All B/R update speculation.

[taconaut]

Thoughtseize costs mana and is tempo negative, probe is free and replaces itself.

Sure, but those considerations are irrelevant to the argument of, "getting to peek ruins games of magic," because both cards do that.

If you want to argue a different point against probe, that is also fine; you've shown good distinctions in this post. However, Probe also doesn't do anything - the reason Thoughtseize has to be tempo negative is because it necessarily creates an exchange of material. You pay a mana, a card, and two life, and get to take their best card and see the rest; when you probe, you pay two life, see the rest, they keep the best card. If you can't beat their hand before you probe it, you can't beat it afterward either - it just gives you an idea how to try to make your plays in the future if you do have options.

The point is, it's disingenuous to argue against Probe from an information standpoint when discard exists, and I don't think any other marginal differences between the two make Probe bannable (unfortunately, Wizards disagrees).

Let's be honest: the "problem" with Probe was that it worked with Cabal Therapy to make opposing hands do nothing at the net cost of one card, one black mana, and two life.

Thoughtseize does the same thing.

#probedidnothingwrong

Ron gets it.

[Alfy]

This is also just not true. There were two archetypes that played probe, and yes, Grixis was very strong, but it's still very strong after the probe banning. Probe detractors always discuss it as though it were literally free, and that any and every deck played it, but that's just not what actually happened in real life.

As for the "risk-taking aspect," I assume you mean the peek that comes with Probe? Again, Thoughtseize is still legal. Thoughtseize gives you exactly as much information as Probe does, and yet no one is yelling about discard taking away some sacrosanct "hidden information" game. People have draw steps, people have Brainstorm; a one-turn snapshot of someone's hand was completely fine.

Probe found a place in any combo deck, so Omni-tell, Sneak and Show, Infect... Going through a search by 4 copies in maindeck on Goldfish, I also see multiple instances of Belcher, Depths, other storm lists. And then also BUG and RUG Delver, 4C Control. Heck, Dredge comes up more than a few times. Just for this year, since Jan 1st til the banning, I get 490 deck lists that include 4 Probes! That’s a third as many hits as for Brainstorm over the same period, the most played card in Legacy. Probe most certainly did not belong to just 2 archetypes. It was ubiquitous.

As for Probe vs Thoughtseize, one is available to any deck and does not require mana, one requires you to play black: how in the heck are those two equivalent? How is “any deck can access to hidden information” the same as “access to hidden info is possible but you’ll have to build your deck around it” the same thing? Quick check: how many Sneak and Show lists play Peek? How many Elves decks maindeck Duress?

Before, all the combo decks - and non-combo decks - got to peek if they wanted to; today, some can and some can’t. Variety. You might disagree on whether this is important or not, but it’s not the same thing as Thoughtseize being a card.

[Ronald Deuce]

Probe found a place in any combo deck, so Omni-tell, Sneak and Show, Infect... Going through a search by 4 copies in maindeck on Goldfish, I also see multiple instances of Belcher, Depths, other storm lists. And then also BUG and RUG Delver, 4C Control. Heck, Dredge comes up more than a few times. Just for this year, since Jan 1st til the banning, I get 490 deck lists that include 4 Probes! That’s a third as many hits as for Brainstorm over the same period, the most played card in Legacy. Probe most certainly did not belong to just 2 archetypes. It was ubiquitous.

That list of decks is not representative of the wider metagame or of wider deckbuilding conventions. Storm, Charbelcher, (only manaless) Dredge, All Spells, and Grixis/4c Value (which you neglected to mention) were the only ones in which Probe was either a common inclusion or a fixture. And, I guess, the occasional BUG Nic Fit list. Probe was highly unorthodox in the other builds.

And saying something is 1/3 as common as something that's in 50% of winning decklists means that it's in roughly 16.6666... percent of decks—somewhere between Chalice of the Void and Daze in the current format according to MTGTop8. Hardly ubiquitous.

