Some neat choices that I agree aren't staple in most decks, but still it looks fairly decent.

One thing bothers me though: Why are you running 4x Arid Mesa with no Plains in your deck? Even w/o Plains it could still be a viable strategy were you to have something like a Landfall ability in here, but I don't see one of those either.

Wouldn't swapping those for 4 more Basic Mountains just increase your fodder for Fireblast and such? I'm lost as to their purpose here.

Thank you for the comment. I run the Arid Mesas as a deck thinning tool. It basically slightly lessens my odds of topdecking a land at a critical moment if I’ve used even one of them.

I suspect that Risk Factor is generally better than Browbeat, though I love both desperately in a burn deck.

I think I agree with Apollo, Arid Mesas are not ideal since you run Fire Blast x4, and you really want to have 4 Mountains out very early to potentially end an early game when they eat one too many Browbeats, a way my burn deck wins regularly, when the opponent simply cannot know how bad an idea it is to take the damage! That said, I can see deck thinning can be helpful, but if you're serious about that run looting, it is a key Red ability, and is the king of deck thinning IMHO. You could even use some Madness cards, like Fiery Temper maybe.

Have you considered the very strong Hellspark Elemental and Ball Lightning ? Both hit like a pickup loaded down with bricks. 6 damage for 3 mana is incredible usually.

Pyrohemia is a good card, and worth considering instead of Volcanic Fallout, though that's some nice art. Pyro can deal more damage if needed, and 3 often a key toughness value.

I do think the deck looks very good, and unusual.

Thank you for taking the time to comment and for the valuable input. This is a new re-tool of this deck that I need to extensively play test. I haven’t played in years and thought I’d pick up again and add those Eidolon of the Great Revel and Monastery Swiftspear . They replaced 4 Hellspark Elemental and a 4th Magma Jet I found that I was never lacking for mountains, at least before, and that’s thanks in large part to the scry from the Jets or the card draw I ended up with thanks to browbeat. I’m very curious to see how the deck performs with these newer (to me) creatures. While I like Ball Lightning a great deal, I often would end up with them wasted thanks to a lot of first strike creatures being in use in the games I played. I’ll definitely keep your suggestions in mind, particularly the Risk Factor that I was completely unaware of. The one less damage vs browbeat is potentially insignificant if I can use it at instant speed. I really like nailing my opponent on their turn.

A fun alternative to Smash to Smithereens is Viashino Heretic , which is repeatable and can deal serious damage potentially, as well as doing double duty as a blocker. I feel okay running 2 as main deck cards, since they aren't fully dead if the opponent has no artifacts, and they are a back breaker if they are using artifacts. Flame Rift is a very efficient damage dealer, and if you're going to win with a red deck, you're generally in the lead anyways, so the card is 4 damage that isn't targeted (and gets through hexproof players) for 2 mana, a good deal IMO.

Yeah, if your local meta is heavy on first strike, then Ball Lightning is a dead card generally, unless you can sucker them into attacking, or can burn their creatures. Regarding your land base, if it works for you then that's what you should use.

The fetchlands do nothing in here. Switch to horizon lands so you can get real value from your manabase. Sunbaked Canyon and Fiery Islet. Even Ramunap Ruins are superior to the fetchlands

I have to respectfully disagree about the fetch lands. Each one I crack decreases the odds that I top deck a land by a percentage point or two. While I like Sunbaked Canyons and Fiery Islets as cards, I don't think they fit here. I also need every bit of mana for spells, so spending a mana to sac a land to draw a card feels like a wasted land drop. The other issue is the fact that they aren't mountains I can sac for a well timed fireblast.

And each fetch you crack is a life you pay doing basically nothing since there are 2 reasons people play fetchlands. Either they need the fix or they need the shuffle, you need neither. You fetch and you decrease the odds of hitting a land from 17/51 to 16/50, thats literally 1%. Now, best case scenario you may fetch 4 times in a single game, so you decrease the odds about 4-5% and that means the amount of games you drew a relevant spell instead of a land when you need it is about 1 every 20 games and I bet the amount of games you lose for running out of life when you could have won by chosing not to start at 16 life are more than 1 out of 20. What I'm trying to say is you'll fare better by running just basics. But you don't have to trust my words, instead trust in maths http://magic.tcgplayer.com/db/print.asp?ID=3096

I mean, I already said a percentage or two... I've done the math. I run 19 total lands. Turn 1 assuming fetch in opening hand plus one mountain, I play the fetch, crack it, then end up with 16/52 (~69.23% chance to not draw land) instead of the 17/53 (~67.92% chance to not draw land). Turn 1 assuming fetch and two other lands, I play the fetch, crack it, and end up with 15/52 (~71.15% chance to not draw land) instead of 16/53 (~69.81% chance to not draw land). Then the more complex math comes in. Imagining I have a total of two fetches and two other mountains by turn four and I've gone first, that's 10 of my 60 cards I've seen. I'd much rather have the 74% chance of drawing a non-land card than the 70% chance. The math from the article you supplied (very cool stuff by the way, thank you) shows how long it will take to guarantee a card advantage, but playing the odds is a different game of Magic all together. If I can get a 2-3% higher chance of drawing a 3+ damage instant or sorcery, I'll take it.

I will rest my case with the conclusion from the article "Ultimately, then, I would argue that the data bears out the contention that playing fetch-lands for their thinning effects are a bad idea: Only a suicidally reckless aggro deck can afford 4 life for a card, and those decks can’t afford to wait 20+ turns for it"

And I will rest my case by saying that Sunbaked Canyons or Fiery Islets will do me more damage than fetches. I will also say that even a percentage chance or two higher of drawing non-lands is better than mountains. Unless you offer a better suggestion, I'll stick with the fetches.

You are of course aware that this is basically the definition of a suicidally reckless aggro deck. I will comment again and say that the article you posted is an opinion based on the guarantee of card advantage. As we know, there are no guarantees. There is still the element of chance involved in our card draws. The slight chance of a better card draw can be the difference between winning and losing.