Grixis vs. MUD Match Up Walkthrough

[forests failed you]

New Vintage Article up on SCG:

http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/vintage/24877-Grixis-Control-vs-MUD-Matchup-Analysis.html

In this article I do a play by play of a match between the Championship Grixis deck V MUD.  

Also, my articles will no longer be appearing under the "Vintage Avant-Garde" column name, as I am branching out to write more about other formats.  However, I will still be writing about a Vintage article at least once a month.

What kinds of Vintage articles do you guys find to be most informative?  Do you like the Match up analysis articles like this one and RUG V MUD from last month?  

Next week's article will be the Return to Ravnica Vintage set review, but I am open to feedback for what kind of Vintage articles you guys would most like to read.

Thanks for reading

Cheers,
Brian DeMars

Edited title for caps.  Great read, Brian - Prospero

[chrispikula]

I liked today's article.  I think it would be interesting to actually write one of these from the point of view of the linear deck sometimes.  There has been very little written by good players about actual in-game decisions with decks like MUD and Dredge (or even Fish).  The better writers and players just want to cast Ancestral Recall all the time, so we never see real analysis of the other side. 

[BC]

Looks like a fun match.  My only question is in game 2, when Jon played Mox, Mox, Thorn, Workshop, Chalice@0.  I really don't understand why he would play Chalice@0 instead of Chalice@1.  You had already played your Mox, so the only thing he had to fear at 0 is topdecked Moxes/Lotus.  Chalice@1 doesn't exactly destroy your deck, but it is certainly more disruptive than Chalice@0 at this stage of the game.  Especially since you drew Top on your next turn, Chalice@1 potentially could have slowed you down enough to turn the momentum of the game.

[vaughnbros]

I liked today's article.  I think it would be interesting to actually write one of these from the point of view of the linear deck sometimes.  There has been very little written by good players about actual in-game decisions with decks like MUD and Dredge (or even Fish).  The better writers and players just want to cast Ancestral Recall all the time, so we never see real analysis of the other side. 

I agree doing a write up of BOTH sides of the match up would make for a much better read and it might explain some of this:

Looks like a fun match.  My only question is in game 2, when Jon played Mox, Mox, Thorn, Workshop, Chalice@0.  I really don't understand why he would play Chalice@0 instead of Chalice@1.  You had already played your Mox, so the only thing he had to fear at 0 is topdecked Moxes/Lotus.  Chalice@1 doesn't exactly destroy your deck, but it is certainly more disruptive than Chalice@0 at this stage of the game.  Especially since you drew Top on your next turn, Chalice@1 potentially could have slowed you down enough to turn the momentum of the game.

I think most people would be in agreement that boarding in cages and not casting chalice at 1 were pretty critical miss plays.  I'd be interested in hearing Jon's explanation of this.

Overall though I did enjoy reading this article

[Meddling Mike]

Looks like a fun match.  My only question is in game 2, when Jon played Mox, Mox, Thorn, Workshop, Chalice@0.  I really don't understand why he would play Chalice@0 instead of Chalice@1.  You had already played your Mox, so the only thing he had to fear at 0 is topdecked Moxes/Lotus.  Chalice@1 doesn't exactly destroy your deck, but it is certainly more disruptive than Chalice@0 at this stage of the game.  Especially since you drew Top on your next turn, Chalice@1 potentially could have slowed you down enough to turn the momentum of the game.

He followed up with a Workshop, Chalice on zero, and a Grafdigger's Cage and then passed the turn.

The only thing I can think of is that it may have been bait to make sure the Grafdigger's Cage resolved.

There was also a similar situation after the Hurkyl's in game 3. If I understand the game state correctly he should have had an Ancient Tomb and a Mishra's Workshop untapped to play the Chalice on 1 or 2.

[Cruel Ultimatum]

Why did he board in grafdiggers cage? Sounds bad.

Other then that and some potentially poor lines like the chalice on 0, I enjoyed the article. Are you ever going to do any blue v blue matchups?

[StanleyAugust]

Sorry if I sound too negative because I actually enjoyed the article, I just think it's a bit too easy to just play a game and write a summary. I like the indepth articles way more.

[BC]

I also thought it was a good read, but I agree with the other posters that getting both players' perspective would have made it much better.  I also agree that siding in Grafdigger's Cage is wrong, but none of the MUD player's thought process is included.

[bisamratte]

Nice read.

Some things about your boarding strategy:
- I'd really like to stun Wasteland or Forgemaster with Needle
- Snapcaster + Flashback costs way to much mana against Spheres
- EE dodges Spheres and trades positive.

What about this?

- 3 Mental Misstep
- 2 Flusterstorm
- 1 Nihil Spellbomb
- 1-2 Snapcaster Mage
+ 1 Mountain
+ 4 Ingot Chewer
+1 Lighnting Bolt
+1 Engineered Explosives
+1 Pithing Needle

[Metman]

Nice job on the article Brian.  I like the analysis of a set of games with context during and following.  Like others, I would like to see the perspective of your opponents as well.  It would provide insight to the matchup that your perspective doesn't cover. 

[Will]

Good read, but that MUD list is definitely not super well constructed as the lack of Trinisphere and other questionable calls show. Also, as others have stated his sequence of plays was definitely not optimal with regards to the Chalice @0 instead of 1 and bringing in Grafdigger's Cage.

[Methuselahn]

Aww dang.  I was hoping to read this but it looks like SCG took it down.   It hasn't even been 2 months! wtf!   If anyone could copy/paste or provide a link to where it exists I'd be in your debt.

