New Demars article on Starcity

[chrispikula]

http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/vintage/23797_Vintage_AvantGarde_Mishras_Workshop_Strikes_Back.html

Disappointing that Nick Detwiler is somehow not mentioned anywhere in the article. He built these decks!

[Prospero]

Raf and Vinnie Forino are responsible for the original build of Espresso and much of the technology that has been inculcated since.  The two of them had been away from the game since August, so the work with Espresso since then has been mine, but if we're going to give credit we can't have that conversation without mentioning them.

[Klep]

Let's not have a conversation about credit at all.

[chrispikula]

Let's not have a conversation about credit at all.

It is hard to discuss an article that gives credit to people for ideas if we can't talk about giving credit to people for ideas.  This article attributes ideas to me that I don't deserve credit for.

[forests failed you]

The article was focused upon discussing the deck as an object: what it is, why it is, and how it works, not a history of the people who have worked on or innovated the archetype over time.  When I reference: "Chris Pikula's deck" in the article, I specifically mean to identify "the deck Chris Pikula played at the tournament," and specifically am making no assertion about where it came from, who has worked on it in the past, or who deserves credit for building the list.  All I am concerned with in an article like this is: what cards got played and why, and couldn't possibly care less about who may or may not have suggested those cards--but, rather care about why those cards in that combination won the tournament. 

I didn't purposefully exclude Nick Detwiler's name from my article, when I know to I always give him credit and props for his work with the Workshop archetype.  I included him in Vintage Top 100 cards list as a contributor because I said he was the most capable workshop player and deck builder currently operating in Vintage. 

You have to remember, I live in Michigan and don't get to attend a lot of the important events in the NE that are shaping the Vintage metagame; so I'm not privy to a lot of the conversations about who worked on decks, or who tests with who, or who shipped who what list.  A lot of the time I just get to look at the results and the data, and am just making sense of it and explaining what it means for people moving forward.  If the information is easily available to me, I'm not going to purposefully omit giving people credit for the work they do on decks; but, I'm not going to go out of my way to do a history report on everybody who ever worked on a deck every time I want to talk about a deck list.  By and large most people don't care about who has worked on a deck over time, they care much more about what was new and exciting about the list and why the deck did well, not about dropping a bunch of names and saying "so and so suggested the 3rd crucible of worlds..." 

Chris, I'm not so much giving you credit for reinventing the wheel, I'm directly talking about what the deck you played does, how it works, and why it was a good choice for the tournament. 

[forests failed you]

By the way, I will point out that Nick built the decks in the comment section of my article.

[chrispikula]

Hi Brian!

This really wasn't a big deal, I didn't mean for you to think it was.  Your extended explanation, while appreciated, was not really necessary.  I understand why you write the articles the way you do- I just felt a little bad about this one because it felt like I was getting a bit of credit for someone else's work. I understand that you are not part of the East Coast scene and I don't expect you to know or care who built what.  I think in this case I just felt bad for Nick on a personal level because it seemed like I was stealing some of his thunder!

[chrispikula]

Oh- I enjoyed the article!  Nice work!

[Guli]

Thanks, I liked it. I agree on the Stp, Claim removal package with support of Snap and Pridemage.

Maze of Ith is also great versus Tinker for the same reasons it is good versus Trygon.

I would like to note though, I have seen people experiment with WASTELANDS in mana drain decks. Feels chunky but, yea just noting it

[credmond]

It's odd that the deck is still being called Espresso when that variant was associated with the use of Serum Powder and the use of the term Espresso related to the use of powders primarily and secondarily cards like expedition map.

Is Espresso somehow related to the name of the team that is behind the deck? What I see is a well built Mud Prison deck that is very different than the original Espresso lists being piloted successfully by a team that was associated with Espresso Mud lists. Maybe these decks should be tied by name to an individual or team, like NorthEast Mud Prison or Detwiler's Mud, unless Espresso has become the brand for the individual/team.

[Cruel Ultimatum]

It's odd that the deck is still being called Espresso when that variant was associated with the use of Serum Powder and the use of the term Espresso related to the use of powders primarily and secondarily cards like expedition map.

