I've been paying close attention to Standard from the perspective of Monoblack Devotion. I picked up this deck sometime after Pro Tour Theros and have really learned the ins and outs of the deck over the course of various events. The past two weeks I wrote about the archetype exclusively, one article about how I tuned the deck to win a local event, and another focusing entirely on winning the mirror match. That article is more relevant now than ever because Monoblack is poised to grow even more popular as it cements itself as the best deck in Standard. This past weekend was Grand Prix Albuquerque, and Monoblack was out in full force. When the dust settled Monoblack compromised half of the Top 8 and ultimately won the title in the hands of Owen Turtenwald.

Monoblack Devotion by Owen Turtenwald
Finished 1st Place at 2013 Grand Prix Albuquerque - 11/23
Main Deck
Sideboard
4 Desecration Demon
1 Erebos, God of the Dead
4 Gray Merchant of Asphodel
4 Nightveil Specter
4 Pack Rat
Creatures [17]
2 Devour Flesh
1 Doom Blade
4 Hero's Downfall
4 Thoughtseize
2 Ultimate Price
4 Underworld Connections
Spells [17]
4 Mutavault
19 Swamp
3 Temple of Deceit
Lands [26]
Deck Total [60]



3 Dark Betrayal
1 Doom Blade
3 Duress
1 Erebos, God of the Dead
3 Lifebane Zombie
3 Pharika's Cure
1 Shrivel
Sideboard [15]




View a Sample Hand!


Solitaire this Deck!

Click for full deck stats & notes!
Monoblack Devotion by Paul Rietzl
Finished 5th - 8th Place at 2013 Grand Prix Albuquerque - 11/23
Main Deck
Sideboard
4 Desecration Demon
1 Erebos, God of the Dead
4 Gray Merchant of Asphodel
4 Nightveil Specter
4 Pack Rat
Creatures [17]
2 Devour Flesh
4 Hero's Downfall
4 Thoughtseize
2 Ultimate Price
4 Underworld Connections
1 Whip of Erebos
Spells [17]
4 Mutavault
1 Nykthos, Shrine to Nyx
18 Swamp
3 Temple of Deceit
Lands [26]
Deck Total [60]



3 Dark Betrayal
2 Doom Blade
3 Duress
1 Erebos, God of the Dead
3 Lifebane Zombie
3 Pharika's Cure
Sideboard [15]




View a Sample Hand!


Solitaire this Deck!

Click for full deck stats & notes!
Monoblack Devotion by Todd Anderson
Finished 3rd - 4th Place at 2013 Grand Prix Albuquerque - 11/23
Main Deck
Sideboard
4 Desecration Demon
1 Erebos, God of the Dead
4 Gray Merchant of Asphodel
4 Nightveil Specter
2 Pack Rat
Creatures [15]
2 Devour Flesh
3 Doom Blade
4 Hero's Downfall
4 Thoughtseize
1 Ultimate Price
4 Underworld Connections
1 Whip of Erebos
Spells [19]
4 Mutavault
1 Nykthos, Shrine to Nyx
19 Swamp
2 Temple of Deceit
Lands [26]
Deck Total [60]



1 Dark Betrayal
1 Devour Flesh
3 Duress
1 Erebos, God of the Dead
3 Lifebane Zombie
2 Pack Rat
1 Pithing Needle
Sideboard [12]




View a Sample Hand!


Solitaire this Deck!

Click for full deck stats & notes!
Monoblack Devotion by Joseph Nix
Finished 5th - 8th Place at 2013 Grand Prix Albuquerque - 11/23
Main Deck
Sideboard
4 Desecration Demon
1 Erebos, God of the Dead
4 Gray Merchant of Asphodel
4 Nightveil Specter
3 Pack Rat
Creatures [16]
4 Devour Flesh
4 Hero's Downfall
4 Thoughtseize
2 Ultimate Price
4 Underworld Connections
1 Whip of Erebos
Spells [19]
4 Mutavault
17 Swamp
2 Temple of Deceit
2 Temple of Silence
Lands [25]
Deck Total [60]



2 Doom Blade
2 Duress
1 Erebos, God of the Dead
3 Lifebane Zombie
1 Pack Rat
2 Pharika's Cure
2 Pithing Needle
1 Ultimate Price
1 Whip of Erebos
Sideboard [15]




View a Sample Hand!


Solitaire this Deck!

Click for full deck stats & notes!
Sitting on the other side at the top of the Standard metagame hill is the Monoblue Devotion deck. This deck made up just 16% of the day two field, but three copies in the Top 8 and multiple more in the Top 16 reveal that the deck is an over performer. Like the Monoblack Devotion deck, Monoblue features a rock solid, single-colored manabase along with a playset of Mutavault for value. The strong manabase combined with redundancy in the creature base allows the deck to consistently execute its devotion gameplan and overwhelm the opposition. Monoblue Devotion also abuses its god, Thassa, God of the Sea, and its legendary artifact, Bident of Thassa, in ways that Monoblack can only dream of. Monoblue has continued to prove itself as a dominant aspect of the metagame, and like Monoblack it is firmly in the realm of tier one and is not going to be unseated. Three copies in the Top 8 of this event, including Sam Black's second Top 8 with the deck in as many Grand Prix, are a testament to how solid the really deck is.

