Three weeks ago, the vast majority of tournament players seemed to suggest that the format wasn’t going to change much since the World Championships.
Many doubted that Mirrodin Besieged would have much impact, and many that did predict a large impact saw the rich getting richer, thanks to cards like
Green Sun’s Zenith and Go for the Throat. The consensus seemed to be that the most dominant deck of Worlds, U/B Control, and the de facto best deck of
the past four months, Valakut, would be the early favorites.
Sure enough, Pro Tour Paris was jam-packed with U/B Control and Valakut decks, making up 43% of the field as the two most popular decks. Interestingly,
they both performed very poorly.
There are a lot of interesting angles from which to view Standard, and so the discussion on Extended I was originally planning on doing this week will
take place next week so that we can do a thorough analysis of the format as a whole (not to mention give me another week to brew Extended decks!).
Consider that, at Worlds, 71% of players played one of the four most popular decks (Valakut, U/W, U/B, and Vampires). Among these archetypes, only one
posted a winning record as a whole (U/B) and was widely considered the most successful Standard deck of the tournament. It was a format where almost
all of the popular decks were at a slight disadvantage, and the under-the-radar decks had an advantage.
Interesting… Tell me more.
Here we are two months later, with Mirrodin Besieged added to the mix. Now the top five decks end up accounting for 71% of the players (Valakut, U/B,
Caw-Blade, Kuldotha Red, and Vampires), and once again, we observe only a single winning record among the top five most popular decks. Once again, this
single popular and successful deck is remembered as the deck of the tournament, Caw-Blade. There is more to consider, however.
Among the 482 players that participated in Pro Tour Paris, only 31% selected a deck that had an overall winning record. If that sounds a little strange
to you, it should. One might say that 69% of players in Pro Tour Paris were “wrong” about Standard. How could so many more people play decks with
losing records than winning records? The good decks were just that dominant. But what were the good decks? One possible perspective is to
consider the breakdown between Squadron Hawk decks and non-Squadron Hawk decks.
Decks with Squadron Hawks: 58.47%
Decks without Hawks: 48.42%
Okay, that is kind of insane. Now, before anyone goes jumping off any mathematically disadvantaged cliffs, remember those numbers don’t have to add up
to 100%, even though the sets are exclusive from each other and include everyone. The reason for this is that there were a lot more players without
Hawks than with. As a result, non-Hawk players are going to end up a lot closer to 50% as a result of how many more “mirror” matches they had to play.
Still, even taking this into consideration, it’s pretty clear that Squadron Hawk dominated this event, in everything from Caw-Blade to Boros to Quest
and G/W Aggro.
Worlds was home to one of the most balanced formats in years. That balance has come to an end. It’s pretty clear that the metagame is not stable, and
most players, at least as of Worlds, didn’t have a good grasp on what the format was really about. Let’s take a look at the total breakdown of every
archetype in Paris (Special Thanks to Paul Jordan and Rashad Miller).
|
Archetypes |
% of Field |
Players |
% with 21+ points |
Success Rate |
Match Win % |
|
Valakut |
22% |
105 |
12% |
6% |
48% |
|
U/B Control |
21% |
100 |
12% |
6% |
45% |
|
Caw-Blade |
14% |
67 |
25% |
19% |
61% |
|
Kuldotha Red |
7% |
36 |
4% |
6% |
42% |
|
Vampires |
7% |
34 |
10% |
15% |
50% |
|
Quest+G/W Aggro |
6% |
29 |
8% |
14% |
56% |
|
Boros |
6% |
28 |
10% |
18% |
56% |
|
RUG |
3% |
15 |
8% |
27% |
58% |
|
Classic U/W |
3% |
15 |
2% |
7% |
49% |
|
Green/Eldrazi Ramp |
2% |
10 |
0% |
0% |
37% |
|
2% |
9 |
4% |
22% |
48% |
|
|
RDW |
2% |
8 |
0% |
0% |
47% |
|
BUG |
1% |
6 |
4% |
33% |
46% |
|
Misc Aggro* |
1% |
6 |
2% |
17% |
58% |
|
Infect |
1% |
4 |
0% |
0% |
51% |
|
Misc Control** |
1% |
4 |
0% |
0% |
38% |
|
Grixis Tez |
1% |
3 |
2% |
33% |
65% |
|
Elves |
1% |
3 |
0% |
0% |
7% |
|
Average |
5% |
25/482 |
5% |
11% |
50% |
*White Weenie x2, Bant, Allies, Naya, R/G
**Mono-Black, Grixis, Mass Polymorph
Most of the categories are fairly straightforward. The percentage of the field stat is a function of Day 1, though it didn’t change much on Day 2
(other than that Caw-Blade got more popular, and Valakut and U/B dropped in popularity, as a function of doing poorly Day 1). The stat-measuring
percentage of the 7-3 or better decks for each archetype amounts to the dominance of the deck at this event. The “Success Rate” stat is a measure of
what percentage of players that piloted each archetype managed to achieve at least 21 points in Standard (a record of 7-3 or better). Each of the
categories has an “Average” number down at the bottom, to give you an idea of how each deck stacked up against the field as a whole. Any deck that was
played by more than 5% (25 players) was above average in popularity. Any deck that posted above 11% Success Rate was above average in success, while
posting an more than a 50% match-win percentage meant the deck had an above average finish in terms of overall strength.
