Both versions played (by Brian Weissman and Chris Pantages) went 4-1-1. The deck does poorly against Counter Post, but Pantages and Weissman correctly guessed that the field at Nationals would be 'post poor.

Brian had these comments on the deck: "I was happy to assuage all skepticism about my deck with my 4-1-1 showing. Actually, my record would have been 5-1 had I not been cheesed over by Henry Stern. He was watching my third round match against Brett Quorn, and in the third game, with about thirty seconds left in the match and five cards left in his library, Brett, the true sportsman that he is, tried to concede. Now, this situation would have been fine and dandy had I been playing the very familiar Turbo Stasis (against which MANY people have conceded in the middle of a third game), but, because my deck was new, Brett's concession looked like collusion to Henry, and he wouldn't allow it. I tried to argue that the concession was totaed to argue that the concession was totally justified, since there were three Howling Mines in play, and I was going to Recall for four Abeyances on my next turn, but Henry wouldn't listen. He gave me the whole "players can only concede when they have a distinct strategic reason for doing so" bit, and I was screwed. Oh well, I at least know that I went 5-1 :-). If I were to play the deck again, I would lose the Armageddon and make it 60 cards. While I feel like this deck is nearly invincible against everything but a well tuned counterpost deck, I must stress that it is extremely taxing to play, and that it isn't really viable unless you have ninety minute rounds. Every match that went to three games used up almost all of the allotted time, and I didn't finish one of them."

Brian Weissman