Shady dealings @ the Baltimore 5k

284 posts / 0 new
Last post
Shady dealings @ Baltimore 5K

After winning game one of my 6th round with a 5-1 record, I was disqualified from the starcity open for "cheating". I am the victim of Alex Bertoncini's desperate attempt to win a match in the face of defeat and head judge John Carter's biases.

He beat me game 1 with no complaints. After losing game 2 he calls for a judge in an attempt to get me a game loss for my foil basic lands. The judge looks through my deck and sideboard and determines there is nothing wrong with my deck since my deck is almost half foils including random numbers non basic lands, some creatures, some spells, and some sideboard cards. Alex then appealed to head judge John Carter (?). In between judge calls Alex assured me he knows I am in no way trying to cheat he just wants to make sure my lands are OK with the judges. I agreed i'm obviously not trying to cheat because my deck is filled with random foils. He agrees. Mr. Carter comes to the same conclusion the first judge does and we continue playing. I win game three in large part due to an admitted misplay by Alex. He is quite upset and so I quietly leave the table. After I leave I am told he starts yelling and cursing about how much of a cheater I am. My friends and I all have a good laugh at the absurdity of this. Before I started my next round I double check with the head judge to make sure that I dont need to make any adjustments to my deck. He tells me to "Just Play" which I take to mean everything is fine lets not make a big deal about this. What it apparently meant was "Our starcitygames open series points leader Alex has convinced me that your a cheater and I am now sending a judge to watch your match and search for a reason to DQ you." After winning my first game and beginning my 2nd game the head judge stops me and informs me I am being DQ'd from the tournament without prize. In total disbelief I ask why? He says he and his judges have been observing me for two rounds and I am manipulating and touching my cards in ways that lead them to believe I am cheating! I ask for an example which they can't give me. Eventually I got an answer along the lines of "I touch my deck too much" I explain that I am paying with 8 fetchlands, 4 fauna shamans, and 4 knight of the reliquaries and my deck requires me to shuffle my deck almost every turn. After I present my deck to my opponent to shuffle and cut they set it down in the middle of the table and I have to pick it up, straighten it, and put it back to its original position. I am repeatedly told "my judges believe your touching and manipulating your deck and cards in a way that makes us think your cheating" and I will have to file an appeal with the dci. Un. Real. There was no warnings, no investigations into my side of the story, just an immediate DQ.

I think it is clear these judges had their opinions clouded by a well known player Alex Bertoncini trying to save face and get a victory he didn't deserve and made an atrocious decision to DQ me from the tournament based off heresy and their own misguided snap judgments. I am terrified of the precedent this sets. I also must call the integrity of Alex Bertoncini into question. I hope he is proud of getting innocent players kicked out of tournaments for doing absolutely nothing wrong. I hope you know this kind of behavior greatly cheapens any accomplishments you may have this season. I am of course going to appeal this as high up as i can possibly go as it as grotesque an injustice as i've ever seen in nearly 13 years playing this game.

- Chris Pregent
That just shows that even judges can be corrupt.  I find that very unfair for you.  I think Alex should have been kicked out for cursing at the first position.
Want to know how to keep a moron busy? Reread this sentence to find out!
If Alex wasn't DQed for extemely poor sportsmanship and conduct unbecoming of a tournament participant...

...I'm actually raging at that part quite a lot.

I'd challenge that their excuse for declaring a DQ could be easily applied to other decks. Who doesn't run fetchlands? Who doesn't have some card that requires you to search your library and grab something? If you weren't letting the opponent cut and shuffle, and you didn't in some way have someone else (say, a judge or any other legal third party) shuffle your deck for you to remove the element of deck stacking, maybe it'd be justified.

But from what I'm reading, you followed proper conduct.

Next thing you know, they'll ban people for "rearranging their graveyards" if they're running a recursion-focused deck.

Man, almost anything can be warped into an DQ excuse, if you think about it.


This is practically World Cup tier wtf shenanigans...

Or at minimum, that Esper Charm story.

Damn.

Just...

DAMN.

Hope that appeal is successful, because... DAMN! WHAT THE FLYING FSCK! IT'S LIKE THEY WENT "OH, IF HE WINS HE CHEATED, BUT IF HE LOST WE REALLY CAN'T TELL YET IF HE'S CHEATING... BUT AS SOON AS HE WINS, DQ HIS ASS." WHATEVER HAPPENED TO UNBIASED JUDGING!?
If we get the transient facts, then we'll feel the Info-High!
This sort of behaviour is completely unacceptable at this level of play, or any level for that matter. Personal bias should never enter into the equation. Also lol at heresy instead of hearsay.
All God does is watch us and kill us when we get boring. We must never, ever be boring. -Chuck Palahniuk My Card as designed by febbstalicious42
Show
Four-Finger Discount :2mana: Instant Gain control of target creature. You lose life equal to its toughness. Almost as good as the five-finger discount.
phyrexianloyalty.png
I'll first point out that in every story there are almost always two (or more) sides. If someone could get Bertoncini to come and reply/rebut what's been said, I'd be quite curious to hear his side. Same for the judges.