As always, let’s start with the Tier 1. At Worlds, we saw a format containing only one true Tier 1 deck, U/B, and even that deck was not miles ahead of
everything else. The format was very stable and very “fair.” This time around, however, the metagame seems to have slid completely out of whack. Each
of these four archetypes performed exceptionally well (each finishing with a better record than U/B did at Worlds). Additionally, each was above
average in terms of dominance and success (including RUG, despite its being played by only 3% of the field). These are certainly not the only decks
that can make a claim at Tier 1 status, as there were some very successful rogue decks; however these are the only archetypes to achieve widespread
enough success to have earned the spot for sure.
Tier 1:
Let’s start with the deck of the tournament and the hot topic of the month, Caw-Blade.
Creatures (8)
Planeswalkers (7)
Lands (26)
Spells (19)
- 3 Mana Leak
- 4 Day of Judgment
- 4 Spell Pierce
- 1 Deprive
- 4 Preordain
- 1 Stoic Rebuttal
- 1 Sylvok Lifestaff
- 1 Sword of Feast and Famine
Sideboard
Caw-Go was one of the hot topics at Worlds, back in December; however, its performance did not exactly make very big waves. The old Caw-Go decks had
strong matchups against the creature decks but struggled with spell decks. This is in stark contrast to U/B decks of today that perform excellently
against spell decks but struggle with some of the creature decks. Mirrodin Besieged has added a number of important new cards to Standard, one of the
most important of which is Sword of Feast and Famine, allowing Caw-Go to gain a massive advantage against the very spell decks it had so much trouble
with. Obviously, a host of support cards (such as Stoneforge Mystic) are utilized to make the most of this card, but the new dimension redefines the
format.
Sword of Feast and Famine doesn’t look like a format-defining card but a deeper examination reveals its true power. The value of a turn is often
basically the card you draw, the mana you produce, and your attack phase. Sword of Feast and Famine gives you a card of value out of the discard, an
entire turn’s worth of mana from its untap, and an attack phase worth of damage from the +2/+2. Getting hit by this Sword is very much the equivalent
of getting Time Warped. The catch to it is that once they start hitting you with this sword, it gets harder and harder to stop getting hit by it. When
we discuss ways to combat Sword of Feast and Famine, many options are left off the table, as we can’t afford to get hit by it, even once.
Hammer of Ruin is a cute idea, but by the time you get to hit someone with it, they’ve generally already hit you with the Sword at least once. If they
Forged down the Sword on your end step, you’re still further behind than when you started, especially if they have Sun Titan in their deck and
sideboard Divine Offering (as they rightly should).
On the flipside, this is why Tumble Magnet is so effective against Swords. It’s a proactive card that you can deploy before the Sword that provides
insurance that you will not be hit by one by surprise. If I had but half the artistic talent of Geordie Tait, this would be the perfect place in the
article to create an advertisement parody in the vein of those “Crystal Meth: Not Even Once” advertisements.
Opponents playing Gideon and Jace and a Celestial Colonnade on turn 5 isn’t normal…
But when you get hit by a Sword of Feast and Famine, it is.
Not even once.
As for discussion of the deck in general, let’s start with the most obvious question. Is this deck for real?
Short answer: Yes.
Long answer, this deck has staying power and endurance and will be a lasting pillar in the metagame. It’s resilient, powerful, and consistent, not to
mention not easily hated out. Caw-Go lost both of its matches against Naya, as well as both against Grixis Tezzeret. It had a losing record against
Quest and BUG. It split matches against a variety of random aggro decks, including White Weenie, Infect, R/G, and Allies, as well as Mono-Green Ramp.
All of these losing and 50-50 matchups add up to 40 matches of even-to-bad matchups (most with very small sample size).
Against the other 346 non-mirror matches, Caw-Blade posted a winning record!
This is quite an uncommon level of dominance for an archetype played by 14% of the field, and the format will surely warp around it. I highly recommend
Caw-Blade to players that enjoy this style of deck, with a few changes to help adapt to the inevitable warping of the format.
1. Consider two Sun Titans! Sun Titan is a fantastic card in its own right, works well in this deck, and is the perfect natural foil to the artifact
destruction that smart players will adopt; not to mention it owns the mirror. Maybe it’s for the sideboard, not the maindeck; just consider it.
2. Consider sideboarding four Divine Offerings. Artifacts are on the rise, and I’m not just talking Swords. Hitting Argentum Armor, Tumble Magnet,
Sphere of the Suns, or Steel Overseer is a potentially game-winning play.
