Subject: PQ-Rome Report: Indy Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 22:13:02 -0400 From: "Theron L. Martin" To: The Dojo On October 10th Indianapolis saw its only PQ event of the Rome cycle. Held at the Convention Center attached to the RCA Dome (a facility large enough to hold a convention the size of Gen Con or Origins, should either ever feel inclined to relocate) in downtown Indy, it saw an attendance of a mere 53 players, most of them regular tournament-goers. More significantly, it also featured the first public mention of the split between T.O. George Pratt and his Simply Magic organization and long-time partner and sponsor The Goal Line, the team that has run all Indy prereleases and nearly all of its other major MTG events to date. What this means for MTG players in the Indiana area is that The Goal Line is no longer involved in running major Magic tournaments and should not be contacted for preregistration or other details concerning Simply Magic events. Back to the business of the tournament itself. As expected, the field at the PQ was moderate to heavy with weenie decks of all varieties, though the amount of Sligh was lower than is traditional for this area. Aside from weenie, the field was generally what you might expect - lots of Living Death, Awakening, Counter- Phoenix, a couple of Humility decks, and the random monoblue deck here and there - or at least so it appeared on the surface. Once you dove beneath the surface, you could find a lot of people experimenting with new deck types and significantly altered versions of standard archtypes, as you will see below. I personally had been using a Bridge/Grindstone-based control deck which does quite well against weenie decks, but it's had to fight for its wins against Living Death and Awakenings, so I went looking for something else that was strong against Death, Awakening, and Counter-Phoenix, and could at least bear up against most weenie decks. While assembling my Mid-Season Breakdown, I came across a listing for a U/B heavy control deck. It caught my eye, so I took it, modified it a little, and reworked the sideboard. In its current incarnation, it simply shouldn't lose a match to a Survival/Nightmate/Death deck and performs quite well against Awakenings. I knew weenie speed could be a problem for it, so I sideboarded heavily against it, including some Super Secret Tech against Counter-Phoenix and, to an extent, against weenie. Since I may be playing the deck at a qualifier next week, I won't list it now, but I will say that it plays with two Portcullises *standard* (they can screw more than just LD) and a couple of other cards you wouldn't normally expect to see in a serious constructed deck. Normally at this stage of the report a reporter will describe how they did throughout the tournament. I'm not going to do that, because some of the ways I lost were either extraordinarily bad luck or incomprehensibly bizarre. Two examples: 1) I start, play Island. Opponent plays Mountain, Jackal Pup. Naturally one is thinking Sligh at this point, so I use my second Island to cast a Legacy's Allure instead of holding on a Counterspell. Opponent plays Swamp, Lotus Petal, Ritual, Hatred for 18, attack. HUH?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? 2) vs. pure WW, I had two Dread of Nights in play and two Nauseas in hand and *still* lose. (Explaining how this happened would take too long, but it involves Cataclysm, lack of countering spells at one point, and lack of a third land or second blue mana source at another.) 3) three times during the tournament, I play WW, go first, drop a second turn Legacy's Allure, then watch my opponent lay a second turn Soltari Visionary. AAAARGGH! Casting a turn two Visionary shouldn't be that probable. The one highlight of my day was getting to beat Dave Petersen [sp?], the reigning Midwest Regional Champion, in the fourth round. I was frustrated by not being able to get any non-land permanents in the first duel against him, and Dave was frustrated in the second and third duels by not being able to get reliable black mana sources. Still, he was running Death, and my deck simply shouldn't lose to even a well-played Death deck. (This was kind of ironic in that Dave first learned to appreciate and respect Recurring/Survival/ Death decks when he saw me play my prototype in the U.S. Open last July). After six rounds, the Top Eight decks are as follows: 1. Chris Hamm, 5-1, B/R Beatdown 2. Leonard Richardson, 4-0-2, Rude Awakening 3. Tim McKenna, 4-0-2, Counter-Phoenix 4. Ped Bun, 4-0-2, Infinite Loop Death (see below) 5. Brad Taylor, 4-1-1, traditional Death 6. Sam Gilly, 4-1-1, monoblue Medallion/Tradewind control 7. Jeff Burton, 4-1-1, WW 8. Robert Gardner, 3-0-3 (yes, that's right!), LD Warp variant (see below) DECK NOTES: Chris Hamm's deck was entirly 2cc or less. It used a Suicide Black-type creature base, Acidic Slivers, Bolts, a touch of white - oh, and 4 Amoks standard. Don't laugh! They were actually very strong in this amazingly fast and lethal deck. Leonard's deck used an altered creature base; I promised I wouldn't reveal exactly what he did with it, but one of the traditional standby creatures for Awakenings decks was totally absent from his deck. Tim McKenna's deck ran much lighter on counters than C-P normally does in favor of standard Drifters, Silver Wyvern, and a full complement of Allures (a move which doubtless made him much stronger against weenie decks but more questionable against other control decks). The WW and Brad Taylor's deck were both standard for their types, and Sam Gilly's monoblue was Tradewind and buyback spell oriented, again fairly standard. The variant Death decks deserve a separate mention. Robert Gardner's version actually used only one LD but instead used four Time Warps. It