In any case, from the side you've presented Chris, it does seem pretty darn unfair and ridiculous. It always sucks when you try your best and do nothing wrong, and something unforeseen stops you - especially if it was someone else doing something wrong causing it. Appeal, and try not to let it get you down - hopefully it won't ever happen again to you and this will just be a disappointing memory. ^^
I'm all about super-control in MTG. If you're able to stop my shenanigans, then there aren't enough shenanigans. Lv 1 Judge Current Decklists Sweeping Beauty (Casual) A Vision of Clones (Casual) Coming soon... more decks! :-O
Why would you get DQ'd for having foil basic lands, anyway?
In Legacy, Blue is the best color. Let's punish blue, in Modern. And they listened!
Why would you get DQ'd for having foil basic lands, anyway?


Foils bend, regular cards don't.
Bending makes it easy to see where a foil card is - this can be prevented by using Perfect Fit sleeves and shuffling the deck a lot.

An army of squirrels is still an army. pmppost.png

Wow.... This almost makes me wonder if it is worth playing in the higher level events if things can be rigged this way. In all honesty in a good deck that is running multiples 'stacking' should be a non-issue because you will get what you need sooner than later in most cases.

Take a sample list

4:A
4:B
4:C
4:D

4:E
3:F
3:G
4:H
4:I
4:J

6:Fetch lands
16: Dual/Basic/ETBT/ETC.

Deck total: 60

Start game, D7.
Odds of getting 'A' at least once in your opening hand, 1:15, 1:14.75, 1:14.5, 1:14.25, 1:14, 1:13.75,  1:13.5.

Those are the odds in order of your opening hand of getting just card 'A'.  As the game progresses odds of drawing a card, if not already drawn increases.  This is if you play no fetches, and no other search methods in your deck.

Odds of getting a fetch land using the number 6.
1:10, 1:9.84, 1:9.67, 1:9.5, 1:9.34, 1:9.17, 1:9.

So, getting one fetch land should happen, at least twice in every three hands.

Continuing to say, if you play one fetch crack it and search for a land, still not having had card 'A'. That makes total cards left in your deck, assuming you are on the play 52.  Making your new odds, 1:13 to draw card named 'A'.

With one fetch land used, odds of drawing one, on your next draw. At 52 cards left in deck are, 1:10.4. 

The point behind all this ranting? I was bored and wanted to do some basic math,  but it goes to show that odds of getting the cards you need are not all that bad, especially in a consistent deck, if the game goes beyond 5 draw phases for you, if you have the wonderful luck of never getting a fetch or other searcher/fetch, Your odds for drawing a fetch land, become 1:8, your odds for drawing card 'A' become 1:12. 

Overall you aren't guaranteed to draw a specific card, but odds are certainly not against you. I also now that many of the more competitive decks use 8 fetches instead of 6, makes the chances of you getting it even higher.

Like I said, I am bored wanted to post this.
I Agree with Indigo IMAGE(http://i137.photobucket.com/albums/q223/Bigbadmamajama/noheroescopy.jpg) ^^ WIP atm, if you can name the song its from, I will love you forever. That is me
I wasn't there and don't know what really happened. DQs suck, from what I heard.
old quotes from the Worldwake talk: Mike Turian: While Mark Rosewater made Tarmogoyf, I made Tarmogoyf what he is today Mark Rosewater: Would we ever reprint Tarmogoyf? Maybe.

I am Blue/Green


whatcolor_isblue.jpg

174 How many of your friendships have lasted more than ten years? Which of your current friendships do you still feel will be important to you ten years from now?
Pocket-sized digital recorders are fairly inexpensive these days, and have a lot of memory.  With some you could record most or all of an entire event.  I prefer to discreetly turn it on when you see a situation coming that you may want evidence for.  In some situations, turning on a digital recorder non-discreetly, right in front of someone can solve a problem before it happens.

We live in a day and age when absolute video proof can be ignored by those in charge.  So I wouldn't count on a good recording doing much good when it comes to a rules appeal.  But imagine how much better you'd feel right now if you made a recording of that experience public... and imagine how Bertoncini and Carter would feel right now if we were all listening to their rantings and rationalizations and debating them in these and other forums.  Imagine how SCG would feel.

Attitude reflects leadership. Vindicated! * HawkBlade is aggro/control! * Post-ban HawkBlade! * Jace, the Mind Sculptor is good! * End-of-Lorwyn TurboFog! ‘Everything that needs to be said has already been said. But since no one was listening, everything must be said again.’ – André Gide '...but if you're repeating yourself in an online forum, chances are you're just feeding a troll.' - Rat Bastardsen
Pocket-sized digital recorders are fairly inexpensive these days, and have a lot of memory.  With some you could record most or all of an entire event.  I prefer to discreetly turn it on when you see a situation coming that you may want evidence for.  In some situations, turning on a digital recorder non-discreetly, right in front of someone can solve a problem before it happens.

We live in a day and age when absolute video proof can be ignored by those in charge.  So I wouldn't count on a good recording doing much good when it comes to a rules appeal.  But imagine how much better you'd feel right now if you made a recording of that experience public... and imagine how Bertoncini and Carter would feel right now if we were all listening to their rantings and rationalizations and debating them in these and other forums.  Imagine how SCG would feel.




