Top Performing Decklists
| Deck | Creator | Record | Best Finish |
|---|---|---|---|
| Red Deck Wins | luffydochapeudepalha | 9-1 | 1st in MTGO Standard Challenge 32 #12765769 |
| Gruul Aggro | mogged | 9-1 | 1st in MTGO Standard Challenge 32 #12769892 |
| Izzet Spellslingers | -nausea- | 8-2 | 1st in MTGO Standard Challenge 32 #12769865 |
| Jeskai Oculus | crazymorango | 8-2 | 1st in MTGO Standard Challenge 32 #12769907 |
| Jeskai Oculus | darth_vaner | 8-2 | 1st in MTGO Standard Challenge 64 #12769053 |
| Gruul Aggro | mogged | 8-2 | 1st in MTGO Standard Challenge 32 #12765784 |
| Jeskai Control | scipios | 8-1 | None |
| Rakdos Aggro | stalonge | 7-1 | 1st in MTGO Standard Challenge 32 #12769901 |
| Red Deck Wins | numberonenoob | 8-2 | 2nd in MTGO Standard Challenge 32 #12769907 |
| Jeskai Control | soulstrong | 8-2 | 2nd in MTGO Standard Challenge 32 #12769865 |
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 Beanstalk , 4 Color Legends , 4 Color Omniscience , 5 Color Battles , 5 Color Legends , Big Red , Boros Aggro , Boros Auras , Boros Burn
Meta Performance Analysis
Mountain ranks #407 out of approximately 406 cards in raw efficiency (top 100%).
Game Impact Factor
Color Differential
Colorless average: 63.4%
Performance compared to other Colorless cardsBased on our comprehensive multi-metric analysis, Mountain 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: 45.41 (Win rate × Top 8 rate ÷ Mana value)
At 0 mana, the average win rate in the format is 74.4%. Mountain has a win rate of 76.6%, making it 3.0% better than other 0-mana cards.
Top Performing Partners
| Card Name | Type | Deck Count | Win Rate | 1st Places |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Flowstone Infusion | Instant | 5 | 100.0% | 5 |
| Slick Sequence | Instant | 28 | 81.7% | 16 |
| Heritage Reclamation | Instant | 12 | 80.9% | 6 |
| Third Path Iconoclast | Creature — Human Monk | 37 | 80.8% | 19 |
| Dispelling Exhale | Instant | 43 | 79.6% | 21 |
| Shiko, Paragon of the Way | Legendary Creature — Spirit Dragon | 50 | 79.0% | 22 |
| Marang River Regent | Creature — Dragon | 48 | 77.7% | 22 |
| Flashfreeze | Instant | 18 | 77.5% | 6 |
| Ephara's Dispersal | Instant | 8 | 75.5% | 5 |
| Wild Ride | Sorcery | 7 | 75.0% | 4 |
Card Synergy Analysis
Cards that perform better with Mountain 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Elesh Norn, Mother of Machines | Legendary Creature — Phyrexian Praetor | 5 | 5 | 94.1% | 73.3% | +20.9% |
| Overlord of the Hauntwoods | Enchantment Creature — Avatar Horror | 5 | 7 | 93.5% | 75.0% | +18.5% |
| Frontline Rush | Instant | 2 | 6 | 100.0% | 83.1% | +16.9% |
| High Noon | Enchantment | 2 | 5 | 85.7% | 73.8% | +11.9% |
| Warleader's Call | Enchantment | 3 | 5 | 100.0% | 88.3% | +11.7% |
| Overlord of the Balemurk | Enchantment Creature — Avatar Horror | 5 | 12 | 84.9% | 76.4% | +8.6% |
| Sheoldred, the Apocalypse | Legendary Creature — Phyrexian Praetor | 4 | 16 | 83.5% | 75.1% | +8.4% |
| Go for the Throat | Instant | 2 | 8 | 82.2% | 74.8% | +7.4% |
| Cut Down | Instant | 1 | 13 | 82.2% | 75.3% | +6.9% |
| Magmatic Hellkite | Creature — Dragon | 4 | 11 | 90.3% | 83.5% | +6.8% |
Top Archetypes
| Archetype | Deck Count | % of Archetype | Win Rate |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gruul Aggro | 2077 | 100.0% | 47.5% |
| Red Deck Wins | 1377 | 100.0% | 52.8% |
| Boros Burn | 392 | 100.0% | 47.9% |
| Temur Otters | 333 | 99.1% | 41.8% |
| Gruul Leyline | 189 | 100.0% | 57.0% |
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.