Is Espresso somehow related to the name of the team that is behind the deck? What I see is a well built Mud Prison deck that is very different than the original Espresso lists being piloted successfully by a team that was associated with Espresso Mud lists. Maybe these decks should be tied by name to an individual or team, like NorthEast Mud Prison or Detwiler's Mud, unless Espresso has become the brand for the individual/team.

You are correct the deck has evolved, primarily because of the printing of phyrexian metamorph. Although metamorph may look much different then serum powder, they are both establishing the same role, which is to build a more redundant shop deck. In my opinion espresso shops is the most baseline shop deck, it is built to lock your opponent out of the game and end it with a lodestone, karn, or smokestack. All of those finishers overlap into the prison style of the deck. The way I look at it, the flavors of shops are espresso, welder, metalworker, or aggro (juggernaut/slash panther/precursor golem/etc).

That being said, I thought the article was pretty good. I was surprised that there was no mention of dark confidant in the end of the article. In my opinion, bob is the best draw engine against shops, and is very good against the midrange creature decks.

[credmond]

It's odd that the deck is still being called Espresso when that variant was associated with the use of Serum Powder and the use of the term Espresso related to the use of powders primarily and secondarily cards like expedition map.

Is Espresso somehow related to the name of the team that is behind the deck? What I see is a well built Mud Prison deck that is very different than the original Espresso lists being piloted successfully by a team that was associated with Espresso Mud lists. Maybe these decks should be tied by name to an individual or team, like NorthEast Mud Prison or Detwiler's Mud, unless Espresso has become the brand for the individual/team.

You are correct the deck has evolved, primarily because of the printing of phyrexian metamorph. Although metamorph may look much different then serum powder, they are both establishing the same role, which is to build a more redundant shop deck. In my opinion espresso shops is the most baseline shop deck, it is built to lock your opponent out of the game and end it with a lodestone, karn, or smokestack. All of those finishers overlap into the prison style of the deck. The way I look at it, the flavors of shops are espresso, welder, metalworker, or aggro (juggernaut/slash panther/precursor golem/etc).

That being said, I thought the article was pretty good. I was surprised that there was no mention of dark confidant in the end of the article. In my opinion, bob is the best draw engine against shops, and is very good against the midrange creature decks.

The problem is history and the fact that Espresso was directly associated with Serum Powder as a defining characteristic. Using 3-4 metamorphs is not distinctive to this variant. It's basically lazy and confusing to call this Espresso. It's a good deck though. Very solid. "<<Team X>> MUD Prison" would describe it exactly. Let's just not be lazy and keep calling whatever these guys run as Espresso unless that's their team name. The use of Serum Powders in shops is still very viable and does carve out a unique variant and that variant should be called Espresso because its been called that in the past.

[Cruel Ultimatum]

It's odd that the deck is still being called Espresso when that variant was associated with the use of Serum Powder and the use of the term Espresso related to the use of powders primarily and secondarily cards like expedition map.

Is Espresso somehow related to the name of the team that is behind the deck? What I see is a well built Mud Prison deck that is very different than the original Espresso lists being piloted successfully by a team that was associated with Espresso Mud lists. Maybe these decks should be tied by name to an individual or team, like NorthEast Mud Prison or Detwiler's Mud, unless Espresso has become the brand for the individual/team.

You are correct the deck has evolved, primarily because of the printing of phyrexian metamorph. Although metamorph may look much different then serum powder, they are both establishing the same role, which is to build a more redundant shop deck. In my opinion espresso shops is the most baseline shop deck, it is built to lock your opponent out of the game and end it with a lodestone, karn, or smokestack. All of those finishers overlap into the prison style of the deck. The way I look at it, the flavors of shops are espresso, welder, metalworker, or aggro (juggernaut/slash panther/precursor golem/etc).

That being said, I thought the article was pretty good. I was surprised that there was no mention of dark confidant in the end of the article. In my opinion, bob is the best draw engine against shops, and is very good against the midrange creature decks.

