Did you have specific reasons why you dropped the Ral Zarek ? I play American Control and he allows me to get a lot of stuff out a turn early. (Turn 5 AEtherling ) He also helps get rid of pesky things like Tamiyo, Young Pyromancer and Thragtusk . And, if Aetherling is out when you get his ultimate, you've just about won the game right there. Why not run 2 Jace and 2 Ral? That way you'd be even and could even get two planeswalkers out at the same time.

Thanks for the suggestion Umbreomancer. I like Ral Zarek and there were times he won me games, but I moved him out for several reasons.

1. There has been a Bant hexproof craze at my LGS and too often Ral Zarek couldn't target the threats on the board that I needed to remove.

2. A friend at my LGS who runs a lot of control decks suggested I test out Jace, Architect of Thought . I really like Jace's -2 for card advantage, and his +1 can be very handy in some situations. I just picked up my first two JAoT and am testing him out to see whether I like him better then Ral. Jury is still out.

3. The American control decks at Worlds (e.g. Ben Starks) were running JAoT and not Ral. I figured they knew something I didn't.

4. I thought Ral Zarek would be a big help against enemy planeswalkers, but he hasn't helped as well as I hoped. For instance, Liliana of the Veil lands, gets a +1 to 4 and is out of reach and both Jace's are beyond a one turn kill. Warleader's Helix does a better job here.

Don't get me wrong, Ral Zarek has won me a few games and provided 2 for 1 in games that let me hang on longer even though I didn't win. And after rotation, where Searing Spear is gone and three damage removal is harder to find, he may make it back into the deck on that alone.

I don' think I would ever drop AEtherling turn 5. I always want at least one open mana so I can exile him to avoid any removal. In fact I'm nervous if I don't have at least two blue to blink him twice if need be. But you have an excellent point that with this deck reconfigured, there is a case to be made that Ral's+1 would be useful, especially with 25 lands. I just mainboarded Rolling Temblor to deal with Geist of Saint Traft and other hexproof over Searing Spear , so losing instant speed might make having the extra mana useful. Honestly though, I don't know what I would take out at the 4 drop to get him in there as the deck is configured. After rotation, he could fill the spot Restoration Angel fills, but for this deck to be effective after the rotation, there has to be some sort of playable red wrath to synergize with Boros Reckoner (the way Blasphemous Act and Rolling Temblor do right now), otherwise I'm not sure I see it.

Anyway, that's my ramblings for now. In short, Bant hexproof is the main reason. If you have suggestions for how to work Ral Zarek into the deck, please let me know. Thanks for the suggestion.

It's very true that Bant hexproof is the worst thing since Tibalt, the Fiend-Blooded (It was one of only two decks that I lost against the first time I tried out my American). And it may be unconventional, but I'm definitely going to at least sideboard in Glaring Spotlight for decks like that. It's not so much that I'm praising Ral's -2 simply because it's burn, but because it's burn that doesn't cost anything. If I play Ral when the opponent has no threats out, but next turn plays something like Jace or Liliana, I can pay no mana to do three damage to it and then Warleader's Helix , Turn&Burn, or Aurelia's Fury the planeswalker to kill it.ANother thing I've noticed that you only have one Snapcaster Mage . I'm not sure if that's because you can't afford it or you purposefully put one in there, but here's some advice someone gave me on numbers of one card in your deck.

4 copies: Things you want to see in your opening hand and multiple copies throughout a game. For control, these will be removal, counterspells, or ways to get card advantage. They don't have to be 4x of a single card, but instead be 2/2 or 1/3 splits of cards with similar effects.

3 copies: Something you don't want to see in your opening hand, but you want to draw into it in a few turns.

2 copies: Something you only want to see once per game and never in your opening hand. For your deck, this will probably be 2x AEtherling , or a 1/1 split of Aetherling and Niv-Mizzet, Dracogenius (That's what I have).

1 copy: Something don't need in order to win, but would make winning easier. This could also be very situational spells.

Snapcaster I would see as something of a 2 or 3-of. I don't use the Snapcasters because they're rotating out, but if you're putting in them, then you want more than one.

