fbpx

Deck Highlight — Updating Standard ADPZ… Again

Deck Highlight — Updating ADPZ… Again

The last time we saw ADPZ on ChannelFireball, it was sporting Exp. Share in the hands of Isaiah. Starting there, is Exp. Share actually worth playing?

When introduced to the idea, I was intrigued. I’ve played it in ADPZ decks enough times to make an informed decision. Frankly, I think it’s a win-more card. ADPZ is already self-reliant in many ways, namely Metal Saucer filling that gap. For a deck that wants to attack three times and win, but is sometimes forced to swing four times, games aren’t lasting very long.

Let me break this down further. Taking a look at DinoData.app, there have been over 5,000 matches logged with ADPZ since April 6:

  • 4,805 with zero Exp. Share – 53.2% overall win rate
  • 87 with one Exp. Share – 57.5% overall win rate
  • 310 with two Exp. Share – 53.9% overall win rate
  • 29 with three Exp. Share – 44.8% overall win rate
  • 40 with four Exp. Share – 57.5% overall win rate

The only two “complete” data sets are that of zero and two Exp. Share in the deck. Matchups are as follows, first with zero, then two:

This can be confusing. Starting with the Eternatus data pool, there are 420 games logged with zero Exp. Share, but only 16 with two copies. The 60 percent clip is extremely misleading as a result. Sure, games were one, but the vast majority of these events are going to have been best-of-one matches. Is the win rate really that good?

Wins also appear to be easier against LMZ with two Exp. Share. There you’re looking at a difference of 292 games played to only 23.

There seems to be merit to Exp. Share in matchups where ADPZ is unfavored, but it seems to decrease the odds of success against close matchups.

Maybe there haven’t been enough games played. It’s entirely possible.

Here’s the list I would recommend moving forward, focused on consistency. It recently won a 355-person tournament:

PTCGO Code

##Pokémon - 12
4 Zacian V SSH 195
3 Dedenne-GX UNB 57
2 Arceus & Dialga & Palkia-GX CEC 156
1 Mawile-GX UNM 141
1 Eldegoss V CPA 5
1 Crobat V SHF 44
##Trainer Cards - 37
4 Professor's Research SSH 201
4 Boss's Orders RCL 154
1 Marnie SSH 169
4 Quick Ball SSH 179
4 Metal Saucer SSH 170
4 Energy Switch ROS 109
4 Cherish Ball UNM 191
3 Switch CES 147
2 Energy Spinner UNB 170
2 Air Balloon SSH 156
1 Rusted Sword SHF 62
1 Great Catcher CEC 192
1 Escape Rope BUS 114
2 Chaotic Swell CEC 187
##Energy - 11
8 Metal Energy 8
3 Water Energy 3

Many lists are playing three Dedenne-GX lately, perhaps because ADPZ has been weaker than in the past – it can’t afford to prize a piece and fall behind. One Marnie might be a little suspect, but to the same effect, you’re looking to win quickly so it might not make much of a difference. Speaking of Marnie, I’ve been toying with the idea of just running four Marnie in ADPZ and seeing how that affects the deck. If you can play one almost each turn until you’re ready to start taking Prizes, it might compensate for how the tiers of power have closed; ADPZ just isn’t as powerful as it has been before.

A single Escape Rope seems fine, still alongside three Switch. It’s nice to have the option while not overcommitting to it. I ran a four Escape Rope list with Battle Styles’ release and was horrified at how often it would backfire. A single Rusted Sword seems to do the trick for many lists, but without a way to search it out, I’ve always been skeptical. Two Chaotic Swell is the talk of the town, denying Power Plant and roughing up Fire decks.

Escape Rope (125/163)Escape Rope (163)

If you want to mess with the list, consider taking out a single Dedenne-GX, maybe subbing out some Cherish Ball for something else and also tweaking the Stadium count.

As always, play this deck if you like to win quickly and stick to a linear game plan. Map your Prizes, use your GX attack, then execute your strategy with gust effects and win as fast as possible.

Discussion

Scroll to Top