I. Introduction
As I'm sure most SCG readers are aware, Mark Rosewater recently posted an article on magicthegathering.com about why R&D is hosing the color Blue. In the article, and in a subsequent forum post, he talks about how Blue is overpowered and thus needs to be brought down to size, a process that R&D has already started. To me, the implication in that sentiment is that Blue will continue to get the short end of the stick in Ravnica, but that is neither here nor there.

Indeed, in recent years, it seems to me that Blue's been consistently getting the shaft. My perception of the matter was that the Blue in Mirrodin and Onslaught (and for that matter, non-Meloku, non-Keiga, non-Hinder cards in Kamigawa) was subpar at best, and at times horrifically bad. My feeling was that there were a lot of interesting Blue cards in draft that were playable, albeit lacking in raw power, but there were very few cards that I would use in a constructed deck. Of course, upon reading MaRo's article, I began to think a little bit more about my perception, especially given the forum postings that are calling for further hosing of Blue to bring it 'in line' with the rest of the colors.

Now, we all know about Combo Winter and the overpowering Blue of Urza's block - but how has it fared since then? Does Blue deserve further hosing, or is it okay as it is? As Rosewater's article really gave no hard facts or figures to determine this point, I took it upon myself to see whether or not Blue has really been overpowering.

I immediately threw Vintage, Legacy, and Extended formats out the window as evaluation vehicles - those ships have long since sailed (Ancestral Recall, anyone?). I waffled about Extended for a bit, but I decided that as long as it included Tempest and Urza blocks, it wouldn't be fair to use Extended as a measure of the decreasing power of Blue since the end of Urza block. That left Standard as my format of measurement.

II. Analysis - Part 1
How exactly does one determine if one color is overpowering others in Standard? What better way than to look at the biggest stage for Standard in the world - World Championship tournaments? One way to do it is to look at Worlds results and see how many decks contain each color:

Worlds 2001:
Decks containing Blue: 5/8
Decks containing Black: 4/8
Decks containing White: 1/8
Decks containing Red: 4/8
Decks containing Green: 2/8

Worlds 2002:
Decks containing Blue: 8/8 (!)
Decks containing Black: 6/8
Decks containing White: 0/8
Decks containing Red: 2/8
Decks containing Green: 2/8

Worlds 2003:
Decks containing Blue: 6/8
Decks containing Black: 2/8
Decks containing White: 5/8
Decks containing Red: 3/8
Decks containing Green: 5/8

Worlds 2004:
Decks containing Blue: 5/8
Decks containing Black: 3/8
Decks containing White: 3/8
Decks containing Red: 5/8
Decks containing Green: 2/8

Upon cursory examination, it seems like Blue is indeed overpowering other colors, as it is the only color that has placed at least five decks in every Worlds Top 8 since Masques/Invasion Standard. However, the Worlds 2004 results really got to me, as I knew that at least three of the "Blue" decks (the three Affinity decks) actually ran very little Blue. This prompted me to dig deeper and see whether the decks that contained Blue actually played a large number of Blue cards, or if the Blue was there are a splash. Also, I thought it would be nice to see how many different Blue cards made showings in Worlds over the past four years, to more accurately judge the variety of Blue cards that have made it to tournament-worthy decks.

III. Analysis - Part 2
In order to do this, I had to do decklist analysis. Upon grabbing the decklists for Worlds 2001, I realized I had a problem - I didn't feel comfortable including cards like Undermine and Absorb as purely Blue cards, because they were not. At the same time, I didn't want to leave them out completely. So, I developed a system to deal with gold cards that I thought reached a fairly logical conclusion, and hopefully a happy medium as well. In this analysis, gold cards are counted as a fraction of a whole Blue card in accordance to its proportion of colored mana symbols. For example, Meddling Mage is 0.5 of a Blue card because the Blue component is half of the total colored casting cost. Psychatog would also be 0.5 of a Blue card because at 1UB, there are two colored mana symbols and Blue is one of them. Undermine would be 0.66 of a Blue card (UUB), Dromar's Charm would be 0.33 of a Blue card (UBW), etc. 4 Psychatog thus translates into 2 whole Blue cards.

I also realized that cards that are not Blue are not necessarily colored cards either; this came to my attention especially during the analysis of Worlds 2004, where four artifact-heavy decks made an appearance. However, I decided that this was okay, because the goal is to examine how prevalent Blue is; if artifacts are better, then so be it. Also, I noticed that the Affinity decks had about equivalent numbers of Blue, Red, and Black cards (those being Thoughtcast, Shrapnel Blast/Atog, and Disciple of the Vault), so I figured that the relative proportions would probably be okay. I also figured that if the only deck that could possibly introduce skew was KCI (and that deck going primarily to showcase the best card drawing and tutoring spells in Standard), then I should be okay. Nevertheless, take the numbers for Worlds 2004 as you will.