As for Probe vs Thoughtseize, one is available to any deck and does not require mana, one requires you to play black: how in the heck are those two equivalent? How is “any deck can access to hidden information” the same as “access to hidden info is possible but you’ll have to build your deck around it” the same thing? Quick check: how many Sneak and Show lists play Peek? How many Elves decks maindeck Duress?

I'm going to assume for a moment that the reason Probe was banned was because of the power of the decks in which it was played. (Wizards didn't publish any logically cohesive explanation for their reasoning; reread the ban announcement closely and critically if you don't believe me. Their reasoning was even worse than the "Gentleman's Agreement.") The only two decks in the group I listed above that are/were competitive are Grixis/4c Value and Storm. Grixis was indisputably on top of the format between the ban of Top and the bans of Probe and DRS, and Storm hovered between 4% and 8% of top-8 decks, usually closer to the former.

So Grixis was the perceived problem—the fact that both banned cards (Probe and DRS) are integral to those decks indicates that the bans were intended to knock the decks down a peg or five. One of the key opening plays in Grixis/4c (and, notably, in Storm) was Gitaxian Probe followed by Cabal Therapy. Without Probe, obviously, that's an impossible line of play now. But Thoughtseize—which I mentioned before had the same net cost as Probe 'n' Therapy—remains legal, and it combines those effects into a single card. (I know it doesn't hit multiples, but that's less relevant than you might think.) Why is that important? Because it's statistically more likely that you'll have one specific card in your hand than that you'll have two separate specific cards in your hand.

So Thoughtseize does what old Probe-Therapy plays did in a more compact package, yet it remains legal while Probe was banned. So once again, Probe did nothing wrong.

Any discussion of "free information for anyone who wants to use Probe" is, frankly, stupid and irrelevant. It certainly didn't put other decks into the top slots, and even in the salad of left-field builds you listed above, it's worth pointing out that the lists that eschewed Probe for relevant cards greatly outperformed the ones that ran Probe.

Oh, yeah, and some Elves lists maindeck Thoughtseize. Just like they did before Probe got banned. Not many, but some. Must make the card ubiquitous, or something.

[taconaut]

...Any deck...

I typed out a whole rebuttal to this post and forgot to copy paste it to guard it against the Source eating, and it did Fortunately, Ron touched a bunch of the things I was going to discuss, but the biggest point was that many of the decks you listed were not even that competitive at the time, and the versions that were certainly did not feature Probe. Just because an arbitrary pilot decided to put 4 probes in does not mean they were right to do so.

Just look at the DTB forum for those months of 2018 you mention:

6x Grixis
6x BUG/4C control
5x Miracle
5x Depths
4x DNT
4x ANT
4x BR
3x Red Stompy/Eldrazi (each)
3x Lands

Probe is not featured in the majority of these decks. Yes, it is in Grixis, which you could argue was too strong, but it was certainly not "unbiquitous." Not only that, but there is "variety," like you mention: I see prison decks, control decks, tempo decks, combo decks, and midrange decks in multiple colors. Not even all the decks play brainstorm, the other bête noire of the denizens of this board specifically!

Furthermore, as I've stated before, the following three things cannot simultaneously be true:

1.) Probe is too powerful.
2.) There are no costs to playing or deckbuilding with Probe.
3.) There exist competitive decks that do not play Probe.

We know 3.) is true, because it is obvious in the data posted above. So either:

A) 1, 2, or 1 and 2 are false
B) Legacy players are simply not competitive (otherwise they would obviously make the free inclusion of probe in their decks)

Because B seems unlikely, at least when talking about the winners metagame (and whether or not cards are too powerful and warrant a ban), it must be A.

The point of the Thoughtseize comparison is not that Probe and Thoughtseize are the same card; the point is to illustrate that Probe detractors have a double standard with respect to hidden information when it comes to Probe. If both discard and Probe give a snapshot of the opponent's hand, and Probe is banned because seeing your opponent's hand just completely ruins a game and makes it elementary, why isn't everyone playing Thoughtseize? Not only does Thoughtseize let you see their whole hand, you get to take their best card!!

