Games in which both players have decision trees beyond “did I bring and then DRAW sideboard hoser _____” or “my goldfish is faster than yours” are not boring. Wanting to win is justifiable cause for playing mindless linear decks, wanting to have fun is not.

We see fair strategies all around in standard and I personally want to play modern not just for stronger cards but for different means to win. Being fair is boring.

The problem is that no other author matches Sheridan for quality of post.

Sheridan sticks to the facts, is generally unemotional about his comments and then is willing to acknowledge his mistakes and then tries to see why he made such errors and if there’s anything to be learnt from them.

He also has the type of article series that allows him to keep writing weekly.

Jordan’s original article was actually what many wanted (an overview of RUG Delver after it won that SCG event), but it’s difficult to follow on that type of article – so we got a bunch of Jordan’s articles about ‘Monkey Grow’ which didn’t really sate any appetites (we already got the primer we wanted). He then followed that with a bunch of primers on decks no-one really cared for.

Trevor has a similar problem – the original articles on Grixis Control were great, but an author can’t sustain themselves on just writing on a single deck. Especially when they’re emotionally invested in the deck. Trevor has started branching into meta-analysis (see this article), but it makes no sense after Sheridan’s article in the same week (which is infinitely better).

Monday’s article by Ryan M Overturf was pretty much what everyone wanted (again). But I’d be interested to see how he could keep up the momentum by writing about the deck each and every week. It’s difficult, but you can see someone like Jeff Hoogland do it (with Kiki-Chord) – so it’s possible.

Modern Nexus might be best served trying to get a weekly deck tech on a break-out deck (ala RUG Delver, Grixis Control and now Grixis Delver) without requiring those authors to continuously provide content. And then figure out some sort of weekly schedule that isn’t just thoughts on a specific deck.

As it stands, I read everything Sheridan writes word for word – and then gloss over the rest. I can’t imagine I’m in the minority.

I have to agree with this – in the context of Sheridan’s article (which admittedly pooled data from LA and Charlotte, but still), these sentences made no sense. And in the case of an event as large as a GP, looking at just the Top 8 and making sweeping declarations about the metagame comes off as myopic – expand your sights to the Top 32 in Charlotte, and the Burn and Affinity pop right back up. They weren’t out in the same numbers as they were in LA, but they were around. And speaking of “old-guard format staples”… Isn’t that Jund by definition? It’s eaten 2 bannings and it’s still around. If that’s not a format staple, I don’t know what is.

Now granted, I still agree with a lot of what this article is saying: the metagame is trending to a fairer, more interaction-oriented place overall (mostly because it was awful hard for it to get LESS interactive, but that’s neither here nor there), current combo decks are either fast and resilient or have a value-based backup plan, and Collected Company proved that it’s still a metagame force to be reckoned with. I also appreciated the spotlight for decks like Knightfall (whose fringe status still mystifies me), Naya Company (which has come roaring back after being left for dead during Eldrazi Winter), and Kiki Chord (which is the latest deck to get on Team Nahiri). So I hope this post isn’t interpreted as unilateral negativity. I just think the point regarding linear aggro getting pushed out is a bit hyperbolic.

Why yes, I *would* be happy to see Modern become mostly about fair, interactive games where both players are involved in reciprocal decision-making. Thanks for asking.

I’ve been in the format for just under a year now, and it’s only just starting to look like it’s okay to actually try to play Magic with the other person at the table instead of just trying to ignore each other and hope your deck goes off faster than the other guy’s. Maybe I’m the outlier, but I see this as a good thing. I want competition, not recitation.

Why? Because simultaneous to GP Charlotte, the even larger GP Los Angeles was taking place and old-guard format mainstays like Affinity (and Merfolk) were all over it. In fact, the final match featured a 13 year-old (!) piloting Affinity (but losing in the most unlikely fashion to the fish).

As per the previous article on these GPs at Modern Nexus, Affinity was one of the two best performing archetypes over the weekend and was ANYTHING but “pushed out of the picture.” In contrast, it was one of the better Grand Prix weekends Affinity (or any archetype) has had.