Is he allowed to shuffle my deck like this?

31 posts / 0 new
Last post
So I was at the pre-release event on sunday, and one of my opponents insisted on shuffling my deck every time I shuffled it.

I don't mean he cut my deck, I mean he full on shuffled it every single time. Once or twice I think he even pile shuffled it.

I didn't want to start anything, but I found it to be exceedingly annoying. Do I have to allow him to full on shuffle my deck every time? Cutting it, I can understand but...
Yeah, that's fine to do.  And in competitive tournaments (like ProTours) I'd encourage it.
Do I have to allow him to full on shuffle my deck every time?

Yes, absolutely. Your opponent must be given the opportunity to further shuffle your deck every time you shuffle it. At low-level tournaments like prereleases they don't have to do so if they don't want to, but you have to give them the chance.

If you don't like the way your opponent is handling your cards you can call a judge and request that the judge perform the shuffle rather than your opponent (such requests will be honored at the judge's discretion), but you can't just refuse to let them shuffle.

From the Magic Tournament Rules:
Decks must be randomized at the start of every game and whenever an instruction requires it. Randomization is defined as bringing the deck to a state where no player can have any information regarding the order or position  of cards in any portion of the deck. Pile shuffling alone is not sufficiently random.

Once the deck is randomized, it must be presented to an opponent. By this action, players state that their decks are legal and randomized. The opponent may then shuffle it additionally. Cards and sleeves must not be in danger of being damaged during this process. If the opponent does not believe the player made a reasonable effort to randomize his or her deck, the opponent must notify a judge. Players may request to have a  judge shuffle their cards rather than the opponent; this request will be honored only at a judge’s discretion.

If a player has had the opportunity to see any of the card faces of the deck being shuffled, the deck is no longer considered randomized and must be randomized again.

At Competitive and Professional REL tournaments, players are required to shuffle their opponents’ decks after their owners have shuffled them. The Head Judge can require this at Regular REL tournaments as well.



Yeah, that's fine to do.  And in competitive tournaments (like ProTours) I'd encourage it.

At Competitive tournaments it's required for them to shuffle.

Come join me at No Goblins Allowed


Because frankly, being here depresses me these days.

Alright. It just seems so... 

I mean, if the point is to stop me cheating how do I know he's not cheating by shuffling my deck improperly...

Thanks for the answer  
I mean, if the point is to stop me cheating how do I know he's not cheating by shuffling my deck improperly...

Because you shuffled it before you handed it to him, which means he's starting out with a completely randomized deck and has no idea what order it's in. Even the best cheater in the world can't possibly stack a deck when they don't know how it started out. (Assuming your cards aren't marked somehow so he can tell what they are without looking, and you make sure he doesn't sneak a peek at the cards while shuffling.)

Come join me at No Goblins Allowed


Because frankly, being here depresses me these days.

If both players shuffle a deck you can assume it is random. As long as you hand a randomly disrtibuted deck to your opponent, nothing they can do will make it less random.

… and then, the squirrels came.
So what is the point? If it is already randomized, why would you do anything more to it?
If it's not... Then that player should do it better.
So what is the point? If it is already randomized, why would you do anything more to it?

Having your opponent shuffle after you do is a measure to ensure that you can't cheat either, because no matter how stacked you leave your deck, your opponent's shuffle would negate it.

Come join me at No Goblins Allowed


Because frankly, being here depresses me these days.

Although it's legal and even encouraged to shuffle your opponent's deck whenever he shuffles it, I would probably consider bringing over a judge for slow play if he's pile shuffling that often. Pile shuffling is no more random than any other technique, and as far as I'm concerned, it's a delaying tactic.
Although it's legal and even encouraged to shuffle your opponent's deck whenever he shuffles it, I would probably consider bringing over a judge for slow play if he's pile shuffling that often. Pile shuffling is no more random than any other technique, and as far as I'm concerned, it's a delaying tactic.


Pile shuffling can also be used as a means of counting the deck (to check its all there).

~ Tim   

I am Blue/White Reached DCI Rating 1800 on 28/10/11. :D
Sig
56287226 wrote:
190106923 wrote:
Not bad. But what happens flavor wise when one kamahl kills the other one?
Zis iz a sign uf deep psychological troma, buried in zer subconscious mind. By keelink himzelf, Kamahl iz physically expressink hiz feelinks uf self-disgust ova hiz desire for hiz muzzer. [/GermanPsychologistVoice]
56957928 wrote:
57799958 wrote:
That makes no sense to me. If they spelled the ability out on the card in full then it would not be allowed in a mono-black Commander deck, but because they used a keyword to save space it is allowed? ~ Tim
Yup, just like you can have Birds of paradise in a mono green deck but not Noble Hierarch. YAY COLOR IDENTITY
56287226 wrote:
56888618 wrote:
Is algebra really that difficult?
Survey says yes.
56883218 wrote:
57799958 wrote:
You want to make a milky drink. You squeeze a cow.
I love this description. Like the cows are sponges filled with milk. I can see it all Nick Parks claymation-style with the cow's eyes bugging out momentarily as a giant farmer squeezes it like a squeaky dog toy, and milk shoots out of it.
56287226 wrote:
56735468 wrote:
And no judge will ever give you a game loss for playing snow covered lands.
I now have a new goal in life. ;)
Fair enough, but it shouldn't be necessary mid-game.
Fair enough, but it shouldn't be necessary mid-game.