Monoblue Devotion by Sam Black
Finished 5th - 8th Place at 2013 Grand Prix Albuquerque - 11/23
Main Deck
Sideboard
4 Cloudfin Raptor
4 Frostburn Weird
4 Judge's Familiar
4 Master of Waves
4 Nightveil Specter
4 Thassa, God of the Sea
4 Tidebinder Mage
Creatures [28]
2 Jace, Architect of Thought
Planeswalkers [2]
2 Bident of Thassa
2 Cyclonic Rift
1 Rapid Hybridization
Spells [5]
20 Island
4 Mutavault
1 Nykthos, Shrine to Nyx
Lands [25]
Deck Total [60]



1 Bident of Thassa
1 Cyclonic Rift
1 Dispel
1 Dissolve
4 Gainsay
2 Jace, Architect of Thought
2 Jace, Memory Adept
1 Negate
2 Rapid Hybridization
Sideboard [15]




View a Sample Hand!


Solitaire this Deck!

Click for full deck stats & notes!
Monoblack Devotion proved quite potent in the hands of the pros, putting Todd Anderson, Paul Rietzl, and Owen Turtenwald into the Top 8. A fourth copy reached the Top 8 played by the man Marshall Sutcliffe called ‘Joseph “Shrine to” Nix,' who didn't even play his namesake. Monoblack Devotion made up just 13% of the total day two metagame, meaning it greatly outperformed the field by putting four copies in the Top 8. Digging deeper shows me that three of the four undefeated 9-0 day one decks were piloting Monoblack Devotion. The strong core of Monoblack makes it excellent at defeating the untuned decks and rogue strategies that lurk during the first day of a Grand Prix.

Opinions on the legendary land were split, as both Todd Anderson and Paul Rietzl chose to play a copy of Nykthos, Shrine to Nyx. Todd and the other pros played 26 lands, a number I've been advocating for a while now. The additional land means the deck hits land drops more often, and that leads to more wins. Between Scry lands, Mutavault, Underworld Connections, and Pack Rat this deck is quite resistant to flooding out. I am glad to see all the players used a full four Mutavault, because playing less is just heinous.

What is most striking to me about these decklists is the numbers on Pack Rat. Paul Rietzl and Owen Turtenwald both packed the full playset. Pack Rat is extremely impressive in the deck, and during the later rounds of the tournament it was a powerhouse in the video coverage. This aligns with my own positive experiences with the card, so I am not surprised these players played four in the maindeck. Playing more Pack Rat allows the Monoblack deck to operate more aggressively and take matters into its own hands. In a metagame that is dominated by Monoblue Devotion and the mirror match, being proactive with Pack Rat is the ideal strategy to be employing. Pack Rat absolutely shines in those two matchups so playing the full four makes perfect sense. In order to fit Pack Rat these players were forced to cut down on removal spells. Rather than seeking to cast a reactive removal spell on turn two, the deck is seeking to get aggressive and develop the board.

Owen Turtenwald got the best of both worlds by playing four Pack Rat and only cutting one removal spell, but Whip of Erebos was lost in the exchange. Losing this powerhouse card does hurt the late game, but adding make Pack Rat makes the deck more potent early on. Exchanging some late-game power for early-game plays is a sensible decision for a deck with no lack of options or firepower in the later turns of the game. Making the deck more consistent and stronger intrinsically is my goal when tuning a deck that is already at the top of the metagame, and my tuning of the deck over the past few weeks reflects that. I like the direction Owen took the deck and believe the four Pack Rat configuration is the way to go going forward. When the monoblack deck was first seen before the Pro Tour Pack Rat was in the sideboard, while it reached the Top 8 of PT with two in the maindeck. Four in the maindeck is the next natural step as the metagame at-large continues to stratify and focus towards the big two of Monoblack and Monoblue.

Removal configurations were mixed. Joseph Nix played a maindeck nearly identical to the one I shared last week, including the four Devour Flesh. Owen chose to diversify by playing one Doom Blade in addition to two copies of Devour Flesh. Todd Anderson threw the mirror match to the wind by playing a whopping three Doom Blade. This choice seemed to have worked out well for him in the Swiss, and it was certainly excellent in the quarterfinals as he was paired against a Naya deck. Doom Blade was not enough to best Monoblue pilot Sam Pardee in the semis, but congrats to Todd on the invitation to the next Pro Tour. If the Standard metagame mirrors the top decks of the Grand Prix I would be hesitant to play that many Doom Blade, just as I have avoided it before. I can understand Owen playing one copy in the maindeck as it truly is much more powerful than Devour Flesh against all of the Monoblue decks, and while mostly dead in the mirror match, it can destroy Mutavault, something Ultimate Price cannot claim to do.

The sideboard of the Monoblack deck is much more fluid and interchangeable than the maindeck. Most players agree on the general makeup of the ideal Monoblack sideboard, but the nature of metagames means that the optimal sideboard is not set in stone but changes week to week and tournament to tournament. This tournament showcased some exciting new sideboard options going forward.

Pharika's Cure has long been a staple of sideboards online, which is infested with Monored aggro. The lifegain is a great benefit, but it comes at the cost of only being effective against the smallest creatures. This sort of removal spell is ideal against the fast creature decks that favor creature quantity over quality. While Pharika's Cure is at its best against Monored, it is actually quite effective against any sort of rush aggro deck, including the new breed of white aggressive decks, the Rakdos aggro deck that won in Santiago, and even Monoblue Devotion. The finals coverage featured Owen using Pharika's Cure to kill a Master of Waves and all of the tokens along with it.

