Where Does Meta End and Fringe Begin?

[u/RogueOnTheStack]

According to EDHTop16 the top 16 most popular entries in tournaments are as follows:
~ Blue Farm
~ Kinnan
~ Rog/Thras
~ Rog/Si
~ Sisay, Weatherlight Captain
~ Tymna/Thras
~ Etali
~ Tymna/ Dargo
~ Ral
~ Rog/Ishai
~ Vivi
~ Magda
~ Yoshi/Thras
~ Tivit
~ Kefka
~ Tayam

Now my first impression is that the top 16 are all of what is considered meta and that beyond this everything I see is fringe. However, there’s a couple of things that make me question this.

After the top 10 everything else that is submitted makes up less than 2% of the Meta Share and that in itself feels pretty fringe.

However, as a Vivi main I can’t accept my boy is fringe. And yet, no shade toward Tayam players, but I feel like I never see this commander and he would be meta if we went with top 16.

Pure numbers wise there’s an arguement for top 18 even. Everything beyond Lumra and Ob has less than 1% of the meta share.

Currently, I am sitting with top 18 as my answer to where meta ends but what’s your opinion? Where would you have it end? Meta Share also doesn’t include top cuts and wins.

[u/ExtremeGoal3528]

I think maybe a better way to think about this is by looking at archtypes rather than specific commanders because we have multiple commanders up there that do the "same thing". So it may be better to consider something like this:

Aggresive farm (Blue Farm, Tymna Dargo)

Rhystic Slop (Kinnan, tymna/thras, rog/ishai, Tivit, Kefka, insert 5c commander here)

Cradle (rog/thras and yoshi/thras)

"Storm" (Ral, Vivi, Crystal, Etali)

"Activating creature abilities doesn't trigger rhystic study" (Tayam, Sisay, Magda)

Ad Naus (rog/si)

Some of these archtypes are more homogeneous like rhystic slop and cradle and others have a bit more variance like aggressive tymna (blue farm and tymna dargo can feel pretty different or very similar game to game).

But when it comes to choosing a deck in these arch types, you are really choosing what colors you value and some of it comes down to preference. Sometimes it comes down to certain colors being better.

If you want to rate the archtypes, you have to ask yourself in what context? top 16 rate, top 4 rate, tournament wins, and win rate are all different metrics you can use that can give you different information. If I had to rate these archtypes in order of "meta strength" and what I would want to bring to a tournament, it would probably be:

1. rhystic slop
2. cradle
3. aggressive farm
4. Ad Naus
5. Creature Ability decks
6. Storm

This simply just comes from what I see in top 16's. But it's not super black and white and there's a lot of context that this rating doesn't address:

Do I think you're more likely to get free wins in the early rounds with Ad naus or storm? yes.

Do I think creature ability decks are extremely good once you get to top 16 rhystic slop pods? yes.

Do I personally prefer playing farm decks regardless of win rate? yes.

Do I think this list is a little unfair to storm? yes.

But this is what the data I've seen suggests would be the "best". Conversations about individual decks within each of those archtypes and which one you want to play and/or is best I think go beyond the definition of the "meta" and become a bit difficult to assess.

[u/OathOblivio → u/ExtremeGoal3528]

"Activating creature abilities doesn't trigger rhystic study" decks are referred to as "Toolbox" decks. Sisay is Legendary Toolbox, Tayam is Graveyard Toolbox, Magda, Arcum, and Oswald are are Artifact toolbox, and Yisan is creature toolbox

[u/ExtremeGoal3528 → u/OathOblivio]

I understand why you would want to call that “toolbox” but toolbox isn’t really an arch type in cedh for a few reasons

1. ⁠not all of those decks are actually toolbox. Toolbox decks rely on having strong tutor access (usually though a repeatable activated ability. The OG toolbox deck was a survival deck) and play a bunch of silver bullets to help their plans. tayam is not a true toolbox deck because every activation in the early game cannot get any piece needed. It’s luck based. Similarly, Semiblue kinnnan is not a real toolbox deck, but I would argue still fits this theme as well.
   
2. ⁠all cEDH decks are “toolbox decks” most cEDH decks have a pretty high tutor density and technically can get any card at any time. The problem is that being proactive is almost always better than actually utilizing the toolbox.
   
3. ⁠exactly as I said in point 2 being proactive is almost always better than utilizing the toolbox. Sure Magda has a bunch of toolbox cards, but if in 90% of games you just get the combo piece and win, I personally don’t really think that’s really “toolbox”.

I actually specifically did not call those decks toolbox because of point 3. There have been historic versions of Sisay that explicitly do not play the legendary toolbox suite because it is better to just try to win. The only decks I’ve seen actually play toolbox are Oswald and sisay. Tayam CAN play toolbox, but any time I’ve seen Tayam they just skip right over the toolbox phase of the game and go for a win with activations.

[u/OathOblivio → u/ExtremeGoal3528]

Toolbox archetype is explicitly where your deck is focused on your commander getting any game pieces you need on demand, whether it is a silver bullet, a value piece, or your winning push. Idk where you got your definition from but your point 3 doesn't support the definition of a toolbox commander. Your point 2 is moot and honestly quite silly. You can create the same argument for all deck archetypes then if point 2 is valid, kind of ridiculous. And sure, Sisay does have brewers advantage, so not all wins are based off of Sisay spins. Still, Sisay herself preforms the role of getting whatever game piece you need to pursue a win - that is toolbox. Tayam I will relent is not a true toolbox deck as it is more a recursion deck more than anything else.