I also want to point out that there is negative atheism (I do not believe in a God due to there being no evidence to support the god claim) and positive atheism (There is no god)
One of them does not make a claim, but rather rejects the god claim as baseless and without evidence. The other makes a positive claim about the existence of god one way or another. (In this case, a positive claim that a god does not exist)
Anyone making a claim of any kind, is therefore subjected to the burden of proof. It doesn't matter if your position is more likely or not. If you are to make a claim of any kind, be it about the existence (or non-existence) of something, the burden lies upon the claimant. ALWAYS.
In the scenario pages back, where one user claimed the existence of god, and the next called the belief in a diety a lie... BOTH people made claims.
first claim: God exists.
Second Claim: That is a Lie.
These two claims are independent of one another, and both, have a burden of proof that neither has provided.
The burden of proof lies with religion. Not with Atheism.
so junk reanimator just placed 1st at scg orlando open. 3 in the top 8.
classic series boxborough also had 2 junk decks in the top 8 for what it's worth.
The deck has been around and winning everything for the past 3 weeks now. I think if it were anywhere near feasible to hate this deck out of the meta it would have been done so by now.
The only matchup I notice that this deck loses to consistently is bant enchantments. Only problem there is that bant enchantments loses to pretty much everything else.
That said, I've been testing against bant enchantments and I've found that slum reaper does major work against that deck. Turn 2 lingering souls into T3 slum reaper with a blink or unburial rites once or twice shuts that deck down pretty hard. We already had abrupt decay + acidic slime to take care of their enchantments.
I'm not advocating to jam slum reaper into your sideboards just yet, but should you find yourself in a situation where bant enchant is a big part of your meta, then a couple slum reaper out of the board is just what the doctor ordered.
If you've been able to get to turn 4 to acidic slime anything, you are already gonna win. the deck needs an early answer, before 10-12 damage comes across on turn 3.
I split the finals of an SCG IQ yesterday, when I get home I'll post my list and match ups and thoughts. I don't really remember exactly how each matchup went but I do remember certain specific situations.
-Have you actually played with the Troll? Do you know how good regeneration is right now? There's absolutely no reason why you would need to rely on Resto in G1 to win you the game when the hate just isn't there.
I do play troll, I never said it wasn't good, I just said it wouldn't win games. and regeneration doesn't do jack against tragic slip and Rancor. Restoration angel can win games on its own, lotleth troll can't.
-Again, I'm not saying don't play any Restos in the 75, but having more than 2 in the main detracts from your plan. The SB is there for a reason. In fact, I think postboard, Resto is one of your better threats.
I think being able to play every game like a SB game makes your threats more diversified, and makes your win % in game 1 more likely, again, I'm not saying don't run troll, i run 2 in my 75. Again, I'm not saying lingering souls is bad, I'm saying that restoration angel is better.
-I can't see how gaining value out of every single card in your deck is bad. What's bad about it? I said the MAIN plan of the deck should be to WIN on the back of Rites. There's nothing bad about gaining value off Rites.
I agree that gaining value off rites is the best plan, but it can't be the only plan. Lingering Souls and Trolls won't win games as much as restoration angel and thragtusk, and knowing that every plan you have can just as likely win you the game is a very good thing that a lot of decks don't have.
-Also, lingering souls doesn't have near the impact on Naya blitz (a bad matchup) as turn 1 dork, turn 2 healer, turn 3 angel. I can argue just as well that the Healers are bad against everything else, what's the point?
Healers aren't as bad against random 2/2's and aren't as bad against a reckoner, and a healer/angel Races better against a reckoner.
I agree that Jund with MD Seals will be problematic, but then I would either play more Decays main, or just play other decks. You're playing this deck more as a midrange deck, which is fine. But why play fair when you don't have to?
But am I really playing it fair? Being able to play off your deck and out of your graveyard isn't really fair at all. The difference is that I'm not at the same extreme as you, which means while my blowouts are fewer than yours, my deck still gives me the ability to play multiple angles of attack and allow me to outplay my opponent a lot more than the linear version. Also, this means that I don't have to worry about graveyard hate because I can do other things until I find my abrupt decays or acidic slimes.
You're trying to absolve a man who betrayed an innocent man and lead him to die. Ok.
So what are you trying to say exactly? He didn't betray the innocent man? Nope, we know he did.
That the innocent man didn't die? Nope, we know he did.
That his betrayal didn't lead the innocent man to die? Nope, we know it did.
So where's the absolution exactly?
Jesus was not innocent. He was a wanted criminal, remember? Judas gave information to the capture of a wanted man. Claiming to be the son of god was a very blasphemous act, and that's what Jesus claimed himself to be.