High
Mid
Low
Mutavault
$31.24
$21.93
$17.99
Store QTY Price
Mass MTG 1 $17.99
The End Zone 2 $18.95
alphaduals 4 $18.99
Zigmorph 2 $19.10
Marks Card Shop 4 $19.19
Most Good Hobby 2 $19.23
Dogs of War Gaming 1 $19.42
DJs Card Shop 1 $19.50
TJ Collectibles 2 $19.59

>> View all Prices for Mutavault <<

Store.TCGplayer.com allows you to buy cards from any of our vendors, all at the same time!
Shop, Compare & Save with TCGplayer.com! - [Store FAQ]
Magic MTG Card
Magic MTG Card Mutavault Magic MTG Card
Magic MTG Card


Pharika's Cure is at its best against the toughest matchups, which is a strong case for its sideboard inclusion. The extra life is actually quite important in these matchups, and in practice Pharika's Cure is reminiscent of a black Lightning Helix. Previously I have opted to sideboard the more broadly powerful Doom Blade, but as the metagame continues to move away from decks like Green Devotion and Red Devotion, and towards more aggressive decks built to exploit Monoblack, then playing the more specifically potent Pharika's Cure is a step in the right direction. If a metagame was extreme enough there is nothing to say that Monoblack could not adapt and play a full four Pharika's Cure in the maindeck. I do not ever see things coming to this, but the point is that the Monoblack deck can continue to adapt and roll with the punches, so to speak, and exploit various metagames.

The coolest sideboard card of the weekend is Shrivel. I've been a bit envious of the players that splash green and get Golgari Charm, but Shrivel provides me the perfect devoted-to-black alternative. I was first introduced to Shrivel a few days ago when Todd Anderson posted about the card in a Facebook thread. The official Top 8 list in coverage has Todd with only a 12 card sideboard and does not list Shrivel, but the day one undefeated decklists show Todd playing three in the sideboard. In his Top 8 profile he brags about using the card to kill five creatures at once. Owen and Paul got the memo and sideboarded one Shrivel while Owen said he might sideboard an additional copy. Shrivel seems excellent against the rush aggro decks that play a slew of x/1 creatures, particularly the white aggressive decks. I am excited to add a copy to my sideboard and will try a second if it performs well.

I was surprised to see Dark Betrayal being played in high numbers. Owen and Paul had three copies each in their sideboards, as did ninth place finisher Matt Sperling. These players correctly identified Monoblack Devotion as the deck of the tournament and rightly positioned their sideboards accordingly. Dark Betrayal is an extremely efficient card in the mirror match and offers a strict upgrade to any of the other removal spells in sideboarding. As a one-mana removal spell, Dark Betrayal serves as an excellent way to generate tempo and get ahead of the opponent, or at least keep up. Dark Betrayal also offers a great answer to Pack Rat and can sometimes allow its controller to come back from being behind to Pack Rat: something no other card in this matchup can claim. Previously most decks sideboarded just one copy, but it appears that three is the new norm. Simply because these decks are publicized and the general populace is likely to adopt three means that playing three is necessary just to keep up. Maybe four is the way of the future, much like four Gainsay is standard in the Monoblue sideboard.

In order to fit new sideboard cards like Pharika's Cure, Shrivel, and extra copies of Dark Betrayal, other cards must go. First on the chopping block is Pithing Needle. Pithing Needle provided a clean solution against planeswalkers in particular. Pithing Needle is great against Esper control, but the real inclusion in the sideboard was to beat the planeswalkers from Green Devotion. Domri Rade, Xenagos, the Reveler, and Garruk, Caller of Beasts require proactive answers to be dealt with effectively, and Pithing Needle offers the perfect solution. As both Green Devotion and Esper control have started to wane from the metagame, cutting Pithing Needle for more effective sideboard cards is a logical conclusion.

Pharika's Cure replaces some sideboard copies of Doom Blade because it serves a very similar role but is more effective against more difficult matchups, meaning it gives Monoblack extra percentages in the places it needs them most.

Monoblack continues to cement itself as a dominant force in Standard. The consistency of the deck paired with a high power level of individual cards, including four Thoughtseize, make the deck relatively un-exploitable and ensure a solid operating plan against every deck in the format. The deep card pool in Standard offers a plethora of options while providing a potent sideboard. In particular, the Standard cardpool features a wide assortment of powerful black removal spells that can be played in any configuration to meet the needs of various metagames. I cannot Foresee Monoblack being unseated from the top tier of the metagame and would thoroughly prepare to play against it at any Standard event.

I am going to continue to play Monoblack Devotion in Standard, and Owen's list is everything I liked about my old list but with more Pack Rat and a new sideboard. Three Desecration Demon, as I advocated last week, is still a fine option, and would allow one copy of Whip of Erebos to fit into the maindeck.

-Adam












http://www.channelfireball.com/articles/owens-another-win-mono-black-in-albuquerque-1st/
This past weekend I went to GP Albuquerque and I won it. Yeah, I won it no big deal. It's a huge relief to not write another article about a deck I played and how I did terribly with it but that I think the deck is good anyway. I feel like I've been doing that a little too often lately. I've been playing a ton of Standard as of late, and finally have a deck that I actually like to play.

The lion's share of the credit goes to Paul Rietzl, since he is the one who originally sent me the deck list. I suspected that Mono-Black Devotion would be a good deck because of the sheer volume of other decks I had tried and disliked. My testing was not useless though, since I learned that no matter what deck I played I still lost to black. In the end, myself, Paul Rietzl, Matt Sperling, Tom Martell, and William Jensen played the deck (give or take a few cards) and finished in 1st, 8th, 9th, 13th, and 28th place. If you count our wins and losses, ignoring matches played against each other, we amassed 43 wins and 12 losses—a 78.2% win rate.

