RDW DTK

[Crossed]

RDW DTK 75 cards, 15 sideboard 19 {Mountain} 19 lands 4 {Lightning Berserker} 4 {Foundry Street Denizen} 4 {Firedrinker Satyr} 4 {Monastery Swiftspear} 3 {Zurgo Bellstriker} 19 creatures 2 {Magmatic Chasm} 4 {Dragon Fodder} 4 {Stoke the Flames} 4 {Lightning Strike} 4 {Hordeling Outburst} 4 {Titan's Strength} 22 other spells Sideboard 2 {Searing Blood} 1 {Magmatic Chasm} 4 {Twin Bolt} 4 {Wild Slash} 2 {Roast} 2 {Rending Volley} 15 sideboard cards Notes:

[Kaylesh]

Why 8 fetches? You run red only, and no triggers on landfall. Wouldn't you be better (and cheaper) off with 19 mountains instead?

[Dsx Cherno]

I'm wondering the same thing

[Z5]

Its called thinning. Each fetch removes 2 cards from your deck (itself, and a mountain), increasing the chance of getting a card that is useful.

[Kaylesh]

Ah. Makes sense.

[Kaalia with haste]

Its called thinning. Each fetch removes 2 cards from your deck (itself, and a mountain), increasing the chance of getting a card that is useful.

Hasn't it been proven that this just isn't worth it? The reason it looks like the pros are doing it is because they have delve spells to fuel like murderous cut and whatnot. I'd recommend mountains over the fetches

[Dsx Cherno]

Especially since that's a potential 8 life lost.

[Munchlax]

Its called thinning. Each fetch removes 2 cards from your deck (itself, and a mountain), increasing the chance of getting a card that is useful.

This doesn't seem worth it in this deck. If you can't win with your opening hand and one non land draw you shouldn't be playing the deck. Also, you don't see people using evolving wilds for thinning. And thinning really only takes one card out of the deck which honestly isn't great.

[Crossed]

Thinning is the reason I run them. I run them to prevent flooding in a mono red deck. Every land I fetch out eliminates (by a very small percentage) a land that I might have drawn into instead of that spell I needed to win. My plan is to get to 3-4 lands and stop drawing them so I can continue drawing spells. If I don't win by turn 4-6 I've lost anyhow. Life doesn't matter in a red deck

[LinkCelestrial]

Thinning is the reason I run them. I run them to prevent flooding in a mono red deck. Every land I fetch out eliminates (by a very small percentage) a land that I might have drawn into instead of that spell I needed to win. My plan is to get to 3-4 lands and stop drawing them so I can continue drawing spells. If I don't win by turn 4-6 I've lost anyhow. Life doesn't matter in a red deck

The graph I saw puts you at one extra card in turns in the double digits. The math is there, it's not worth it.

[Mattao19]

It changes the percentage by like under 2-3% but doesn't really matter

[Prplprince]

lol I had the thinning argument with someone a few weeks back. Personally I like to think thinning is nice but you take it to a new level. On average you're gonna lose 2-3 life and that's on a good day 

[Crossed]

Ok, let's put the land argument aside for the moment. What are the opinions of the build? MB and SB alike

[Thechriswatson]

I'm not a big fan of  {Zurgo Bellstriker} I'd rather play {Dragon Whisperer}

[LinkCelestrial]

I'd like to see some {Wild Slash}.