3. Mix up your list a little bit! No need to let everyone know exactly how much of each type of countermagic you play!
4. Don’t cut the Ousts from the sideboard! I have seen so many people do that. For shame!
5. In the mirror, you really want a hand with a white creature or a Preordain (to look for one). It takes a truly amazing hand to make one want to keep
a seven-card hand without one.
6. Remember that Sword of Feast and Famine does neat tricks with Celestial Colonnade. It makes the Colonnade “not enter tapped,” as long as you
remember to play it precombat. Additionally, if you have eight mana, you can activate Colonnade, equip it, then attack, getting six damage in and a
hitting a card, while still having your eight mana on your main phase.
7. Elspeth Tirel is a reasonable sideboard card to consider.
8. There’s nothing wrong with playing Sword of Body and Mind maindeck, in the right meta.
9. People that immediately cut a land from every deck deserve to get mana screwed.
10. Caw-Blade put nine(!) players in the Top 16 of StarCityGames.com Open: DC this past weekend (including four among those that split the Top 8). Make
sure to look for Gerry’s article later this week!
Yeah, yeah, we have all been hearing about Caw-Blade nonstop. Is that really the only big success story of Paris? Sure, sure, Tezzeret is new, so
it will surely get headlines, as well, but is that all there is to know about this format? Valakut and U/B have fallen; Caw-Blade is the nut, and
Tezzeret is a real deck?
Actually, no, that’s not all there is to the format. While Caw-Blade certainly had the most impressive performance of the event, this event was
remarkable in that there were four different decks that performed exceptionally well in large numbers, as well as a host of rogue decks that crushed.
This truly was an event where there was a massive gap between the 31% who were ahead of the curve and the 69% who were on decks from two months ago.
This isn’t an indictment of every Valakut, U/B, and Vampires player, as there certainly were a number of individuals that made it work quite well. One
of the many lessons we have learned from 5CC is that it’s not unusual for a deck to be one of the best when properly built and played but quickly
dropped to a low tier when built or piloted suboptimally.
The point is Caw-Blade was not the only massive success in Paris among major archetypes. Other decks play Squadron Hawk as well!
Creatures (30)
- 4 Ornithopter
- 1 Kor Outfitter
- 4 Kor Skyfisher
- 1 Stoneforge Mystic
- 4 Vengevine
- 4 Fauna Shaman
- 4 Squadron Hawk
- 4 Memnite
- 4 Glint Hawk
Lands (23)
Spells (7)
The most important concept to understand with Quest decks is that their win percentage is probably double in games where they have turn 1 Quest
compared to games without it (with the same number of cards). As such, good Quest players mulligan extremely aggressively. If their seven-card hand is
not excellent, they ship it, as most six-card hands with Quest are better than almost any non-Quest seven.
The next line to understand is the importance of discarding Vengevine on turn 1. If you’re on the draw and don’t have Quest in your opening seven, one
of the best lines you can look for is to just discard Vengevine on turn 1 and possibly turn 2. Then drop two creatures in one turn and start the beats!
Many opponents won’t be able to beat such an aggressive opening, and even if they can kill your Vengevine(s), it’s very easy for Quest to bring them
back if they’re on the discard Vengevine plan.
T1: Discard Vengevine
T2: Memnite, Glint Hawk, Memnite, attack for four.
T3: Attack for seven and playing anything else.
T4: Game
Playing against Quest is actually a very different experience from what many players imagine it will be. I highly, highly recommend getting some games
in against a proficient Quest player, as it’s one of those decks whose percentage improves once the pilot gets familiar with the pacing of it. It can
be tempting to sacrifice your Quest as soon as possible. This is often a mistake, as the threat can be stronger than the actual equipment. Once you get
the Armor, your opponent can Jace it back to your hand. Once you get the Sword, you can’t get the Armor any more. Once you get anything, they now have
free reign to Bolt your other guys. As long as you have it in play and active, you can respond to a burn spell by buffing a guy. You can respond to
Jace’s -1 with pro-blue. You can see which guy they Tumble Magnet and buff someone else. This can be worth six damage if you want, but it can also be
worth it to just get another attacker and get a Sword hit in.
One final note on Quest: While it has been quietly raking up wins against unprepared opponents, I have a feeling this strategy will decline in success
as players begin to adopt a reasonable level of artifact destruction. Quest bends over backwards to trigger its namesake enchantment, focusing almost
all of its card power into a super fast Argentum Armor. A single Divine Offering, Shatter/Crush, or Nature’s Reclaim makes this all fall apart. Even
Into the Roil and Tumble Magnet can be huge nightmares. Combine this fragility with a vulnerability to sweepers (if you can keep the equipment in
check), and you’re talking about a house of cards that’s ready to fall at a moment’s notice. No question, Quest is one of the most unfair things you
can do in this format, but it’s also very easy to hate out if you just decide that it’s worth it. Now that Caw-Blade and Tezzeret and Boros are all top
strategies, there’s no reason not to play plenty of artifact hate.
