Only a benighted observer would infer that this was as "response" to the metagame at Vintage Champs, and represents a healthy metagame shift. Rather, it shows that for small events like these, the composition - and strength of the players - matters immensely. The same is true, but to a lesser extent, of the Challenge this past Saturday. It will be a little while until we get to our regularly scheduled programming.
Unlike champs where the strength of the players didn't matter? (sees rich shay and montolio in finals, shakes head). Interesting that they are people who do quite well in the mtgo meta...
Yes, and neither of them played on 10/21. You misunderstood what I wrote, it seems.
Good to see Ben take it down - the playmat just isn't the same without his name on it.
He and I were texting afterwards, and he had some thoughts on the list:
Spyglass kinda stunk.
Glowrider was strong.
He didn't draw Thorn all day, but it went fine without it.
He only drew Arbiter once and it wasn't relevant, but there were lots of times it could have been good. 1-2 is a fine number, though Mindcensor might be better.
A U/B winning list without Time Walk, Demonic Tutor, or blue Delve draw engine? How exotic is that? Murderous Cut over Dismember makes sense to me if you're not running the other Delve spells. I still feel I'm missing something, but maybe I'm not seeing outside the box.
Off topic: @aaron-patten
It would be close to disastrous if workshop were to be restricted alone. Nothing but C-c-combo everywhere.
If shops is too good and needs restriction, then ancient tomb should go first but I say it shouldn't be restricted at the moment.
The situation isn't so cut and dry anymore. Wotc have shaped the current meta and it can only get worse on the current path.
Sphere needs to go.
Mentor needs to go.
On the other hand, I wouldn't mind scrapping the current meta (B&R list) and starting from scratch. I believe Vintage is overdue for a rebirth.
@smmenen Well, people can definitely play what they want more often on MTGO than anywhere else (besides 100% proxy and cockatrice, but for sanctioned, competitive play it's MTGO).
The other thing is that card availability on MTGO is instantaneous. Let's say I play one of my terrible brews and get frustrated with the results. Then I see how Thiim's awesome MUDrazi deck has been crushing people. So I add my entire deck to my trade binder, get a few hundred tickets, and buy Thiim's deck card for card. That process is as quick as five minutes (if you want to scout the best deal it could take longer).
This makes the case for paying attention to MTGO results as a barometer of the health of Vintage stronger, not weaker. Less stickiness in deck selection implies a "truer" representation of metagame composition and health of the format. The fact that Shops are so expensive on paper suggests that their actual metagame representation is artificially suppressed, especially in paper environments, relative to non-Shops strategies. That MTGO has greater substitutability generally makes it all the more remarkable that Shops are dominating.