Examining Blue: UW Pickles

I talked about Wafo Tapa Monoblue in the previous article, and now it's time to proceed to the GP Krakow winning list, the UW Pickles piloted by Paul Cheon. First of all, congrats to Paul for making level 6 and obviously this deck contributed a portion of the success. The deck looks pretty solid on paper, and further testing will justify whether the deck performs as solidly as it looks. Here is the original list of Paul's, where I've started testing.

UW Pickles Paul Cheon
2007 Grand Prix Krakow, Poland Format: Type II - LRW
Finished: 1st Place Number of Players: 847
Main Deck:
3 Brine Elemental
4 Phyrexian Ironfoot
2 Teferi, Mage of Zhalfir
2 Venser, Shaper Savant
4 Vesuvan Shapeshifter
4 Ancestral Vision
4 Cryptic Command
3 Oblivion Ring
4 Rune Snag
3 Wrath of God
4 Adarkar Wastes
4 Calciform Pools
3 Nimbus Maze
10 Snow-Covered Island
4 Snow-Covered Plains
2 Urza's Factory
Sideboard:
2 Aeon Chronicler
3 Aven Riftwatcher
3 Faerie Trickery
2 Jace Beleren
2 Magus of the Tabernacle
1 Oblivion Ring
1 Teferi, Mage of Zhalfir
1 Wrath of God

A general rule of thumb when copying a net deck; always test the original list before you make any modification. I know, it's a normal thing for everyone to have the urge to improve the deck once you see it, but before you actually applied any of the “improvements”, you should always test the original version to get the real feel of the deck. I mean, it won a GP on its strength, so who are we to question it? However, if you had tested it for a dozen of matches, you pretty much know how the deck works and you know what cards are appropriate for the specific metagame. For example, the UW Pickles was designed to take on a heavy creature field, therefore featuring many main deck hate like Phyrexian Iroofoot and Wrath of God maindeck and even more in the sideboard.

After testing dozens of matches with the original list, I found myself on the losing end instead of the winning road. The deck is actually a very complicated deck to play and faces many difficult decisions in every single turn. As the deck features both Wrath of God and a decent amount of creatures, you actually have to make the right decision on holding back or committing to the board as early as turn 3, with many more complicated decisions later to made, especially against aggro strategies. Surprisingly, it is a simpler match to play against control because there is less decisions to make. You simply charge up your lands, wait for your opponent to do something, and you catch them up with an end of turn Teferi, cast a few counters exhausting your opponent and go for the throat in your main phrase.

That being said, it was the original version. Here is my updated version of UW Pickles:
UW Pickles Terry Soh

Main Deck:
2 Aeon Chronicler
3 Brine Elemental
4 Phyrexian Ironfoot
2 Teferi, Mage of Zhalfir
4 Vesuvan Shapeshifter
4 Ancestral Vision
4 Cryptic Command
4 Faerie Trickery
3 Oblivion Ring
3 Wrath of God
4 Adarkar Wastes
4 Calciform Pools
3 Nimbus Maze
11 Snow-Covered Island
4 Snow-Covered Plains
1 Urza's Factory
Sideboard:
3 Aven Riftwatcher
2 Jace Beleren
2 Magus of the Tabernacle
1 Oblivion Ring
2 Remove Soul
3 Sower of Temptation
1 Teferi, Mage of Zhalfir
1 Wrath of God

I had taken out Rune Snag in place of maindeck Faerie Trickery. I know, Rune Snag suits the curve better and there is already plenty of three drops in the deck besides Faerie Trickery, but the fact that most people are aware that the deck runs 4 Rune Snag is a disadvantage. The deck has plenty of maindeck anti-creature elements such as Wrath of God, Oblivion Ring and Phyrexian Ironfoot and running 4 Rune Snag, which is much better against creature matchup anyways, does not help much in other midrange matchups. Most people either wait or cast cheaper spells rather than risking Rune Snag once you reached mid-game, since most people who read the internet knows the deck runs 4 Rune Snag.

I also had taken out Venser in place of maindeck Aeon Chronicler. I always felt that the deck has enough answers to permanents on board, and it lacked of some card drawing. I think Aeon fits the perfect role here as he serves as a win condition, defense and card advantage as well. Even if you disagree with the Aeon over Venser, I would definitely play a 4th Oblivion Ring in the maindeck and something else rather than Venser. Don't get me wrong, Venser is a great tempo card, but when you have better options and solutions in the other color, in this case white, why do you still want it anyway?

The land base is almost perfect, the only difference is I had taken out the 2nd Urza's Factory and added an Island because the deck actually has some hard times casting Cryptic Command, not to mention it is really bad to draw into 2 Urza's Factory. Pickles combo will get the job done most of the time.

The difference between my version and the original is...