No one runs Rest in Peace MD. The whole point of the deck in G1 is you want the Rites to be the focal point of your plan, not a card that gives you random value here and there. What I mean by that, is that when you cast it, you just win the game. Having the Troll/LS will increase the chance of doing that, while blinking your Thragtusks with Restos will not. Postboard, things obviously change depending on the MU. If you think they have RiP, then you can adjust your gameplan accordingly.
I wouldn't say Sam Black's list is perfect, but not playing Troll/LS is not correct.
@Novajoe, grats on the top 4. Your list is very similar to what I'm running atm. One thing I've wondered is the necessity of having Caverns against decks with counters, do you think they are needed?
So what happens when you don't draw Unburial Rites? And yes, it does happen. Having a deck in any game (even game one) that relies heavily on one specific situation/card is bad never the best way to go in a midrange deck. I can't see how gaining value out of every single card in your deck is bad. What's bad about it? I Still have the ability to turn 4 an Angel, but I don't need to because I can gain significant value out of every single card in my deck without being overly redundant, rather than relying on staying alive till I can hit an Unburial Rites. Also, lingering souls doesn't have near the impact on Naya blitz (a bad matchup) as turn 1 dork, turn 2 healer, turn 3 angel.
Also, on MODO I have ran into plenty of jund lists running MD Ground seal, and wouldn't be surprised if paper catches on to it. it's generally good against every deck in the format outside of Naya and the mirror, but it still cantrips so its not a total bust.
With all of the testing I've done, I'm more inclined to drop BTE than gyre sage. IMO gyre sage is probably the closest thing the format has to tarmogoyf, except it can ramp too.
BTE to me just seems like a dead card outside of its interactions with gyre sage.
It might keep it's worth simply because it can really help to stabilize an early aggro rush on the draw, but I'm going to search and see if there's maybe a better option.
Says the guy who was insta-cutting it a week ago.
This is the point exactly. Without testing nobody has an idea what a card is capable of.
You aren't dismissing the list instantly, but you are banking a lot of your opinion on his reputation by your own admission.
Not necessarily. I honestly have no opinion on the deck, or Gyre sage in general. To me it's just another naya deck. All I'm saying is that a player or deckbuilder of Saito's caliber doesn't put cards in a deck without careful consideration and thought, so there must be a reason, even if we don't see it instantly. To dismiss something as bad based purely on appearance without any real general testing is narrow-minded.
Saito probably played 50+ matches with the deck before posting it. You wanna dismiss it after 10? C'mon.
it surprises me how many on here will look at a list like that and defend it just because saito made it. If anyone else would have posted that list they would have been laughed out of the forum.
None of saito's current standard lists hold any credentials either outside of what... winning an FNM or 4-0ing a random daily? But just because saito made them they must be gold... because he's saito.
It's not defending the list, it's not instantly dismissing it. The fact is, Saito is a great deckbuilder, and while not every deck he puts out is a stellar one, his abilites and successes earn him that respect. When you take your deck and win grand Prix's and top 8 Pro Tours people won't be so quick to dismiss you either. It's called a reputation.
I've got at least 10 matches in with the deck. Gyre sage is a horrible accelerator. The only good he does in the deck is if you get stuck on 3 lands. The only reason to even play him over avacyn's pilgrim is because he ends up being more than a 1/1 body.
say you play him turn 2. Then Turn 3 you get to play a guy and get a counter on him. Then you get a turn 4 thragtusk if you hit all of your land drops.
Avacyn's pilgrim allows the same clock, except he does it while also allowing turn 2 reckoner/smiter or lets you do your BTE shenanigans on turn 2 instead of waiting till turn 3.
Did you ever consider that you're playing the deck wrong, and try a different approach? I don't know how much you could possibly know about a deck in only ten matches. I'm also not really sure what Gyre Sage has to do with the amount of land you draw. Seems irrelevant. Also, the specific reason you play him over Avacyn's Pilgrim is because he can become more than a 1/1. A 3/4 for 2 mana is nothing to scoff at, especially when the deck strategy is to generate a dominating field position, not race.
I would personally rather have a 2/3, 2/2 and Domri on turn 3, than a 1/1, 2/2 and Domri on turn 2. It's his ability to get you into an overpowering mid game against other aggro decks that warrants his inclusion, not his ability to accelerate or race.
So question for everyone here. Has anyone tried dropping the door package along with the lanterns etc. and just going for a 4 of omniscience and unexpected results? Run a few more fogs etc. to last, but t3 or 4 unexpected could work. Maybe this plan might be more effective even though it may seem more random? Obv you wouldn't run the X cast spells, or have those in the sideboard.
The results would be too random I think. The problem with those cards, while they can be powerful, they can not be as well. Magic is already a game of variance, you wouldn't play cards that flip coins or or anything else, so why play unexpected results.