Thoughtseize and probe aren't the same card, but they have similar consequences. The only difference for people to hate one and not the other must be bias.

[Alfy]

The point of the Thoughtseize comparison is not that Probe and Thoughtseize are the same card; the point is to illustrate that Probe detractors have a double standard with respect to hidden information when it comes to Probe. If both discard and Probe give a snapshot of the opponent's hand, and Probe is banned because seeing your opponent's hand just completely ruins a game and makes it elementary, why isn't everyone playing Thoughtseize? Not only does Thoughtseize let you see their whole hand, you get to take their best card!!

Thoughtseize and probe aren't the same card, but they have similar consequences. The only difference for people to hate one and not the other must be bias.

This argument is in bad faith. There is a difference between an effect existing in the game for a cost, and that cost including having to play a color, and that same effect being available to each and every single deck at no cost of tempo. This was the crucial aspect (and much more than raw power), so as long as you continue sidestepping it, there’s not a real discussion.

As for the ubiquitousness of Probe, I very much stand by what I said. I really don’t care that Sneak builds existed without it, or that top-8’s did not include Belcher decks with Probes (although hits tend by essence to be top lists). The point was and remains that it was played A LOT and in all kinds of decks. Despite Legacy being a graveyard for all kinds of color pies errors, I can’t think of one type of effect that is played that commonly across all decks, and certainly not for that low a cost.

Probe did not bother me personally. I played my very first games in the format when the card was legal, and quite frankly, it was a useful crutch to understand what was going on on “the other side” at a time when I did not have the money nor the partners to try other decks. But neither am I sad to see it gone.

[Megadeus]

Thoughtseize has the cost of you needing to be playing black, costing a mana AND 2 life, giving up your turn 1 play (unlike probe which gave you the information for free and instructed whether you need to now hold up mana for a counter, cantrip for something, remove their turn 1 play, or play your deathrite, or waste their only land), and Thoughtseize is a much worse card to draw late when both players are top decking. If you don't understand the subtle yet high power level of probe then I can't help you. There's a very good reason it's banned or restricted in every format.

[taconaut]

This argument is in bad faith. There is a difference between an effect existing in the game for a cost, and that cost including having to play a color, and that same effect being available to each and every single deck at no cost of tempo.

As for the ubiquitousness of Probe, I very much stand by what I said. I really don’t care that Sneak builds existed without it, or that top-8’s did not include Belcher decks with Probes (although hits tend by essence to be top lists). The point was and remains that it was played A LOT and in all kinds of decks.Despite Legacy being a graveyard for all kinds of color pies errors, I can’t think of one type of effect that is played that commonly across all decks, and certainly not for that low a cost.

Both Ron and I demonstrated to you that Probe was, emphatically, not played in all decks. That claim is just simply not true. He even showed by your own metric that at most 16% of decks played it.

So, again: either probe has a cost, or everyone is dumb for not including it in their decks. I assume the first is true, because I don't think Legacy players are that oblivious.

For instance, it looks like you play Turbo Depths and Stompy. Can you explain why neither of these decks play Probe? if the power level of the card is bannably high, and it is

available to each and every single deck at no cost of tempo.

then why don't those lists include it? Turbo depths is a combo deck, allegedly the most suitable archetype for Probe, so it seems like it would be a prime candidate for inclusion; yet, competitive lists do not have it.

Similarly, you might argue that Stompy can't include it, because of chalice. Well, then I ask: if Probe is so powerful it needs to be banned, and chalice apparently is not, being still legal, why play Dragon Stompy over a deck that has access to such a powerful card as Probe?