+2 Aeon
+4 Faerie Trickery
+1 Snow Covered Island

-2 Venser,Shaper Savant
-4 Rune Snag
-1 Urza's Factory

Matchup Analysis

Straight-up Aggressive decks
+2 Magus of the Tabernacle
+3 Aven Riftwatcher
+2 Remove Soul
+1 Wrath of God

-4 Faerie Trickery
-2 Aeon Chonicler
-1 Brine Elemental
-1 Teferi, Mage of Zhalfir

Most of the decks in this category do not have access to counterspells, and they are packed with quality creatures and removal such as Oblivion Ring, Eyeblight's Ending and Incinerate. You don't really need to counter much; you would rather have more direct hate such as Wrath of God, Magus of the Tabernacle etc. Remove Soul is still a fine option here since you don't have much too do on turn 2, and it is still a cheap removal compared to the expensive Faerie Trickery. Basically, the ideal plan is to stall the board with Ironfoot and Riftwatchers, forcing your opponent to overextend to the board. Once you felt it's time to reset, cast the Wrath of God.

Aggro-Control decks

(Against Faeries)
+3 Sower of Temptation
+3 Aven Riftwacher
+2 Remove Soul
+1 Oblivion Ring
+2 Magus of the Tabernacle

- 3 Wrath of God
- 4 Faerie Trickery
4 Phyrexian Ironfoot


(Against Mannequin)
+2 Remove Soul
+1 Teferi,mage of Zhalfir
-3 Wrath of God

I would define decks with counters and a couple of cheap creatures as aggro-control, and Mannequin is one of them despite not packing any countermagic. This is one of the most complicated matchup for you, as you have to take into consideration your opponent being able to counter your wrath effect and playing around it, since some of their creatures either is Wrath-proof such as Epochrasite or has flash such as faeries.

Therefore, I concluded that siding out all Wrath is the right way to go. Good players will never overextend like those straight aggressive decks and even if they do, they are pretty sure they can stop your Wrath with Thoughtseize, countermagic etc. The sideboard card to take out is easy; you take all Faerie Trickery out against faerie, obviously, along with Ironfoot since it doesn't block anything. Against Mannequin, it's a whole different dimension. It is actually better to keep all the Counterspells in the deck since most of their creatures are 187 creatures, therefore it is pointless to use an Oblivion Ring on a Mulldrifter or Shriekmaw, since they had got their job done if they are on the table. Ironfoot is one awesome creature against them as it singlehandily holds an army of Shadowmage, opposing Ironfoot and Shriekmaw all by himself. Teferi is good against them because they have four Epochrasite and four Riftwing Cloudskate as well as stopping them from doing dirty tricks with end of turn Mannequin. Again, they seldom commit much to the board, so Wrath is rather pointless. Once you stabilize, Pickles will get you there.

Control decks

+2 Jace Beleren
+1 Teferi, Mage of Zhalfir
+1 Oblivion Ring
+3 Sower of Temptation

-3 Wrath of God
-4 Phyrexian Ironfoot

Wrath of God and Phyrexian Ironfoot are redundant in this matchup and naturally none of them stays after sideboard. Jace and Teferi are a no-brainer inclusion after boarding, but the rest require some explanation. You are the aggressive player in this matchup, as other deck such as Guile tends to have more countermagic than you. So you play in a different direction. You tend to have a lot of problematic permanents (after board) against them; almost all your cards are good threats by themselves and provide card advantage. In this case, the extra Oblivion Ring gives you protection from a resolved Teferi. Your own Sower is meant to fight opposing Sowers as well. You could also bring in Remove Soul instead of Sower, depending on your preference. It's just that the Sower plan is more rewarding if it managed to resolve.

I took it to an 8-man for the first time after testing it a bunch of times, and I meet Faeries. I kept a hand with 2 Faerie Trickery and that costs me a game. The 2nd game was all defending but I was never in a good position to lock him, and incoming fliers is something you can hardly deal with when they have counterpells as well.

The second 8-man I played against a deck whom goes turn 2 Oona's Prowler, turn 3 Mulldrifter, turn 4 Bonded Fetch, turn 5 Cairn Wanderer. Turns out he's a Reanimator. We both split the first two games and headed to the third. We headed to the third game where he actually discards on turn 2 after not playing a land and proceeded to win the match later. The deck was rather disappointing in the 8-man rather than the profit-making Guile deck. Perhaps I am not as skillful as Cheon is, or the deck really lacks of something. For all you out there wanting to test this deck, let me remind you. This is a very complicated deck to play, be very cautious on each decision you made each turn because it heavily affects your upcoming plan. There is hardly any auto pilot hand for this deck. Never the less, locking the hell out of your opponent is still a lot of fun. If you are the type of person whom enjoys solving complicated board puzzles, this is the deck for you.

by Terry Soh, magic.tcgplayer.com