Thanks Umbreomancer for the breakdown. I've read that before and thought I was following it, but maybe as the deck has evolved I have drifted out of proper alignment. Until this most recent version I had 2 Snapcaster Mage mainboard in this version. I may switch back to 1x Blasphemous Act and 2x Snapcaster Mage . I do have a full playset and usually run 2-3. My other American deck AEtherling is Alright 8-14-13 version, which doesn't run Boros Reckoner runs 3 Snapcaster Mage mainboard. In fact, I've never actually run this version without 2x Snapcaster Mage . Very recently I have been tweaking the deck to get 2x Rolling Temblor mainboard as a mini wrath as a solution to hexproof. Last time I ran this deck I had 3x Boros Reckoner and just one Blasphemous Act . the combo worked well and since Rolling Temblor has a natural synergy with Boros Reckoner , I expanded on it at the expense of a snapcaster. Maybe that's not the right move, but partially it was in this interview with Ben Stark:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ojzi2JQn7gg

that led me to make the cut. You'll see why he cut down to just one Snapcaster Mage if you watch the video. With that said, I've only hit one deck with Scavenging Ooze and Deathrite Shaman while using his deck and I was still able to effectively use 2 Snapcaster Mage game 1 without issue (and sided out 2x for game 2!).

I would like to get a 2nd Snapcaster Mage in there, but I'm not sure what I would want to cut. It would probably be Blasphemous Act or possibly pushing Assemble the Legion sideboard. What do you think?

Blasphemous Act I think would be sideboarded (Which is what I'm doing, maybe we should just compare decks), because it only really works if you can always draw Reckoner or against creature heavy decks. Try to sideboard it then put it in against things like Young Pyromancer or Bant Hexproof of course, because you always need board wipe against that freaking deck. I run 1 Assemble the legion because it's one of my four win-cons (Niv-Mizzet, Entreat the Angels , Assemble the Legion, Aetherling), but if you want to focus more on Aggro than control 2 of Assemble is perfectly fine. I still think it would be a good idea to stick Aurelia's Fury in there because it's such a versatile card, but it's your choice. I wish there was a battle feature on this website so we can see which one works better.

Aurelia's Fury might have a place if I was going the Silence /Render Silent route as a way to prevent my opponent from casting spells, but I don't see it in this deck. It's one of those great in theory, just ok in practice type cards.

Blasphemous Act definitely stays main board since I'm running 4x Boros Reckoner . Maybe one should go sideboard for a 2nd Snapcaster Mage . As a wrath it's worked as a nice trick for me against a bant he proof deck that dropped voice, essentially I generated tokens for him on purpose just so I could get the mana cost low enough to pull the trigger.

Good point. I didn't notice that you were running four Reckoners.I still think that Niv-Mizzet, Dracogenius would be a good idea just because he's a great draw engine that works well with Aurelia, the Warleader .Have you thought about putting Chandra, Pyromaster in the deck? Her +1 would be just as good as Aurelia's Fury and her 0 would certainly help if you don't have good cards.

The deck has plenty of draw power: 3x Sphinx's Revelation , 2x Think Twice , 3x Azorius Charm , 2x Jace, Architect of Thought , and potentially more with 2x Snapcaster Mage .

Also the CMC of Niv-Mizzet, Dracogenius makes him unplayable in a competitive environment.

What about Chandra?

Compare Chandra's +1 to Jace AoT's +1. Her's prevents one creature from blocking, while Jace reduces power of all of your opponent's attacking creatures. She helps your offense by clearing a path while Jace helps your defense. Comparing their second ability, Jace gives you more: you get to see three cards versus one, you potentially get to keep two, and you play then when you want, both ultimates are great but Chandra's is more dependent on you drawing burn while Jace lets you take your opponent's best. Chandra is playable, but fits better in a more aggro style deck when you will be applying pressure, such as a boros deck or RDW (without access to blue). Jace is more for a control deck, which applies here. I think Jace is better at the 4 slot. You can debate on whether Ral Zarek deserves to be here, but I think Jace fits better. I do like all three.

I can understand that. This is a really great deck; I'm just trying to give suggestions as well as get some advice for my own America deck. Maybe I'll stick in a Ral Zarek and two Jace AoT.

I really appreciate the feedback and the discussion. I'm always fine-tuning the deck and exploring different options. If you like the deck please play test it and let me know what works and what didn't! And of course if you have an idea please share! Thanks again!

I like this deck, I personally would not use Desolate Lighthouse for card draw because of the discard step. I really like this deck other then that.

Something to think about is Tamiyo, the Moon Sage , even though she is rotating soon she is great, also Ral Zarek for his plus one

Izzet Staticaster combos nicely with Boros reckoner. Block with reckoner, block with staticaster, tap caster EOT to ping creatures or life totals. Gets sillier as more reconkers hit the field.