Your problem there is that in some states that could be illegal, so on top of the hassle of whatever happened at a tourney(I'm not going to blindly take a side on this, there's ALWAYS 2 sides to every story, and not saying the OP is lying, but he can only present his subjective view of things, just as the other side is subjective and I don't know either side well enough to just take one side over the other), but then you got legitimate legal fallout to deal with.  Not exactly anyone's idea of a good time.

My question is what level of judicial oversight exists at these levels of play?  Because making an appeal after the fact does very little to rectify the erroneous call on the spot.
It isn't too hard to know what's legal, or to work around it. 

In some cases you may need to inform the person you're recording that you're doing so.  Not necessarily a bad thing; imagine saying "Alex Bertoncini, Judge Carter, this conversation is being recorded for purposes of quality control". 

You could also record a conversation "accidentally". 

I'd gamble that SCG wouldn't risk the negative publicity that would come from pursuing charges against a player in such a situation.

We do have to be aware that these days standing up for ourselves against any authority, even something as silly as the DCI, raises the possibility of us ending up getting waterboarded next to some unfortunate kid from Afghanistan in Guantanamo Bay.  Its still the same choice as always though, we all have to decide for ourselves whether we're going to stand up, or bend over.
Attitude reflects leadership. Vindicated! * HawkBlade is aggro/control! * Post-ban HawkBlade! * Jace, the Mind Sculptor is good! * End-of-Lorwyn TurboFog! ‘Everything that needs to be said has already been said. But since no one was listening, everything must be said again.’ – André Gide '...but if you're repeating yourself in an online forum, chances are you're just feeding a troll.' - Rat Bastardsen
It isn't too hard to know what's legal, or to work around it. 

In some cases you may need to inform the person you're recording that you're doing so.  Not necessarily a bad thing; imagine saying "Alex Bertoncini, Judge Carter, this conversation is being recorded for purposes of quality control". 

You could also record a conversation "accidentally". 

I'd gamble that SCG wouldn't risk the negative publicity that would come from pursuing charges against a player in such a situation.

We do have to be aware that these days standing up for ourselves against any authority, even something as silly as the DCI, raises the possibility of us ending up getting waterboarded next to some unfortunate kid from Afghanistan in Guantanamo Bay.  Its still the same choice as always though, we all have to decide for ourselves whether we're going to stand up, or bend over.



Oh I definitely didn't mean to imply you shouldn't stand up for yourself.  Just don't do it in such a way that you get yourself into a worse position was all.
It isn't too hard to know what's legal, or to work around it. 

In some cases you may need to inform the person you're recording that you're doing so.  Not necessarily a bad thing; imagine saying "Alex Bertoncini, Judge Carter, this conversation is being recorded for purposes of quality control". 

You could also record a conversation "accidentally". 

I'd gamble that SCG wouldn't risk the negative publicity that would come from pursuing charges against a player in such a situation.

We do have to be aware that these days standing up for ourselves against any authority, even something as silly as the DCI, raises the possibility of us ending up getting waterboarded next to some unfortunate kid from Afghanistan in Guantanamo Bay.  Its still the same choice as always though, we all have to decide for ourselves whether we're going to stand up, or bend over.



Oh I definitely didn't mean to imply you shouldn't stand up for yourself.  Just don't do it in such a way that you get yourself into a worse position was all.



That's surely never bad advice.
Attitude reflects leadership. Vindicated! * HawkBlade is aggro/control! * Post-ban HawkBlade! * Jace, the Mind Sculptor is good! * End-of-Lorwyn TurboFog! ‘Everything that needs to be said has already been said. But since no one was listening, everything must be said again.’ – André Gide '...but if you're repeating yourself in an online forum, chances are you're just feeding a troll.' - Rat Bastardsen
Pocket-sized digital recorders are fairly inexpensive these days, and have a lot of memory.  With some you could record most or all of an entire event.  I prefer to discreetly turn it on when you see a situation coming that you may want evidence for.  In some situations, turning on a digital recorder non-discreetly, right in front of someone can solve a problem before it happens.

We live in a day and age when absolute video proof can be ignored by those in charge.  So I wouldn't count on a good recording doing much good when it comes to a rules appeal.  But imagine how much better you'd feel right now if you made a recording of that experience public... and imagine how Bertoncini and Carter would feel right now if we were all listening to their rantings and rationalizations and debating them in these and other forums.  Imagine how SCG would feel.



creeper
Photobucket Team GFG - Glux's Fine Gents
Pocket-sized digital recorders are fairly inexpensive these days, and have a lot of memory.  With some you could record most or all of an entire event.  I prefer to discreetly turn it on when you see a situation coming that you may want evidence for.  In some situations, turning on a digital recorder non-discreetly, right in front of someone can solve a problem before it happens.