The problem is history and the fact that Espresso was directly associated with Serum Powder as a defining characteristic. Using 3-4 metamorphs is not distinctive to this variant. It's basically lazy and confusing to call this Espresso. It's a good deck though. Very solid. "<<Team X>> MUD Prison" would describe it exactly. Let's just not be lazy and keep calling whatever these guys run as Espresso unless that's their team name. The use of Serum Powders in shops is still very viable and does carve out a unique variant and that variant should be called Espresso because its been called that in the past.

That is what you identify espresso with, what I am saying is that is not what defined the deck though. Nick and the Forinos have played other variants of shops, such as Mud marinara for their red shops list and Martello shops for the forgemaster variant.  That being said they do make delicious espresso.

[credmond]

It's odd that the deck is still being called Espresso when that variant was associated with the use of Serum Powder and the use of the term Espresso related to the use of powders primarily and secondarily cards like expedition map.

Is Espresso somehow related to the name of the team that is behind the deck? What I see is a well built Mud Prison deck that is very different than the original Espresso lists being piloted successfully by a team that was associated with Espresso Mud lists. Maybe these decks should be tied by name to an individual or team, like NorthEast Mud Prison or Detwiler's Mud, unless Espresso has become the brand for the individual/team.

You are correct the deck has evolved, primarily because of the printing of phyrexian metamorph. Although metamorph may look much different then serum powder, they are both establishing the same role, which is to build a more redundant shop deck. In my opinion espresso shops is the most baseline shop deck, it is built to lock your opponent out of the game and end it with a lodestone, karn, or smokestack. All of those finishers overlap into the prison style of the deck. The way I look at it, the flavors of shops are espresso, welder, metalworker, or aggro (juggernaut/slash panther/precursor golem/etc).

That being said, I thought the article was pretty good. I was surprised that there was no mention of dark confidant in the end of the article. In my opinion, bob is the best draw engine against shops, and is very good against the midrange creature decks.

The problem is history and the fact that Espresso was directly associated with Serum Powder as a defining characteristic. Using 3-4 metamorphs is not distinctive to this variant. It's basically lazy and confusing to call this Espresso. It's a good deck though. Very solid. "<<Team X>> MUD Prison" would describe it exactly. Let's just not be lazy and keep calling whatever these guys run as Espresso unless that's their team name. The use of Serum Powders in shops is still very viable and does carve out a unique variant and that variant should be called Espresso because its been called that in the past.

That is what you identify espresso with, what I am saying is that is not what defined the deck though. Nick and the Forinos have played other variants of shops, such as Mud marinara for their red shops list and Martello shops for the forgemaster variant.  That being said they do make delicious espresso.

It's not just me. For reference, Prospero's own words on the subject . . . http://www.themanadrain.com/index.php?topic=41811.0
Serum Powder is a defining characteristic of Espresso.
Without Powders, its far clearer to call it simply MUD Prison and not be lazily calling everything under the sun Espresso.

Otherwise, what does "Espresso" mean?

[Cruel Ultimatum]

It's odd that the deck is still being called Espresso when that variant was associated with the use of Serum Powder and the use of the term Espresso related to the use of powders primarily and secondarily cards like expedition map.

Is Espresso somehow related to the name of the team that is behind the deck? What I see is a well built Mud Prison deck that is very different than the original Espresso lists being piloted successfully by a team that was associated with Espresso Mud lists. Maybe these decks should be tied by name to an individual or team, like NorthEast Mud Prison or Detwiler's Mud, unless Espresso has become the brand for the individual/team.

You are correct the deck has evolved, primarily because of the printing of phyrexian metamorph. Although metamorph may look much different then serum powder, they are both establishing the same role, which is to build a more redundant shop deck. In my opinion espresso shops is the most baseline shop deck, it is built to lock your opponent out of the game and end it with a lodestone, karn, or smokestack. All of those finishers overlap into the prison style of the deck. The way I look at it, the flavors of shops are espresso, welder, metalworker, or aggro (juggernaut/slash panther/precursor golem/etc).

