Took this to PM to avoid having to have a technical back and forth, but we were able to get on the same page on a number of issues:
@vaughnbros asserts the following premises, which I will stipulate to for the sake of this argument:
- Gush Mentor is 22% of the metagame
- Total Gush decks are 29% of the metagame (meaning that non Mentoir Gush decks are 7% of overall metagame)
- Total Mentor decks (Gush Mentor and non-Gush Mentor decks) are 29% of the metagame
So far so good.
Now, back to the question:
- Q: 1) If Mentor is restricted, what is the % change in the overall proportion of Gush decks in Top 8s that you expect? (I assume you believe it will have a downward direction, but please indicate).
Vaughbros best estimate was a 7% of decline in Gush decks, to 22%.
My estimate, in post 112, was that between 33-50% of Gush Mentor players would switch to a non-Gush deck.
Using the stipulated premises above, that means a 7-11% decrease in Gush decks from 29%.
In other words, after all of this debate, Vaughnbros prediction is exactly in line with mine.
Now, let's turn to the second question:
- If Gush is restricted, what is the effect on Mentor?
Vaughbros best estimate is that Mentor would fall to 21% of Top 8s if Gush is restricted, but estimated a range of 7%-36%.
The range I estimated in post 112 is actually very similar. I estimated a post-Gush Mentor range of 16-37%, distributed among three different post-Gush restriction Mentor decks.
So, we agree on some broad generalities, although we disagree on many specifics.
My main argument is that Mentor should be restricted instead of Gush, because a restricting Mentor will bring Gush decks, overall, to an acceptable level. Vaughnbros said he agrees on this point (the latter clause, not the former).
whew that was like pulling teeth, but we got there!
We can now turn to issues on which we disagree.
- I think that the chances that Mentor either maintains or actually increases it's % of the metagame are not as improbable as he believes. Specifically, I think that the combined chances that Mentor either maintains or actually marginally increases it's % of the metagame are better than he believes.
I'm not saying that the chances that Mentor maintains it's current % or increase are more probable than a decline, but I think it is certainly more likely that Mentor would increase post Gush restriction than that Gush would increase post Mentor restriction.
That's the most important part of my claim because, if true, that makes Mentor the better restriction.
The reason for this is that Mentor is so portable among blue decks, unlike the cards Vaughbros mentioned earlier, like Thorn or Bridge. And as the best win condition in the format, post-Gush blue decks will readily adopt Mentor as a dominant win condition.
It just depends on how the post-Gush Mentor decks shake out. But the ranges and estimates on provided in post 112 show how this might happen. I'm not saying that they will, just saying that they might.
@ajfirecracker said in SMIP Podcast #63: "Where Do We Go From Here?":
Do you think the two prior restrictions of Gush were not correctly decided?
The first was correct, or at least reasonable. The second was, imo, incorrect. I have SCG articles analyzing both, and staking out these positions.
The reason I think the second was incorrect is because I believe that the combined restrictions of Scroll, Brainstorm and Ponder were more than enough to rein in Gush decks. Gush's performance from 2010-2012 suggests that I was very likely correct about this.