Thread by @mtg_ds

A 🧵👇
How does #ONE Limited compare to other recent formats? We can look at trophy-winning decks compiled by @17Lands to get a reasonable, if imperfect look.

First, ONE is 𝗯𝘆 𝗳𝗮𝗿 the fastest environment we've seen recently, in terms of turns/game:

It's also predominantly a 2-color format. This table is sorted by mean number of cards in a third color -- trophy-winning ONE decks feature fewer than 1, on average. There is a lot of variation in this dimension across formats, and ONE is among the lowest.

Trophy-winning decks in ONE also skew a bit lower in average rarity, or at least, 70% of non-basics in trophy-winning decks are commons, which is a bit higher than typical.

I don't think this is the same as saying that ONE is a "pauper" (versus "prince") format.

Consistent with its status as a very fast format, ONE is the most play-advantageous format we've seen recently. In games played trophy-winning decks, being on the play is associated with an additional 3.9% win rate!

We've also seen a fairly high propensity to mulligan.

The typical trophy-winning ONE deck plays slightly fewer lands than average, at 16.6 lands/40 cards.

ONE is typified by a fairly high number of artifacts, a fairly low number of creatures, and not many enchantments, on average. Note that this artifact count is probably an underrepresentation, given the prevalence of Mites as the characteristic token.

Finally, in keeping with its status as a "fast" format, the average MV of non-land cards in trophy-winning decks is quite low, at 2.74. One=drops play a large role, and there is some hint here of the "u-shaped" phenomenon I've heard @Chord_O_Calls discuss.

If you have ideas for other interesting cross-format comparisons to investigate, please let me know!

And if you think this is cool, and want to see it again, let me know with ❤️&🔁 -- it's the best way for me to know what's resonating.