Main Deck
4 Mutavault
19 Swamp
3 Temple of Deceit
4 Desecration Demon
1 Erebos, God of the Dead
4 Gray Merchant of Asphodel
4 Nightveil Specter
4 Pack Rat
2 Devour Flesh
1 Doom Blade
4 Hero's Downfall
4 Thoughtseize
2 Ultimate Price
4 Underworld Connections
Sideboard
3 Dark Betrayal
1 Doom Blade
3 Duress
1 Erebos, God of the Dead
3 Lifebane Zombie
3 Pharika's Cure
1 Shrivel
These are the 75 cards Huey and I ran, and if I could go back and change the deck I don't think I would change a single card. Clearly that sounds like a thing the guy who won the tournament would say, but given how well each of us finished, the only slots in dispute were the cards Huey and I played different from the rest of the group.

Whip of erebos
I chose not to play Whip of Erebos. I saw myself sideboarding it out a ton, and didn't like it very much even in the aggressive matchups. When you look at your deck after sideboard against mono-red, a matchup where I had heard high praise of the Whip, your only creatures are Nightveil Specter, Pack Rat, and Desecration Demon. None of which are particularly good when given lifelink, since the Desecration Demon never actually deals combat damage. So it works as a slow way to gain 2 life a turn from Nightveil Specter or close out a game you weren't already going to win with a Pack Rat, which seemed unlikely to me. I admit that the Whip is great in the mirror and gives whoever has it a serious edge that they otherwise wouldn't have had. I chose to make my deck more streamlined and consistent—better against the rest of the field and worse in the mirror.

Nykthos, shrine to nyx
I also cut Nykthos, Shrine to Nyx for a Swamp in an effort to minimize the number of times I had Nightveil Specter in my opening hand and be unable to cast it. I think Nykthos is a very good card to have in the mirror match, when both players have Underworld Connections and a handful of great spells, but I think in most matchups you would rather just be able to play the Specter when you have it. I believe that because I both had below average draws in most of the games and because of these two specific changes I lost to both Matt Sperling and Paul Rietzl in the Swiss rounds of the tournament. It is impossible to tell what might have happened if I had played their list.

Since I was able to cut the Whip, I chose to move one of their sideboarded Doom Blades to the main and with a free sideboard slot I was able to jam a Shrivel, which was great for me. The mono-white aggro matchup is very close each time I play it, and Shrivel is a total blowout, so having a land mine that wins the game almost every time it's drawn is great for a matchup you know will be very close. I was also pretty happy with Doom Blade—the way I like to play the deck it's good to have more cheap removal spells. Moving forward it might be too big of a liability to have a card like Doom Blade in your main deck if you expect a big portion of the field to play mono-black.

It's funny because during the long stretch of tournaments before this one, where I feel like I have under-performed, I began to doubt myself more and more. I became much less confident than I used to be about my own deck choice, card selection, and even my plays. After I won GP DC with a deck of my own design and started to practice with Paul's deck, I just never lost. The more I played with the deck the more I won. I even started to tell people I couldn't be of help to them since with any configuration of the deck I tried I would just win. I began to think I was overreacting and lost my confidence all at once again, and my overconfidence couldn't be trusted either. It turns out I wasn't too wrong. Before the tournament, I tried to tell everyone I could about how great the deck actually was and very few listened. I begged and pleaded with them saying, “I have Excalibur, this deck is Excalibur!” Just an unbeatable weapon of choice. I knew I had stumbled on something great, and for the many times in my Magic life when someone has handed me a great deck list, I felt it was my duty to try and give back to as many people as I could. In hindsight, I actually regret not trying harder to convince more people to play it.

Pack Rat
The best part of the deck, and the choice I feel makes it stands out from other Mono-Black Devotion builds is four Pack Rat maindeck. I felt this was a strong piece of technology that almost no other people would find. Pack Rat is currently one of the best cards in the format and possibly too good. If you're on the play and you have an uncontested Pack Rat alongside one copy of Mutavault, you get to attack for 2, then 8, then 15! It's absurd how good the card is and how small a window it allows your opponent to handle it before they are just dead. Thoughtseize into Pack Rat is as good as the Modern staple Thoughtseize into Dark Confidant, except that the Pack Rat is just way better because you're doing a similar thing to a Modern deck in Standard.

I also loved this idea because Pack Rat is easily the best card in the mirror, and I knew other decks would have 2 main 2 sideboard, whereas we would just start the match presideboarded against them. I continued to have flashbacks of Pack Rat in Sealed and draft, where you just play it and the opponent sits stunned with no answer. It's just way too good of a card when it goes unanswered, and many games I played throughout the tournament had me steal one game of the match with a quick Pack Rat. Matches of Magic are much easier to win when you get a game for free because you have turn two Pack Rat. It also made it feel like I wasn't lucky, like in draft—here I just had a better strategy than my opponents. I had a card that acted like a Bitterblossom or a Stoneforge Mystic that came down early and singlehandedly took over the game.

I will readily admit though that I was quite fortunate to win the tournament. I had pretty good pairings throughout and good hands to match. I never got mana-screwed in a game three when I needed to win, and I was able to ID into Top 8 while others were forced to play. Some of my opponents mulliganed in the Top 8 matches while I did not. This was a tournament where I prepared a ton and I had a great deck for the field. Paul said in his Top 8 profile that the deck had no bad matchups.


The deck reminds me of Jund. It has tons of good cheap removal, a solid plan against any aggressive or controlling strategy, and the deck is very hard to sideboard against. If you put too much cheap removal in your deck to deal with the Pack Rat then you can lose on the spot to an Underworld Connections. It's been said many times, but I can't understate the value in playing with a card like Thoughtseize. Black decks are weak to the God creatures, but Thoughtseize will always be a good answer to Thassa, God of the Sea. Master of Waves is just a horribly ineffective creature when it trades straight-up for a two-casting-cost removal spell, but the blue deck can't realistically sideboard out their best card. Often they just hope to get lucky with it and catch you off guard.