That being said, I thought the article was pretty good. I was surprised that there was no mention of dark confidant in the end of the article. In my opinion, bob is the best draw engine against shops, and is very good against the midrange creature decks.

The problem is history and the fact that Espresso was directly associated with Serum Powder as a defining characteristic. Using 3-4 metamorphs is not distinctive to this variant. It's basically lazy and confusing to call this Espresso. It's a good deck though. Very solid. "<<Team X>> MUD Prison" would describe it exactly. Let's just not be lazy and keep calling whatever these guys run as Espresso unless that's their team name. The use of Serum Powders in shops is still very viable and does carve out a unique variant and that variant should be called Espresso because its been called that in the past.

That is what you identify espresso with, what I am saying is that is not what defined the deck though. Nick and the Forinos have played other variants of shops, such as Mud marinara for their red shops list and Martello shops for the forgemaster variant.  That being said they do make delicious espresso.

It's not just me. For reference, Prospero's own words on the subject . . . http://www.themanadrain.com/index.php?topic=41811.0
Serum Powder is a defining characteristic of Espresso.
Without Powders, its far clearer to call it simply MUD Prison and not be lazily calling everything under the sun Espresso.

Otherwise, what does "Espresso" mean?

Did you read that article? Which is kinda outdated, you know considering it was before metamorph was a card...That being said, really did you read the article?

[credmond]

It's odd that the deck is still being called Espresso when that variant was associated with the use of Serum Powder and the use of the term Espresso related to the use of powders primarily and secondarily cards like expedition map.

Is Espresso somehow related to the name of the team that is behind the deck? What I see is a well built Mud Prison deck that is very different than the original Espresso lists being piloted successfully by a team that was associated with Espresso Mud lists. Maybe these decks should be tied by name to an individual or team, like NorthEast Mud Prison or Detwiler's Mud, unless Espresso has become the brand for the individual/team.

You are correct the deck has evolved, primarily because of the printing of phyrexian metamorph. Although metamorph may look much different then serum powder, they are both establishing the same role, which is to build a more redundant shop deck. In my opinion espresso shops is the most baseline shop deck, it is built to lock your opponent out of the game and end it with a lodestone, karn, or smokestack. All of those finishers overlap into the prison style of the deck. The way I look at it, the flavors of shops are espresso, welder, metalworker, or aggro (juggernaut/slash panther/precursor golem/etc).

That being said, I thought the article was pretty good. I was surprised that there was no mention of dark confidant in the end of the article. In my opinion, bob is the best draw engine against shops, and is very good against the midrange creature decks.

The problem is history and the fact that Espresso was directly associated with Serum Powder as a defining characteristic. Using 3-4 metamorphs is not distinctive to this variant. It's basically lazy and confusing to call this Espresso. It's a good deck though. Very solid. "<<Team X>> MUD Prison" would describe it exactly. Let's just not be lazy and keep calling whatever these guys run as Espresso unless that's their team name. The use of Serum Powders in shops is still very viable and does carve out a unique variant and that variant should be called Espresso because its been called that in the past.

That is what you identify espresso with, what I am saying is that is not what defined the deck though. Nick and the Forinos have played other variants of shops, such as Mud marinara for their red shops list and Martello shops for the forgemaster variant.  That being said they do make delicious espresso.

It's not just me. For reference, Prospero's own words on the subject . . . http://www.themanadrain.com/index.php?topic=41811.0
Serum Powder is a defining characteristic of Espresso.
Without Powders, its far clearer to call it simply MUD Prison and not be lazily calling everything under the sun Espresso.

Otherwise, what does "Espresso" mean?

Did you read that article? Which is kinda outdated, you know considering it was before metamorph was a card...That being said, really did you read the article?

Yes I did. I stand by my assertion that their current list is nothing more than a well-built Mud Prison list.

Otherwise feel free to point out the difference between a well-built Mud Prison list and Espresso Stax! I am sorry but 3-4 metamorphs aint gonna cut it . . .