Thoughtseize has the cost of you needing to be playing black, costing a mana AND 2 life, giving up your turn 1 play (unlike probe which gave you the information for free and instructed whether you need to now hold up mana for a counter, cantrip for something, remove their turn 1 play, or play your deathrite, or waste their only land), and Thoughtseize is a much worse card to draw late when both players are top decking. If you don't understand the subtle yet high power level of probe then I can't help you. There's a very good reason it's banned or restricted in every format.

Again, I am not disputing that Thoughtseize and Probe are different cards, and have different deckbuilding implications. I am saying only that both cards let you look at your opponent's hand.

That's it!

I am specifically disputing the argument that free information is fundamentally anathema to the game. People act like getting a look at your opponent's hand just completely destroys a game of magic, but still run discard in their decks. That is dissembling.

I agree Probe is a very powerful card; I personally think it is not powerful enough to ban.

By way of addressing your comparison, I would say, sure, Probe is better late game, but it isn't a freeroll:
- It puts pressure on your life total, which is a resource combo decks have to employ judiciously
- It makes your mulligan decisions trickier (do you keep the hand that has one nonbasic land, four nonland cards, and two probe G1 in the dark?)
- It occupies slots in your deck that could be something else (relevant for decks that play toolboxes like Green's Sun Zenith - there's a reason not all decks play Probe)

There's a very good reason it's banned or restricted in every format.

There just really isn't. Probe is banned entirely because more people dislike it than like it.

As I've said before, that might be good for the game, as it's bigger than it has ever been; it's just a bummer when it always seems like it's the decks you like that Wizards takes shots at

[morgan_coke]

Both Ron and I demonstrated to you that Probe was, emphatically, not played in all decks. That claim is just simply not true. He even showed by your own metric that at most 16% of decks played it.

So, again: either probe has a cost, or everyone is dumb for not including it in their decks. I assume the first is true, because I don't think Legacy players are that oblivious.

For instance, it looks like you play Turbo Depths and Stompy. Can you explain why neither of these decks play Probe? if the power level of the card is bannably high, and it is



then why don't those lists include it? Turbo depths is a combo deck, allegedly the most suitable archetype for Probe, so it seems like it would be a prime candidate for inclusion; yet, competitive lists do not have it.

Similarly, you might argue that Stompy can't include it, because of chalice. Well, then I ask: if Probe is so powerful it needs to be banned, and chalice apparently is not, being still legal, why play Dragon Stompy over a deck that has access to such a powerful card as Probe?



Again, I am not disputing that Thoughtseize and Probe are different cards, and have different deckbuilding implications. I am saying only that both cards let you look at your opponent's hand.

That's it!

I am specifically disputing the argument that free information is fundamentally anathema to the game. People act like getting a look at your opponent's hand just completely destroys a game of magic, but still run discard in their decks. That is dissembling.

I agree Probe is a very powerful card; I personally think it is not powerful enough to ban.

By way of addressing your comparison, I would say, sure, Probe is better late game, but it isn't a freeroll:
- It puts pressure on your life total, which is a resource combo decks have to employ judiciously
- It makes your mulligan decisions trickier (do you keep the hand that has one nonbasic land, four nonland cards, and two probe G1 in the dark?)
- It occupies slots in your deck that could be something else (relevant for decks that play toolboxes like Green's Sun Zenith - there's a reason not all decks play Probe)



There just really isn't. Probe is banned entirely because more people dislike it than like it.

As I've said before, that might be good for the game, as it's bigger than it has ever been; it's just a bummer when it always seems like it's the decks you like that Wizards takes shots at

Stompy lists would never run it, they avoid all 1cc spells as part of their design.

Turbo Depths honestly should have been running it, and would have started to given enough time.

[taconaut]

Stompy lists would never run it, they avoid all 1cc spells as part of their design.

I addressed this in my post.

Obviously you can't run it with Chalice - if you can't, why not play a deck with Probe instead, if it's so powerful? Clearly a large enough portion of the population decided Chalice was the better choice, because it was a DTB during an era where Probe was legal.

How do you square that decision with the opinion that Probe is broken (or the opinion it's available to every deck)?