I love the amount of removal in the deck, I love playing with a card like Pack Rat, and I really love a deck that can fully capitalize on a card as good as Gray Merchant of Asphodel. On the low end of its power it drains for 4 life, and when things are going well you can drain someone for 8 or 10. Do you realize how powerful a Magic card is that deals 10 damage to your opponent and gains 10 life? It's a 20-point life swing, for five mana. That is absurd. Imagine if Sorin's Vengeance cost five mana instead of seven, and you got a 2/4 creature to boot. They would ban it. Gray Merchant isn't THAT good, but it's close, and it can do those things. It's both an absurdly powerful card on its own, but it also plays well into your strategy in games you're winning, in games you're losing, and in games that are very close. It can act like a Thragtusk or a Fireball or a card that just locks up a race. It's hard to accurately state what this card does, but I never sideboard it out in any matchup and it can render interaction irrelevant when drawn in multiples.

Once again i'd like to thank Paul Rietzl for shipping me the list and I hope my insights and input on the deck were valuable. If you had told me two weeks ago that I would win back-to-back Grand Prix, there's about to way I would have believed you. It's really been an amazing trip for me, learning not to doubt myself and to just believe that I can achieve great things if I put my mind to it. I could have even slowed down and stopped going to as many tournaments, I sure thought about it. My preparation for this tournament was very good and I know if I work as hard as I have been working for future events I will continue to put up good results in Legacy, or Standard, or Limited. I invest a lot of time and energy into Magic and I never give up no matter how bad things are going, I'm proud of my recent accomplishments and I know I have a ton of people out there who root for me, and I'm happy showing them I can win.

















http://www.starcitygames.com/article/26855_Thoughtseize-You.html
Thoughtseize You

REID DUKE
9/05/13
#Spoilers  #Fundamentals  #THS

Thoughtseize has come to be one of the most iconic cards in Magic. Though the card itself has not been legal in every format, the Thoughtseize effect is more or less ubiquitous in cards like Duress, Inquisition of Kozilek, and dozens of others. Now, with Thoughtseize being reprinted in Theros, its presence will be felt more than ever, and its status as a tournament staple is all but guaranteed for the next few years. Understanding how to use Thoughtseize will be integral to the success of any tournament player. Today I'll cover everything you need to know about Thoughtseize, from deckbuilding to sideboarding to gameplay.


The Risks Of Thoughtseize

Trading One For One

The first step is to understand what Thoughtseize really accomplishes in a game of Magic. While it's a hyperefficient card that sees extensive play even in Legacy and Vintage, there are some heavy costs associated with the card as well.

Thoughtseize, in terms of card advantage, represents a one-for-one trade—no advantage is gained directly. Therefore, step one in considering Thoughtseize is to think about whether your deck wants to trade one for one. Good candidates for Thoughtseize along this metric might be Jund or U/B Control. However, not every deck will fit this bill.

A common pitfall that I see among newer deckbuilders is a draw towards B/R decks that feature both a lot of burn and a lot of Thoughtseize effects. This is natural because black and red are a likely pair according to Magic's flavor and those are among the most iconic effects that each color has to offer.

However, the reality is that Thoughtseize is exactly what a burn deck does not want. The strength of burn is that it's difficult for the opponent to interact with through ordinary means, so if you add Thoughtseize to the deck in the place of a card that would otherwise contribute to your game plan, you're really just giving your opponent exactly what they want—a way to trade off cards against you.

In my experience, such decks are excellent at getting the opponent down to five life but are not the best at actually winning games.

The same is true of ramp strategies, like Mythic and Wolf Run Ramp. These decks devote such a high proportion of their cards to mana that each nonland card must have a very high impact on the game in order for the strategy to work. So a card like Thoughtseize, the goal of which is to trade with an opposing spell (of which the opponent has many more than you), is not really what you're looking for.

These decks can still consider Thoughtseize, especially as a sideboard card, for specific reasons that I'll get into below, but it's important to understand that its inclusion comes at a dear cost.

Redundancy

For decks that do want to trade one for one, Thoughtseize is appealing in its ability to accomplish that efficiently and reliably. However, it's still not perfect for every situation. In terms of tempo, Thoughtseize does not affect the board and trades with a card which the opponent has not yet invested mana into—strictly speaking, casting a Thoughtseize puts you a little behind.

Consequently, Thoughtseize is quite poor against a deck with a lot of redundancy. Redundancy, in the context of a Magic deck, means that cards are very replaceable. Splinter Twin does not have much redundancy because it needs to assemble one copy of Deceiver Exarch, one copy of Splinter Twin, and one cheap way to protect the combo. Thoughtseize is excellent against such a deck because when you take away the opponent's one Exarch, they have very few cards that they can draw that will help them recover from the loss and their deck functions poorly if they're unable to do so.

The opposite example is a very basic creature deck—think White Weenie or Mono-Green Aggro. Thoughtseize would be at its worst against a deck of twenty Forests and forty Kalonian Tuskers because it's overwhelmingly likely that you would take one Kalonian Tusker out of the opponent's hand and they would simply play a different one instead. The Thoughtseize effect is doubly bad against such a deck because you cannot effectively attack their hand and casting Thoughtseize does not help you keep up with what's on the board. You'd much prefer to have a Doom Blade, which answers a creature that the opponent has already spent mana on, or you'd prefer to have your own creature, which will help you under any circumstances.

