All B/R update speculation.

[FTW]

This is still early days (EW will show how the format settled), but preliminary results on MTG Top 8 show other decks competing with Frog just fine.

Post-ban Legacy Challenge. Top 8 has only 1 Frog deck:
https://www.mtgtop8.com/event?e=58932&d=641271&f=LE

4 Glaring Fleshraker decks (3 Eldrazi, 1 Mystic Forge)
UWx control with white removal
Painter with 7x "R: destroy target blue creature"

and then Rood at 2nd still playing his Frogless Reanimator/Dragon combo. Speaking of Worldgorger Dragon doing nothing.

[thefreakaccident]

Vintage shops is starting to run stonecoil serpent. Would be pretty funny to see that in legacy.

[FTW]

Today's Challenge: https://www.mtgtop8.com/event?e=58984&d=641743&f=LE

1st place Rood's Worldgorger Dragon again!

Top 8:
2 Frogless Reanimator
1 UB Frog Reanimator
1 UB Frog Tempo
1 Doomsday without Frog
1 Eldrazi
1 Initiative
1 Moon Stompy

2/8 Frog

Frog is winning games but not oppressively yet. Just functioning as a top tier creature format staple. Field's already more diverse than 2 weeks ago with Scam.

Lots of Frog at 9-16 in both challenges, but those decks are losing to other decks. So a lot of players are jamming Frog but not necessarily winning for it. Meanwhile some Reanimator & Doomsday are doing better without Frog.

Would be interesting to see someone crunch the data on win % and conversion rates.


Edit: Another Challenge
https://www.mtgtop8.com/event?e=59003&d=641897&f=LE

Top 8:
2 Eldrazi
Mystic Forge
Nadu
Lands
UB Frog Reanimator
Yorion Beans
Goblins

1 Frog. Nadu won.

[thefreakaccident]

Despite the grief ban, I believe Reanimator is still the best deck. I don't know how many bans would be necessary for that not to be the case.

I know plenty of things still need to shake out, but I suspect it will rise to prominence again. I can't seem to lose at the moment.

[FTW]

Agreed, Reanimator still seems the best deck.

Most people blame Frog. Focusing on Maxtortion winning 1 Challenge with UB Froginator. But Rood got 1st & 2nd in 2 consecutive challenges the same week with Dragon Reanimator (no Frog). Other lists with 0-1 Frog are also top8ing. Frog's strong, but maybe not the main problem?

MtgGoldfish has a big article jumping on the "Frog is the problem" bandwagon. Then shows just 1 Top 8 won by Froginator, and other events with diverse Top 8s full of Eldrazi, Frogless Reanimator, Nadu Elves, Painter, Miracles, Cradle Control, even Initiative and Goblins.

They only show matchup data for the Challenge won by Froginator and with highest Frog presence, not the others. Even in that event, Nadu Elves and Painter have a better win rate than Dimir Tempo. Dimir Tempo was just most played. UB Reanimator's win rate was high, but Frogless is winning a lot too - would the win rate without Frog be high too? Wonder what the win rates are over the other events.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

The problem is the cheap easy enablers of the reanimator strategy, which is to say, Entomb and Reanimate. That's it.

That and the overall power level of creatures going up, whether that's the quality of fatties to reanimate, hatebears and beaters that slot easily into the deck like OBM and Frog, or utility creatures that self pitch like Troll and Grief.

They can keep trying to play whack a mole with every new pushed creature in any of those categories that they keep printing, they can stop printing stupid creatures, or they can just bite the bullet and ban the enablers of the strategy, Entomb and Reanimate. Or at least one of those.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

It doesn't help that they seem to have straight up stopped putting anti-reanimation text on fatties entirely, though.

[PirateKing]

MtgGoldfish has a big article jumping on the "Frog is the problem" bandwagon. Then shows just 1 Top 8 won by Froginator, and other events with diverse Top 8s full of Eldrazi, Frogless Reanimator, Nadu Elves, Painter, Miracles, Cradle Control, even Initiative and Goblins.