Turbo Depths honestly should have been running it, and would have started to given enough time.

Everyone I know that hates Probe says this, but then never put it in their decks.

Why?

Could it be because it's not actually optimal for every deck, but instead is good in specific contexts?

I think that is a much more reasonable explanation than, "everyone should have been running it but didn't realize it yet."

[mistercakes]

With DRS gone, it's likely probe would have kept storm too strong. Better to ban probe, which had enough annoying overlap in some smaller amount of decks than to start looking for other cards in storm to ban instead.

[niv]

Everyone I know that hates Probe says this, but then never put it in their decks.

Why?

Could it be because it's not actually optimal for every deck, but instead is good in specific contexts?

I think that is a much more reasonable explanation than, "everyone should have been running it but didn't realize it yet."

I agree with this here, but I'm not sure if it's for the same reasons.

I'll start by saying I don't really think probe into Therapy is really what busted the card (in storm)...I think that it just lets you use two (initial) cards in hand for a thoughtseize with upside in this case...not too unreasonable in my opinion. I think comparing Therapy + Probe to Thoughtseize isn't really fair, as it really diminishes how powerful the card can be alone.

I think the power of the information on Turn 1 (on the play, but still on the draw) is rather understated, and a large part of what makes the card much too strong.

Being able to see your opponents gameplan and play around wasteland before you even play your first land of the game, for example, are why the card is so good. This power diminishes as the game goes on, but still is relevant (and is completely free on its own for storm/young pyro tokens etc). It is extremely powerful T1 on the play: being able to determine a gameplan and see your opponents before you even start playing the game is pretty insane. Theres a fair amount of games I'd bargain I lost against some skilled Grixis delver opponents to T1 otp Gitaxian Probe because the player knew exactly what he needed to do before even playing a land.

Further, I think this is why I think Turbo Depths probably wouldn't have run the card: They really don't need or care much about the information it offers alone. Their reactive spells are exclusively discard. They get the information they need, and the deck innately plays enough protection for Marit Lage to deal with a good bit of removal to force a single attack through. In depths if you're running probe you're probably better off just running discard instead because the deck is already running black and it will actually advance your gameplan.

[taconaut]

I think the power of the information on Turn 1 (on the play, but still on the draw) is rather understated, and a large part of what makes the card much too strong.

This is exactly the perspective I am disputing.

Being able to see your opponents gameplan and play around wasteland before you even play your first land of the game, for example, are why the card is so good. It is extremely powerful T1 on the play: being able to determine a gameplan and see your opponents before you even start playing the game is pretty insane.

If you play "Swamp, Thoughtseize you, go," you know the contents of your opponent's hand and can't be wastelanded.

If I am playing Storm and don't have a probe in my opener, if I want to play around wasteland, I can often lead on "Fetch Island, Ponder." In fact, that's what I did a large percentage of the time, because it plays around wasteland and doesn't reveal as much information. Moreover, waiting for the fundamental turn could sometimes be better, because your opponent gets draw steps, too - Probe gives a one-time snapshot that changes as soon as they draw a card or brainstorm.

These things just are not as big a deal as people make them out to be. Is Probe a good card? Yes. Does it let you do powerful things? Yes. Does it have a low cost? Yes. Is it bannable? No.

And the depths consideration is a great example why:

Further, I think this is why I think Turbo Depths probably wouldn't have run the card: They really don't need or care much about the information it offers alone.

So, which is it? Is the hand information game-changingly powerful, or just an optional "nice to have?"

Their reactive spells are exclusively discard. They get the information they need, and the deck innately plays enough protection for Marit Lage to deal with a good bit of removal to force a single attack through.

I'm glad you are acknowledging that discard is also a source of the exact same info Probe was.

In depths if you're running probe you're probably better off just running discard instead because the deck is already running black and it will actually advance your gameplan.

Exactly. So, in other words, thoughtseize fills a comparable role to gitaxian probe, even if their costs and power levels differ in small but meaningful ways? And, those ways could be meaningful to the functioning or your deck?