We live in a day and age when absolute video proof can be ignored by those in charge.  So I wouldn't count on a good recording doing much good when it comes to a rules appeal.  But imagine how much better you'd feel right now if you made a recording of that experience public... and imagine how Bertoncini and Carter would feel right now if we were all listening to their rantings and rationalizations and debating them in these and other forums.  Imagine how SCG would feel.



creeper



You don't have to resort to such shady tactics like putting a wire on yourself or filming a match like you're a secret agent. Chances are, if you can spot something suspicious in the match going on enough to turn on a camera, you should be able to neutralize the situation either by speaking up to your opponent or by calling a judge and asking them to stay and watch the rest of your match. I'm also willing to bet that during a dispute with your opponent and the judges, pulling out your hidden camera and offering it as evidence will open up a can-of-worms that will end up causing your DQ before your opponent's. I can think of several scenarios where a judge could conclude you were attempting to cheat by having a camera hidden on your person.

I also find it unsettling how quickly people believe the word of an anonymous stranger who was more than likely emotional about the situation before they get the entire story. There has already been at least one or two people on several other discussion boards who have said that they have talked to the head judge and that there was much more than was mentioned in the opening post.

Now, of course, this isn't saying that what the opening post suggests happened doesn't happen, but I would take this as a note of caution to anyone who plays competitively. You should always be aware that there are people out there who will attempt to cheat you out of plays, wins, or matches and the best combatant against these types of people is having a good knowledge of the rules and not being afraid to call a judge over to observe. Unsportsmanlike conduct can lead to a DQ if your opponent chooses to go that route.

Allons-y!

You don't have to resort to such shady tactics like putting a wire on yourself or filming a match like you're a secret agent. Chances are, if you can spot something suspicious in the match going on enough to turn on a camera, you should be able to neutralize the situation either by speaking up to your opponent or by calling a judge and asking them to stay and watch the rest of your match. I'm also willing to bet that during a dispute with your opponent and the judges, pulling out your hidden camera and offering it as evidence will open up a can-of-worms that will end up causing your DQ before your opponent's. I can think of several scenarios where a judge could conclude you were attempting to cheat by having a camera hidden on your person.

I also find it unsettling how quickly people believe the word of an anonymous stranger who was more than likely emotional about the situation before they get the entire story. There has already been at least one or two people on several other discussion boards who have said that they have talked to the head judge and that there was much more than was mentioned in the opening post.

Now, of course, this isn't saying that what the opening post suggests happened doesn't happen, but I would take this as a note of caution to anyone who plays competitively. You should always be aware that there are people out there who will attempt to cheat you out of plays, wins, or matches and the best combatant against these types of people is having a good knowledge of the rules and not being afraid to call a judge over to observe. Unsportsmanlike conduct can lead to a DQ if your opponent chooses to go that route.



Who mentioned cameras?  Who suggested producing recorded evidence on the spot?  No one mentioned wires either for that matter. 

Post links please.

The OP's story is (according to the OP) about what happens after all the normal stuff doesn't work.
Attitude reflects leadership. Vindicated! * HawkBlade is aggro/control! * Post-ban HawkBlade! * Jace, the Mind Sculptor is good! * End-of-Lorwyn TurboFog! ‘Everything that needs to be said has already been said. But since no one was listening, everything must be said again.’ – André Gide '...but if you're repeating yourself in an online forum, chances are you're just feeding a troll.' - Rat Bastardsen
lol your **** are in quite a twist aren't they?
Photobucket Team GFG - Glux's Fine Gents
I've removed content from this thread because Baiting and Flaming are a violation of the Code of Conduct.  You can review the Code of Conduct here.
Pocket-sized digital recorders are fairly inexpensive these days, and have a lot of memory.  With some you could record most or all of an entire event.  I prefer to discreetly turn it on when you see a situation coming that you may want evidence for.  In some situations, turning on a digital recorder non-discreetly, right in front of someone can solve a problem before it happens.

We live in a day and age when absolute video proof can be ignored by those in charge.  So I wouldn't count on a good recording doing much good when it comes to a rules appeal.  But imagine how much better you'd feel right now if you made a recording of that experience public... and imagine how Bertoncini and Carter would feel right now if we were all listening to their rantings and rationalizations and debating them in these and other forums.  Imagine how SCG would feel.




It isn't too hard to know what's legal, or to work around it. 

In some cases you may need to inform the person you're recording that you're doing so.  Not necessarily a bad thing; imagine saying "Alex Bertoncini, Judge Carter, this conversation is being recorded for purposes of quality control". 

You could also record a conversation "accidentally". 

I'd gamble that SCG wouldn't risk the negative publicity that would come from pursuing charges against a player in such a situation.

We do have to be aware that these days standing up for ourselves against any authority, even something as silly as the DCI, raises the possibility of us ending up getting waterboarded next to some unfortunate kid from Afghanistan in Guantanamo Bay.  Its still the same choice as always though, we all have to decide for ourselves whether we're going to stand up, or bend over.


Bolded the parts where using a camera and/or a wire is being offered as a possibility. If you were talking about something entirely differently, you probably should chose different wordings since after reading these posts several times I'm under the impression that this is what you are discussing.

The OP's story is only his side of the story. That is not entirely accurate, just like no one's side of the story is ever accurate.