Missing

What I haven't yet mentioned is the chance of missing with your Thoughtseize, which is a huge risk that I consistently see players underestimate. Games of Magic are won and lost on small margins; when you mulligan, when you get two for oned, or when anything else happens to set you behind on cards, the pressure falls on you to do something great in order to pull yourself back to parity. If you cannot and both players have comparable draws, you will lose the game. I don't think I'd be able to overstate how bad it is to miss on a Thoughtseize, particularly in Limited or in a grindy matchup like a Jund mirror. For you to want Thoughtseize in your deck, circumstances must be such that the risk of missing is very low or the rewards of hitting are very high.

The risk of missing is the main reason why the card Thoughtseize tends to outshine other versions of the Thoughtseize effect. It's one of the reasons that I've never registered Appetite for Brains in a Constructed tournament, and it's the reason why Duress is typically relegated to sideboard.

Coming Down To Topdecks

Let's compare the Thoughtseize effect to the similar and equally iconic Counterspell effect.

The advantages of the Thoughtseize effect are:

You can cast Thoughtseize at your own convenience, while Counterspell must be used in a specific window.
You get to see the opponent's hand.
Thoughtseize and similar cards tend to be quite cheap.
Some cards cannot be easily countered.
The advantages of the Counterspell effect are:

You answer a card that the opponent has invested mana into.
You protect yourself from topdecks.
You'll come to regret the inclusion of Thoughtseize any time the game stalls out and players begin playing off the top of their libraries. Drawing Thoughtseize when the opponent has no cards in their hand (or only lands) is much the same as missing with it.

It's an unfortunate quality of Thoughtseize that it helps draw the game towards that topdeck situation while also being an abysmal topdeck in itself.

Ask yourself during deck construction and during sideboarding how likely it is for the game to come down to a topdeck situation; indeed, sometimes it's your goal for the game to get to this point (Jund, Junk, Pox, and similar decks frequently have this goal). If it seems likely, then ask yourself how much you can afford to dilute your deck with cards that are so bad to draw in the lategame.

A simple way to weigh the risks and rewards of Thoughtseize is to consider it a card that's excellent to have in your opening hand and poor to draw at any other time. Before you start playing, try to predict how many turns the game is likely go, and you'll get a number for how many cards you're going to see in a typical game. Compare the number of cards that you'll draw in your opening hand (hopefully seven) to the number of cards you'll draw off the top of your deck in the course of the game.

When this ratio is high, as it is against a fast combo deck, Thoughtseize is more likely to shine. While it might not be intuitive, I've found Inquisition of Kozilek to be an excellent card in Modern Jund against decks like Affinity and Burn (the life loss on Thoughtseize can be a large cost and should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis) for exactly this reason. When the ratio is low, as it is in something like a Jund mirror, Thoughtseize is more likely to be a liability.

For years, I've felt confident in my ability to win Jund mirrors in Modern. My secret is that I sideboard out every last Thoughtseize, Inquisition of Kozilek, and Duress that I have in favor of cards that are more powerful to rip off the top of my deck. Almost invariably both players have empty hands by turn 4 or 5, and against an opponent who has six dead draws in their deck, my chances to win a game from that point become quite high the longer the game drags on.

To recap, be wary of including Thoughtseize in decks that do not want to trade one for one. Thoughtseize has lower value in a metagame full of decks with a lot of redundancy. Look to sideboard out Thoughtseize against decks like this and in matchups that are likely to come down to topdecks.

I recommend restricting yourself to five or six copies of Thoughtseize effects in your maindeck and seven between maindeck and sideboard. This is my personal maximum that I adhere to in every format.

The Rewards Of Thoughtseize

Now that I've warned you about the dangers of overloading your deck with Thoughtseize and its cousins, I'm free to explain why despite these weaknesses it stands as one of the most useful tools available to a deckbuilder.

Breaking Up Synergy

My philosophy in deckbuilding is to focus on cards that are individually powerful by their own merits. However, this is not the only way to build Magic decks. In fact, my friend and teammate, the esteemed Sam Black, takes much the opposite approach, looking for advantages in favorable interactions between cards. Such an approach has many benefits. Even my Tarmogoyfs will look foolish when they face down Sam's Bonescythe Sliver, Megantic Sliver, Syphon Sliver, and Galerider Sliver all in play at once! (I insult Sam's creativity only in the interest of a simple example).

It's cards like Thoughtseize that allow the well-rounded, Rock-style strategies to compete against the (typically) more powerful synergy-based decks. Thoughtseize represents a way to trade resources quickly and efficiently, and once you can force that Galerider Sliver to stand on its own, your more powerful cards will win their individual battles. The Thoughtseize effect accomplishes the goal of breaking up synergy better than more situational answers like Doom Blade or Naturalize because of its applicability against creature-based strategies, control, and combo alike.

Answering A Specific Problem

What's the first thing you do when you lose game 1 of your Limited match to Primeval Bounty? Presumably, your answer is something along the lines of "feel sorry for myself" or "mutter curses under my breath." If so, what's the second thing you do? Personally, I scour my sideboard for Naturalize, Solemn Offering, Bramblecrush, or any other method I can find in desperation to get an enchantment off the table!

But sometimes you're playing a B/R deck.

Well, the Thoughtseize effect is a great way to answer a problem card that you can't otherwise handle. Before I broke down and added Golgari Charm to the sideboard of my Standard Jund deck, I was sideboarding Duress in against Mono-Red Aggro with the goal of stripping away a Burning Earth and trying to win the game before my opponent topdecked another. It's not the perfect plan, but it's better than simply giving up!

