I still fail to see how the numbers are escaping people. This is probability on Turn 1. That includes one mana spells like disfigure or darkblast. Somewhere between 8 and 5 percent failure rate. On. Turn. One.
I will concede that splash lands will make your mana slightly worse for everything else. That's why its so critical to understand that you only have to dedicate a small portion of that mana base to the splash, and will still be fine. In this way we are minimizing this secondary risk by keeping the core mana base more intact. That's the whole point of this discussion almost: you can make 1-off splashes without having to go all in on the mana base
And if the splash really is that valuable, why would it be a one-off effect? You would be happy with a 12% chance to stumble their mana dork, but are crying over the even-lower-percent chance that your mana fails in this apparently extremely important situation? In this situation wouldn't you be splashing for >1 of this effect (if its so damn important), so you can increase the probability of drawing the effect when we want? And in this case of '3 or so' of the thing, the math shows that plentiful mana is definitely needed, and is therefor outside the scope of the argument. I'm not trying to make a point for bad splashing, I'm making a point for the mana requirements of an actually-good splash.
To that end, lets talk about how one-off splashes are usually for very "splashy" effects, almost none of which make that category by being one mana or by being critical plays on certain turns (they are the play that warrants the critical play). Perfect cases in point are PW's. You won't die because you didn't cast your bomb exactly on time, but if you do, you get to pull way far ahead. For a concrete example lets use a splash for sorin, grim nemesis in a GW or UW control deck as a solid finisher piece. You can afford to sit back a couple turns because inevitability is on your side by nature of the deck type. This, in turn, brings up a solid point in that one-off splashes are probably better suited for slow decks.
Regardless, I'm not trying to talk about the quality of splash, the argument is intended to be 'properly thought out one-off splash will be happy with around 4-7 sources, see article for proof'
I will concede that splash lands will make your mana slightly worse for everything else. That's why its so critical to understand that you only have to dedicate a small portion of that mana base to the splash, and will still be fine. In this way we are minimizing this secondary risk by keeping the core mana base more intact. That's the whole point of this discussion almost: you can make 1-off splashes without having to go all in on the mana base
And if the splash really is that valuable, why would it be a one-off effect? You would be happy with a 12% chance to stumble their mana dork, but are crying over the even-lower-percent chance that your mana fails in this apparently extremely important situation? In this situation wouldn't you be splashing for >1 of this effect (if its so damn important), so you can increase the probability of drawing the effect when we want? And in this case of '3 or so' of the thing, the math shows that plentiful mana is definitely needed, and is therefor outside the scope of the argument. I'm not trying to make a point for bad splashing, I'm making a point for the mana requirements of an actually-good splash.
To that end, lets talk about how one-off splashes are usually for very "splashy" effects, almost none of which make that category by being one mana or by being critical plays on certain turns (they are the play that warrants the critical play). Perfect cases in point are PW's. You won't die because you didn't cast your bomb exactly on time, but if you do, you get to pull way far ahead. For a concrete example lets use a splash for sorin, grim nemesis in a GW or UW control deck as a solid finisher piece. You can afford to sit back a couple turns because inevitability is on your side by nature of the deck type. This, in turn, brings up a solid point in that one-off splashes are probably better suited for slow decks.
Regardless, I'm not trying to talk about the quality of splash, the argument is intended to be 'properly thought out one-off splash will be happy with around 4-7 sources, see article for proof'