[nataz]

I gotta say I was a little confused by the espresso title as well. Every time I see the name I'm always looking for powders in the list. Call it whatever, I don't think it really matters. The latest espresso stax is kinda just the natural evolution of really classic MUD lists.

[Will]

Yes I did. I stand by my assertion that their current list is nothing more than a well-built Mud Prison list.

Otherwise feel free to point out the difference between a well-built Mud Prison list and Espresso Stax! I am sorry but 3-4 metamorphs aint gonna cut it . . .

I really was trying not to get into your back and forth but I think I might be able to make things a bit clearer with a bit of history on the deck and the archetype in general.  So originally Nick as well as Raf and Vin Forino built and tested Espresso Stax.  This is the version which as you and Nick stated in his primer was characterized specifically with Serum Powders present.  For GenCon and the months after, Nick and the Forino's switched to a Welder variant (MUD Marinara).  From there, Nick thought that the metagame had changed enough to make Espresso Stax a good choice once more.  However, as was stated earlier in the thread, the Serum Powders were cut to make the deck more threat dense.  Nick introduced the "new" deck as Nouveau Espresso, although it was just an updated Espresso Stax which had evolved to exclude Serum Powder.  Aside from this though, the deck is still Espresso Stax which is what in my opinion the deck still is.  If you feel the need to nitpick the deck name and don't think that the deck Chris and Mickey played was Espresso Stax then refer to it as Nouevau Espresso instead or a well built MUD Prison deck as that's what it has been from the outset.  With that being said though, I think it is a somewhat superfluous point to be debating.  It's similar to arguing whether a Gro deck which has exchanged Quirion Dryad which is it's namesake for Tarmogoyf is still a Gro deck, something that is equally unimportant in the grand scheme of things.

[John Jones]

Yeah from now on, any player who will sit down from me will now face 3 MD chewer and 3 MD other Shops hate cards as well as a slew of counterspells and lands. *Devious Smiley* Also I am going to be packing Pulverize in my board just in case.

But really, I thought the article was fine. Though shops, specifically espresso shops, did win the 1st event of this season at TDG. http://www.themanadrain.com/index.php?topic=43772.0

[credmond]

Yes I did. I stand by my assertion that their current list is nothing more than a well-built Mud Prison list.

Otherwise feel free to point out the difference between a well-built Mud Prison list and Espresso Stax! I am sorry but 3-4 metamorphs aint gonna cut it . . .

I really was trying not to get into your back and forth but I think I might be able to make things a bit clearer with a bit of history on the deck and the archetype in general.  So originally Nick as well as Raf and Vin Forino built and tested Espresso Stax.  This is the version which as you and Nick stated in his primer was characterized specifically with Serum Powders present.  For GenCon and the months after, Nick and the Forino's switched to a Welder variant (MUD Marinara).  From there, Nick thought that the metagame had changed enough to make Espresso Stax a good choice once more.  However, as was stated earlier in the thread, the Serum Powders were cut to make the deck more threat dense.  Nick introduced the "new" deck as Nouveau Espresso, although it was just an updated Espresso Stax which had evolved to exclude Serum Powder.  Aside from this though, the deck is still Espresso Stax which is what in my opinion the deck still is.  If you feel the need to nitpick the deck name and don't think that the deck Chris and Mickey played was Espresso Stax then refer to it as Nouevau Espresso instead or a well built MUD Prison deck as that's what it has been from the outset.  With that being said though, I think it is a somewhat superfluous point to be debating.  It's similar to arguing whether a Gro deck which has exchanged Quirion Dryad which is it's namesake for Tarmogoyf is still a Gro deck, something that is equally unimportant in the grand scheme of things.

It's basically the equivalent of Meandeck taking some Gro list card for card and calling it Meandeck Gro when its just Gro. I been playing Shops for a long time. If you want credit for innovating a new variant then indeed show a new variant. That's why the Espresso lists rocking 4 Serum Powders do deserve recognition as something totally new and a distinct variant. Powders change the shop deck at a fundamental level. But drop the powders and switch back to good old mainstays and we are seeing something shop players have been rocking for a long time. Classic Mud Prison + 3-4 metamorphs.

