Recently, the folks at the Command Zone did two shows where they accumulated stats from 300 Commander games to try and answer a few questions about the format. They looked at a variety of things that affect your win percentage, from early Sol Rings, to land drops, to deck color(s) to the cost of decks. The numbers they came back with were sometimes predictable and sometimes not. You should definitely check out both episodes to see the results.

After watching both shows, there were three points I took away from them that weren't specifically discussed and I wanted to share them with you.

The Best Player Will Win More

When the Strongest Player is in a game, they are the default target. This doesn't mean that every game with the Strongest Player in it is a three against one beatdown. What it means is that everyone is aware of the Strongest Player and all other things being equal, will choose the Strongest Player as the target.

Given that, the Strongest Player isn't necessarily the Best Player. If the Strongest Player is constantly being targeted by three other players, the benefits of being the Strongest Player can be nullified, so they win less often. This can often lead to another player being the Best Player simply because they don't get the attention of the table that they should. The Best Player often flies under the radar, able to save their resources for crucial moments in the game that give them wins, while the Strongest Player is forced to use those assets just to survive.

The stats the Command Zone team gathered bear this out. Players believe that getting an early Sol Ring is a huge advantage, but the stats show it actually reduces the likelihood of winning. Players believe that either instant and sorcery based, creature based, or artifact based decks have the highest win percentage, but it is actually planeswalker-based decks. Finally, 88% of players said going first in a game has little to moderate effect on winning games, yet the player who goes first in four-player games wins 30% of the time!

These stats show us that when players believe something gives another player an advantage, they attack them to try and mitigate the damage. If they think that what they are doing is harmless, they don't. Since players in a group recognize the Strongest Player as the biggest threat before the game starts, they will do what they can to mitigate that advantage, letting someone who isn't viewed as the Strongest Player get a bonus.

Lands or Going First

The second stat they mentioned was the number of lands. It was broken up into two parts. The winning players have almost 11 lands while the losing players tend to have only 9. Also, 42% of games were won by the player with the most lands. This is an outrageously high percentage and shows the value of having more lands very clearly.

Or does it?

These two stats offer a chicken and egg situation. The player who goes first plays the first land. Assuming all else is equal; they will always play a land that gives them more lands. Even if you figure all players have relatively the same amount of ramp spells, the advantage goes to the player who played first. So is it really more lands that wins games or more turns that allows you to play more lands that wins games?

I tend to look at that 42% and say that more lands is the reason why going first offers such a boost to one's win percentage. The first turn offers you the opportunity to play the next land before everyone else, but what happens to the player who goes first and doesn't match the ramp that the other players on the board play? Given the numbers, we know that playing more lands is more important than going first so I see going first as simply a way to help you up your ramp as opposed to being a win condition in and of itself.

Another point to consider with the land stats; the average winning player has 11 lands while the average losing player has nine. With my meta, the point of the stat is still true, but the numbers are different. These stats were drawn from games that were played by better than average to good players playing with good decks. My meta tends to involve decks that aren't nearly as tuned as the ones these stats were drawn from. My meta also involves players who probably aren't as good and/or aren't paying as close attention to the board as these players are. Given that, it shouldn't be surprising that our games tend to run longer, meaning more lands hit the battlefield. I expect our winning player still has more lands than the losing player, but I'm also betting the numbers are two lands higher, meaning our winning player likely has 13 lands, while our losing players likely have 11.

Choosing Fun

The purpose of putting together the stats was to show you what wins because this is something we care about. Knowing that more lands means you will win more means that you will likely find more ways to get more lands into play so you can win more games. The stats from the Command Zone are valuable assets when looking to build more competitive decks.

It is also very clear from the stats that running White in your decks lessens your chance of winning. So:

Go first.

Play more lands than your opponents.

Play Black.

Don't play White.

Don't play Sol Ring in the first three turns of a game.

Play Sol Ring in your deck.

Play Cyclonic Rift in your Blue decks.

This will help you win and winning is fun... so do this.

Or better yet, play the deck you want to play. Build the deck the way you want to build it. If you want to run a Boros deck, do it. Winning is fun, but playing the game and building the deck and enjoying the time with friends, and doing the big, splashy play are all fun too. I'd suggest even more fun than just winning. And if you can win by defying the odds and playing your deck your way, winning will be even more fun.

Those games that I played last night? The win was nice, but getting the win by fighting off my opponents while Liliana Vess's loyalty count slowly climbed each turn until I was able to ultimate it for the first time ever was the real fun.

Enjoy the games. Play the games so everyone has fun. Go for the splashy play, even if it means your chances of winning slip a little. When I tune my decks, I'm not looking for the absolutely optimal mana ratio. I'm not looking for a perfect curve. I'm looking to maximize the likelihood that Ol' Buzzbark will let me throw my foam dice six or seven times in one game. I'm looking for the chance to flip 15 cards in a row off the bottom of my deck with Grenzo, Dungeon Warden. I'm hoping Lazav, Dimir Mastermind can catch an early Eldrazi into the graveyard. Strive for the outrageous and ridiculous in your games! The wins are great but on average, they only come 25% of the time. I love getting a win, but the big crazy play is what everyone remembers. We play the game for the fun. Winning is great, but don't be a slave to it. Playing with the decks and friends you love is just so much better.

Bruce Richard

@manaburned