From what I've read from people that were either there or had talked to the Head Judge about what happened, the deck had a mix of foils, mainly basic lands, and they were noticeably warped. Alex complained about how this could lead to cheating but the deck check was passable. After the match, Alex pursued the topic and showed the judges how Chris could have easily cut his deck to a basic land with the foils he had. When the judges were watching Chris' next match, they saw him touching and straightening his deck quite often, and not just because of his many shuffle effects in the deck. As an seasoned player should know, this is a clear sign of suspected cheating and it is in the judge's book to hand out a penalty for cheating, which is a DQ. The basic moral is to either use all foil or no foil cards in your competitive deck and only handle your deck when you have to for game reasons. You don't win matches by making your deck look nice and tidy or by having the most foils. These are huge red flags for judges.

Allons-y!

As someone who has yet to play in a really serious tournament (highest I've attended were regionals, but here in Perth we don't exactly have 5ks or anything ^^), is this foil issue a really big one? I personally always include any foils in my 'four of' of each card because, like many people, I prefer the look and the (perhaps erroneous) prestige of having a foil version as opposed to a regular - but of course if it's going to pose a serious risk of landing me in trouble I'd rather not. Having said that, if it's just lands, like most people I do have an abundance of non-foil basics. =P
I'm all about super-control in MTG. If you're able to stop my shenanigans, then there aren't enough shenanigans. Lv 1 Judge Current Decklists Sweeping Beauty (Casual) A Vision of Clones (Casual) Coming soon... more decks! :-O
There was a DQ that happened this past year at a Grand Prix where someone's opponent had 4 foil Hell's Thunder in his deck. Those were the only foils. The guys got called at one point and the judge stated it was marking his cards and he received a DQ. If I play with foils, I play with a split of foil and non-foil of a specific card, e.g. 1 Prerelease foil Sun Titan with 2 non-foil regular Sun Titan. It's probably better to be safe than sorry and either play with all foils or no foils. If you aren't sure, ask the head judge and see if you need to replace the foils with non-foils.

Allons-y!

just man up and foil out your deck.
Photobucket Team GFG - Glux's Fine Gents
Pocket-sized digital recorders are fairly inexpensive these days, and have a lot of memory.  With some you could record most or all of an entire event.  I prefer to discreetly turn it on when you see a situation coming that you may want evidence for.  In some situations, turning on a digital recorder non-discreetly, right in front of someone can solve a problem before it happens.

We live in a day and age when absolute video proof can be ignored by those in charge.  So I wouldn't count on a good recording doing much good when it comes to a rules appeal.  But imagine how much better you'd feel right now if you made a recording of that experience public... and imagine how Bertoncini and Carter would feel right now if we were all listening to their rantings and rationalizations and debating them in these and other forums.  Imagine how SCG would feel.




It isn't too hard to know what's legal, or to work around it. 

In some cases you may need to inform the person you're recording that you're doing so.  Not necessarily a bad thing; imagine saying "Alex Bertoncini, Judge Carter, this conversation is being recorded for purposes of quality control". 

You could also record a conversation "accidentally". 

I'd gamble that SCG wouldn't risk the negative publicity that would come from pursuing charges against a player in such a situation.

We do have to be aware that these days standing up for ourselves against any authority, even something as silly as the DCI, raises the possibility of us ending up getting waterboarded next to some unfortunate kid from Afghanistan in Guantanamo Bay.  Its still the same choice as always though, we all have to decide for ourselves whether we're going to stand up, or bend over.


Bolded the parts where using a camera and/or a wire is being offered as a possibility. If you were talking about something entirely differently, you probably should chose different wordings since after reading these posts several times I'm under the impression that this is what you are discussing.

The OP's story is only his side of the story. That is not entirely accurate, just like no one's side of the story is ever accurate.

From what I've read from people that were either there or had talked to the Head Judge about what happened, the deck had a mix of foils, mainly basic lands, and they were noticeably warped. Alex complained about how this could lead to cheating but the deck check was passable. After the match, Alex pursued the topic and showed the judges how Chris could have easily cut his deck to a basic land with the foils he had. When the judges were watching Chris' next match, they saw him touching and straightening his deck quite often, and not just because of his many shuffle effects in the deck. As an seasoned player should know, this is a clear sign of suspected cheating and it is in the judge's book to hand out a penalty for cheating, which is a DQ. The basic moral is to either use all foil or no foil cards in your competitive deck and only handle your deck when you have to for game reasons. You don't win matches by making your deck look nice and tidy or by having the most foils. These are huge red flags for judges.



The bold and underline part, so you are saying if someone has a mild form of OCD and wants their cards to be straight they should not be allowed to play in any kind of competitive enviroment where they may want to make sure the Decks are straight? By this same token, people shuffling through their hands incessently could be considered unsportmanlike for trying to distract your opponent and incite misplays or to distract them from fully thinking their turns through.

If this played out the way the OP actually said, then it was clearly him being singled out and DQ'd to get rid of someone with a nice record.
I Agree with Indigo IMAGE(http://i137.photobucket.com/albums/q223/Bigbadmamajama/noheroescopy.jpg) ^^ WIP atm, if you can name the song its from, I will love you forever. That is me
just man up and foil out your deck.