[forests failed you]

I used the name "espresso stax" because that was the title of the deck in the results forum.

[Will]

Yes I did. I stand by my assertion that their current list is nothing more than a well-built Mud Prison list.

Otherwise feel free to point out the difference between a well-built Mud Prison list and Espresso Stax! I am sorry but 3-4 metamorphs aint gonna cut it . . .

I really was trying not to get into your back and forth but I think I might be able to make things a bit clearer with a bit of history on the deck and the archetype in general.  So originally Nick as well as Raf and Vin Forino built and tested Espresso Stax.  This is the version which as you and Nick stated in his primer was characterized specifically with Serum Powders present.  For GenCon and the months after, Nick and the Forino's switched to a Welder variant (MUD Marinara).  From there, Nick thought that the metagame had changed enough to make Espresso Stax a good choice once more.  However, as was stated earlier in the thread, the Serum Powders were cut to make the deck more threat dense.  Nick introduced the "new" deck as Nouveau Espresso, although it was just an updated Espresso Stax which had evolved to exclude Serum Powder.  Aside from this though, the deck is still Espresso Stax which is what in my opinion the deck still is.  If you feel the need to nitpick the deck name and don't think that the deck Chris and Mickey played was Espresso Stax then refer to it as Nouevau Espresso instead or a well built MUD Prison deck as that's what it has been from the outset.  With that being said though, I think it is a somewhat superfluous point to be debating.  It's similar to arguing whether a Gro deck which has exchanged Quirion Dryad which is it's namesake for Tarmogoyf is still a Gro deck, something that is equally unimportant in the grand scheme of things.

It's basically the equivalent of Meandeck taking some Gro list card for card and calling it Meandeck Gro when its just Gro. I been playing Shops for a long time. If you want credit for innovating a new variant then indeed show a new variant. That's why the Espresso lists rocking 4 Serum Powders do deserve recognition as something totally new and a distinct variant. Powders change the shop deck at a fundamental level. But drop the powders and switch back to good old mainstays and we are seeing something shop players have been rocking for a long time. Classic Mud Prison + 3-4 metamorphs.

Or it's like Team Meandeck taking their Meandeck Gro list changing 3-4 cards and still calling it Meandeck Gro.  What I just said was that Nick and the Forinos built Espresso Stax (with Serum Powder) then put the deck down and revisited it and updated it (removed Serum Powder).  I hope that you understand that by "Meandeck taking some Gro list" you are in this case referring to Meandeck taking their own Gro list and calling it "Meandeck Gro".  The same people who renamed the deck and in this case supplied the list were the ones who initially built it and named it Espresso Stax.  

The problem that you are having may be because of what I said in my previous post that Espresso Stax is and was a well built MUD Prison deck.  I don't know why taking away Serum Powder the card changes anything, but it was has been and always will be a well built shop prison deck.  If you don't like the fact that by this point Espresso Stax and "A well built MUD Prison deck" are synonymous then I guess I'm sorry.  I just find it hard to believe that you can't see how the deck evolving and losing Serum Powder for Phyrexian Metamorph (when Metamorph got printed) changes the fundamental identity and why the people who initially built the deck have to change their deck name to address this.  

I'm not going to post in this thread anymore about this because honestly this isn't worth my time and I don't want to take away from meaningful discussion on this article.

[Asphyxious]

First of all, I liked the article, and I especially like and agree with Shops possibly being a new predator for Dredge.  I've felt like the dredge matchup has continuously gotten stronger for shops over time, and Cage only continues that pattern.

As for Espresso Stax, I was always under the impression that "Stax" was the Prison style of shops (using Smokestack as the primary win condition) and the "Espresso" indicated that the deck was mono-brown.  I think the serum powder/metamorph package is more equivalent to a blue deck's draw engine, except in this case it's a redundancy engine.

