Poro Tour Modern 1 #1 Pokemon Shift (146) - Leo Lahonen
129 players - 18/02/17
http://porotour.com/poro-tour-modern-top-8-pakkalistat-2/
Et copier-coller des articles sur ChannelFireball c'est peut être imbuvable mais je préfère garder uen trace de ces articles
Si vous voulez les images j'ai mis le sleins vers leurs articles
Lien de l'article
Bring to Light lets you play a slew of colors, and an excellent toolbox package. The only limitation is how many cards you can fit into your deck. So who says that that number has to be 60? When players go to 61, or Finkel forbid even more, people assume you have no idea what you’re doing and that your deck isn’t competitive. So how about a 150-card Bring to Light deck that just took down a 130-person Modern tournament in Finland last weekend?
I could write until I’m arthritic about the things this deck is capable of, but it starts with mana fixing. Between Farseek, Search for Tomorrow, Harrow, Kodama’s Reach, and Sakura-Tribe Elder, there are plenty of ways to make more colors and ramp your mana.
The card draw spells form another long list. Thirst for Knowledge and Worldly Counsel help you get deeper into your deck. Remand and Cryptic Command pull double duty in functionality. Izzet Charm can also load up the graveyard, deal with a creature, and dig deeper.
Gifts Ungiven can come up with some pretty crazy piles. You have the combo with Unburial Ritesavailable to lock up a game. You have value packages. There’s a playset of Snapcaster Mages to make sure you can go deeper. You’ve got removal spells in Lightning Bolt and Path to Exile, sweepers in Wrath of God, and even a singleton Crumble to Dust to deal with Tron!
Bring to Light can get any card in the deck. It can set up the Gifts into Unburial Rites, or find other game winners
Scapeshift threatens to just win the game on the spot if you have 7 lands and your opponent is at 18 or less life. With 64 lands, you hardly even notice the times where drawing Valakut, the Molten Pinnacle is pretty bad!
Traumatize is another interesting option. It combos really nicely with Splendid Reclamation as you’re likely to put 30 lands into play. This is also likely to hit some Valakuts to just win the game, but at the very least you have access to more mana than you’ll ever know what to do with, and very likely some Unburial Rites for value.
You also have Madcap Experiment with just the single Platinum Emperion as your only artifact. Grabbing the Experiment with Bring to Light is a win condition against a number of different decks, such as Burn.
Glittering Wish gives you access to even more Bring to Lights in the sideboard. It can also find Fracturing Gust against Affinity or Bogles, Izzet Staticaster to deal with tokens or little infect creatures, Slaughter Games to beat combo, Supreme Verdict or Firespout for a sweeper, Nahiri, the Harbinger to deal with problematic permanents and threaten ultimate, or just Rhox War Monk when you need a beater and are ready to race.
I think it’s pretty easy to dismiss a 150-card deck. The thing has to be a nightmare to shuffle, and how consistent could it possibly be? That said, it just won a large tournament and it’s sweeter than sweet. As someone who won a PTQ long ago with Battle of Wits, consider me in love with this deck!
lien de l'article
Today I wanted to take a quick look at a new Modern deck that broke out at a 130-player "Poro Tour" tournament 2 weeks ago in Finland. It was played by Leo Lahonen, a member of the Finnish national team that finished in the Top 8 at the 2016 World Magic Cup. (The Fins must love their puns, as Lahonen registered as a member of team "Almost Finnished" for the Pro Tour Team Series and "Poro" is apparently Finnish for "Reindeer".)
At the World Magic Cup, Lahonen was setting up effective turn-2 kills with his Blue-Red Kiln Fiend deck. At the "Poro Tour" event, he registered a 150-card deck with a dazzling number of options and combos.
I love it!
Three years ago, I wrote an article titled "Is Playing More Than 60 Cards Always a Bad Idea?" which couldn't be more relevant now. My conclusion was that, although it's typically best to stick to the minimum of 60 cards, there are exceptions. Two of those exceptions apply to Leo Lahonen's deck:
You are playing with cards that devour your library. A classic example is the 88-card deck that Noah Boeken and Trevor Blackwell played at Pro Tour Osaka 2002. They did that because they could Traumatize themselves and get enough cards into the graveyard to win in one blow with Psychatog. Lahonen's deck also contains Traumatize, which (if he mills Valakut, the Molten Pinnacle and 6 Mountains) can set up lethal with Splendid Reclamation. More on this later.