Plus, some cards simply cannot be answered after the fact. Imagine a B/W Tokens deck that struggles a great deal against Supreme Verdict. The best answer might be to try to take it away with Thoughtseize!

I always rest a little easier when I have Thoughtseize in my deck because I know that it represents at least a possible answer to nearly anything my opponent can throw at me. I'll return to the concept of "answering a specific problem" in the gameplay section below.

Seeing The Opponent's Hand

While it's hard to put a tangible value on seeing the opponent's hand, I've always found it to be quite a large advantage that most players undervalue.

Personally, I was a player who developed good and precise technical play before I had much of a knack for reading my opponents. Perhaps it was due to my background in Magic Online or maybe just related to my introverted personality, but either way when Gitaxian Probe was first printed, I added it to all of my decks and began to win a lot more.

I played Gitaxian Probe in decks that you wouldn't think could make particularly good use of it: U/B Control, Caw-Blade, etc. However, I found it easy to find a route to victory once all hidden information was laid out before me.

The effect of seeing the opponent's hand is very powerful and can be life or death in certain matchups. Just as one example, consider the difference between a Storm player who casts Duress, sees the coast is clear, and takes their easy win versus one who sees a hand full of counters and knows to be patient and wait for more disruption.

Creating A Hole

The real key to Thoughtseize follows from the ability to see the opponent's hand and is what sets it apart from similar effects like Hymn to Tourach, Cabal Therapy, and Counterspell. You see your opponent's hand, you consider the game, and then you decide what card to choose.

Let's return to the topic of redundancy. I offered the all Kalonian Tusker deck as an example of a deck with so much redundancy that Thoughtseize becomes a liability. However, the real-life equivalent of such a deck can sometimes be surprisingly vulnerable to Thoughtseize. Even if we restrict ourselves to Mono-Green Aggro, decks will still play their creatures on a mana curve starting at one and reaching up to four, five, or six. They might have combat tricks or finisher cards like Overrun; they might have utility cards or planeswalkers. When you cast Thoughtseize, you can see what resource or category of card the opponent is short on and attack that.

If you see a hand of weenie creatures, you can strip the one Giant Growth and feel safe behind your Sengir Vampire. If you see a hand full of top-end finishers, you can strip their one cheap play and push your early advantage.

I made the claim earlier that Thoughtseize puts you behind on tempo, but this is truer in a technical sense than in practice since you can use Thoughtseize to break up an opponent's mana curve. If you cast it early in the game and they only have one strong play to make on the following turn (or if you can plan further ahead than that), you can strip that card and make them waste their mana.

Gameplay: Casting Thoughtseize

Creating A Hole Against A Control Deck

With regard to redundancy, we've discussed creature beatdown decks, and we've discussed synergistic combo decks. A third category of deck against which Thoughtseize really shines is the reactive control deck.

While control decks often feature cards that are individually good, they do require a proper mix in order to function properly. For example, not enough creature defense and you can lose to a quick rush. No counterspells and you can lose to a planeswalker; no finishers and you can flood out and lose the late game. These are the matchups where creating a hole is most important.

I believe that Thoughtseize has become even better against control decks as the card pool of Magic has expanded, and is particularly powerful alongside planeswalkers. I love playing Jund against control decks like U/W/R in both Standard and Modern because there are so many possible approaches to the game and it's a fun challenge to find the best one.

Standard Jund (after sideboarding) will have powerful creatures, planeswalkers, Rakdos's Return, Underworld Connections, and sometimes even more angles of attack like Acidic Slime or Ruric Thar, the Unbowed! Granted, U/W/R has ways to beat any and all of these cards, but it's difficult for the opponent to have them all at any one time. It's nearly impossible when you're Duressing them.

When you cast Duress, you get to see your opponent's vulnerabilities. If they have too much removal, then maybe you shouldn't even bother trying to beat them with creatures—just take away their counter and resolve a Rakdos's Return. On the other hand, if you Duress on turn 1 on the play and they have a hand full of Dissipates, take away their Detention Sphere and see what you can stick in the first three turns of the game.

Example: You have two lands in play, and your opponent has one. You cast Duress on turn 2, and these are both players' hands.

Your hand:

Woodland+Cemetery  Cavern+of+Souls  Underworld+Connections  Huntmaster+of+the+Fells  Rakdos%27s+Return
Opponent's hand:

Hallowed+Fountain  Clifftop+Retreat  Syncopate  Negate  Dissipate  Warleader%27s+Helix Thundermaw+Hellkite
Generally speaking, Underworld Connections is one of the best cards against U/W/R, but the key to this situation is that you need to ignore it, at least for the time being. This Duress has shown you your opponent's strength—a lot of counterspells—and one possible weakness—not many answers to a resolved creature. In this example, I would take Warleader's Helix and use Cavern of Souls to resolve Huntmaster of the Fells.

Huntmaster is not traditionally one of the best cards in the matchup, but in this case it's what the situation calls for. The opponent has plenty of topdecks that can answer the Huntmaster, but at least if they have to tap out for Supreme Verdict or Thundermaw Hellkite, you'll have a window to resolve a spell in spite of all their counters. You're unlikely to have much luck trying to brute force through all of those counters.

Answering A Specific Problem

The gameplay of Thoughtseize comes down to two questions—when to cast it and what card to take. The two questions are related.

Once you know the matchup, ask yourself what the most important cards are to take with your Thoughtseize. In the example of the Limited match used above, I've sideboarded in Duress with the goal of stopping my opponent's Primeval Bounty; the ideal time to cast Duress is probably the turn right before they hit six mana since that's the time that they're most likely to have the Bounty in their hand.