That being said, let's look at what I found:

=================================================

Worlds 2001 (Masques/Invasion):
Tom van de Logt (champion) - Black-Red
Blue Cards: 0
Non-Blue Cards: 36

Alex Borteh - Merfolk Opposition
Blue Cards: 36
Non-Blue Cards: 4
Counterspells: 8 (Counterspell, Thwart)
Card Drawing/Tutoring: 4 (Gush)
Bounce: 0
Tap Effects: 4 (Opposition)
Creatures: 20 (Darting Merfolk, Lord of Atlantis, Merfolk Looter, Merfolk of the Pearl Trident, Vodalian Merchant, Waterfront Bouncer)
Other: 0

Antoine Ruel - Nether-Go
Blue Cards: 17.33
Non-Blue Cards: 19.66
Counterspells: 6.66 (Counterspell, Undermine)
Card Drawing/Tutoring: 10 (Accumulated Knowledge, Fact or Fiction, Opt)
Bounce: 0
Tap Effects: 0
Creatures: 0
Other: 0.66 (Crosis's Charm)

Andrea Santin - Orb Opposition
Blue Cards: 34
Non-Blue Cards: 4
Counterspells: 9 (Counterspell, Thwart, Foil)
Card Drawing/Tutoring: 3 (Gush)
Bounce: 0
Tap Effects: 4 (Opposition)
Creatures: 18 (Glacial Wall, Lord of Atlantis, Merfolk Looter, Rootwater Thief, Waterfront Bouncer)
Other: 0

Mike Turian - Mono-Red
Blue Cards: 0
Non-Blue Cards: 37

Jan Tomcani - Dark Fires
Blue Cards: 0
Non-Blue Cards:36

Tommi Hovi - Probe-Go
Blue Cards: 17
Non-Blue Cards:19
Counterspells: 8.66 (Absorb, Counterspell, Dromar's Charm, Disrupt, Memory Lapse)
Card Drawing/Tutoring: 8 (4 Fact or Fiction, 4 Probe)
Bounce: 0
Tap Effects: 0
Creatures: 0.33 (Dromar, the Banisher)
Other: 0

David Williams - Saproling Opposition
Blue Cards: 27
Non-Blue Cards:11
Counterspells: 10 (Counterspell, Thwart, Foil)
Card Drawing/Tutoring: 13 (Sleight of Hand, Accumulated Knowledge, Fact or Fiction, Gush)
Bounce: 0
Tap Effects: 4 (Opposition)
Creatures: 0
Other: 0

=================================================

Worlds 2002 (Invasion/Odyssey)
For the sake of simplicity, I used Carlos Romao's U/B Psychatog list, Tuomas Kotiranta's U/B/r Psychatog list, and Sim How Han's Squirrel Opposition list, and multiplied the numbers by the archetype's respective number of showings in the Top 8. I feel justified in doing this because upon examination, the lists are different only in very minor ways, so the data itself isn't really skewed.

Carlos Romao (champion) - U/B Psychatog (4 slots in Top 8)
Blue Cards: 27
Non-Blue Cards: 9
Counterspells: 10 (Counterspell, Force Spike, Circular Logic)
Card Drawing/Tutoring: 9 (Cunning Wish, Deep Analysis, Fact or Fiction)
Bounce: 6 (Repulse, Upheaval)
Tap Effects: 0
Creatures: 2 (Psychatog)
Other: 0

Tuomas Kotiranta - U/B/r Psychatog (2 slots in Top 8)
Blue Cards: 21
Non-Blue Cards: 15
Counterspells: 8 (Counterspell, Circular Logic)
Card Drawing/Tutoring: 6 (Fact or Fiction, Deep Analysis)
Bounce: 2 (Repulse)
Tap Effects: 3 (Fire/Ice)
Creatures: 2 (Psychatog)
Other: 0

Sim Han How - Squirrel Opposition (2 slots in Top 8)
Blue Cards: 15
Non-Blue Cards: 23
Counterspells: 4 (Circular Logic)
Card Drawing/Tutoring: 0
Bounce: 0
Tap Effects: 7 (Fire/Ice, Opposition)
Creatures: 4 (Merfolk Looter)
Other: 0

=================================================

Worlds 2003 (Odyssey/Onslaught)
Again for the sake of simplicity, I took Daniel Zink's Wake list and multiplied its numbers by its number of showings in the Top 8, again because there aren't really significant differences in the lists.