For example, I watched Travis Woo tonight UR into an omniscience on turn 4, and win. Then I watched him dud into a Supreme verdict. Then watched him dud into something else. It's too random, even in a deck built to exploit it.
And there is absolutely no way in this format I wouldn't run Sphinx's Revolution.
I have 2 aurelias fury over the rakdos's in my deck. How do you find the rakdos? maybe ill do a 2/1 split. I just like the semi silence as well as added for with tapping on the fury. I usually only pump it to two, maybe 3. I also run elixer main too, the 5 life helps.
3/3 splits on teminus to supreme verdicts as well.
Against the midrange and control decks it's house. knowing that you can afford to wait to wrath them then next turn rakdos them without them most likely being able to put a lot of pressure just gives you so much time to basically do whatever you want against them, baring insane top decks. It pretty much gets the job done on the spot.
Abrupt decay is just so overall good. It deals with Detention sphere and Silverblade paladin just the same, and is very versatile in every matchup.
Took this list to a top 4 split at my FNM, 42 people.
I don't remember how each matchup played out specifically, but I wen't 3-1-1 and played:
round 1: UWR midrange (2-0)
Round 2: Naya Midrange (1-2)
Round 3: Boros (2-0)
Round 4: Bant control (2-1)
Round 5: ID
Quarterfinals: Same Naya list from second round. (2-0)
Split top 4.
Some things I've noticed about the deck:
1. in an aggro dominated field, Urban evolution is clunky and slow. I'd almost it rather be a fog or another sweeper.
2. increasing ambition was a house against any midrange to control deck.
3. Rhox Faithmender is a beast against red decks, even through a skullcrack.
4. Omni-Borbo was consistently good.
5. The deck isn't that bad against aggro. it's certainly winnable with tight play. The games get increasingly better after sideboard.
6. Slaughter games was great. Actually the whole sideboard was great. Lab maniac may not be needed though. I would have loved to get a kill with him however.
7. If the meta trends toward esper control and such, Rakdos return will stay main. It wasn't bad against anything game 1 and I didn't see it game 1 against boros, although it still got sideboarded out game 2. Plus I got to blow out the bant player after he played his turn 4 jace on the draw and I wrecked his hand for 5 cards.
The burden of proof lies with religion. Not with Atheism.
If you've been able to get to turn 4 to acidic slime anything, you are already gonna win. the deck needs an early answer, before 10-12 damage comes across on turn 3.
I do play troll, I never said it wasn't good, I just said it wouldn't win games. and regeneration doesn't do jack against tragic slip and Rancor. Restoration angel can win games on its own, lotleth troll can't.
BTE, evolved experiments, Huntmasters and their wolves, not to mention against 2/1's with first strike.
never said they didn't, just said they do it better. and you're relying on a 2-1 just as much as I am.
I think being able to play every game like a SB game makes your threats more diversified, and makes your win % in game 1 more likely, again, I'm not saying don't run troll, i run 2 in my 75. Again, I'm not saying lingering souls is bad, I'm saying that restoration angel is better.
I would play both in the land of Tragic slips.
I agree that gaining value off rites is the best plan, but it can't be the only plan. Lingering Souls and Trolls won't win games as much as restoration angel and thragtusk, and knowing that every plan you have can just as likely win you the game is a very good thing that a lot of decks don't have.
Healers aren't as bad against random 2/2's and aren't as bad against a reckoner, and a healer/angel Races better against a reckoner.
But am I really playing it fair? Being able to play off your deck and out of your graveyard isn't really fair at all. The difference is that I'm not at the same extreme as you, which means while my blowouts are fewer than yours, my deck still gives me the ability to play multiple angles of attack and allow me to outplay my opponent a lot more than the linear version. Also, this means that I don't have to worry about graveyard hate because I can do other things until I find my abrupt decays or acidic slimes.
Jesus was not innocent. He was a wanted criminal, remember? Judas gave information to the capture of a wanted man. Claiming to be the son of god was a very blasphemous act, and that's what Jesus claimed himself to be.
So what happens when you don't draw Unburial Rites? And yes, it does happen. Having a deck in any game (even game one) that relies heavily on one specific situation/card is bad never the best way to go in a midrange deck. I can't see how gaining value out of every single card in your deck is bad. What's bad about it? I Still have the ability to turn 4 an Angel, but I don't need to because I can gain significant value out of every single card in my deck without being overly redundant, rather than relying on staying alive till I can hit an Unburial Rites. Also, lingering souls doesn't have near the impact on Naya blitz (a bad matchup) as turn 1 dork, turn 2 healer, turn 3 angel.
Also, on MODO I have ran into plenty of jund lists running MD Ground seal, and wouldn't be surprised if paper catches on to it. it's generally good against every deck in the format outside of Naya and the mirror, but it still cantrips so its not a total bust.