Recommendation: I’m a little cool on it and would suggest avoiding getting into it, unless you love these sorts of decks or are already into it. It’s
still a strong deck but will probably be poorly positioned in the next couple of weeks.
Creatures (24)
- 4 Goblin Guide
- 4 Plated Geopede
- 4 Steppe Lynx
- 3 Stoneforge Mystic
- 4 Squadron Hawk
- 1 Spikeshot Elder
- 2 Mirran Crusader
- 2 Hero of Oxid Ridge
Planeswalkers (1)
Lands (26)
Spells (9)
Ever since Steppe Lynx, Plated Geopede, and Arid Mesa, Boros has been a factor. While its popularity has waxed and waned, it’s currently on a major
upswing. The possibility of absurdly aggressive openings, thanks to the aforementioned landfall creatures and Goblin Guide, gets enough free wins that
Boros players are often content to have to “settle” for the games involving the “bad cards.” Mirrodin Besieged is here and with it, a ton of new
weapons for Boros to help fill out those “bad card” slots.
To start with, Sword of Feast and Famine is nowhere near as good here as it is in Caw-Blade, but it’s still a strong option to consider. Another
equipment that Rietzl forgot existed, Bonehoard, offers a powerful new tool that allows Stoneforge Mystic to not only find a body but the ability to
make every creature into a lethal threat, going long. Personally, I imagine that the Sword of Feast and Famine could move out of the maindeck to make
room for the Bonehoard, though perhaps there’s a different cut to be made, such as a Mirran Crusader. Mirran Crusader is another new addition provided
by Besieged, promising exciting combinations with equipment (thanks to double strike), not to mention making life difficult for U/B (which has
traditionally been a bad matchup for Boros).
A final addition to make its way into Boros is that of Hero of Oxid Ridge. While not all Boros players had the Hero, it’s certainly right to play him,
and he makes all the difference in the world. This is most clearly seen by Boros posting a match-win percentage against Caw-Blade of just 42.31%, as a
whole. That’s really quite bad, so how was it that Paul Rietzl posted a record of 3-0-1 against Caw-Blade in the Swiss? Perhaps a little variance, but
more likely it would seem that adding a couple copies of the best possible card against them can go a long way.
Hero is just a total nightmare for Caw-Blade. They can’t Spell Pierce it obviously, and counterspells are quite poor in this matchup anyway. Day of
Judgment generally doesn’t work well, and often the Hero hits the turn after the Day. Caw-Blade relies heavily on its Hawks and Mystics to block, which
Hero effortlessly trumps, while attacking for 4-7 points of basically unblockable, haste damage. Even the sideboard plan of Oust is not particularly
effective. If you’re going to play Boros, make sure you have at least two copies of the Hero main and at least one more in the board. It’s even worth
considering cutting the Koth from the main for a third Hero if there is a particularly large amount of Caw-Blade in your area. Additionally, while it’s
often right to cut a Lightning Bolt from one deck or another, Lightning Bolt is particularly good right now, and you should surely have the full four.
Boros performed quite well against the field as a whole, especially if you consider that its losing record to Caw-Blade is heavily disputed. The
matchups where Boros struggled were the other aggro matchups, with a combined record of 7-15 (32%) against Quest, Kuldotha Red, Mono-Red, and Allies.
One of the big questions for the weeks ahead is who will win the arms race between Boros and Caw-Blade. Caw-Blade started the favorite, but Hero of
Oxid Ridge has upped the ante.
Finally, our last Tier One archetype (and this one doesn’t even use Squadron Hawk!).
Creatures (13)
Planeswalkers (4)
Lands (26)
Spells (17)
Sideboard
Creatures (10)
Planeswalkers (7)
Lands (27)
Spells (16)
Sideboard
There is so much variety between RUG players that I felt it appropriate to post two of the top lists to give an idea of which cards are variable and
which are a bit more locked in. This is about the tenth major tournament in a row where RUG has not been popular but has been one of the best
performing decks. It’s so strange, but ever since Michael Jacob broke Block in half with the RUG deck, that has been the story of this deck’s life.
At Pro Tour San Juan, the majority of players discounted it, despite Brad Nelson winning the Block Championship with it just a month before. Then, the
deck initially was discussed as a player in Standard but was quickly overshadowed by Primeval Titans and Fauna Shamans. Frost Titan and Inferno Titan
both broke out, causing resurgences from time to time, but at no point has RUG ever been even remotely popular.
San Juan: 5%
States: Â 4%
Worlds: Â 6%
Paris: Â 3%Â
Now, what is particularly interesting is that at each of these four events, RUG was among the best performing decks in the room! The RUG deck is
certainly one of the hardest decks to play in Standard, but still, it boggles the mind that an archetype can so consistently overperform at each and
every event and still not get the respect it deserves. While there was not enough RUG played to get a clear picture of all of its matchups, a couple
trends were immediately obvious.