Daniel Zink - Wake (4 slots in Top 8)
Blue Cards: 15
Non-Blue Cards: 18
Counterspells: 5 (Mana Leak, Circular Logic)
Card Drawing/Tutoring: 10 (Deep Analysis, Compulsion, Cunning Wish)
Bounce: 0
Tap Effects: 0
Creatures: 0
Other: 0

Peer Kroger - Reanimator
Blue Cards: 1
Non-Blue Cards: 34
Counterspells: 0
Card Drawing/Tutoring: 0
Bounce: 0
Tap Effects: 0
Creatures: 1 (Arcanis the Omnipotent)
Other: 0

Dave Humpherys - U/G Madness
Blue Cards: 20
Non-Blue Cards: 18
Counterspells: 4 (Circular Logic)
Card Drawing/Tutoring: 6 (Deep Analysis, Careful Study)
Bounce: 3 (Unsummon)
Tap Effects:
Creatures: 7 (Aquamoeba, Wonder)
Other: 2 (Quiet Speculation)

Wolfgang Eder - Goblin Bidding
Blue Cards: 0
Non-Blue Cards: 38

Gabe Walls - Astral Slide
Blue Cards: 0
Non-Blue Cards: 33

=================================================

Worlds 2004 (Onslaught/Mirrodin)
Terry Soh - Rift Slide
Blue Cards: 0
Non-Blue Cards: 34

Julien Nuijten (champion) - G/W Slide
Blue Cards: 0
Non-Blue Cards: 35

Ryo Ogura - Goblins
Blue Cards: 0
Non-Blue Cards: 37

Aeo Paquette - Mox Affinity
Blue Cards: 6
Non-Blue Cards: 36
Counterspells: 0
Card Drawing/Tutoring: 4 (Thoughtcast)
Bounce: 0
Tap Effects: 0
Creatures: 2 (Somber Hoverguard)
Other: 0

Kamiel Cornielissen - Vial Affinity
Blue Cards: 4
Non-Blue Cards: 36
Counterspells: 0
Card Drawing/Tutoring: 4 (Thoughtcast)
Bounce: 0
Tap Effects: 0
Creatures: 0
Other: 0

Manuel Bevand - KCI
Blue Cards: 17
Non-Blue Cards: 24
Counterspells: 4 (Condescend)
Card Drawing/Tutoring: 13 (Serum Visions, Thirst for Knowledge, Thoughtcast, Fabricate)
Bounce: 0
Tap Effects: 0
Creatures: 0
Other: 0

Gabriel Nassif - U/W Control
Blue Cards: 17
Non-Blue Cards: 18
Counterspells: 13 (Mana Leak, Rewind, Annul, Condescend)
Card Drawing/Tutoring: 4 (Thirst for Knowledge)
Bounce: 0
Tap Effects: 0
Creatures: 0
Other: 0

Murray Evans - Aggro Affinity
Blue Cards: 11
Non-Blue Cards: 32
Counterspells: 3 (Mana Leak)
Card Drawing/Tutoring: 4 (Thoughtcast)
Bounce: 0
Tap Effects: 0
Creatures: 4 (Somber Hoverguard)
Other: 0

=================================================

Proportion of Blue Cards, Cumulative:
Worlds 2002 showed a huge spike in the proportion of Blue cards, because all eight decks included Blue to run either Psychatog or Opposition. Nevertheless, from 59.8% in 2002, the proportion has dropped to 29.3% (Worlds 2003), and all the way to 17.9% (in the artifact-heavy Worlds 2004). It's worth noting that only Nassif's U/W Control and Bevand's KCI ran Blue cards in any significant number, and that those numbers are drastically lower than many of those in the past.

Unique Blue Cards, Cumulative:
I also noticed that the sheer number of unique Blue cards has dropped dramatically since Worlds 2001, from 25 all the way to 9. Even in the Blue-heavy environment of Worlds 2002, there were only 12 unique Blue cards being played. This indicates to me that there are less Blue spells worth playing now than there were in 2001. As time has gone on, the cards used have also become more heavily concentrated into counterspells and card drawing/tutoring, despite options for both being inferior to their 2001 counterparts. This leads me to believe that the mechanics of the color itself are very desirable, perhaps moreso than any comparable mechanics in the other four colors, and for good reason - countering spells and drawing cards are two of the most powerful effects in the game.

V. Conclusions
So what does this all mean? Honestly, I'm not sure. It seems to me that Wizards has hosed Blue extensively, especially over the past three sets; there simply haven't been very many Blue cards being played in constructed at all. However, Blue decks are still very viable, and power cards like Meloku and Keiga seem to indicate that Blue's power level is still fairly high in Standard. The variety of Blue cards being played has gone down significantly over the past four years, but Blue has nevertheless been present in the majority of Top 8 Worlds decks every season. Blue doesn't really seem to miss the classic UU Counterspell in Standard, as Mono-U Control stands to be one of the better decks in post-Ravager Standard. Does that mean Blue should be further nerfed, or has it already been balanced out with the other colors? I personally believe that Blue is close to being balanced, that it perhaps needs some more mid-range Constructed-level playables but that overall its power seems to be in line with the other colors. I don't know how others feel about this, though, so I'd love to see some discussion about this on the forums.

Thanks for reading. This is my first attempt at an article, so I hope that it was at least decent and that I didn't screw up too horribly. Please direct any feedback to me; I'd love to hear what I did wrong and what I did right.

Jonathan Wang
wraith985 on SCG and TMD
jrwang at NOSPAM gmail dot com