Deck | Creator | Record | Best Finish |
---|---|---|---|
Esper Pixie | dr4gun0v | 6-8 | None |
Esper Pixie , Grixis Control , Izzet Prowess , Jeskai Oculus
Radical Idea ranks #2210 out of approximately 5129 cards in raw efficiency (top 43%).
Blue average: 50.3%
Performance compared to other Blue cardsBased on our comprehensive multi-metric analysis, Radical Idea is a decent card with average performance in the current meta.
Recommended number of copies: 1
Performance Efficiency: 8.71 (Win rate × Top 8 rate ÷ Mana value)
At 2 mana, the average win rate in the format is 47.5%. Radical Idea has a win rate of 46.4%, making it 2.3% worse than other 2-mana cards.
Card Name | Type | Deck Count | Win Rate | 1st Places |
---|---|---|---|---|
Finale of Promise | Sorcery | 5 | 44.6% | 0 |
Goblin Electromancer | Creature — Goblin Wizard | 7 | 35.4% | 0 |
Thrill of Possibility | Instant | 5 | 30.0% | 0 |
Crackling Drake | Creature — Drake | 5 | 25.0% | 0 |
Opt | Instant | 8 | 21.9% | 0 |
Lava Coil | Sorcery | 5 | 20.8% | 0 |
Negate | Instant | 5 | 20.8% | 0 |
Arclight Phoenix | Creature — Phoenix | 5 | 20.0% | 0 |
Shock | Instant | 5 | 12.5% | 0 |
Cards that perform better with Radical Idea 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 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Goblin Electromancer | Creature — Goblin Wizard | 2 | 5 | 50.0% | 53.9% | -3.9% |
Crackling Drake | Creature — Drake | 4 | 5 | 45.0% | 50.8% | -5.8% |
Opt | Instant | 1 | 7 | 39.1% | 51.1% | -11.9% |
Negate | Instant | 2 | 5 | 38.9% | 51.5% | -12.6% |
Shock | Instant | 1 | 5 | 33.3% | 51.2% | -17.9% |
Archetype | Deck Count | % of Archetype | Win Rate |
---|---|---|---|
Izzet Prowess | 8 | 0.8% | 31.0% |
Esper Pixie | 1 | 0.1% | 42.9% |
Grixis Control | 1 | 33.3% | 0.0% |
Jeskai Oculus | 1 | 0.1% | 50.0% |
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.