Implying that maybe there are some decks that might not want to run probe, and that it isn't, in fact, broken?

This is why the arguments about Probe being free, busted, and not for every deck make no sense - if it were actually free and broken, depths would play it.

[Alfy]

thoughtseize fills a comparable role to gitaxian probe,[/I] even if their costs and power levels differ in small but meaningful ways? And, those ways could be meaningful to the functioning or your deck?

So basically, you’re just going to twist whatever other people write to suit your whims? “This specific deck is interested in the specific effect of Thoughtseize” becomes “you agree that Probe and Thoughtseize are similar”?

I’m sure there’s a Greek word for this kind of rethorical dishonesty, but I’m no more interested in looking it up than I am in reading more of this.

[Ronald Deuce]

When the hell was Storm on top of the format? In the Mystical Tutor days? And how is casting T1 Thoughtseize throwing away a turn? It neuters opponents' hands. For one mana. And it gives you "free information." And it takes anything that's not The Tabernacle at Pendrell Vale. (/sarcasm)

I genuinely can't tell who's for real in this thread anymore. Anyone who has ever lost a Legacy game to a T1 Probe followed by nothing probably shouldn't be playing games that involve critical thought. The interaction of Probe, Therapy, and Young Pyromancer was the core "problem" (assiduously sticking to scare quotes here) that rational people complained about, and their complaint never held water. As a corollary, to people who aren't interested in numeric data, why wouldn't you want to ban Chalice of the Void if it's more ubiquitous and powerful than Gitaxian Probe? Bias.

I hate getting this frothy, but seriously, there's a lot of nonsense in these recent posts. And lest anyone forget, the "reasoning" provided by Wizards behind banning probe had nothing to do with any of your arguments: it was, effectively, "Probe is really good. We chose to ban it in a lot of formats. Therefore, we should ban it in Legacy."

[Fox]

In Grixis Delver, Probe led to [effective] turn 1 kills @Ronald Deuce. Before you ever got to play a game, you could lose simply because your opening hand had duplicates - and that plus a mulligan exacerbated the problem. You might think you could get back into the game, but token factory/flashback Cabal. More than the non-game potential [without any restrictions, like say Chalice has], Probe was the engine that fueled every delve card (UBg-only colors advantaged). The other aspect that was highly problematic is the the card is inherently uninteractive. You had to make zero decisions [which could be interacted with] to learn how to make an opponent's interaction not work, while your interaction became better. It is especially important to point out that the Probe player never had to commit a land (cutting self down to 1 color Basic, or risking Wasteland vs Dual).

Let's recap here: risk of non-games, highly abusable card, and inherently uninteractive.

There was nothing healthy about how we got to Probe getting banned. Before Cruise and DTT were banned, we really should have seen the common problem [Probe] banned. It's not healthy game management to ban multiple manifestations of problems instead of banning the root of the problem. It should be noted that for all balance issues in the format that Fetchlands are the real elephant in the room [fuel delve, fuel DRS, breaks Brainstorm, automatically better topdeck odds vs non-Fetch user, etc.].

---

Anyways, still pretty annoyed at WotC for 2 missed chances to fix current legacy. I don't know how long we have to see Grixis Jammy Jams and miracles at near tier zero to realize that Hymn and blue Hymn (Counterbalance) are hands-down the main diversity killers in legacy. Plenty of prisoners we could exchange with those two gone, like DRS/SDT.

[Zulabnar]

WIzards take decisions following players. People love blue control deck, they continue printing total no-sense card powering blue, they are not worried about people not playing blue.

Unfortunately this not help the format to stay healty.
Now there are well delined Tiers

2 tier 0 Grixis control and Miracle that has the majority of wins\top in high attendance tournament

Some tier 1 that are more or less non interactive deck (dark depths, ant, sneak and show and Eldrazi) To have a little diversity they had to print ELDRAZI lol, total no sense creature, with 2 mana lands to have big creature and big effect so there is at least 1 aggro deck in Legacy. Because all other creature card are too shitty to do something in a metagame with 7 cc1\2 removal + snapcaster + jace.