Good read, but that MUD list is definitely not super well constructed as the lack of Trinisphere and other questionable calls show. Also, as others have stated his sequence of plays was definitely not optimal with regards to the Chalice @0 instead of 1 and bringing in Grafdigger's Cage.

lawlz.  Trinisphere and even Black Lotus are rather poor in MUD, especially Forgemaster MUD.

[hitman]

http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/vintage/24877-Grixis-Control-vs-MUD-Matchup-Analysis.html

It looks like starcitgames.com just underwent some changes.  They might not have linked his articles when you checked.

[Cruel Ultimatum]

Good read, but that MUD list is definitely not super well constructed as the lack of Trinisphere and other questionable calls show. Also, as others have stated his sequence of plays was definitely not optimal with regards to the Chalice @0 instead of 1 and bringing in Grafdigger's Cage.

lawlz.  Trinisphere and even Black Lotus are rather poor in MUD, especially Forgemaster MUD.

Huh? Trinisphere is pretty freaking good in mud, the only time I wouldn't play it was if my meta was like 70%+ mud. Black lotus is also pretty good even if you are only making colorless mana with it.

[Methuselahn]

You're right, hitman.  The article was only temporarily borked.  Thanks.

I like that Brian presents games and focuses on the decision making process.  That's the most valuable thing in these articles.  I wouldn't mind hearing his thoughts and rationale for keeping/mulling any given opening grip of a selected deck versus an array of top tier decks.  Like, is so-and-so 7 cards keepable vs MUD? vs Combo? Blue? the mirror?

Huh? Trinisphere is pretty freaking good in mud, the only time I wouldn't play it was if my meta was like 70%+ mud. Black lotus is also pretty good even if you are only making colorless mana with it.

Meh, if you knew 70% of the field was MUD, would you really even choose to play MUD, knowing you'd face the mirror all day long?

Trinisphere is great for the first couple of turns, then it's garbage.  On the play, versus combo, fish, or any deck that wins by casting many spells it is great the first couple of turns, but that's about it.   Trinisphere doesn't stack effects with other spheres.  Also, it sucks that it stops working when your Tangle Wire taps it.  It's also pretty bad on the draw.  Playing first, your opponent will drop all their moxen before you get a turn, negating it's usefulness.  When do you want to draw into a Trinisphere after turn 2-3?  Almost never.  It used to be a lot better, dont get me wrong, but that's when it was unrestricted and there wasn't a critical mass of sphere effects already.   'Back in the day' when it was unrestricted, Lodestone Golem and Thorn didn't exist and you were able to build a deck around it. IIRC, Roland Chang dominated several SCG Power9 tournies, as well as Gencon with 4 Trinispheres.

I always side out Lotus and Trinisphere.  Let's say you crack Lotus to play a couple of spheres and a golem on turn one, then what?  You're up shite creek with a turd for a paddle unless you get extra lands.  But drawing lots of lands is generally bad.  Lotus is bad, especially in Forgemaster MUD for the same reason Mana Vault is bad.  It's one shot of mana.  In Smokestack decks it's not AS terrible because you can use Lotus/M.Vault to win attrition wars.  Both are less than stellar at continually applying pressure.

[rpf5029]

Meh, if you knew 70% of the field was MUD, would you really even choose to play MUD, knowing you'd face the mirror all day long?

There don't seem to be too many great things to play instead.  There's nothing that I can think of that outright crushes Shops.

[vaughnbros]

Meh, if you knew 70% of the field was MUD, would you really even choose to play MUD, knowing you'd face the mirror all day long?

There don't seem to be too many great things to play instead.  There's nothing that I can think of that outright crushes Shops.

Correct there are no popular decks that outright crush stax, but against a field of 70% workshops a properly meta gamed fish deck, like RG beats, would dominate.

[PeAcH]

White Thrash annihilates shops.

You can check Adrià Martí WT decklists from early this year in Februrary in the LCV:

http://www.thecouncil.es/tcdecks/deck.php?id=7713&iddeck=56119

Workshops (21%) and Blue (39%) added a total of 60% of the field with 52 players:

http://www.manainfinito.com/articulos/vintage/metagame-breakdown-lcv-2012-febrero

and March:

http://www.thecouncil.es/tcdecks/deck.php?id=8028&iddeck=58503

Workshops (15.4%) and Blue (42.3) added almost a 60% again in a field of 52 players:

http://www.eternalcatala.com/viewtopic.php?f=30&t=1744

I know the decklists can be tweaked for sure, but if your meta is Workshop infested, White Thrash is the way to go.

Not as fancier as a Big Blue deck, but reaaaaaaally to the point: 9 strip effects, basic lands, artifact destruction and disruption (Stony Silence and Cage versus Kuldotha), and Moat style beaters like Porcelain.

What more can I say?

[xouman]

I remember that february tournament in Mataro, and Adrià lost the final to Jordi, who was playing MUD :p But I agree, White trash is one of the decks capable of cause troubles to MUD, as long as it can stay clear of Hellkite and Crucible.

MUD can be a pain if people continue playing missteps and flusters in the main. If people switch those cards for viashino heretic/tarmogoyf maindeck, MUD is easier. Just by playing MD bolts, grixis improves its chances.

[PeAcH]

Hi Xouman,

Yes, Adrià lost, you can check the videos of the finals where you will see some serious missplays on his side of the table:

http://www.manainfinito.com/videos/lcv-2012-febrero-final-jordi-carbonell-panther-mud-vs-adri-mart-white-weenie

I totally agree on the point that MD hate versus blue needs to be switched to Artifact destruction and creature removal in order to beat Shops.

Otherwise, you are defendant on the MUD pilot's third hand and mulligans to win on the draw assuming you win second match with 7-8 sideboard cards.