Pretty much the only foils I ever get are the promos, prizes, and the occasional foil from a limited event or trade. ^^ Think I'll just go with the ask a judge route; seeing as I pretty much keep my hands off my deck I don't see it being an issue, especially as my foils are pretty random and I don't have any 4-of-foils like the Hell's Thunder example.
I'm all about super-control in MTG. If you're able to stop my shenanigans, then there aren't enough shenanigans. Lv 1 Judge Current Decklists Sweeping Beauty (Casual) A Vision of Clones (Casual) Coming soon... more decks! :-O
@ BeatusNox: No, of course simple straightening of your deck is not illegal. You're taking it to the extreme. If you look at the scenario in context as an outsider, here are the elements:

-Some cards are foil, mainly basic lands.
-An opponent suspects there is some manipulation going on with the deck.
-When watching the next match, the player, who is already accused of having marked cards and manipulating his deck, is seen fixing and touching his deck quite often.

This signals potential cheating. Just the simple motion of touching the side of your deck or touching the lip of the sleeve can easily be a cheater's technique to anticipate what card is on top. For instance, if all his basic lands were foil, and therefore more distinguishable than non-foil cards, just touching the side of the deck or the lip of the sleeve can let the player feel if the card on top of his deck is a land or not. Keep in mind he was also playing a deck that required heavy shuffling, so it would not be hard for him to use this slight touching to an advantage to shuffle the basic land away or vice versa.

Unfortunately, these scenarios aren't farfetched. They used to be common practice amongst cheaters back in the day and are still used, but less frequently because of the strict policies set up by the DCI.

Allons-y!

For some finality on the matter, here is the official response from a Starcitygames representative:

forums.mtgsalvation.com/showpost.php?p=5...

Allons-y!

just man up and foil out your deck.


We can't all be Wafo Tapa(hope I spelled that right).
I would have killed, literally ended someones life, to NOT have Arrogant Bloodlord riding a giant ant... Good times:
Show
but where DID the other fork come from?
Show
Lord_Zed: I was at my friends house when this happened. He's married and his wife was an excellent baker. She had baked a homemade apple pie the night before. I was hungry, and my friend convinced me to try those low carb monster drinks. Before this day, I had never triend energy drinks before. Boy was I in for a treat. When I tried that first monster, I really enjoyed the flavor, but the taste that it left in my mouth wasn't so good. What was my solution? Drink another! before I could finish drinking that 2nd monster, I felt it already kicking in(these drinks were not very far apart, we're talking minutes here) my friend decided that it was a good idea to whip out that fresh pie his wife made the night before. I didn't know what to do, since I felt incredibly invigorated, and at the same time, freaked out by the rush I was feeling, but I was also hungry, and my friend have me an entire plate with a fork and said "help yourself." He extended his saucer to me, and I cut him a piece of the pie and handed it to him, then I looked at the pie, noticed that the pie was in an aluminum holder, and dumped the entire pie onto my plate and started eating it with 2 forks. I don't know where I found that other fork, it probably came from my friend. Anyhow, his wife wasn't happy, and I was already in magical christmas land. 2 days later, I was in my friends bed and I slept for 14 hours. His wife outlawed my from having any of her baked goods for a while(which sucked because I could just show up at there house, steal some sweets, and leave) and said I couldn't have any energy drinks at her house, unless under close watch. My friend, on the other hand, had to take me out to a steak dinner, because apparently I won a bet where I climbed a tree and didn't die.
The great land debate:
Show
97563441 wrote:
Zendikar had fetchlands, and Worldwake had manlands. What are the new Scars duals called?
61325265 wrote:
Explosive Peanut Lightning lands. Well, that's just what I call them.
61325265 wrote:
58232598 wrote:
i'm just trying to figure out what the point of saying this is. it's just really random.
And so the pot met the kettle.
For some finality on the matter, here is the official response from a Starcitygames representative:

forums.mtgsalvation.com/showpost.php?p=5...


I thought that was a pretty fair response.

I think if this situation brings something to light, it's to take care when playing in more important tourneys so that if you're being genuine you don't find yourself at the wrong end of a bad situation (or in the bad situation at all).
I'm all about super-control in MTG. If you're able to stop my shenanigans, then there aren't enough shenanigans. Lv 1 Judge Current Decklists Sweeping Beauty (Casual) A Vision of Clones (Casual) Coming soon... more decks! :-O
Pocket-sized digital recorders are fairly inexpensive these days, and have a lot of memory.  With some you could record most or all of an entire event.  I prefer to discreetly turn it on when you see a situation coming that you may want evidence for.  In some situations, turning on a digital recorder non-discreetly, right in front of someone can solve a problem before it happens.

We live in a day and age when absolute video proof can be ignored by those in charge.  So I wouldn't count on a good recording doing much good when it comes to a rules appeal.  But imagine how much better you'd feel right now if you made a recording of that experience public... and imagine how Bertoncini and Carter would feel right now if we were all listening to their rantings and rationalizations and debating them in these and other forums.  Imagine how SCG would feel.




It isn't too hard to know what's legal, or to work around it. 

In some cases you may need to inform the person you're recording that you're doing so.  Not necessarily a bad thing; imagine saying "Alex Bertoncini, Judge Carter, this conversation is being recorded for purposes of quality control". 

You could also record a conversation "accidentally". 

