Greven's Rating system:
5.0: First pick no matter what. I will always play this card.
4.5: Splashable and first pick worthy.
4.0: First pick pack 1.
3.5: Early pick though not always a first pick.
3.0: Solid early/mid pick.
2.5: Solid pick in color.
2.0: Should generally make the deck if in this color.
1.5: Decent filler.
1.0: 23rd card if you have to.
0.5: This card will sometimes be sideboarded in.
0.0: I will never put this card into my deck (main deck or after sideboarding).

This card is just very solid - and very nearly free. I would probably play 3-4 in any 3+ color or landfall deck.
I did screw the up at the pre-release by revealing late game when the last thing I wanted was a basic land.

I believe it is strictly correct to look at the top 5 cards (unless you have already scryed or something and are sure you want what is there ), even if you don't want a land, because the information is valuable. It's not *very* valuable however, such that you might get demoralized by seeing a card you want get bottomed.

(If you are not following, the reason the info is valuable is that you'd rather playing knowing you will never draw an out than play having it on the bottom not knowing...). I guess if you have 5 or 6 Fertile Thickets then late in the game you could probably totally restack your deck!

1.0

I totally hate this. The best it can do is let you keep a speculative two-lander, but I keep those mostly anyway. In limited, you often have a few powerful cards, and milling one of those can be a disaster. If it was look and then decide to reveal, great. But that would be rare power level. As is, I don't want to play it.

1.5 at best.

~SE++

You play this in every Green deck, so it's at least a 2.0. It's not a 2.5, though. The ceiling is too low.

This thinking is 100% mathematically unsound. There is a bad interaction of this card with your opponents ingest, but other than that, before you play this you have a random deck. After you play it (and look) you either have a random deck (in which you know the bottom 5 cards in order) or a random deck with a land on top (in which you know the bottom 4 cards).

I found it very good when I played landfall (and here often the CIPT doesn't hurt you much because you land fall dudes are cheap), and it's also pretty decent if you need to fix your mana (not GREAT mind you, but decent -- like obviously if you are splashing 1-2 swamps or something they are not likely to be your top 5 cards BUT sometimes you need to "reverse splash" to get than 2nd plains or forest for a double colored card.

Well, the only time this card is good IMO is when your hand is stacked, and you just need another land in order to be able to cast all your stuff. But you don't really need the Thicket for that, natural drawing is mostly good enough, and Thicket may well hurt your development more than help it. You have a point about landfall, but then, if they have an ingester you are unwilling/able to block, it's just a CIP tapped land. So ATM I'm picking it after pick ten, if there's nothing playable left, and probably not playing it.

Oh, and mathematically unsound: you are wrong. If you don't play the Thicket, the chances of your bomb being in the top five are higher than if you play it and look. Because in the second case, all the cases where the bomb was on top transform into cases where it's on the bottom. Which makes it twice as likely that your bomb is in the bottom five, and impossible for it to be in the top five.

Edit: forget it, you get the next five on top, which are again just as likely to have your bomb in it. So it comes down to that milling your bomb makes for some unhappy moments.

I also watched CalebD play with it, and I'm even more convinced I'm right. Outside of the times when all you want is to get another landfall trigger, this is bad.

This set is weird. Most formats I am so rarely happy to draw a land this would be bad. In this format, I find this to be not true. BUT if you are not playing landfall and are playing a 17 land (GW allies?) deck, I could see cutting it. But so many spells in this format are expensive that you very rarely play >1. So this is good on turn 1 (CITP is fine,and if you are land light and have a 2 or 3 drop you can put a land on top), bad on turns 2-3-4 generally, and then it starts to get better, up until the 8th land which is not super relevant (unless you have a lot of landfall triggers, then it's fine).

If you want a landfall trigger, it's often BETTER than drawing a non-land.