First of all, RUG absolutely crushed Valakut at this event. Valakut has traditionally been a poor matchup for RUG, but the additions of cards like
Lotus Cobra and Green Sun’s Zenith to Valakut have been a great boon to RUG. Cobra turns on RUG’s removal spells, and Green Sun’s Zenith means less
Summoning Traps and makes countermagic that much better. Add to this the Spreading Seas, Goblin Ruinblasters, Acidic Slimes, and even some Tectonic
Edges, and we have the recipe for why RUG defeated Valakut 21-6 (78%!). The other obvious trend was RUG’s utter inability to interact effectively with
Kuldotha Red, getting smoked 2-7 (22%). It’s interesting to note that Shenhar played more sweepers than most RUG players, which may have helped account
for his added success.
The RUG deck uses a number of excellent cheap tempo cards, making good use of its “4s and 6s” to gain a winning advantage. Recently, players such as
Shahar Shenhar have been experimenting with a bona fide “5,” Precursor Golem. Go for the Throat and Disfigure are more common than Doom Blade.
Lightning Bolt seems less popular in Valakut than it used to be. Journey to Nowhere doesn’t affect him much. No question, this is a fine time for
Precursor Golem, which combines with Lotus Cobra to present a two-turn clock on the third turn!
Savvy players will question if this strong positioning will continue, as more and more artifact hate gets adopted. One factor to remember is that RUG
has no other Disenchant targets, making it a risky move to board in such hate. That said, he is still vulnerable to the maindeck hate that’s going to
rise (though he does have a natural resistance to Tumble Magnet). I have to admit I keep thinking about Precursor Golem in Tezzeret or Machine Red, but
I have not yet found the right formula to take advantage of these pairings.
Thrun, the Last Troll is a natural fit for RUG decks, at least in the sideboard, but he’s really not that amazing of a dude. As we asked when Mirrodin
Besieged first came out, who actually loses to a Thrun in Standard? He’s fine, sure, but he is just this guy. He is swell at picking up swords,
however…
Sword of Feast or Famine is another fine addition that vies for the spot of “5.” Just as Lotus Cobra into Precursor Golem threatens to win a game on
its own, so too does Lotus Cobra into Sword of Feast and Famine. For more commentary on such antics, feel free to reread the gushing Sword play above
in the Caw-Blade section. The lessons here are two-fold. First, more and more decks are packing artifacts that didn’t use to, and Sword of Feast and
Famine will be everywhere, not just Caw-Blade. Even decks from Faeries to Bant to Naya, in Extended, are adopting it!
Tier 1.5:
Now that we have seen that Quest, Boros, and RUG all make compelling arguments for their status as Tier One decks, let’s look at a few a decks that can
also make a claim but haven’t quite proven themselves on a large scale.
Creatures (25)
- 4 Bloodghast
- 4 Gatekeeper of Malakir
- 4 Vampire Lacerator
- 4 Kalastria Highborn
- 4 Pulse Tracker
- 3 Viscera Seer
- 2 Captivating Vampire
Lands (23)
Spells (12)
Sideboard
Up first, we have old-school pro, poker superstar Noah Boeken, with stock Vampires. As predicted, the only change to his list was the addition of Go
for the Throat, a card whose printing has actually probably hurt Vampires more than helped it on account of more opponents with good removal spells
against you, instead of dead ones (Doom Blade).
Vampires had a strange tournament, winning just under 50% of its matches but somehow posting a surprisingly high success rate. What was it about
Vampires that caused so many to fail with it, while many others achieved success? I know that if this were a blue deck, we would all assume that it was
because of the skill of the pilots. After all, if a blue deck had this kind of result, people would just say “Oh yeah, the good blue players are just
way better at it than the bad ones.” Could it be that Vampires is actually a particularly challenging deck to optimize? I can’t say for certain, but
we’re talking about a small enough sample size that it could just be a sticky pile of variance that we accidentally stepped in.
So what is holding Vampires back? A record of 9-22 (29%) against Caw-Blade is about as fatal a flaw as you can have in this format! Vampires did well
against Valakut, U/B, and Kuldotha Red, but who didn’t? Maybe that’s what separated the successful Vampires players from the unsuccessful ones (not
everyone got paired up against Caw-Blade!). I imagine that Vampires will make a comeback once the format evolves a little bit (less Caw-Blade, more
artifact kill, and a return of some traditional decks), but I wouldn’t touch this deck with a ten-foot pole in the next two weeks. It’s just the wrong
time.