A lot of tier 2 that has cance only in small tournament because of high variancy.


IMHO : The format is awful and noone is interested in changing it in a different way.

[pettdan]

I agree with Zulabnar [edit: regarding the state of the format], however the format is still evolving and it should be given time to continue to evolve and settle. The next step in banning everything but the main offender would be to ban Snapcaster Mage, as a friend argued today, and I think this might help. Sure they (i.e. Miracles and Grixis Control) would get Mission Briefing, but not getting that 2/1 flash creature would be a step back [edit: this is debatable though].

On the topic of the banning of G. Probe, I have been reading the discussion half-heartedly but I think my first comment said the relevant stuff. Well, to each his own..

Edit, again: actually, it's kind of interesting when, hypothetically, the t0 deck consists of only very fair cards (maybe a single broken card, though this is of course debated) and this still makes it overpowered. Considering banning Snapcaster Mage is strange indeed, such a fair card.

[taconaut]

In Grixis Delver, Probe led to [effective] turn 1 kills @Ronald Deuce. Before you ever got to play a game, you could lose simply because your opening hand had duplicates - and that plus a mulligan exacerbated the problem. You might think you could get back into the game, but token factory/flashback Cabal.

I want to acknowledge that the scenario you're describing sucks, but also, it assumes:

- They had a Probe
- They had a Cabal Therapy
- They had a Young Pyromancer
- Your hand had duplicates
- You couldn't play either of the duplicates in the first two turns, because they'd have to sacrifice their pyro if they started on Probe > Therapy on 1, or they'd have to wait until turn 3 to do both the Probe and the Therapy
- You didn't have a removal spell or counterspell that could stop Young Pyromancer

Like, sure, that can happen, but that is a huge intersection of small probabilities. I wouldn't be surprised if it were more likely that a regular player saw you lead on a blue fetch, and just named Force of Will to hit two copies. Sometimes Legacy games are blowouts! This is about the fairest blowout that could happen - you could've gotten all spells'd, turn one showed with force backup, chaliced on one, etc etc all with greater frequency. I think this specific instance is just not a strong enough case for banning a card.

Probe was the engine that fueled every delve card (UBg-only colors advantaged). The other aspect that was highly problematic is the the card is inherently uninteractive. You had to make zero decisions [which could be interacted with] to learn how to make an opponent's interaction not work, while your interaction became better.

Again, all of this applies to targeted discard too (though I'll admit the delve to a lesser extent because it doesn't replace itself). You still have to make decisions after the Probe to make their interaction not work, unlike discard which can just take their best interaction, and as soon as they have a draw step, the situation changes, because they have hidden information again. I'm not saying the peek isn't an advantage, but it also doesn't make you clairvoyant or automatically mean you have the tools you need to deal with what they have.

It is especially important to point out that the Probe player never had to commit a land (cutting self down to 1 color Basic, or risking Wasteland vs Dual).

I think this is also highly overstated. Even when I could play Probe, I would aggressively fetch basics to play around wasteland because it's just a safe thing to do. Maybe it's harder to do with Grixis delver without Probe (I usually played ANT), but I would be surprised if this interaction mattered more than once every twenty games. Most of the time, you're going to have a good intuition whether wasteland is going to be a relevant concern by the time the opponent plays their first spell or second land of the game, and again, discard would give you the same information.

Before Cruise and DTT were banned, we really should have seen the common problem [Probe] banned. It should be noted that for all balance issues in the format that Fetchlands are the real elephant in the room [fuel delve, fuel DRS, breaks Brainstorm, automatically better topdeck odds vs non-Fetch user, etc.].

