a few things (as I'm sure you are aware of, I'll just point them out anyways):
-They help storming, which makes empty appealing, empty being already good against critters and artifacts. storming for lethal is easier against all decks with mass bounce, a bounce becomes a threat itself.
-They help remove / delay threats
-They combo with draw 7s, resulting in sometimes massive board advantage
-up the blue count

which means bounce spells are randomly good, even in matches where you don't need them to save your butt. They just have a wider range between being dead and being awesome. Generally, vault/key is dead more often but when it's not, well, you win. So, vault-key shouldn't be dismissed easily, instead, testing has to show and playstile must be respected. I am sure you are aware of the great and constant success spanish player Gillem Ragull has with bounce-based blue storm decks shows that those cards aren't to be dismissed either.
http://www.morphling.de/search.php?type=1&app=10&sorting=DESC&search=Guillem+Ragull&sent=1
(watch how his deck evolves over time... this is just great.)
The "spanish gush" versions, which are evolutions of european storm (which had always featured a lot of bounce spells) have great success in a diverse meta.
http://www.morphling.de/top8decks.php?id=1373
I'd like to point out the research done by my brother (up in this thread), which evaluated statistically which gush versions tend to be the most successful. This evaluation should be done again, since there are more data by now. It would be interesting to see the differences.
direct link: http://www.themanadrain.com/index.php?topic=41535.msg577527#msg577527
Well, I think we have to give gush more time to define different types of decks. Gush decks have always sprayed a great variety of possibilities, sometimes altering the feel of a deck drastically by only changing a few cards.
Jonas

[Blovdek]

@peter; exactly!

@rico; not true, i run a lot more "instantly" broken cards than you do. I have 2 draw 7s compared to none that you play, have 4 preordain and gifts ungiven and i also play 1 more tutor in the form of
imperial seal. and secondly as peter explained bounce is almost never dead, because it does a few thing:

- delays your opponent, which is a lot of time just what you want that you can combo off with protection
- helps with storm
- has massive sinergy with draw 7s (which are not any longer consider the "pure" broken cards)
- have very good applications vs workshop, since this should be the proble matchup

[Rico Suave]

@Rico:  Have you considered Spell snare instead of Thoughtseize? I was actually in the process of testing Spell snare along side Spell pierce (2/2 Split/ -1SDT) before you posted your changes to the deck.  I knw thats one less permanent against stax& tangle wire but we get one more counter for their spheres & chalice@2 and the deck can still deal with BOB,fish, Time vault and Oath even better w/Snare in the main...  

I definitely want a Thoughtseize effect somewhere in my 75, because after Force it is the next most important disruption effect for me against other combo/control decks.  So for me I would consider Thoughtseize to be necessary, at least somewhere even if it is just the SB, whereas other counters like Drain or Spell Pierce are nice but not necessary.  Yeah those cards are really good but we don't really need them.  They kind of just take up space.

The problem with cards that are nice but not necessary is the fact there are so many of them.  I can list dozens of cards that are perfectly legit at home in a Gush deck, but the vast majority of them are not necessary at all.  For me the problem with Spell Pierce is I wanted less of that "overall good but not stellar" quality and more "this thing owns" quality like Ancient Grudge against Workshops.  So I took out the least stellar cards in the 75, which happened to be Spell Pierce for me.

There is nothing wrong with Spell Snare.  But I'm afraid it fits into that nice but not necessary category.  Would you rather play Spell Snare or Mana Drain?  For me, and my plan against Workshops, I feel that being able to hard counter a Karn or Duplicant before it hits the board is important, so I would consider playing Drain or even Annul before Spell Snare.  But it's important to recognize what your plan is, what your opponent is going to do to challenge that plan, and then run control cards that will help you best deal with your biggest problems.  

I have to disagree, not fundamentaly but gradually. I would contest the statement that bounce spells on their own are worse then drawn single combo pieces. yes, with a tutor you can search for the other piece and try to push your win through, and it often works. Not always though, and it is mostly the argument that bounce spells are dead cards which isn't true in my opinion. Sure, bounce spells are not the best thing to have against a grip of duresses and draw. But those 3 bounce spells help accomplish a few things (as I'm sure you are aware of, I'll just point them out anyways):
-They help storming, which makes empty appealing, empty being already good against critters and artifacts. storming for lethal is easier against all decks with mass bounce, a bounce becomes a threat itself.
-They help remove / delay threats
-They combo with draw 7s, resulting in sometimes massive board advantage
-up the blue count