I'd gamble that SCG wouldn't risk the negative publicity that would come from pursuing charges against a player in such a situation.

We do have to be aware that these days standing up for ourselves against any authority, even something as silly as the DCI, raises the possibility of us ending up getting waterboarded next to some unfortunate kid from Afghanistan in Guantanamo Bay.  Its still the same choice as always though, we all have to decide for ourselves whether we're going to stand up, or bend over.


Bolded the parts where using a camera and/or a wire is being offered as a possibility. If you were talking about something entirely differently, you probably should chose different wordings since after reading these posts several times I'm under the impression that this is what you are discussing.

The OP's story is only his side of the story. That is not entirely accurate, just like no one's side of the story is ever accurate.

From what I've read from people that were either there or had talked to the Head Judge about what happened, the deck had a mix of foils, mainly basic lands, and they were noticeably warped. Alex complained about how this could lead to cheating but the deck check was passable. After the match, Alex pursued the topic and showed the judges how Chris could have easily cut his deck to a basic land with the foils he had. When the judges were watching Chris' next match, they saw him touching and straightening his deck quite often, and not just because of his many shuffle effects in the deck. As an seasoned player should know, this is a clear sign of suspected cheating and it is in the judge's book to hand out a penalty for cheating, which is a DQ. The basic moral is to either use all foil or no foil cards in your competitive deck and only handle your deck when you have to for game reasons. You don't win matches by making your deck look nice and tidy or by having the most foils. These are huge red flags for judges.



"We live in a day and age when absolute video proof can be ignored by those in charge.  So I wouldn't count on a good recording doing much good when it comes to a rules appeal"

- I'm not sure how this isn't clear, but I'll rephrase -

Today a person can be caught red-handed on video, and if he or she is the right person, with the right kind of power and/or authority and/or lawyers, it won't matter.  This offers some context as to the value of evidence of any kind, no matter how conclusive.  The statement also estimates audio evidence as generally less persuasive than video evidence, and offers that as context. 

A digital recorder isn't the same thing as a wire.
Attitude reflects leadership. Vindicated! * HawkBlade is aggro/control! * Post-ban HawkBlade! * Jace, the Mind Sculptor is good! * End-of-Lorwyn TurboFog! ‘Everything that needs to be said has already been said. But since no one was listening, everything must be said again.’ – André Gide '...but if you're repeating yourself in an online forum, chances are you're just feeding a troll.' - Rat Bastardsen
Sorry if my slang for equivocal items that achieve the same goal was not precise enough for you to understand the content of my post.

Allons-y!

Sorry if my slang for equivocal items that achieve the same goal was not precise enough for you to understand the content of my post.



Sorry if I take exception to your putting words in my mouth.

Using the phrase "wearing a wire" has a connotation different from "digital recorder", and you were going for the effect you could get by using the first phrase.  THAT'S a purpose that one term achieves, but the other does not - and your purpose in using the first phrase, rather than the second.
Attitude reflects leadership. Vindicated! * HawkBlade is aggro/control! * Post-ban HawkBlade! * Jace, the Mind Sculptor is good! * End-of-Lorwyn TurboFog! ‘Everything that needs to be said has already been said. But since no one was listening, everything must be said again.’ – André Gide '...but if you're repeating yourself in an online forum, chances are you're just feeding a troll.' - Rat Bastardsen
Sorry if my slang for equivocal items that achieve the same goal was not precise enough for you to understand the content of my post.



Sorry if I take exception to your putting words in my mouth.

Using the phrase "wearing a wire" has a connotation different from "digital recorder", and you were going for the effect you could get by using the first phrase.  THAT'S a purpose that one term achieves, but the other does not - and your purpose in using the first phrase, rather than the second.


I was clearly exaggerating the measures you were suggesting to go through to prevent cheating, which is completely besides the point of that paragraph. The point, in case you missed it, was that if you are catching situations that are in need of observation of a third party, it is far easier and safer to call a judge or check what your opponent is doing.

Allons-y!

Sorry if my slang for equivocal items that achieve the same goal was not precise enough for you to understand the content of my post.



Sorry if I take exception to your putting words in my mouth.

Using the phrase "wearing a wire" has a connotation different from "digital recorder", and you were going for the effect you could get by using the first phrase.  THAT'S a purpose that one term achieves, but the other does not - and your purpose in using the first phrase, rather than the second.


I was clearly exaggerating the measures you were suggesting to go through to prevent cheating, which is completely besides the point of that paragraph. The point, in case you missed it, was that if you are catching situations that are in need of observation of a third party, it is far easier and safer to call a judge or check what your opponent is doing.



I get that, and I'd agree.  But what you recomend does nothing if you find yourself in a situation like the one described in the OP (whether the OP accurately describes the situation or not is another matter). 
Attitude reflects leadership. Vindicated! * HawkBlade is aggro/control! * Post-ban HawkBlade! * Jace, the Mind Sculptor is good! * End-of-Lorwyn TurboFog! ‘Everything that needs to be said has already been said. But since no one was listening, everything must be said again.’ – André Gide '...but if you're repeating yourself in an online forum, chances are you're just feeding a troll.' - Rat Bastardsen
@ Jed

It end up bringing the question how far do you go? If you can DQ someone for touching their deck too much, then why not if they tap a foot? If the blink too much or put their hand down on a table to stretch, if they are constantly checking their Graveyard, or if they look at their sideboard. If they have a card that lets them look at the top card of their deck, can they not be Dq'd if they look at the top put it back and then look at it again for excessive touching of their deck?