[Prospero]

Before Espresso Stax most of the MUD decks that were being played were Metalworker/Monster MUD decks.  They wanted to kill you with cards like Juggernaut, or the Metalworker/Staff combo. 

Espresso was the first modern MUD Prison deck.  If I showed you the lists that we were testing in December of 2009, after Lodestone Golem had been spoiled, then you'd see how similar the deck is between now and then.

Beyond that, there is a stable of cards that rotate in and out.  I have run Factories, Ghost Quarters and Ports in the 'flex spots' of lands.  A MUD deck virtually must run:

1 Strip Mine
1 Tolarian Academy
4 Ancient Tomb
4 Mishra's Workshop
4 Wasteland

Duplicants were a maindeck card for a while, now they're not.  Razormane Masticores were in the maindeck at one point, now they're not.  And, yes, Serum Powder was a very, very effective card in the maindeck.  It was what separated Espresso, at that time, from the other MUD decks.  At that time there were other variants of MUD Prison running around the area, specifically Joe Brown's list that he won Waterbury with in 2010.

'Espresso' was never meant to define the deck as using any single card.  Serum Powder was a quick thing to look to - if the deck had Powder, it was Espresso, usually.  If it didn't, back then, it wasn't.  To pigeonhole a deck like that, and say that it isn't that same deck anymore because it doesn't run that same card, even if it runs 56 other cards that it ran at various points, seems foolish.  I'd ask you to find a copy of a 'Classic MUD Prison' list, but you won't find something that looks close to Espresso, because, having been developed in December of 2009, there was nothing out there that was like it. 

Back in the day there was an argument on the old forums about whether or not Keeper should run the Power Artifact combo in the deck.  People never disputed that it was still Keeper when it ran it, or that it wasn't if it didn't.  Taking this further, shouldn't we allow room for future printings?  Jesse Martin is a known TPS pilot, and has been for a while.  If he called his deck TPS before the printing of Gitaxian Probe, can he still call it TPS now that he's running Probes?  What if I believe that Probe is an identifying characteristic of the deck?

Metamorph meant that you couldn't really run Powders.  I'm not saying that I'm never going to run them again.  If you were going to make an argument that the deck wasn't Espresso anymore (because a card had been cut) then I'd say that your best bet would be to do that if we cut Smokestacks, as they're a card most often found in a Prison deck.

Still, I have to admit that I'm surprised that this is even a discussion.  If you'd feel better calling it 'Classic MUD Prison', go for it.  There was no 'Classic MUD Prison' quite like this before Espresso, so I don't know to what deck you'd be referring. 

[voltron00x]

So um, all of this fun discussion aside, good article Brian.  I think you've been on a hot streak lately with your Vintage articles.

On a personal level... In a way, Detwiler bested me at this event as the 3rd & 4th place decks were mostly my design, while the 1st and 2nd place lists were largely Nick's. 

I'll get you yet, Mr. Detwiler, and your pretty Shops, too!

[nataz]

Metamorph meant that you couldn't really run Powders. 

I'd like to talk about this.

Is this because you are worried that you need a higher threat density for metamorph to be effective? If so, does metamorph drive your deck design, or does your deck design make metamorph better?

That said, I love the elegance of espresso stax. I have a great appreciation of its compact and efficient card selection, but I'm always frustrated any time I play a deck in vintage that lacks any kind of library manipulation. Being chained to that initial 7, + 1 card/turn is an incredible drawback exacerbated when the metagame adapts and begins to add in tutorable MD artifact hate.

Have you experimented at all with expedition map? Especially with the addition of Maze to the SB, and the 4x crucible + strip mine, it seems like a solid effect.

[Prospero]

Metamorph meant that you couldn't really run Powders. 

I'd like to talk about this.

Is this because you are worried that you need a higher threat density for metamorph to be effective? If so, does metamorph drive your deck design, or does your deck design make metamorph better?

That said, I love the elegance of espresso stax. I have a great appreciation of its compact and efficient card selection, but I'm always frustrated any time I play a deck in vintage that lacks any kind of library manipulation. Being chained to that initial 7, + 1 card/turn is an incredible drawback exacerbated when the metagame adapts and begins to add in tutorable MD artifact hate.