Creatures (26)
- 4 Kabira Evangel
- 4 Kazandu Blademaster
- 4 Oran-Rief Survivalist
- 4 Akoum Battlesinger
- 4 Hada Freeblade
- 3 Harabaz Druid
- 3 Talus Paladin
Lands (24)
Spells (10)
Pro Tour Paris was peppered with rogue aggressive strategies, and on the whole, they performed quite well. Just as we saw the World Championships
filled with successful rogue decks and unsuccessful mainstream decks, we’re seeing a horrible repetition of that phenomenon. Modern Standard truly is a
battlefield that provides major advantages to rogue deckbuilders and those that tune decks that are a little under the radar. It becomes so easy for
people to slant their decks against whatever they aim for that there is a huge payoff for bringing something to the table that people aren’t aiming
for.
Do I think Allies is the next big thing? No, no I don’t; however this list is a good example of the sorts of rogue aggro strategies that performed well
in Paris. What is of particular interest to me is the Tuktuk Scrapper. I still fantasize about an Ally deck with four Tuktuk Scrappers and Liquimetal
Coating. There are enough artifacts these days that the Scrapper would rarely be “dead,” and in fact you could even use more artifact destruction than
just this to ensure that Liquimetal Coating is a live draw. Mirrodin Besieged doesn’t really bring much to the table for Allies; however M12 surely
will…
Creatures (2)
Planeswalkers (7)
Lands (22)
Spells (29)
A breakdown of the card choices and theory behind the design can be found here. As for its
actual performance, there is no question Grixis Tezzeret was one of the best performers of the event, winning 65%+ of its matches, despite a third of
its pilots getting deck registration error losses. So why is this only Tier 1.5? With only three pilots, the sample size is just not big enough to say
much. A single pilot with a good performance can distort the records too much. We can’t even get a good picture of what its matchups were really like,
other than it absolutely crushes U/B, as the sample size was just too small. Now, that said, we can glean a lot of interesting information if we dig a
little deeper.
What if we stop for a moment and consider that Martin Juza, Lucas Blohon, Raul Porojan, and Lino Burgold all played U/B Tezzeret in Paris? Yes, they
played a very different build, with a combo finish and quite different matchups (they lose to Caw-Blade, whereas Grixis loses to Valakut), but there
are also a lot of similarities. Next, let’s add in Christian Huttenberger, who played a very U/B control-esque build. Looking at all of the Tezzeret
decks that we can find, we start to get a better picture of the power of the basic strategy. For reference, here is Huttenberger’s build:
Creatures (2)
Planeswalkers (7)
Lands (21)
Spells (30)
- 1 Mana Leak
- 2 Spell Pierce
- 4 Everflowing Chalice
- 3 Inquisition of Kozilek
- 4 Preordain
- 3 Mox Opal
- 3 Tumble Magnet
- 2 Throne of Geth
- 3 Stoic Rebuttal
- 3 Ratchet Bomb
- 2 Ichor Wellspring
Sideboard
Uncovering useful data about these eight decks is quite challenging, as the five U/B builds were just recorded as U/B Control during the event. This is
a shame, as it would be very enlightening to have a nice clear picture about their performance as a whole. Still, all is not lost. We have the records
of Lucas (7-3) and Huttenberger (7-2-1), and I had an opportunity to speak with Juza about his record. He 5-0ed Day One; then after 1-5ing the draft
portion, he was on life tilt and unable to win even a single Constructed game on Day 2, before dropping in the second-to-last round (5-4). As for the
other two Czechs, a little research reveals Constructed records of: Raul Porojan 1-4 and Lino Burgold 4-6. Somewhat ironically, while both Lucas and
Juza crushed the first Constructed portion before stumbling in the drafts, Porojan and Lino stumbled in Constructed, while 8-1ing the drafts they were
in.
With eight players that I know of having played Tezzeret, the total numbers come out to:
|
Archetypes |
% of Field |
Players |
% with 21+ Points |
Success Rate |
Match Win % |
|
Various Tezzeret Decks |
2% |
8 |
6% |
38% |
59% |
Â
Keep in mind that despite the various Tezzeret builds being played by such a small percentage of the field, it still produced such a high success rate
that it could be considered above average in dominance (A “% with 21+ Points” score above 5%). Add this to match-win percentages and success rates that
are through the roof, and we’re seeing a much more reliable picture of a strategy that was second only to Caw-Blade on the weekend.
While Vampires is fatally flawed against Caw-Blade and will likely struggle to break into the Tier 1 and the various rogue aggro decks by their nature
need to fly under the radar, Tezzeret presents a compelling argument that they are actually an outright Tier 1 strategy.
The X-factors to consider here are numerous, however. First of all, it’s certainly possible that someone else played Tezzeret at the Pro Tour. I can
find no trace of any other pilots; however there’s a disproportionate amount of coverage of players with winning records. As such, it’s quite possible
that someone I had never heard of showed up with their own Tezzeret list and quietly 1-4ed the Constructed portion before failing to make Day 2.
Perhaps Huttenberger had a teammate with the same 75.