I understand being tough on cheating is very important, but there is a limit, if you can Dq people for touching their deck does that not start to erase the line of acceptable and not acceptable?
I Agree with Indigo IMAGE(http://i137.photobucket.com/albums/q223/Bigbadmamajama/noheroescopy.jpg) ^^ WIP atm, if you can name the song its from, I will love you forever. That is me
The two situations are completely different. Audio recording would do nothing to alter the events. It was a matter of the contents of the deck, marked cards, and potential deck manipulation.

Allons-y!

The two situations are completely different. Audio recording would do nothing to alter the events. It was a matter of the contents of the deck, marked cards, and potential deck manipulation.



An audio recording could give him a way to hold those responsible accountable.  The results may not be changed, but it could lead to more honest judging in the future*.  He could be like the wikileaks of the Magic world.

* if of course anything wrong went on
Attitude reflects leadership. Vindicated! * HawkBlade is aggro/control! * Post-ban HawkBlade! * Jace, the Mind Sculptor is good! * End-of-Lorwyn TurboFog! ‘Everything that needs to be said has already been said. But since no one was listening, everything must be said again.’ – André Gide '...but if you're repeating yourself in an online forum, chances are you're just feeding a troll.' - Rat Bastardsen
@ Jed

It end up bringing the question how far do you go? If you can DQ someone for touching their deck too much, then why not if they tap a foot? If the blink too much or put their hand down on a table to stretch, if they are constantly checking their Graveyard, or if they look at their sideboard. If they have a card that lets them look at the top card of their deck, can they not be Dq'd if they look at the top put it back and then look at it again for excessive touching of their deck?

I understand being tough on cheating is very important, but there is a limit, if you can Dq people for touching their deck does that not start to erase the line of acceptable and not acceptable?


It's not just tapping the top of your deck though.  Running your hand along the side is a well known way to get an edge with a foiled deck.  It's completely different.  Do I think the OP was intending to cheat?  No.  Do I think he was doing something shady and the DQ was probably a reasonable choice?  Yes.
NO ONE EXPECTS THE QUAGSIRE INSURRECTION! My SUPER AWESOME GregtheEgg lightning bolt: http://i299.photobucket.com/albums/mm284/fengairen2/Scan.png pmppostchandraversion.png
@ Jed

It end up bringing the question how far do you go? If you can DQ someone for touching their deck too much, then why not if they tap a foot? If the blink too much or put their hand down on a table to stretch, if they are constantly checking their Graveyard, or if they look at their sideboard. If they have a card that lets them look at the top card of their deck, can they not be Dq'd if they look at the top put it back and then look at it again for excessive touching of their deck?

I understand being tough on cheating is very important, but there is a limit, if you can Dq people for touching their deck does that not start to erase the line of acceptable and not acceptable?


It is all up to the judge's discretion. In this instance, it was several other factors plus a two-round investigation that resulted in "catching" the "cheating."

If you read the penalty and offenses guide for judges (there is a free app called MTGJudge with all this information readily available) you'll see that there are specific instances with explanations as to why certain acts are not allowed. Constantly checking the graveyard and having no change in the board position as a result can be conceived as slow play, depending on the situation. Looking at your sideboard during a game is not allowed. Looking at the top card of your deck because of Sphinx of Jwar Isle constantly with no actual change in game state after doing it multiple times in a short span is considered stalling. The rest is stuff that is allowed, unless there are other factors that make these actions suspicious.

Seriously, I encourage anyone with questions to research how judges handle situations and what is punishable. The more knowledgable people are, the less confusion and issues will occur in the future.

Allons-y!

@ Jed

It end up bringing the question how far do you go? If you can DQ someone for touching their deck too much, then why not if they tap a foot? If the blink too much or put their hand down on a table to stretch, if they are constantly checking their Graveyard, or if they look at their sideboard. If they have a card that lets them look at the top card of their deck, can they not be Dq'd if they look at the top put it back and then look at it again for excessive touching of their deck?

I understand being tough on cheating is very important, but there is a limit, if you can Dq people for touching their deck does that not start to erase the line of acceptable and not acceptable?


It's not just tapping the top of your deck though.  Running your hand along the side is a well known way to get an edge with a foiled deck.  It's completely different.  Do I think the OP was intending to cheat?  No.  Do I think he was doing something shady and the DQ was probably a reasonable choice?  Yes.



What kind of shady thing might he have been doing that wasn't cheating?

 

Attitude reflects leadership. Vindicated! * HawkBlade is aggro/control! * Post-ban HawkBlade! * Jace, the Mind Sculptor is good! * End-of-Lorwyn TurboFog! ‘Everything that needs to be said has already been said. But since no one was listening, everything must be said again.’ – André Gide '...but if you're repeating yourself in an online forum, chances are you're just feeding a troll.' - Rat Bastardsen