Articles

The Contrarian Theory

As the Contrarian Theory works everywhere in the world... it should work in Magic.

The theory states that what the majority of people do, you should do the opposite and you will come out in front. For example, if the entire world believes that BHP is going to go up, you should short-sell the damn stock. If the entire tournament is going to be geared to beat Fires, build a deck that beats decks that beats Fires.

Similarly...if you like beatdown, you should play control. Vice versa, if you love control and countermagic, you should play the most vicious, fastest Sligh decks possible. Why?

Well...if you love beatdown, your worst matchups are usually control-based decks with mass removal and an unkillable creature (Morphling, Dromar etc). There is absolutely nothing you can do if you don't kill your opponent in the first 8 turns, as once control's mana base develops, the deck does wonders. How many times have you knocked a Stasis player down to 1 miserable life, and he comes back and wins it?

Therefore, you build your deck and sideboard to fight against control, like playing River Boas, Kavu Chameleons, Boils, Chokes etc etc. And because you know how your deck works intricately, and you know what it takes to beat control...doesn't it make more sense for YOU to play control instead?

Just because you know what cards must be countered in an aggressive deck, you could theoretically play a control deck vs the similar deck that you like to play with an advantage, as you know the entire makeup, when the deck runs out of steam, how much life you can allow yourself to get smacked down before you start reacting. That's a major problem with most control-based players... when do we start being pro-active instead of re-active. 10 life? 12 life? 5 life? How will Urza's Rage change the environment? All these questions are already a known quandary with a beatdown player.

The same thing goes for a Control player. I'm a predominantly control based player. I don't feel comfortable tapping my lands. If I have no Counterspells in hand I feel naked. I hate red with a passion, green with even greater passion. My biggest pet hates are Mogg Fanatic, Quirion Elf and River Boa. I just hate letting an early Mogg through for 5 points before I'm forced to Quicksand it or Wrath of God.

But my best tournament performance to date has been with a Sligh deck. No shit.

That's because I feel that I play Sligh a tad bit differently against all decks, not just control decks. I don't like to rely on the topdecking strategy of most beatdowns. I prefer to have enough barbeque sauce in my hand to bring him down to Urza's Rage range in one end of turn phase, taking to account the number of Counterspells he may have in his hand.

I prefer to cast my creatures as Counterspells fodder, or creature removal fodder, instead of overextending. Even in a similar matchup, I would much rather go head to head and try and kill you before you kill me, rather than waste valuable Fireblasts against someone else's creatures (Unless its a jackal pup).

So the contrarian theory, in my mind seems to work.

The only problem is...I have got more Ball Lightnings than mountains. No shit.

And with Survival and Trix gone from Extended, maybe I'll resist the temptation to constantly play Stasis, and play one of the great Dion Fung decks of yesteryears.

4 Mogg Fanatic
4 Jackal Pup
4 Ball Lightning
4 Incinerate
4 Fireblast
4 Thunderbolt
4 Urza's Rage
4 Shock
4 Price of Progress
3 Cursed Scroll

1 Dustbowl
4 Wasteland
16 Mountains

Sideboard:

4 Pyroblast
4 Red Elemental Blast
4 Anarchy
3 Boil

Roy Ho
roy_ho@poyntons.com.au
King of Getting Beaten Down.