Experienced cheaters know you will shuffle their decks at the beginning of the game:
they won't bother to stack it at that time. (then again, they might!)
But when they play a card that allows them to search it, then they do their trick, like slipping some goodie near the top.
When there are prizes to be won, trust no one! 


Furthermore:
401.3. Any player may count the number of cards remaining in any player’s library at any time.



Tax evasion is nothing but legitimate self-defense against the theft that is tax collection.

Not trying to get too anal here, but I've got a related question.

At the pre-release this weekend one of my opponents shuffled his deck like a deck of playing cards. As in he split the deck into two piles, bent a corner back on each stack and allowed them to fall into each other gracefully. At that point he arches both stacks upwards, forcing the cards to stack neatly. I really hope I just explained that in an understandable manner.

Now I've got no problem with my opponent shuffling my deck, but do I technically have any way to prevent my opponent from shuffling in such a way that I feel would de-value the cards within? Aside from being a player, I also like to collect and trade cards. It really made me cringe watching him shuffle his deck like that, because all I could do was think of the value going down the drain. Thankfully he didn't care to shuffle my deck and instead opted to cut it.
you can ask a judge to shuffle instead of your opponent

or you can ask your opponent to shuffle in a way that does not damage your cards.
while not in the rules (i think) it should be common courtesy
proud member of the 2011 community team
you can ask a judge to shuffle instead of your opponent

or you can ask your opponent to shuffle in a way that does not damage your cards.
while not in the rules (i think) it should be common courtesy

Yeah, I think most people would give that common courtesy. I just worry about running into a jerk (it happens) who wants to be relentless with my cards. Hadn't thought about asking a Judge to do it; glad that's an option, but hopeful I'll never have to use it.
From MAGIC: THE GATHERING® TOURNAMENT RULES

3.9 Once the deck is randomized, it must be presented to an opponent. By this action, players state that their decks are legal and randomized. The opponent may then shuffle it additionally. Cards and sleeves must not be in danger of being damaged during this process. If the opponent does not believe the player made a reasonable effort to randomize his or her deck, the opponent must notify a judge. Players may request to have a judge shuffle their cards rather than the opponent; this request will be honored only at a judge’s discretion.


 

Tax evasion is nothing but legitimate self-defense against the theft that is tax collection.

I though Magic cards were pretty resilient against riffle shuffling.  I mean, what about the "bend test" to test for counterfiets?  That doesn't damage cards. 

I only play online.  The Magic Online shuffler is AWESOME!
cards without sleeves damage pretty fast, especially around the edges

but yes, online is superior ;)
proud member of the 2011 community team
Just because it was brought up:
"Pile shuffling", that is making a number of piles and systematically placing cards on top the piles in a consistent order, doensn't actually randomize anything.  It simply changes the order of the cards.  In other words if your deck starts out as 16 lands followed by 24 other cards and you pile shuffle into four piles, you will be left with 8 non-lands followed by 4 lands repeated four times.  The order of the cards has been changed, but it is still not a random order.  I mention this because some players will only pile shuffle in order to ensure an even distribution of land, and in this case you should shuffle their deck afterwards.
If a player only pile shuffles, you should call a judge. They could easily be cheating, and a judge should investigate this.
All Generalizations are Bad
That's why you do it in conjunction with another form of shuffling, if you are shuffling properly.

Pile shuffling on it's own is an easy way for someone to stack a deck. 
100th post 29/01/12 500th post 19/05/12 1000th post 19/07/12 How many planeswalkers does it take to screw in a lightbulb?
Show
Better question, what does Nicol Bolas want with the lightbulb?
IMAGE(http://images.community.wizards.com/community.wizards.com/user/blitzschnell/25ceed5d20286936a2014d5e9a9026d2.jpg?v=90000)
Sonic Sez: There's nothing wrong with your opponent shuffling your deck. But if someone tries to shuffle your deck in a way that makes YOU feel uncomfortable... That's no good. It's your deck. No opponent has the right to shuffle your deck if you don't want them to. So what do you do? First, you say NO! Then, you get your deck outta there! Most important, you gotta call someone you trust... Like a Judge! 