They only show matchup data for the Challenge won by Froginator and with highest Frog presence, not the others. Even in that event, Nadu Elves and Painter have a better win rate than Dimir Tempo. Dimir Tempo was just most played. UB Reanimator's win rate was high, but Frogless is winning a lot too - would the win rate without Frog be high too? Wonder what the win rates are over the other events.

That Goldfish article was a frustrating read for sure. Opened with a big stink about how we're living in the worst case reality with UB Tempo and Reanimator being dominant despite the banning of Grief, then laid out a whole bunch of diverse top8s. It took them to the third listing to give a decklist example of their "problem" deck. I hope just more data and more time will quiet these downers, but in the leadup to Eternal Weekend it's a bummer to have to navigate around Legacy content people who only seem comfortable when they're complaining about how everything sucks always.

[PirateKing]

It doesn't help that they seem to have straight up stopped putting anti-reanimation text on fatties entirely, though.

I'd like it if they explored the 4-6 mana creature Goldilocks zone more. I guess in the context of Legacy it's the inverse Goldilocks zone. If it costs 1 or 2 mana then it can slot into every Daze Tempo shell and be good there. If it's a 8/8 Flying that does ABC on cast and XYZ on attack so it costs 12 mana to balance it, then it'll just get Reanimated.
Sheoldred, the Apocalypse is a fine example of a card nobody is going to Entomb for but also no Daze deck will go near it. Get more cards like Questing Beast and less cards like Archon of Cruelty.

[Purple Blood]

The problem is the cheap easy enablers of the reanimator strategy, which is to say, Entomb and Reanimate.

I think Reanimator only becomes a "problem" worthy of a ban if it can simultaneously play an unfair and fair strategy, which is what it has recently been accomplishing. Its not hard to hate out a one-trick-pony graveyard deck. Its much harder to beat when it can effectively pivot to a Delver-esque strategy. And at a certain point that becomes oppressive.

We saw a similar problem with Expressive Iteration. This is what WOTC said when EI was banned:

Izzet Delver has been popular for quite some time in Legacy, and it has picked up some notable recent additions, including Dragon's Rage Channeler, Murktide Regent, and Expressive Iteration. While we acknowledge and agree with the many Legacy players who enjoy the play patterns of Izzet Delver and similar archetypes, our data indicates a need to take the win rate and popularity of the deck down a notch to allow for more metagame diversity and innovation. Our choice is to ban Expressive Iteration, as the card quality and quantity it provides allows Izzet Delver to easily adapt to stay on top of any changes in the metagame.

In addition to removing a generally strong card, our hope is that by removing Expressive Iteration, we reinforce Izzet Delver's historical strengths (efficient one-for-one exchanges) and weaknesses (lack of sources of card quantity) in a way that leaves the deck more vulnerable in the metagame.

In other words: EI was oppressive in Delver because it enabled the deck to play both an aggressive early game and late game (i.e. looping EI for endless cards).

The most reductionist way to put it: there's supposed to be tradeoffs in decks and if something can do everything the best then its obviously too good.

All that said, it remains to be seen if more bans are needed and its way too early for anyone to call for any more bans.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

I think Reanimator only becomes a "problem" worthy of a ban if it can simultaneously play an unfair and fair strategy, which is what it has recently been accomplishing. Its not hard to hate out a one-trick-pony graveyard deck. Its much harder to beat when it can effectively pivot to a Delver-esque strategy. And at a certain point that becomes oppressive.

We saw a similar problem with Expressive Iteration. This is what WOTC said when EI was banned:



In other words: EI was oppressive in Delver because it enabled the deck to play both an aggressive early game and late game (i.e. looping EI for endless cards).

The most reductionist way to put it: there's supposed to be tradeoffs in decks and if something can do everything the best then its obviously too good.

All that said, it remains to be seen if more bans are needed and its way too early for anyone to call for any more bans.