You have a toolbox deck with cards you'd usually prefer not to draw. In Magic's history, not one but two different Hall-of-Famers have made a Grand Prix finals with a 64-card deck.In 2011, Makihito Mihara used a 64-card Scapeshift deck to make the finals of Grand Prix Kobe. His logic was that he needed at least 7 Mountains (and several Valakuts) in his deck for the combo kill, but he never wanted to draw them, so he went over 60 cards to reduce his chances of drawing Mountains while improving his chances of drawing blue mana.
More recently, Ben Rubin finished second at Grand Prix Oakland 2016 with a 64-card Abzan deck. He wanted a certain minimum number of fetchable lands, but he also wanted as many fetchlands as possible, so he solved that conundrum by playing 64 cards.
Lahonen's deck operates under similar constraints: It needs a certain minimum amount of basics, shocklands, and Valakuts to function, but beyond that it's better to maximize the ratio of fetchlands for mana consistency and for synergy with Splendid Reclamation. Basically, you're playing a 5-color Bring to Light deck, so you don't want to draw too many red lands. Moreover, having the option to Gifts Ungiven for Unburial Rites and Elesh Norn is nice, but naturally drawing Elesh Norn is not, which is another incentive to increase deck size.
All in all, there are valid reasons for playing more than 60 cards.
But there are also drawbacks.
Naturally, the biggest drawback to playing more than 60 cards is that it substantially reduces the probability of drawing your best cards. A regular Scapeshift player will draw Search for Tomorrow, Sakura-Tribe Elder, Remand, Bring to Light, and other top-quality cards about 2.5 times more often than Lahonen would. That is a noticeable difference, and 150 cards is arguably too much.
So Why 150?
In the end, it's a trade-off between the advantages and the disadvantages, and subjective judgments are needed to put relative weights on them, so it's hard to pinpoint an "optimum" deck size. But let's at least do some quantitative analysis to get some insights.
Since the only card that explicitly cares about deck size is Traumatize, I'll focus my analysis on that.
Imagine the following sequence: Turn-2 Sakura-Tribe Elder, turn-3 Cryptic Command, turn-4 Bring to Light into Traumatize, and turn-5 Splendid Reclamation. That's pretty good, but it only works if your deck size is large enough for Traumatize.
I will focus on the following scenario: We remove a Traumatize from our deck, along with 10 random cards. These 11 cards represent our opening hand and draw steps up until turn 4-5, and I'll refer to them as "our draw." For simplicity, I purposefully disregard several aspects: I assume that we have enough mana sources to cast Traumatize, and I disregard the deck thinning effects of cards like Sakura-Tribe Elder. Then, we put Traumatize on the stack.
The following two scenarios constitute a success:
Success type 1: We mill at least 6 Mountains and have at least 1 Valakut in our draw or in the collection milled by Traumatize. This will guarantee 18 damage with Splendid Reclamation on the next turn.
Success type 2: We mill fewer than 6 Mountains (i.e., "Success type 1" doesn't apply), but we have at least 2 Valakuts and at least 8 fetchlands or Mountains combined in our draw or in the collection milled by Traumatize. This should also result in 18 damage with Splendid Reclamation on the next turn, although we'd have to pay several points of life.
These success definitions disregard various unlikely combinations for simplicity. For instance, "1 Valakut and 11 fetchlands" isn't included, but that's not unreasonable because our opponent might be pressuring our life total too. Another example is that a fetchland configuration of 4 Flooded Strand and 4 Polluted Delta still counts as a success, even though it can't search enough Mountains. I wish I had more time to refine definitions and calculations, but I expect my approach yields at least a solid approximation.
Under my assumptions, we are 77.3% to have a successful Traumatize.
For Leo Lahonen's original deck, the probability of success would be 56.2% for type 1 and 21.1% for type 2, for a total of 77.3%. That's reasonable, especially considering that if we miss, there is a good chance of being able to flashback Unburial Rites as a consolation prize.
Naturally, I can do the same analysis for any other deck sizes, but for that we need to specify the land distribution for different deck sizes. Here, I'll make the following assumptions:
The total number of lands in a deck with N cards is N*64/150, rounded down. So we retain the same ratio as our original 150-card deck with 64 lands.
We retain all of our Mountains and Valakuts. To justify this, look at regular 60-card Bring to Light Scapeshift decks. They typically have 4 Steam Vents, 4 Stomping Ground, 1 Mountain, 1 Cinder Glade, 2 Valakut, and then usually one or more extra Mountains or Valakuts. Lahonen's list had a 3rd Valakut, a 2nd Cinder Glade, a Sacred Foundry, and a Blood Crypt, which is a bit more than usual, but not by much. I have also seen all of these lands in Bring to Light Scapeshift decks before, so they are not unreasonable inclusions. I'll take all of these lands as a fixed base.