Sean Stackhouse Level Two Judge (Yay!) Maine

Wow, that brings me back. Sonic Sez Says indeed.
I remember quite sometime back you were given the chance to cut your own deck anytime your opponent shuffled it.  It seems this is no longer aloud.  Why was this changed?

I mean if they feared that Player A was somehow using marked cards and would be able to cut to where his card X is after an opponent shuffles I can understand the theory of changing the ruling, but if he can still look at the marked card he is still gaining additional info so this wouldn't completely negate the issue.

By allowing Player B to shuffle the deck and then not give Player A the option to cut his own deck Player B could easily stack a land on top of an already mana flooded draw or a spell on top of a mana lite draw etc after a shuffle effect. 

I would imagine that it would be much easier for Player B to cheat in this case than Player A to cheat and get away with it with marked sleeves.

What is Player A to do if he thinks Player B may have seen a card on the bottom?  Is he suppose to call a judge on the "chance" that Player B may have seen a card?  If Player A would do this what would happen to Player B when he denies looking at any cards...would anything happen to Player A?  Seems like this would create some very unfriendly playing atmospheres after the call...Nobody likes to be accused of anything etc.
at FNM you can cut or shuffle your opponent's deck every time he shuffles
at higher REL you are required to shuffle after your opponent shuffles.
proud member of the 2011 community team
I remember quite sometime back you were given the chance to cut your own deck anytime your opponent shuffled it.  It seems this is no longer aloud.  Why was this changed?

I mean if they feared that Player A was somehow using marked cards and would be able to cut to where his card X is after an opponent shuffles I can understand the theory of changing the ruling, but if he can still look at the marked card he is still gaining additional info so this wouldn't completely negate the issue.

By allowing Player B to shuffle the deck and then not give Player A the option to cut his own deck Player B could easily stack a land on top of an already mana flooded draw or a spell on top of a mana lite draw etc after a shuffle effect. 

I would imagine that it would be much easier for Player B to cheat in this case than Player A to cheat and get away with it with marked sleeves.

What is Player A to do if he thinks Player B may have seen a card on the bottom?  Is he suppose to call a judge on the "chance" that Player B may have seen a card?  If Player A would do this what would happen to Player B when he denies looking at any cards...would anything happen to Player A?  Seems like this would create some very unfriendly playing atmospheres after the call...Nobody likes to be accused of anything etc.

I think they removed the final cut because there's no reason for it, not because it allows player A to cut to a marked card. Player B can't put a land on top of player A's deck while shuffling unless player A's deck is marked or player B is looking at the cards while he's shuffling. If player A  thinks player B is doing this, he should call a judge. What happens after that depends on the judge's investigation.

All Generalizations are Bad
Fair enough...just seems that having that last cut completely negates any chance of having to worry about cheating from Player B.  But I'm sure Wizards has solid reasoning behind the change :D
Fair enough...just seems that having that last cut completely negates any chance of having to worry about cheating from Player B.  But I'm sure Wizards has solid reasoning behind the change :D

Given that Player A is the one who built and knows the contents of the deck, is the one who can look through and arrange it freely before shuffling, and is the one who will be drawing from the deck after the shuffle, we should be far more concerned about the possibility of Player A stacking the deck than the possibility of Player B doing so. Player B has far less opportunity and ability to cheat. Yes, the "one final cut" reduced the ability of Player B to cheat even further. But it increased the ability of Player A to cheat by far more than it reduced Player B's ability to cheat.

Come join me at No Goblins Allowed


Because frankly, being here depresses me these days.

I've had people shuffle my deck so that the cards would face different ways and I've had a rough shuffler or two (bending the cards more that I'd care for) .  It's extremely frustrating and disrespectful and some people do it to get under your skin.
If he's shuffling like that to get under your skin, then don't allow him to shuffle your deck. Let him call the judge.
Not trying to get too anal here, but I've got a related question.

At the pre-release this weekend one of my opponents shuffled his deck like a deck of playing cards. As in he split the deck into two piles, bent a corner back on each stack and allowed them to fall into each other gracefully. At that point he arches both stacks upwards, forcing the cards to stack neatly. I really hope I just explained that in an understandable manner.

Now I've got no problem with my opponent shuffling my deck, but do I technically have any way to prevent my opponent from shuffling in such a way that I feel would de-value the cards within? Aside from being a player, I also like to collect and trade cards. It really made me cringe watching him shuffle his deck like that, because all I could do was think of the value going down the drain. Thankfully he didn't care to shuffle my deck and instead opted to cut it.


Repeated Riffleshuffling is an easy method of randomization. I recommend it.
[c]Forest[/c] gives you Forest
Sign In to post comments