which means bounce spells are randomly good, even in matches where you don't need them to save your butt. They just have a wider range between being dead and being awesome. Generally, vault/key is dead more often but when it's not, well, you win. So, vault-key shouldn't be dismissed easily, instead, testing has to show and playstile must be respected. I am sure you are aware of the great and constant success spanish player Gillem Ragull has with bounce-based blue storm decks shows that those cards aren't to be dismissed either.
http://www.morphling.de/search.php?type=1&app=10&sorting=DESC&search=Guillem+Ragull&sent=1
(watch how his deck evolves over time... this is just great.)
The "spanish gush" versions, which are evolutions of european storm (which had always featured a lot of bounce spells) have great success in a diverse meta.
http://www.morphling.de/top8decks.php?id=1373
I'd like to point out the research done by my brother (up in this thread), which evaluated statistically which gush versions tend to be the most successful. This evaluation should be done again, since there are more data by now. It would be interesting to see the differences.
direct link: http://www.themanadrain.com/index.php?topic=41535.msg577527#msg577527
Well, I think we have to give gush more time to define different types of decks. Gush decks have always sprayed a great variety of possibilities, sometimes altering the feel of a deck drastically by only changing a few cards.
Jonas

I am aware that many people feel different builds of Gush are dependent on playstyles.  I don't know how much I buy into this, because I think much of the time players will use the term "playstyle" as an excuse to justify playing a pet deck.  But that doesn't mean I think playstyle is completely irrelevant to this conversation either.  I'm sure many players will feel more comfortable with deck A and even put up better results, at least at first, and they will think deck A is better than deck B.  Maybe with a little practice that person could become comfortable with deck B and do much better than he possibly could have with his old "playstyle" as it were.  But if that person is preparing for an event it's still the better idea to play deck A because it gives him the best chance of winning that event.  

Moving on I'm glad you do not think bounce is inherently a "do nothing" type of card.  Because now I'm going to explain why the pieces Vault and Key are not "do nothing" types of cards either.  

Here is a list of things the Vault will do without any outside help:
-Punish the opponent for playing a Tangle Wire or Smokestack
-Generate two turns in a row, so we can Gush and replay both lands without sacrificing untapped UU when we pass the turn
-"Time Walk" the opponent in the control mirror who passes the turn with an untapped board

In case you don't understand what I mean by the 3rd point, I want to highlight a situation that a savvy player can take advantage of.  Frequently control mirrors will be a matter where each player is passing back and forth, neither player doing anything because he is leaving his mana untapped and prepared to win a counter war.  In these instances if you play a Time Vault, and your opponent passes to you with a fully untapped board, you can simply skip your turn with Time Vault.  Now your opponent has lost an entire turn's worth of mana (he can't play his instants like TFK or Gifts or FoF or bounce spells) and you have gained the ability to take two turns in a row.  Now you can tap out during your main phase, your opponent can fight over a spell with you, and after all that dust settles you can then proceed to untap and take an entire new turn while your opponent is fully tapped out from the counter war.  This is a tremendous advantage.  

Here are a list of things that Voltaic Key will do by itself:
-Generate mana and/or storm in combination with Sol Ring, Mana Crypt, or Mana Vault.
-Simulate a draw engine, each turn, with Sensei's Divining Top

Here are things that both Vault and Key will do, on their own:
-Fuel a Tolarian Academy
-Pitch to TFK
-Power Mox Opal metalcraft
-Sacrifice to Tinker (while dodging Chalice at 0)
-Combo with Draw 7 effects, creating a massive board advantage
-Serve as cheap permanents against Workshops, while also being unaffected by Lodestone Golem

And this doesn't take into account the fact that Vault/Key brings an entirely new approach and strategy to the deck that can't be described with a checklist.  

But the point isn't to prove that Vault/Key are useful by themselves.  It's to show how even if we can find a use for a card, it doesn't mean the card is actually any good.  The Vault/Key pieces are not good on their own, and neither are bounce spells.  We're not playing these cards because they're good, we're playing them because we need them for some other purpose (like not losing to a resolved Gaddock Teeg).

It is difficult to explain exactly why we would want to play Vault/Key.  We can say that Tendrils is the best outlet for, say, a broken Will turn (because 10 spells is easy and we just want to find one card).  And we can say that Tinker is the best if we're only allowed one spell (locked under Ethersworn Canonist or multiple Spheres).  But coming up with a reason to justify a 2 card combo is more difficult.

I would say that the main benefit of playing Vault/Key is that frequently it is easier to assemble 2 cards and 4 mana than it is to assemble 10 spells in one turn and 4 mana.  And there are going to be a very significant number of games that Tendrils simply cannot win where Vault/Key will win.

@rico; not true, i run a lot more "instantly" broken cards than you do. I have 2 draw 7s compared to none that you play, have 4 preordain and gifts ungiven and i also play 1 more tutor in the form of
imperial seal.

We run slightly different spells.  You have Preordain, I run Top.  You run Imperial Seal, I have Tinker.  They are similar enough in function.

The only real difference is you run a couple draw 7s where I run mana for stability.  