That’s already what I said though

The issue is just that it’s much easier to ban the really obviously broken enablers of the unfair strategy than it is to keep banning every fair black card they print that lets the deck operate on that axis. Entomb and Reanimate are two cards and they’re not going to print more powerful versions of them in the future, even for commander or horizons sets. Grief, Troll, Frog, Bowmasters, Oppo Agent, Voidwalker etc are both more cards but also types of cards they’re obviously going to keep printing more of.

This goes back to the decision to not ban Tarmgoyf to some extent actually. Locked in power creep of creatures means that trying to ban the newest fair creature is just playing whack a mole, and they’re obviously not going to stop pushing big dumb fatties either. The only angle left is the enablers of which Entomb and Reanimate are the most glaringly obvious culprits.

[Purple Blood]

That’s already what I said though

The issue is just that it’s much easier to ban the really obviously broken enablers of the unfair strategy than it is to keep banning every fair black card they print that lets the deck operate on that axis. Entomb and Reanimate are two cards and they’re not going to print more powerful versions of them in the future, even for commander or horizons sets. Grief, Troll, Frog, Bowmasters, Oppo Agent, Voidwalker etc are both more cards but also types of cards they’re obviously going to keep printing more of.

This goes back to the decision to not ban Tarmgoyf to some extent actually. Locked in power creep of creatures means that trying to ban the newest fair creature is just playing whack a mole, and they’re obviously not going to stop pushing big dumb fatties either. The only angle left is the enablers of which Entomb and Reanimate are the most glaringly obvious culprits.

You make a totally fair point. The counter point is, if they actually did what you suggest and start banning the truly problematic cards (e.g. FoW, Daze, Entomb, Reanimate) instead of the new cards (e.g. Ragavan, Arcanist, Grief) then Legacy and Modern are essentially going to merge into each other, particularly consider MH power creep.

For example, if FoW and Daze were banned, they could safely unban every single creature they recently banned and they wouldn't have to constantly play "whack a mole" as you put it.

I have no doubt their decision-making comes down to "we think these cards that have existed for decades in Legacy define the format so we aren't going to touch them even if it means we have to ban new cards on a never-ending basis." They have explicitly said as such.

[Zoid]

They historically have gone for enables rather then pushed creatures precisely because they know they want to keep pushing things.
It's more about killing a whole archetype vs just weakening it by taking a high value card from it.
Entomb also has been banned for a quite a number of years so it could be banned again.
Reanimate could go because all other reanimation options cost 2 and are much weaker.
Grief had to go first because it actively played around hate.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

You make a totally fair point. The counter point is, if they actually did what you suggest and start banning the truly problematic cards (e.g. FoW, Daze, Entomb, Reanimate) instead of the new cards (e.g. Ragavan, Arcanist, Grief) then Legacy and Modern are essentially going to merge into each other, particularly consider MH power creep.

For example, if FoW and Daze were banned, they could safely unban every single creature they recently banned and they wouldn't have to constantly play "whack a mole" as you put it.

I have no doubt their decision-making comes down to "we think these cards that have existed for decades in Legacy define the format so we aren't going to touch them even if it means we have to ban new cards on a never-ending basis." They have explicitly said as such.

They said that about Brainstorm I'm sure, but I don't think it really applies to Reanimate or Entomb. Reanimator was never a tier 1 strategy until recently, excepting like maybe five minutes circa 2010 before they banned Mystical. What's really pushed it over the top is the ability to win through graveyard hate, but personally I don't want them axing good black hatebears like Bowmaster or Voidwalker. I didn't even want them axing Grief.

[FTW]

Now we have a lot more real data, including 600+ person Eternal Weekend.

Large events in the last month-ish
Eternal Weekend Japan - BIG MAGIC (614 players): https://www.mtgtop8.com/event?e=60503&d=654537&f=LE
0 Frogs in Top 3 decks

Top 16:
4 Eldrazi
4 Froginator
2 Nadu
2 Painter
Red Stompy
Mystic Forge
Maverick
Leyline Beans


MTGO Super Qualifier (236 players): https://www.mtgtop8.com/event?e=60272&d=652652&f=LE
0 Frogs in Top 3 decks

Top 16:
4 Froginator
3 Red Stompy
3 Eldrazi
2 Cradle Control
2 UB Tempo
Eldrazi-post
Killabee's Riddlesmith storm!!