Second of all, these three Tezzeret decks are all quite different from each other. Grixis is a bit like the RUG deck; the Czechs played what amounts to
a Polymorph deck, and Huttenberger played a U/B Control deck. They have many similarities, but combining them to form a bigger picture is somewhat
dubious.
Finally, the meta is going to shift. While there is no denying that Tezzeret performed exceptionally in Paris, we don’t yet have evidence that it will
stand up to a prepared format that’s aware of it. Personally, I imagine that it will survive but not dominate the format the way Caw-Blade will, as
it’s not quite as resilient. Additionally, it’s quite hard to imagine what the Tezzeret decks of tomorrow will look like, as they’re sure to morph to
match the demands of the format.
These factors combine to provide enough doubt about its durability that we’re probably best off classifying Tezzeret as Tier 1.5 at the moment. Which
force will win out? Will the inherent power in the deck and obvious sex appeal of Tezzeret lead to its becoming a major player? Or will the high degree
of difficulty in tuning a Tezzeret list scare players away that have only the lists from two weeks ago to go on? The SCG Opens in the coming weeks will
be very revealing!
Tier 2:
I’m not going to spend too much time of the Tier 2 decks, as they all underperformed. Still, they all had redeeming qualities and could be made to
work, especially with a proficient pilot, and are listed here for reference.
Creatures (13)
Lands (28)
Spells (19)
Sideboard
The former boogieman of the format, Valakut once again disappoints (as it did in Worlds), lending more credence to the idea that Valakut is a deck that
crushes weaker players but can be consistently beaten with expert play and preparation. From my perspective, I think Valakut’s continued poor
performance is heavily linked to its having been public enemy number one. With so many Spreading Seas, Tectonic Edges, Goblin Ruinblasters, Acidic
Slimes, Inquisitions of Kozilek, Duresses, Memoricides, Mind Rots, Swords of Feast and Famine, Flashfreezes, Stoic Rebuttals, Deprives, Spell Pierces,
and more, not to mention hyper-aggro decks and combo kills from decks like Forgemaster-Tezz, the format was entirely set up to beat Valakut. Add to
this poorly tuned Valakut lists that totally shifted to Green Sun’s Zenith in an effort to have the best possible matchups against the goldfish and the
decks of 2010, not to mention the average Pro Player club level of Valakut players being significantly lower than that of many other archetypes, and we
are seeing a lot of evidence that Valakut has been operating at a handicap.
While Valakut did well against most of the bad decks, it had some real problems:
Caw-Blade- 42%
Vampires- 41%
Quest- 36%
Tempered Steel– 33%
Boros- 33%
Infect- 30%
RUG- 22%
Keep in mind Valakut was the most played deck, and we have so much data that we can be pretty sure of the reliability, at least with regards to
Caw-Blade, Vampires, Quest, Boros, and RUG, which each featured between 25-107 results. Tempered Steel and Infect featured only nine and ten matchups
respectively but still paint a dark picture for Valakut. To make matters worse, U/B Control was actually the source of a big improvement in Valakut’s
win percentage, as they managed to split exactly 70-70, helping push Valakut a bit closer to 50%!
While there is little question that Valakut was among the worst possible choices for Paris, in the future, I am seeing Valakut players that remember
that they can use Lightning Bolt in their maindeck. I am seeing an Acidic Slime to tutor for making its way into the maindeck. I am seeing Summoning
Trap making a comeback (though still using Green Sun’s Zenith) and less of an infatuation with Thrun, the Last Troll. I am not saying I would play it,
but people will. You know the type.
(Just a note, this is friendly ribbing. I do not actually think that people who play Valakut are scumbags, but it is a popular joke on the circuit
that people who play the most popular deck, when the most popular deck is a non-blue deck that people “hate,” are scumbags.
Other examples in history include the widely accepted facts that only scumbags play Dredge or Jund. It is not actually an indictment of the
players; it is that decks like Dredge, Jund, and Valakut are “bad guys” that top Pros tend to avoid, making it somewhat romantic to paint them as
especially villain-like. Top Pros tend to not feel this way about “bad guys” like Faeries, Five-Color Control, U/W Control, Next Level Blue, or
Teachings, as they are all blue decks, and Top Pros tend to prefer and give special treatment to blue decks. Part of this is about blue being the
best color in Magic, and part of it is that there is more natural overlap between what spikes are into and what blue is about, but it’s probably
more relevant that blue creates the illusion that every blue deck is harder to play, which just isn’t true.
Besides, the biggest factor is probably just history. Once the joke goes on long enough, it becomes the reality. The reality is most tournament
players consider themselves the heroes when they play Jund or Valakut or whatever and consider the Blue Mages the enemies. It is only natural for
the reverse to be true.)
