Top Performing Decklists
| Deck | Creator | Record | Best Finish |
|---|---|---|---|
| Golgari Reanimator | platinum-mythic rank player | 6-0 | 1st in Traditional Standard Ranked Decklists: April 14, 2025 |
| Jund Delirium | platinum-mythic rank player | 6-0 | 1st in Traditional Standard Ranked Decklists: April 14, 2025 |
| Temur Otters | platinum-mythic rank player | 6-0 | 1st in Traditional Standard Ranked Decklists: April 14, 2025 |
| Golgari Obliterator | platinum-mythic rank player | 6-0 | 1st in Traditional Standard Ranked Decklists: April 14, 2025 |
| Sultai Roots | platinum-mythic rank player | 6-0 | 1st in Traditional Standard Ranked Decklists: April 14, 2025 |
| Golgari Midrange | pnutz47 | 6-2 | None |
| Golgari Midrange | dr4ken | 6-2 | None |
Performance Stats (Last 14 Days)
Win Rate Impact
Top Table Win Rate
Meta Trend
Sample Size
Tournament Results
Average Copies
Archetypes Using This Card:
4 Color Legends , 4 Color Repurposing , 5 Color Legends , Abzan Beanstalk , Abzan Doubling , Abzan Midrange , Abzan Pixie , Abzan Roots , Domain Zur Overlords , Elves
Meta Performance Analysis
Llanowar Wastes ranks #411 out of approximately 410 cards in raw efficiency (top 100%).
Game Impact Factor
Color Differential
Colorless average: 64.0%
Performance compared to other Colorless cardsBased on our comprehensive multi-metric analysis, Llanowar Wastes is an underperforming card in the current meta.
Recommended number of copies: 1
Win Rate Timeline
Card Efficiency Analysis
Raw Efficiency (Win Rate/Mana)
Relative Efficiency
Performance Efficiency: 44.73 (Win rate × Top 8 rate ÷ Mana value)
At 0 mana, the average win rate in the format is 74.4%. Llanowar Wastes has a win rate of 75.2%, making it 1.0% better than other 0-mana cards.
Top Performing Partners
| Card Name | Type | Deck Count | Win Rate | 1st Places |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sunspine Lynx | Creature — Elemental Cat | 5 | 71.4% | 3 |
| Blanchwood Prowler | Creature — Elemental | 14 | 68.0% | 5 |
| Vinereap Mentor | Creature — Squirrel Druid | 8 | 67.9% | 3 |
| Urborg Lhurgoyf | Creature — Lhurgoyf | 13 | 65.5% | 4 |
| Glistening Deluge | Sorcery | 12 | 62.1% | 4 |
| Leyline Binding | Enchantment | 15 | 62.0% | 4 |
| Zur, Eternal Schemer | Legendary Creature — Human Wizard | 7 | 58.6% | 2 |
| Kaito, Bane of Nightmares | Legendary Planeswalker — Kaito | 6 | 58.3% | 3 |
| Royal Treatment | Instant | 37 | 57.7% | 10 |
| Stab | Instant | 35 | 56.5% | 7 |
Card Synergy Analysis
Cards that perform better with Llanowar Wastes than they do on average. A positive synergy score indicates stronger performance together.
| Card Name | Type | Mana | Decks | Win Rate Together | Win Rate Apart | Synergy Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Liliana of the Veil | Legendary Planeswalker — Liliana | 3 | 11 | 90.9% | 77.2% | +13.7% |
| The End | Instant | 4 | 9 | 84.1% | 76.2% | +7.9% |
| Up the Beanstalk | Enchantment | 2 | 7 | 80.0% | 74.3% | +5.7% |
| Bushwhack | Sorcery | 1 | 6 | 80.0% | 74.5% | +5.5% |
| Virtue of Persistence | Enchantment // Sorcery — Adventure | 7 | 5 | 77.8% | 73.3% | +4.5% |
| Scavenging Ooze | Creature — Ooze | 2 | 13 | 78.8% | 75.2% | +3.6% |
| Choking Miasma | Sorcery | 3 | 16 | 80.5% | 77.8% | +2.7% |
| Obstinate Baloth | Creature — Beast | 4 | 29 | 78.2% | 75.8% | +2.4% |
| Glissa Sunslayer | Legendary Creature — Phyrexian Zombie Elf | 3 | 10 | 76.9% | 75.1% | +1.8% |
| Unholy Annex/Ritual Chamber | Enchantment — Room // Enchantment — Room | 8 | 21 | 77.9% | 76.0% | +1.8% |
Top Archetypes
| Archetype | Deck Count | % of Archetype | Win Rate |
|---|---|---|---|
| Golgari Midrange | 774 | 98.6% | 44.2% |
| Golgari Demons | 545 | 100.0% | 46.9% |
| Golgari Graveyard | 52 | 96.3% | 41.9% |
| Unknown Archetype | 33 | 9.1% | 36.0% |
| Golgari Roots | 25 | 100.0% | 27.2% |
Statistics Explanation
| Statistic | Description | Formula |
|---|---|---|
| Win Rate Impact | How much this card increases or decreases the win rate of decks that include it, compared to the average deck in the format. | (Win rate of decks with this card) - (Average win rate of all decks) |
| Top Table Win Rate | A weighted win rate that gives more significance to performance in higher tournament placements. First place finishes count for 2x, with diminishing weight down to 8th place. | ∑(wins × placement_weight) / ∑((wins + losses) × placement_weight) |
| Meta Trend | Shows if the card is performing better or worse in the most recent period compared to earlier periods. Positive values indicate improving performance. | (Win rate in recent half of time period) - (Win rate in earlier half of time period) |
| Confidence Factor | A measure of statistical reliability based on sample size. The progress bar indicates how confident we are in the statistics (with larger sample sizes providing higher confidence). | log10(Number of decks + 1) |
| Average Copies | The average number of copies of this card included in decks that use it. | ∑(Copies in each deck) / (Number of decks) |
| Card Synergy Score | Measures how well this card performs with other cards compared to their individual performance. | (Win rate together) - (Average of individual win rates) |
| Raw Efficiency | Win rate points per mana invested. Higher values indicate better returns on mana investment. | (Win rate) / (Mana value) |
| Relative Efficiency | How efficient this card is compared to the average card of the same mana value. | ((Win rate) / (Format average win rate for same mana)) / (Mana value) |
| Performance Efficiency | Combined metric that accounts for win rate, tournament success, and mana investment. | (Win rate × Top 8 placement rate) / (Mana value) |
| Game Impact Factor | A measure of how much this card affects game outcomes, based on win rate adjusted by its deviation from the format average. | Win rate × (1 + (Win rate - Format average) / 100) |
| Color Differential | How this card's win rate compares to the average win rate of other cards of the same color. | Win rate - Average win rate for same color |
All statistics are calculated using tournament data from the selected time period. Sample sizes below 10 decks may not provide statistically significant results.