MTGO Showcase September (264 players): https://www.mtgtop8.com/event?e=59802&f=LE

Top 16:
3 Froginator
3 UB Tempo
2 Eldrazi
Painter
Red & Taxes
UWR Vial
Dragon Reanimator (Rood)
UW ThrullNought
Dredge
Leyline Beans
Doomsday


4 Seasons Main Event (386 players): https://www.mtgtop8.com/event?e=59305&f=LE
1 Frog deck in Top 4

Top 8:
2 UWr control
2 Froginator
Cradle Control
Eldrazi
All Spells
BUG


Frog is clearly good, UB Froginator is Tier 1, but is it unfairly dominating the format the way most players panicked? That's the sort of presence you'd see from Delver when Delver was a fair DTB. Fringe decks like Riddlesmith storm and Dredge are still capable of winning. The online meta seems to have more people jamming Frog, but look at these very large paper events with few Frogs at the top.


Compare that to this summer before the Grief ban!
MTGO Showcase August (168 players): https://www.mtgtop8.com/event?e=58823&f=LE
69% of Top16 has 4x Frog!
Top 4 = all Frog decks

MTGO Showcase July (190 players): https://www.mtgtop8.com/event?e=57252&f=LE
69% of Top16 has 4x Frog!
Top 4 = 4 Scaminator

Big Open in Japan (384 players): https://www.mtgtop8.com/event?e=58547&f=LE
50% of Top 16 has 4x Frog, 5 Scaminators
Winner = Scaminator

Impact Returns Main Event (220 players): https://www.mtgtop8.com/event?e=57887&f=LE
50% of Top 8 has 4x Frog!
Top 2 = 2 Scaminator

Seems like post Grief ban, UB Frog presence did reduce from Tier 0 to regular Tier 1?

[PirateKing]

18/64 for EW Japan is still a lot of representation.

If the trend continues and people start dropping the deck because they can never crack top 8 with it, representation will die down and it will just become another player in the meta.
But if people stick with it and it has like 50% meta share but only a few top 8s, then the optics start to fuel the ban-happy crowds.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

You can tell you've got an honest dealer presenting information honestly when you can tell instantly which place the Frog list got based on whether it's presented as "no frog in top 3" or "1 frog in top 4"

[FTW]

You can tell you've got an honest dealer presenting information honestly when you can tell instantly which place the Frog list got based on whether it's presented as "no frog in top 3" or "1 frog in top 4"

I wanted to emphasize 4th & no Frog made finals.

The one reported as "1 in top 4" also wasn't top 2. 3-4 is basically the same, they could all be reported the same.

For full honesty I linked all results and compared top 16s for all events (except the one where only top 8 was available).

The September MTGO showcase was dominated by Frog (still won by UWr Vial), but the 2 larger paper events had more diverse top finishes. Before the ban, all 4 of those large events were won by Scaminator.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

I wanted to emphasize 4th & no Frog made finals.

The one reported as "1 in top 4" also wasn't top 2. 3-4 is basically the same, they could all be reported the same.

And yet you didn’t report them all the same, you tried to frame it in a way to strengthen your argument even though it was fundamentally dishonest.

Like I know why you did it, that was never mysterious. I’m merely pointing out how it undermines your credibility.

[FTW]

And yet you didn’t report them all the same, you tried to frame it in a way to strengthen your argument even though it was fundamentally dishonest.

Like I know why you did it, that was never mysterious. I’m merely pointing out how it undermines your credibility.

The links & Top 16 breakdown should keep it fully transparent & honest. Not trying to hide anything.

"1 in Top 4" could leave people wondering "was it 1st or 2nd?". I framed it in a way to emphasize it wasn't, and to contrast that to pre-ban results.

It's dishonest to pick at minor wording to pretend there isn't a huge difference before and after ban. Preban: 11 of Top 16 (69%) on 4xFrog? Scaminator vs Scaminator final tables? It says a lot that you resort to personal attacks rather than confront the results.