focused on creating an infinite turn-taking loop with the Time Warp, Anarchist, and Recurring Nightmare, although it also had a fairly traditional (albeit lighter) LD creature mix. It also used a few counters and a Scrivener standard. Contrarily, Ped's deck used a full complement of Deaths but only one Nightmare. He also used some non-standard creature choices for Death decks, such as Shard Phoenix (one of the most under-used creatures in Death decks, IMO), Workhorse, and Blood Pets. Why the latter two, you ask? Consider that when two Pets, a Workhorse, an Anarchist, an Altar of Dementia, and a Living Death are combined, you have an infinite loop designed to mill the opponent into oblivion. This combo isn't terribly difficult to pull off with the aid of Survivals and Scroll Racks, either, and with a good draw can fire off relatively fast - turn four is not impossible. QUARTERFINALS Sam Gilly (monoblue) defeats Tim McKenna (C-P) 2-0 in a match where Tim was color-screwed for red in the first duel and blue in the second. (After seeing their deck lists, I predicted Sam to win this even without the color-screws, though.) Ped Bun (Loop LD) defeats Brad Taylor (traditional LD) 2-0, with Ped winning both duels with his combo, I believe. Chris Hamm (B/R Amok) beat Robert Gardner (Warp LD) 2-1, with Robert notching his sole win without his combo. Leonard Richardson (Awakening) defeats Jeff Burton (WW) 2-1. I want to comment on Leonard's match for the moment. He had mana problems the first duel and got totally thumped, and appeared to be on the same track in the second duel. Jeff played Cataclysm to apparently secure the game and reduced Leonard to 4 life - and then Leonard pull off one of the biggest and most unexpected recoveries I have ever witnessed in a MTG duel, starting by top-decking three lands in a row after the Cataclysm. Jeff was never able to do another point of Damage to Leonard the rest of the game. Their third duel came down to Jeff not having a Visionary on turn three to counter the three Allures Leonard had drawn early. SEMIFINALS Ped Bun defeats Chris Hamm 2-1, with Chris solidly controlling the first duel and the other two being very close but ultimately in Ped's favor. (Chris did an average of 8-10 points of damage to himself in each of these duels.) Leonard topped Sam Gilly 2-0, with several play mistakes probably costing Sam the first duel. The second duel came down to Sam simply not drawing creatures - although he came within seven or eight cards of milling Leonard out with two Grindstones. FINALS Ped Bun defeats Leonard 2-1 for the qualifying slot. I didn't watch this match, but Leonard later told me that the deciding play in the third duel was a near-lockdown by Ped using Thrull Surgeon. COMMENTS Leonard made what I thought was a very interesting point in a discussion I had with him later in the evening: a lot of players, even many experienced ones, don't fully understand how TradeAwakening work and thus don't know how to play against it. People, if you're going to be serious about playing in the Rath Cycle environment (or even in post-Nov. 1st Constructed, for that matter), build this deck and study its mechanics! You're going to run into it sooner or later. I also think it's interesting to note that, in Ped's run through the single elim rounds, he didn't face anyone who sideboarded Portcullis against him. That is significant because Portcullis ruins his day just as badly as it does for any LD deck. Finally, I want to end with some of my own commentary on the "scrub controversy" that's been debated recently on The Dojo. Top players are complaining that a novice player can copy a Dojo deck, go to a tournament, and beat a top-rate veteran player. Yes, that can and does happen, but if it's happening to certain people with regularity, then I think their choice of deck selection and/or their skill level have to be reevaluated. Players who are truly scrubs (i.e. they either haven't been in the game long enough to have mastered the finer nuances or simply aren't capable of it) can only beat a more experienced player with consistency if the more experienced player consistently has a poor deck match-up, and even then I'd question how often that could possibly happen. Maybe that player you thought was a scrub is actually the next up-and-coming Jon Finkel or Olle Rade. Even if the player is a true scrub, I wouldn't begrudge them a lucky run. I've personally seen it happen several times. The other big complaint by top players is the free posting of deck listings on places like The Dojo. Why is that such a big deal? Since most deckbuilding geniuses don't post their decks before they first see use, any deck copied off the Dojo is generally one step behind state-of-the-art deck tech. That means that a top player using one of those decks, or preparing to play against those decks, is one step ahead of someone who merely copies the deck. (If he isn't, then that means he must be using a Dojo deck himself!) This should be enough to give any truly good and experienced player an edge. It certainly won't guarantee victory in a given situation, but *over the long run* that edge usually means the better player will perform better than the scrub. Also, how many top performers from the past year can honestly claim to have sole creative credit for the decks they used to place highly in major events? Most top Constructed decks anymore are either lent to the person that wins with them, copied in part or wholesale from another source, or developed as part of a team effort. Before any of you top players out there rag on a scrub for copying a Dojo deck, consider how often you copy decks, borrow deck designs, or steal ideas from other sources. - The "Big T" (One step above being a scrub, one step below being considered a good player.)