I won with consult-oracle far more than I won with doomsday. Easier to set up and easier on the mana. That combo is the real deal.

Actual Doomsday list (the pictured maindeck is a couple cards off and the sideboard is not close):

The deck was really really powerful but I'm bad at magic now so I messed up a bunch. Should have easily won one of the matches I lost (it was on camera after the regular R3 or R4 match), probably could have won the others as well if I'd played better or mulliganed better.

List/board are 100% Sam Krohlow, his advice was basically to play like a control deck most of the time. Don't try to go off unless you're sure you got it (or, you know, you're about to die). I went off T2 maybe twice (mostly with DT -> Lotus -> DD -> free draw spell) because i had to, but otherwise most games didnt end until turn 6 or 7 at least.

Notable is the zero mana stack with top in play: gush/lotus/ancestral/oracle/petal (or sapphire): tap top, gush for lotus/top, lotus -> UUU, play top, tap draw, ancestral, U floating, 0 cards in deck, petal -> oracle. I won with that pile a couple times, including once on T2 facing lethal.

Personally i hated the shattering sprees in the board and wouldn't play them again. I'd try either an instant or another hurkyls or something. And I wouldnt mind having one more bomb maindeck, either another DD or maybe a tinker type effect or something, I had some games where I was clearly ahead but strugged to close out.

-Jimmy

@Sovarius You can consider that, but its objectively misleading and false. The rules explicitly DO allow me to concede to someone to propel them into the top 8, or ID with someone to put us both in (at the expense of another player). The black-and-white rules-oriented approach leaves no question: Matt was 100% within his rights, full stop.

Saying that the rules do not work the way you'd like is fair. That's an opinion you can have. Most of your arguments are more along the lines of what you consider ethical within an event, not about how the rules work.

@spook You should probably send a PM if only he is allowed to answer. When you post it in public, everyone can see it and respond.

Also, he doesn't owe you anything; he can legally concede if he wants. If those other people are mad, they should have played better and lost less matches.

You can totally cut strip mine now, since the Legend rule was changed recently to allow each player to have their own copy of a legend in play!

My list was pretty similar to Sam's, except strictly better because I cut his bad cards for good ones. List here:

3 Ancient Tomb
1 Cavern of Souls
4 Flooded Strand
2 Island
1 Library of Alexandria
1 Plains
1 Polluted Delta
1 Tolarian Academy
2 Tundra
1 Ancestral Recall
3 Auriok Salvagers
1 Black Lotus
1 Brainstorm
1 Dig Through Time
1 Engineered Explosives
2 Flusterstorm
4 Force of Will
1 Fragmentize
1 Hope of Ghirapur
2 Jace, the Mind Sculptor
1 Mana Crypt
3 Mental Misstep
1 Mox Emerald
1 Mox Jet
1 Mox Pearl
1 Mox Ruby
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Ponder
1 Snapcaster Mage
1 Sol Ring
3 Swords to Plowshares
2 Thirst for Knowledge
1 Time Walk
4 Trinket Mage
4 Walking Ballista

Sideboard:
2 Containment Priest
1 Ethersworn Canonist
3 Fragmentize
1 Grafdigger's Cage
1 Honor the Fallen
2 Hurkyl's Recall
2 Mindbreak Trap
1 Pithing Needle
1 Ravenous Trap
1 Tormod's Crypt

Andy's right, of course. And I don't just say that because this is his site and he can edit my post to agree with him!

You don't have to be friends with everyone here, but being civil is a good thing. There's no reason to insult someone when you disagree with them; that's not edgy or correct or the only way to get a point across. In fact, it's probably the least convincing way to get a point across.

Whenever you want to complain about being "politically correct" or whatever, try this mental exercise: replace those words with "being respectful and considerate". I think you'll have a harder time arguing that sort of behavior is reasonable if you ask yourself that before you make a post calling players names.

Anything Andy does to keep TMD from being like twitter, or the comments section of your local newspaper, or 4chan, or any other part of the vast cesspool of internet discussion that exists, is a noble cause and should be encouraged.

RtR is a terrible careful study, but it also lets you win without bazaar (generate infy mana, RtR for your whole deck, win).

Hey, here's the BUG deck Josh played. He and I built it at Nat's table the night before. It's based on my Champs deck from last year, which in turn was heavily based on Justin Becker's list from (I think?) NYSE that year:

I watched most of his games and we talked about the deck after. We agreed therapy was bad and would cut it. I'd like to see a third Strix, that card is great right now. JTMS was also an underperformer. I might try -2 therapy, -1 JTMS, +1 strix, +2 thoughtseize right now and see how that plays. I'd also like to play a Malicious Affliction, maybe in the sideboard over the murderous cut. Snuff out would also be fine there. I think Josh just found a Cut first so that was that.

@AmbivalentDuck said:

They will never test it, but if the community tests it and it turns out fine (which is what the Commander Rules Committee does!) they might respect our testing.

God I hope not. Commander is a complete joke of a format; I don't know why anyone would want vintage to aspire to that.