Says the guy who was insta-cutting it a week ago.
This is the point exactly. Without testing nobody has an idea what a card is capable of.
Not necessarily. I honestly have no opinion on the deck, or Gyre sage in general. To me it's just another naya deck. All I'm saying is that a player or deckbuilder of Saito's caliber doesn't put cards in a deck without careful consideration and thought, so there must be a reason, even if we don't see it instantly. To dismiss something as bad based purely on appearance without any real general testing is narrow-minded.
Saito probably played 50+ matches with the deck before posting it. You wanna dismiss it after 10? C'mon.
Could be, depending on the list. I personally wouldn't go below 3 revelation.
It's not defending the list, it's not instantly dismissing it. The fact is, Saito is a great deckbuilder, and while not every deck he puts out is a stellar one, his abilites and successes earn him that respect. When you take your deck and win grand Prix's and top 8 Pro Tours people won't be so quick to dismiss you either. It's called a reputation.
Did you ever consider that you're playing the deck wrong, and try a different approach? I don't know how much you could possibly know about a deck in only ten matches. I'm also not really sure what Gyre Sage has to do with the amount of land you draw. Seems irrelevant. Also, the specific reason you play him over Avacyn's Pilgrim is because he can become more than a 1/1. A 3/4 for 2 mana is nothing to scoff at, especially when the deck strategy is to generate a dominating field position, not race.
I would personally rather have a 2/3, 2/2 and Domri on turn 3, than a 1/1, 2/2 and Domri on turn 2. It's his ability to get you into an overpowering mid game against other aggro decks that warrants his inclusion, not his ability to accelerate or race.
The results would be too random I think. The problem with those cards, while they can be powerful, they can not be as well. Magic is already a game of variance, you wouldn't play cards that flip coins or or anything else, so why play unexpected results.
For example, I watched Travis Woo tonight UR into an omniscience on turn 4, and win. Then I watched him dud into a Supreme verdict. Then watched him dud into something else. It's too random, even in a deck built to exploit it.
And there is absolutely no way in this format I wouldn't run Sphinx's Revolution.
Against the midrange and control decks it's house. knowing that you can afford to wait to wrath them then next turn rakdos them without them most likely being able to put a lot of pressure just gives you so much time to basically do whatever you want against them, baring insane top decks. It pretty much gets the job done on the spot.
Abrupt decay is just so overall good. It deals with Detention sphere and Silverblade paladin just the same, and is very versatile in every matchup.
3 Breeding Pool
3 Temple Garden
3 Hallowed Fountain
2 Overgrown Tomb
2 Alchemist's Refuge
2 Hinterland Harbor
1 Watery Grave
1 Steam Vents
1 Godless Shrine
1 Stomping Ground
3 Glacial Fortress
2 Sunpetal Grove
1 Sulfur Falls
1 Kessig Wolf Run
Creatures-2
1 Borborygmos Enraged
1 Drogskol Reaver
3 Chromatic Lantern
2 Ranger's Path
4 Farseek
3 Increasing Ambition
1 Enter the Infinite
1 Omniscience
1 Gilded Lotus
1 Urban Evolution
3 Sphinx's Revelation
2 Rakdos's Return
3 Supreme Verdict
1 Door to Nothingness
2 Terminus
2 Temporal Mastery
2 Fog
1 Elixir of Immortality
3 Thragtusk
2 Abrupt Decay
2 Dispel
1 Terminus
2 Rhox Faithmender
1 Laboratory Maniac
3 Slaughter Games
1 Merciless Eviction
Took this list to a top 4 split at my FNM, 42 people.
I don't remember how each matchup played out specifically, but I wen't 3-1-1 and played:
round 1: UWR midrange (2-0)
Round 2: Naya Midrange (1-2)
Round 3: Boros (2-0)
Round 4: Bant control (2-1)
Round 5: ID
Quarterfinals: Same Naya list from second round. (2-0)
Split top 4.
Some things I've noticed about the deck:
1. in an aggro dominated field, Urban evolution is clunky and slow. I'd almost it rather be a fog or another sweeper.
2. increasing ambition was a house against any midrange to control deck.
3. Rhox Faithmender is a beast against red decks, even through a skullcrack.
4. Omni-Borbo was consistently good.
5. The deck isn't that bad against aggro. it's certainly winnable with tight play. The games get increasingly better after sideboard.
6. Slaughter games was great. Actually the whole sideboard was great. Lab maniac may not be needed though. I would have loved to get a kill with him however.
7. If the meta trends toward esper control and such, Rakdos return will stay main. It wasn't bad against anything game 1 and I didn't see it game 1 against boros, although it still got sideboarded out game 2. Plus I got to blow out the bant player after he played his turn 4 jace on the draw and I wrecked his hand for 5 cards.