I will post the EC link when it's live.

This was a very fun podcast to record. I hope you enjoy it.

Kevin Cron and Steve Menendian analyze six Vintage Scenarios.

Contact us at @ManyInsanePlays on Twitter or e-mail us at

0:01:00: Announcements: VSL season 9 coming soon!
0:08:37: Scenario 1: What Would Mishra Do?
0:48:50: Scenario 2: Schrödinger’s Ancestral
1:05:40: Scenario 3: A Paradox of Mediocrity
1:24:34: Scenario 4: The Balance of Power Does Not Last
1:37:05: Scenario 5: An Embarrassment of Monks
1:48:55: Scenario 6: Survival of the Richest

Hello fellow Vintage enthusiasts!
The playlist for our region's Vintage Challenge for this quarter (4 of the Swiss rounds have commentated coverage) can be found at:

We hold a Vintage Challenge in South Australia once every 3 months so we have coverage from the previous tournaments, and also upcoming events are uploaded every quarter (if interested, you can subscribe to the channel and receive an update the moment our next Vintage coverage goes online).

Looking forward to contributing further to the Vintage community in the future too 🙂 Thanks and enjoy! Kind Rgds, S.

It has been a long time since I've written "In game" analysis. Hell, I haven't really written that many Vintage articles this year.

If you take out the History of Vintage series and the Gush book (Understanding Gush), here are the number of Vintage content articles I've published in the last few years:

2018: 5 (including my article for SCG)
2017: 4
2016: 0 (obviously, the Gush book took alot of time)
2015: 4
2014: 1
2013: 8

So anyway, I've been writing alot more about Vintage lately, and this is my first in-game analysis in an article in quite a while! Possibly since 2013!

So here it is:

This article should show how awesome I think Vintage is right now. And also how powerful the Survival deck is!


  • @chubbyrain said in Proposed New Mulligan Rule for Mythic Championship London:

    @ajfirecracker Do you think Dredge would still run Serum Powder if you have to put the cards back prior to mulliganing?

    Hard to say.

    I think Powder is actually better with this rule but so are normal mulligans, so it's hard to say how that all cashes out. Note that the cards are put back on the bottom, so Powder is fully effective to dig, and you find Powder more often on more cards, and you can more often avoid exiling multiple Powder for a single effect. So we have 1 neutral factor, 2 positive factors for Powder, and 1 "negative" factor in that the effect in not as sorely needed.

    More Powders does also mean more cards in hand on average when you find Bazaar, which is worth a lot when you have disruption elements you can cast from hand.

    read more
  • @ajfirecracker Do you think Dredge would still run Serum Powder if you have to put the cards back prior to mulliganing?

    read more
  • Either they wanted to design around Serum Powder or they had to be careful of the phrase "opening hand" which legally allows stuff like Leylines or Chancellor triggers to be played.

    read more
  • @boerma You are correct. While you can't mulligan 7 times, you can certainly mulligan 0 times. The exponent should be 7.

    I think the rule has been misinterpreted and that you are supposed to put the cards back before determining whether or not you would mulligan, so you would exile the remaining cards in your hand. In practice, it wouldn't matter as you could just declare you are mulliganing and shortcut the selection. But it would effect Serum Powder and makes me wonder if that was the basis for the rule. And it has interesting applications for Powder in Dredge as it would allow you to save certain Dread Return targets from exile (albeit putting it on the bottom of the deck).

    It is interesting how the impact of Serum Powder is much less with the new rule, even if you exile/draw 7 cards. Serum Powder might still be worth it as it increases the number of cards in you opening hands, but that is an interesting debate.

    read more