Cruise and DTT would both still be bananas even if they existed during a Probe ban - they were even nuts in Modern, a format where the cantrips are trash. The point about fetches is definitely true; it's a bummer, though, because I think the main importance of fetches is that they are a pressure relief valve from the reserve list, being pseudo dual proxies, and the financial cost of removing them would be too much for the format to bear. Until we can get rid of the reserved list (which I don't necessarily think of as an unalloyed good, either) I think fetches have to stay, even though they're problematic.

Anyways, still pretty annoyed at WotC for 2 missed chances to fix current legacy. I don't know how long we have to see Grixis Jammy Jams and miracles at near tier zero to realize that Hymn and blue Hymn (Counterbalance) are hands-down the main diversity killers in legacy. Plenty of prisoners we could exchange with those two gone, like DRS/SDT.

What about Grey Hymn (Chalice)? Honestly, all of these cards are fine (counterbalance is especially reasonable without Top, though I miss spinning it) and Legacy is plenty diverse as it stands.

[FourDogsinaHorseSuit]

WIzards take decisions following players.

If this was true brainstorm would be banned because I hate it more than all of the lovers love it, combined.

[Ronald Deuce]

In Grixis Delver, Probe led to [effective] turn 1 kills @Ronald Deuce. Before you ever got to play a game, you could lose simply because your opening hand had duplicates - and that plus a mulligan exacerbated the problem. You might think you could get back into the game, but token factory/flashback Cabal. More than the non-game potential [without any restrictions, like say Chalice has], Probe was the engine that fueled every delve card (UBg-only colors advantaged). The other aspect that was highly problematic is the the card is inherently uninteractive. You had to make zero decisions [which could be interacted with] to learn how to make an opponent's interaction not work, while your interaction became better. It is especially important to point out that the Probe player never had to commit a land (cutting self down to 1 color Basic, or risking Wasteland vs Dual).

I'll concede that all your points there are accurate (though I'd dispute the relevance of Delve in anything but Death's Shadow, which wasn't much of a thing until pretty recently; I'll get to Cruise and Dig below). I just don't see how your points justify a ban when a) Probe-Therapy requires two cards in your opener plus a black land (i.e., 3 cards) and adding Pyroman increases that number further over turns 1–2; and b) there's significantly more abusable stuff out there—if you're looking in blue, there are Counterbalance, Force, Show and Tell, and "The Cantrips," and if you're not, there are prison artifacts and Lion's Eye Diamonds, white taxing creatures and enchantments, Sol lands, Wasteland, fetchlands, Loam, Entomb, and—most importantly—Dark Ritual. I fully appreciate that Probe is really powerful, but to echo/paraphrase Patrick Sullivan's (somewhat ill-timed) rant about Deathrite Shaman, I get that Probe's powerful; I know what the text of the card is. What's the case when there's so much other degenerate stuff out there?

Dig and Treasure Cruise would be busted regardless of whether Probe were legal in Legacy. They're absurdly powerful cards, and they would've been so even had they only fit in decks that had to take extra turns to fill the graveyard without Probe (e.g., Miracles).

Probably should point out that I actually think my favorite deck is in a better position without the risk of getting Probe-Therapy-Flashback-ed; that doesn't mean I didn't really like the card (and didn't do two-thirds of that play numerous times), and I still disagree that it was a problem. But I appreciate your input.

WIzards take decisions following players. People love blue control deck, they continue printing total no-sense card powering blue, they are not worried about people not playing blue. . . . Because all other creature card are too shitty to do something in a metagame with 7 cc1\2 removal + snapcaster + jace.

I'm going to sidestep what you said about Wizards's loving blue, but out of curiosity, would you have favored banning one of the cards you blue-texted (lol) or banning Probe? Feels to me like the problem in blue continues to be the aggro creatures: when your one-drop is bigger than Goblin Guide and your two(ish)-drop has flash and buys back a spell, that's pretty crazy.

Also, apropos of Pettdan's comment, Mission Briefing is pretty busted. Calling it now: better than Snapcaster Mage.