Make no mistake; I predict a Valakut comeback, though it’s more likely to be like the late Jund comebacks, where it’s no longer the format-defining
monster it once was. Just as Standard was once a format where a good deck was a good deck because it beat Jund, we’re seeing some of that same
experience, as everyone seems to have gained enough weapons to compete with it. Even Grixis Tezzeret, which was supposed to be weakest against Valakut
managed to beat it 2-1 in the event (Yay n=3!). History would seem to suggest that Valakut always performs much better at SCG Opens than it does at
Premier Level Events, so if you’re entering one or even if FNM is your battlefield, you have to be ready for it.
Creatures (3)
Planeswalkers (5)
Lands (26)
Spells (26)
The other former top dog of the format, U/B Control, has been decidedly overturned by Caw-Blade, primarily because of the Sword we have spoken so much
about. To be fair, however, it was not just Caw-Blade where U/B suffered. Featuring almost no good matchups, U/B as an archetype is salvaged only by
the disparity in performance between good players with a well-tuned list, which seems to suggest the deck has aged well, and random players playing
the 2010 model. Much of the U/B spotlight was stolen by the Tezzeret decks, but this actually raises a good point. While six players managed records of
7-3 or better among the 100 pilots, two of those players were actually among the five Tezzeret decks that were lumped into U/B Control. Once you
subtract the Tezzeret players from the equation, we see only 4 out of 95 pilots managed to succeed at acquiring 21+ points in Standard, dropping the
stat below the “average” threshold, firmly into “bad.”
As players like Adam Yurchick, Josh Ravitz, Chiffley Cole, and David Saunders demonstrate, as well as players like Kyle Boggemes (who 4-1ed Standard
with the same deck as Yurchick, before 0-3ing the draft), U/B can win. Personally, despite my love of control, I feel like you’re putting yourself at
too much of a disadvantage out of the gate and should avoid this deck, for now. To be fair, it is certainly not an embarrassing choice, but you have to
really want to play control to make it worth it.
Creatures (30)
- 4 Ornithopter
- 4 Steel Overseer
- 4 Memnite
- 4 Glint Hawk
- 4 Vector Asp
- 2 Phyrexian Revoker
- 4 Ardent Recruit
- 4 Signal Pest
Lands (18)
Spells (12)
Sideboard
The poorly named “Hawkward” deck was the butt of no end of jokes, as some even suggested that Sam Black had the most impressive performance of the
tournament, managing to Top 32 with this beast. As the numbers have come in, we see a somewhat disappointing match-win percentage, as well as stories
of Hall of Famers bombing out of the event. This may grab the headlines, but there is more to the picture. Roughly one out of nine players achieved
records of 7-3 or better in Standard. Tempered Steel was played by exactly nine players, two of which pulled it off. Is this just a testament to their
skill? Mild variance? Unclear. Still, it is food for thought, as the archetype seems to have some merit, as well as some room to improve. Unfortunately
for it, I am seeing a massive increase in artifact hate in the weeks to come, and the surprise value is no more. Prediction: Probably won’t make the
cut but will be an important deck to remember come Block season…
Creatures (10)
Planeswalkers (6)
Lands (26)
Spells (18)
Sideboard
There has been a long-standing tension in the format with RUG and BUG. The BUG deck is obviously very structurally similar to RUG but with a better
Titan, different removal, worse mana, and a sideboard featuring worse sweepers and land destruction but a discard package. Thus far, RUG has continued
to outperform BUG, and Paris was no different. The most interesting aspect of BUG’s performance in Paris was that two out of the six pilots managed to
achieve a record of 7-3 or better, despite the overall win percentage of the deck being a mere 46%. This suggests a deck where the small sample size is
making it impossible for us to glean much, as there is basically no middle of the road, just two great performances and four poor ones. I’m one of
those who sees BUG as a bad RUG, but I respect it, and it does fly squarely under the radar. It will take more research to determine the true power
level of this archetype, but it’s one to keep in mind.
That just about does it for today — but first a convenient compiling of suggested tiers from Paris (though keep in mind, this is purely based on the
performances there, not the predicted performances of tomorrow).
Tier 1: Caw-Blade, Quest/GW, Boros, RUG
Tier 1.5: Grixis Tezz, Vampires, Rogue Aggro decks
Tier 2: Valakut, U/B, Tempered Steel, BUG
Tier 2.5: Kuldotha Red, Classic U/W, Infect
Terrible: Green/Eldrazi Ramp, RDW, Elves, Misc Control
Personally, I recommend sticking to the top two tiers, unless you’re bringing a homebrew. This is definitely a format where rogue decks can shine.
Whatever you play, make sure you beat Caw-Blade. Not only was it the best performing deck in Paris, it absolutely crushed DC, as you will no doubt hear
more about as the week goes on. This is the defining strategy of the format and will be the most popular strategy in the weeks to come.
It’s an exciting time in Standard. Things are changing, and dynamic situations always contain opportunity for the clever.
Okay, next week, Extended, for realz this time!
Patrick Chapin
“The Innovator”Â