If I'm playing Jund and my opponent is playing B/W Tokens with the troublesome Auriok Champion, then I'm going to make sure that I cast Thoughtseize on turn 1 when I'm on the draw and by turn 2 when I'm on the play.

I could go on and on with examples of proactive problem cards that your opponent could have, but the answer is typically going to be to cast Thoughtseize as late as you can conveniently do so without giving them a chance to cast the problem card. It's important to note that in reality there are frequently multiple problem cards in any given matchup, in which case you need to adjust accordingly. Say the Primeval Bounty player is G/W and also has Ajani, Caller of the Pride; it would be foolish to wait too long on your Duress and let them stick the planeswalker because then you might lose a game where they don't even draw Primeval Bounty!

The more interesting situation is when you're dealing with reactive problem cards. Remember the Wolf Run Ramp deck from earlier, which doesn't love the idea of playing with Thoughtseize because it doesn't want to trade one for one? Well, this might be a deck that simply has a really hard time beating Dissipate, and needs to sideboard Thoughtseize with the primary goal of stripping a Dissipate and resolving a Primeval Titan.

In this case, you want to be as patient as possible with your Thoughtseize, waiting until the turn before or the turn you're ready to cast your Titan. It would be awful to fire off your Thoughtseize on turn 1 and then have them draw into Dissipate in the meantime. The trickier situations will arise on turn 5 when you don't have a Titan in your hand but are hoping to draw one or when you have Titan, Thoughtseize, and six mana but no seventh land in hand. These should be handled case by case depending on how desperate you feel and how much you can afford to be patient.

If I'm forced to make generalizations, I would try to hold my Thoughtseize in the first example until I draw a Titan. I would cast Thoughtseize right away in the second example so that I can play Titan the following turn whether I draw a land or not.

Notice that in all of the examples given so far the only time Thoughtseize has been cast on turn 1 is when we're on the draw against a deck with Auriok Champion. Thoughtseize does not have to be cast at the earliest possible moment unless there is a special reason why you want to play it that way.

I'll close today by making some general suggestions about how to use Thoughtseize when you do not have a specific goal in mind.

Thoughtseize For Value: When To Cast Thoughtseize

Do not let Thoughtseize ruin your own game plan. Thoughtseize should simply be one more tool to use at your convenience and not a card that should force you to go out of your way. Unless I have a reason to do otherwise, I will play my creature instead of playing my Thoughtseize. Unless I have a reason to do otherwise, I will play my tapped land instead of playing my Thoughtseize. I do not know whether Thoughtseize will go up or down in value each additional turn I wait, so I will make plays that I know are time sensitive (playing creatures) first and will not pay a tangible cost (two life on a shockland) in order to play the Thoughtseize sooner.

Example: You're playing Modern Jund. This is your hand on the play against an unknown opponent:

Overgrown+Tomb  Blood+Crypt  Thoughtseize  Lightning+Bolt  Terminate  Liliana+of+the+Veil Liliana+of+the+Veil
In this scenario, I would play Blood Crypt tapped. If my opponent did nothing, I would play Thoughtseize on turn 2 and play Overgrown Tomb tapped. There is no predictable play that my opponent could make on turn 1 that I feel I desperately need to stop. If they play Deathrite Shaman, I can Bolt it and Thoughtseize on turn 2. If they Thoughtseize me, my hand is fairly redundant, and I'm not afraid of losing any particular card. If they cast Serum Visions or hold up Spell Snare, I don't really care; I probably wouldn't have taken those cards anyway.

If I were to topdeck a two-drop creature, my patience will have cost me a little bit, but Jund isn't a deck where you really need to rush. Life is important, and it's not even clear that "shock myself, Thoughtseize, shock myself, Dark Confidant" will be a great play depending on the matchup. I stand to gain two life and have extra information by paying the small price of waiting one extra turn on my Thoughtseize.

Thoughtseize For Value: What Card to Take

A convenient time for casting Thoughtseize has finally presented itself, but you still have no special goal in mind. First, look at the opponent's hand and see if you can create a hole, aka create and exploit a vulnerability. If you can't, no problem. There's no need to try to force anything or to get impatient—just take their most powerful card!

In Modern, I have a hierarchy of cards that I like to Thoughtseize away against blue midrange or control decks. When in doubt, I take Snapcaster Mage. If there's no Snapcaster Mage, I take Cryptic Command, and if there's no Cryptic Command, I take Sphinx's Revelation or some other powerful late-game card.

I also have a rule that I never try to mana screw my opponent; lots of experience has simply led me to view it as an unreliable strategy. I never take a Mox Opal or Springleaf Drum against Affinity ever. If my opponent kept a one-lander with Serum Visions, I'll often still take their Snapcaster Mage unless I really think I can put on a lot of pressure and close the game fast. Eventually, your opponent will draw out of their mana screw, and you'll regret not taking their more powerful card. If they don't, then you'll win anyway.

Putting It All Together

I hope this primer has helped you to better understand Thoughtseize, if only in a small way. The card is an incredibly powerful tool that all tournament Magic players should know how and when to use. However, it carries a substantial amount of risk with it as well.

To recap:

Thoughtseize doesn't belong in just any deck.
Sideboard it out against decks with redundancy or when the game is likely to come down to topdecks.
Think ahead about what cards you most want to take with Thoughtseize. Use it to answer the cards that you can't easily answer otherwise.
When you cast Thoughtseize, try to create a hole. Look for a vulnerability and push that angle of attack
When in doubt, get maximum value from your Thoughtseize by casting it at your convenience and taking the opponent's most powerful card.
Keep these tips in mind and Thoughtseize will serve you well across many formats and for many years to come.