[Blovdek]

First of all spell pierces are better in my deck, simply because its a much faster deck than yours, so in my deck spell pierce always shines, even if you play it just to mana sink opponent, but that rarely happens. Spell pierces also fight jace much better IMO than discard spells)

And for the time vault sake, you dont only run 2 do nothing cards, you have to dedicade this many slots to it:
1 Tinker
1 Voltaic Key
1 Time Vault
1 Sensei Divining Top (since it combos with voltaic key and is better since you deck isnt going to be playing preordains as a "fast" manipulation, which top is not.
1 ROBOT

So thats an inclusion of 5 cards which would not only make the deck less consistent, but also more vournable and less focused on what it does best. And by this you mean you must have thoughtseize or duress main (i think thoughseize isnt even good enough if you are a dedicade combo fastbond deck, its different if you play dryads, because life is a precious resource), because you always have to see if the coast is clear and that you have protection, because if you go the vault-key way, you really need to be sure, since if 1 piece gets countered the other piece is a dead card. But the "true point" of gush decks has always been an ability to out-cardadvantage you opponent and win (from 2-4 turn) somewhere in between with a great consistency.

Im not saying Timve Vault/Key is not powerfull, quite the opposite i think its the best deck in the format until someone beats it consistantly. U see i own a beta signed mint time vault and i could play it
in my deck, but that is not the point of the conversation, the point is if it is neccesary and i think that it is definitely not in the gush decks, since than not only fastbond becomes much weaker, which should almost always be the first tutor target, or the second one after recall. Fastbond is also easy to get in play and if you play the vault combo in the deck fastbond becomes just another powerfull card, but not broken, because the deck is not suited to take the best out of it, since you will be stuck with a bounch of slow cards and with playing gush you will go even more behind sometimes.

I belive we are here to beat the best deck, not just simply always play it and try to change like 3 cards! It gets boring, belive me

Take care

[Shax]

Why do Traditional Builds of Trygon Tezz have something over say a build of with Gush and artifact destruction? Trygon Predator is great and all at being able to destroy lots of artifacts, but what happens when it gets eaten by Duplicant, or say.. Steelhell Kite? I think creature answers for Workshops isn't really the route we should be taking right now. With Gush, I think you need to take the approach of I'm trying to always build storm. At the same time, any answers I'm going to apply to a deck that is going to be able to defeat my strategy of victory(Time Vault, Robot, Tendrils, ETW..etc). But I think Storm is the best mechanic in the game to win matches because it is relativley easy to make Yawgmoth's Will the strongest card in the game for a bomb. If your focus is using draw sevens to get fresh hands, then you should be running Gush or Rituals. Trygon Tezz is a control deck that is going to win with creatures or vault. If I'm running Gush then the control methods should be somewhere along the lines of Ancient Grudge, and maybe artifact bounce for my own methods.

Heres another option. Has anyone considered a list with Mystic Remora? This is good against everything but creatures.

[covetousrat]

Have anyone look into Storm City Bond? I've done some testing with it by adding additional GUsh and adding tinker robot into the deck. The deck works very well currently. With 16 lands plus 8 artifact mana including Mana Vault and 2 Ancient Grudges main board, it gives a very stable mana base. The arguement for Mana Vault here is to power up the 2 draw sevens, Timetwister and Wheel of Fortune. I don't seem to really like both Spell Pierce/ Thoughtseize or Preordain. I prefer Repeal in the place of Preordain.

Storm city bond is build for a more combo route with the opportunity to be in the place of the controlling player during the early turns. This basically what Gush is aiming for. The best time to cast Gush is from turn 3 onwards.

Finally the new Robot is Obscene. A majority of my wins comes from this new kid. Giving your opponent a turn to find an answer is retarded.

So basically the changes from the Storm City BOnd is

-1 Misdirection
-1 Repeal
-1 Mana Drain
-1 Empty the warrens
-1 Fact or Fiction

For
 +3 Gush
+ 1 Tinker
+ 1 Blightsteel Colossus

Basically I still Gush should be aimed towards the more comboish builds due to its nature. If you want to take the control route, just go and play Tezz.

[kakeboy07]

I haven't posted here in years, but I have been playtesting this and a couple of other decks (mostly just goldfishing and MWS games) and I have a quick question about a possible (sideboard) inclusion.


Dream Salvage b/u
Instant
Draw Cards equal to the number of cards target opponent discarded this turn


___

This might not be the deck for it (thought about tog variants as well), but I've been toying around with it a little bit and its been rather good in particular matchups.  I don't have tournament experience with it, but having 5 ancestral recalls in your deck against anything running bazaar seems quite good on the surface.

I've been putting it in my SB as a 4 of with any u/b colored decks just so I'd have a chance to see what it can do, and I've found it to be opportunistically in gaining some early card advantage against turn 1 bazaar.

[The Duressed]

You guys should probably take a look at the results from a recent tournament in Badalona. Gush decks destroyed the meta in this rather large event:

http://morphling.de/top8decks.php?id=1383