Extending this logic, we retain all of our 33 non-fetchlands. So if we shrink our deck size and cut lands, then we remove fetch lands. That is, the number of fetchlands in the deck is N*64/150, rounded down, minus 33. This is a little strict, and I think that in reality you might make a few different cuts, but it's too hard to choose which ones to cut for every deck size—my assumption is more elegant and easier to implement.
The results are as follows.
The seesaw pattern is because the number of lands is rounded for every deck size.
What you see is that the probability of type 1 success (at least 6 Mountains milled) stays relatively stable throughout, although it is a little lower for smaller decks. An intuitive explanation is that for larger decks, Traumatize comes close to milling 50% of your actual deck—the top 11 cards from your draw don't have a large impact. For smaller decks, Traumatize mills noticeably less than 50% of your deck because the top 11 cards form a more substantial chunk of your original deck, which implies that the chance of milling at least 6/13 Mountains decreases.
The type 2 success (at least 2 Valakut and a bunch of fetchlands) also stays relatively stable between 110-150 cards but then drops off as well for smaller decks. The intuitive explanation for this is that smaller decks contain fewer fetchlands and therefore have a smaller chance of milling enough of them.
So How Many Cards Should You Play?
Although I think Leo Lahonen may be on to something, I think 150 cards is too many. I think it's safe to go down to 120 cards. At least the resulting deck will be slightly easier to shuffle. More importantly, as I showed, this reduction won't substantially hamper the consistency of the Traumatize/Splendid Reclamation combo. But it will increase the likelihood of drawing your best cards by 20%, which is a huge difference.
We could reduce deck size even further, potentially going as low as 100 cards. (I wouldn't go lower than 100 cards because then, according to the above figure, the Traumatize/Splendid Reclamation consistency drop becomes marked.) The reason why I'd stick with 120 cards for the time being is that I want to qualitatively take into account the benefits of an improved mana base and a lower probability of drawing silver bullets, and at some point I'm not sure what to cut anymore. So 120 seems like a good compromise to start from.
It wasn't easy to cut 30 cards from the deck, but my first suggestion would be to start with this.
120-Card Scapeshift
Frank Karsten
Lands
1 x Watery Grave3 x Flooded Strand4 x Misty Rainforest4 x Scalding Tarn4 x Verdant Catacombs4 x Windswept Heath4 x Wooded Foothills1 x Blood Crypt2 x Breeding Pool1 x Overgrown Tomb4 x Steam Vents4 x Stomping Ground1 x Temple Garden1 x Sacred Foundry2 x Flooded Grove3 x Valakut, the Molten Pinnacle2 x Cinder Glade1 x Plains1 x Mountain3 x Island2 x Forest
Creatures
4 x Sakura-Tribe Elder4 x Snapcaster Mage1 x Elesh Norn, Grand Cenobite1 x Eternal Witness1 x Platinum Emperion3 x Renegade Rallier
Spells
3 x Bring to Light4 x Glittering Wish4 x Search for Tomorrow4 x Farseek1 x Path to Exile4 x Scapeshift4 x Splendid Reclamation4 x Remand4 x Cryptic Command1 x Thirst for Knowledge4 x Worldly Counsel1 x Wrath of God1 x Madcap Experiment4 x Izzet Charm4 x Gifts Ungiven4 x Lightning Bolt1 x Unburial Rites1 x Traumatize1 x Harrow
Sideboard1 x Bring to Light1 x Nahiri, the Harbinger1 x Rhox War Monk1 x Firespout1 x Guttural Response1 x Maelstrom Pulse3 x Crumble to Dust1 x Supreme Verdict1 x Fracturing Gust1 x Slaughter Games1 x Izzet Staticaster1 x Wear // Tear1 x Renegade Rallier
I can't confidently claim that this build is better than a 60-card Scapeshift deck, but the deck is competitive, and hilarious to boot. Just imagine the look on your opponent's face when you put down a 120-card deck! Priceless.
Now imagine you do that at the Team Grand Prix in San Antonio (April 1-2). It won't be easy to run a 120-card deck with the Team Unified Constricted restrictions, but if you can convince your teammates, then your fun will be tripled!
Changer mes Données
Changer mon Mot de Passe
Se Déconnecter
Boite de Réception
Messages Envoyés
Brouillons
Nouveau Message
Membre Inactif depuis le 23/02/2023
Message Privé
Commandement cryptique 
Izzet Charm 
Conseil matérialiste 