Have you experimented at all with expedition map? Especially with the addition of Maze to the SB, and the 4x crucible + strip mine, it seems like a solid effect.

Regarding Metamorph:

Yes, Powder isn't necessarily a 'dense' card, in that it isn't an actual threat.  The Powder version of Espresso was powerful, but Metamorph was an incredible gift that acted like superglue; it filled holes in every match.  Metamorph demands a deck that has a lot of things for it to copy, as your game plan (when successfully executed) denied your opponent things worth copying.  You wanted to keep building on your opponent, until you hit a point where he couldn't possibly hope to interact with you.  Metamorph extended Smokestacks, pushed out opposing spells with Spheres, held down opponents for another couple of turns with Wires, put immense pressure on opponents by copying a Lodestone and more.  Cutting the Powders made the Metamorphs better, and you wanted the Metamorph to be better because the change in building helped your cause. 

Map is cool, and I played it to a top 8 at the August Grudge Match, when I was running MUD Marinara.  It is, however, a grindy kind of card that is best used in conjunction with Welders, all while your game plan is slower than it is with something like Espresso.  Espresso wants to drop threat after threat after threat.  Marinara could take a little time to establish a brutal board state.  Also, Map gets hit by Misstep, and Misstep seems to be more popular now than it has ever been before.  Playing a deck where your opponents Missteps and Flusterstorms are dead on arrival is a great, great thing.  Opening yourself up to Misstep has to be really worth it.  I don't think it is for that card, whereas I do think it is for something like Grafdigger's Cage.       

[nataz]

on metamorph;

If metamorph was such a game changing card, why didn't sculpting steel catch on earlier? To quote you from a response in your original espresso stax thread:

"Sculpting Steel is a very reasonable card in the right metagame.  It's a solid enough answer out of a Shop Aggro deck to an opposing Shop deck, but it's just not enough to get the job done...Steel isn't a threat in and of itself, merely a response to a threat.  It only gives you what you already have.  If you were going to fight BSC aggressively, it would be better to remove the threat, outright, than to chance that your opponent has the artifact bounce that would still make him lethal"

What changed? The two things I most often do with metamorph that I can't do with steel is copy a trygon and bust bridges against ichorid. Is that really the tipping point? Additionally, with MD tombs, the addition of dismember, and the rise of creature decks, the additional cost of 2 life does matter.

[chrispikula]

on metamorph;

If metamorph was such a game changing card, why didn't sculpting steel catch on earlier? To quote you from a response in your original espresso stax thread:

"Sculpting Steel is a very reasonable card in the right metagame.  It's a solid enough answer out of a Shop Aggro deck to an opposing Shop deck, but it's just not enough to get the job done...Steel isn't a threat in and of itself, merely a response to a threat.  It only gives you what you already have.  If you were going to fight BSC aggressively, it would be better to remove the threat, outright, than to chance that your opponent has the artifact bounce that would still make him lethal"

What changed? The two things I most often do with metamorph that I can't do with steel is copy a trygon and bust bridges against ichorid. Is that really the tipping point? Additionally, with MD tombs, the addition of dismember, and the rise of creature decks, the additional cost of 2 life does matter.

It also copies Oath's creatures.  Demon Oath often Oaths up a demon, but because of mana constraints can't really do any sort of combo out, and then the Shop player can chain Demons on his turn!

[Asphyxious]

The rise of creature decks does make the 2 life more important, but it also means that there are plenty more targets.  Paying two life to copy a Goyf is a lot better than letting that Goyf attack into you every turn.  Similarly, an unchecked Trrygon simply wins the game, but metamorph can stop it (assuming that the opponent doesn't have exalted creatures).  It can also copy welder, which can often (though not always) save you from getting welded out of the game.

I think the biggest difference is that metamorph can do all of the things that scultping steel can do, and it answers some of the better maindeck anti-shops cards, like oath creatures, trygon, robot, etc.  Personally, I think the versatility is really the difference.