← Back to Sessions

Dimir Tempo vs Midrange Legacy Matchup Analysis

1 requestsStarted 7/22/2026, 8:09:04 PM
Bluesky mention by @JurgenKowalsky: @_MetaMage_ what are differences in cards played between dimir tempo and dimir midrange in legacy. What are the win% of dimir tempo and midrange against the top 16 decks in the Format Please answer the question based on MTG tournament data. The full thread JSON is available but omitted here.
🛠️Get Meta Report

The Dimir Midrange result came back tagged as Standard format, not Legacy. Let me search more carefully and also pull the card lists and matchup data.

🛠️Get Archetype Cards
🛠️Get Archetype Cards

Now let me get the matchup winrates for both archetypes against each of the top 16 decks. I'll run both sets in parallel.

Here is the full breakdown for @JurgenKowalsky. Data window: last 60 days (2026-05-21 to 2026-07-21).

CARD DIFFERENCES: DIMIR TEMPO vs DIMIR MIDRANGE (LEGACY MAINBOARD)

Both archetypes share a common UB shell: Force of Will (4x), Brainstorm (4x), Thoughtseize (~3.6-3.8x), Ponder (~3.6-3.8x), Polluted Delta (4x), Underground Sea (~3.7-3.9x), Undercity Sewers (~1.2x), and Flow State (~3.5-3.7x). The divergence starts there.

DIMIR TEMPO exclusive or near-exclusive cards (presence in Tempo vs Midrange):

  • Wasteland: 100% vs 37% -- Tempo uses it as a full playset for mana denial; Midrange runs it lightly if at all
  • Daze: 96% vs 66% -- a full 3x in Tempo, only ~3x in 66% of Midrange lists; Midrange leans less on cheap counters
  • Fatal Push: 100% vs 27% -- Tempo runs a near-full 3.2x suite; Midrange largely replaces this with other removal
  • Tamiyo, Inquisitive Student: 98% vs 42% -- a core threat in Tempo; optional in Midrange
  • Orcish Bowmasters: 98% vs not appearing in top 30 -- essentially a Tempo-exclusive creature package
  • Murktide Regent: 92% vs 30% -- primary finisher in Tempo; rarely used in Midrange
  • Kaito, Bane of Nightmares: 91% vs not in top 30 -- another Tempo-specific threat
  • Nethergoyf: 63% vs not in top 30 -- additional cheap threat in Tempo
  • Barrowgoyf: 54% vs 32% -- present in both but much more central to Tempo
  • Brazen Borrower: 57% vs 34% -- fringe in both, more common in Tempo

DIMIR MIDRANGE exclusive or heavily skewed cards:

  • Mishra's Bauble: 59% (avg 3.9x) vs 27% (avg 2x) -- Midrange runs full playsets for card selection and graveyard setup
  • Lotus Petal: 58% (avg 3.7x) vs not in Tempo top 30 -- acceleration for faster threats; points to a combo-adjacent sub-archetype
  • Dark Ritual: 54% (avg 3.8x) vs not in Tempo -- confirms a fast-mana angle in Midrange shells
  • The Fantasticar: 48% (avg 4x) vs not in Tempo -- a top-end threat that only appears in Midrange
  • Reanimate: 23% (avg 4x) vs not in Tempo -- some Midrange lists double as reanimator packages
  • Atraxa, Grand Unifier: 21% vs not in Tempo -- confirms the reanimator sub-package in a portion of Midrange
  • Animate Dead: 21% vs not in Tempo -- same reanimator subarchetype
  • Wasteland is far less central in Midrange (37% presence vs 100% in Tempo)

In short: Tempo is a lean, disruption-heavy aggro-control deck built around cheap creatures, Daze, Wasteland, and Kaito/Tamiyo/Bowmasters. Midrange is slower and more value-oriented, with a meaningful subset of lists incorporating fast mana (Lotus Petal, Dark Ritual) and a full reanimator package (Reanimate, Atraxa, Animate Dead) as a late-game angle.

MATCHUP WINRATES vs TOP 16 LEGACY ARCHETYPES (excl. draws, last 60 days)

Opponent (by meta share) | Dimir Tempo WR% | Dimir Midrange WR%
Show and Tell (7.1%) | 61.8% (21-13) | 63.6% (14-8)
Izzet Delver (6.9%) | 63.9% (23-13) | 34.8% (8-15)
Tron (6.7%) | 37.9% (11-18) | 53.8% (14-12)
Energy (5.8%) | 34.5% (10-19) | 53.3% (16-14)
Dimir Tempo (5.5%) | [mirror] | 49.5% overall
Grixis Reanimator (5.2%) | 64.3% (18-10) | 43.8% (7-9)
Doomsday (4.9%) | 60.0% (21-14) | 50.0% (16-16)
Azorius Midrange (4.4%) | 59.0% (23-16) | 33.3% (7-14)
Dimir Midrange (4.2%) | 49.5% overall | [mirror]
Blue Artifacts (3.5%) | 30.4% (7-16) | 38.5% (5-8)
Death & Taxes (3.5%) | N/A (no data) | N/A (no data)
Lands (3.4%) | 31.3% (5-11) | 61.5% (8-5)
Welder Combo (2.3%) | 27.3% (3-8) | 21.1% (4-15)
Mystic Forge Combo (2.1%) | 45.5% (5-6) | 75.0% (6-2)
Jeskai Midrange (2.1%) | 55.6% (5-4) | 55.6% (5-4)
Eldrazi (2.0%) | 33.3% (2-4) | 42.9% (3-4)

Note: Death & Taxes shows 0 recorded matches for both archetypes in the database window, which is unusual -- this may reflect limited overlap in tournament pairings. Sample sizes for some lower-presence matchups (Eldrazi, Jeskai, Mystic Forge, Welder) are small (6-11 matches), so treat those numbers with caution.

Key takeaways: Dimir Tempo is excellent against other blue fair decks (Izzet Delver 63.9%, Grixis Reanimator 64.3%, Azorius Midrange 59.0%) thanks to Wasteland + Daze disruption but struggles badly against artifact-based decks and combo (Blue Artifacts 30.4%, Welder Combo 27.3%, Lands 31.3%). Dimir Midrange flips several of those matchups -- it beats Tron (53.8%), Energy (53.3%), and Lands (61.5%) much more cleanly, and has an incredible edge on Mystic Forge Combo (75.0%), but gets punished by Izzet Delver (34.8%) and Azorius Midrange (33.3%) where the lack of Daze + Wasteland pressure really shows. Both share a soft spot against Blue Artifacts and Welder Combo. Overall, Tempo is the better choice in a field heavy with blue fair decks; Midrange is better positioned against the format's big-mana and non-blue strategies.

Sources: Data from 82 Legacy tournaments (May 21 - Jul 21, 2026): 54% MTGO, 46% Melee.
https://www.mtgo.com/decklist/legacy-challenge-32-2026-07-1912847711
https://www.mtgo.com/decklist/legacy-challenge-32-2026-07-1912847705
https://melee.gg/Decklist/View/cae0d86d-8553-40c7-ad01-b48b01024339