stalling?

61 posts / 0 new
Last post
basically I wanted to get a judge's insight on the topic of this thread.

basically it's about running several cascade spells that can't possibly hit anything in your sideboard so that you can stall out game 2 by just continually cascading.

the argument in favor is that you are playing the cards exactly as written and thus you have no option to shortcut, or you can otherwise not shortcut and play each individual cascade card.

how would you, as a judge handle this in a tournament, if it is clear that a player has no possible spells they can hit with cascade and yet continually play them?
basically I wanted to get a judge's insight on the topic of this thread.

Your link leads to a forum, not a thread. Which thread are you talking about?
I'm just a Pigment of your imagination.
basically I wanted to get a judge's insight on the topic of this thread.

That's a forum, not a Thread...
basically it's about running several cascade spells that can't possibly hit anything in your sideboard

Cascade has nothing to do with the Sideboard...
so that you can stall out game 2 by just continually cascading.

You'd simply reveal the Cards in your library, then shuffle it and put it on the bottom of your Library.
That's a forum, not a Thread...
Cascade has nothing to do with the Sideboard...
You'd simply reveal the Cards in your library, then shuffle it and put it on the bottom of your Library.

it was my fault for not checking the links, sorry.

this is the right one: http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1183568

the basic idea is to win game 1, side out any cards that you could play off the cascade and just continually play the cascade cards in order to kill time by revealing cards off the top of your library and randomizing them. would this be considered stalling?
Cascade has nothing to do with the Sideboard...

He's talking about siding in cards from his sideboard that have cascade, while having no cards in the deck that can actually be played off cascade.


I assume that, after doing it once or twice ,and revealing your entire deck to your opponent, a judge would allow you to skip the reveal part and just have your opponent shuffle and cut.

You are following the card's instructions. However, since those cards with cascade were not previously in your deck, and you are fully aware that nothing can be played with them, it would probably count as stalling.

Judges aren't stupid. (well, not all of them)
(Not a judge, but...)

There is quite deliberately a certain amount of subjectivity about what counts as stalling, but if someone repeats this play often enough, especially if they keep revealing cards individually and otherwise taking unnecessary time about it once it's clear to all concerned that no cards that can be Cascaded up are to be found, that's pretty clearly stalling.

Seems to me there's only limited advantage to be gained from this, anyway. Cascade spells are relatively expensive and most aren't easy to "cheat" out in ways that will actually trigger Cascade. You'll seldom be able to Cascade more than once or maybe twice in a turn, other than by chaining Cascades together, which seems to be excluded by your description of the situation (too likely to actually be useful). Thus to repeatedly take advantage of this trick you've got to be letting your opponent have turns too, turns you aren't doing very much to impede since you're spending all your mana on relatively inefficient spells.
Jeff Heikkinen DCI Rules Advisor since Dec 25, 2011
Absolutely stalling.
24. Midgame Shuffling Time Limit
A reasonable time limit will be allowed for all shuffling and deck-searching that occurs during a game. Player should be allowed thirty seconds to conduct simple searches; more complicated searches may be allowed more time at the Judge’s discretion.

If a Judge determines that a player’s shuffling time is excessive, that player will be subject to the appropriate provisions of the DCI Penalty Guidelines. Shuffling requirements specified in Section 21 apply.

151. Cheating - Stalling
Definition: A player intentionally plays slowly in order to take advantage of the time limit. If the slow play is not intentional, please refer to Tournament Error - Slow Play instead.
Example:
A. A player in a Magic tournament has two lands in his hand, no options available to significantly affect the game, and spends excessive time "thinking" about what to do to eat up time on the clock.
B. A player in a Dreamblade tournament is ahead in turns and significantly slows down his pace of play so the opponent has little chance to catch up.
C. A player playing slowly appeals a warning in an attempt to gain advantage by having more time to make a decision.
D. A player intentionally exceeds the pregame time limit before the third game in an attempt to make it harder for his opponent to win in time.
Philosophy: If it is clear that a player is stalling, the integrity of the match is compromised and he or she will face a serious penalty.
Penalty: All Levels - Disqualification

You can only Cascade once a turn;

No. Nothing stops you from using multiple spells with cascade in a single turn.

Plus, think how much time that turn would take when you have to reveal your entire deck 1 card at a time?
Okay, I just read the whole thread. I think it comes down to one simple question that will answer the issue quite cleanly. Here's the question that needs answered:

Can you use a shortcut that simply reveals the deck and then shuffles it on subsequent Cascades once it has been shown from an earlier Cascade that there isn't a single card in your deck that can be hit?

If the answer to that question is "Yes, that is a legal shortcut that can be used.", then refusing to use that shortcut is quite clearly stalling.

If the answer is No, then I think the strategy is legal, provided you aren't taking excessive time with any one instance.

EDIT: I think I'll post this in that thread as well.
I'm just a Pigment of your imagination.
So how many judges would rule that you must shuffle your deck for every Storm copy of Mind's Desire if the library hasn't changed between copies? Not very many, I'd wager. This is the same sort of shortcut - the procedure isn't followed exactly as printed on the card/rules, but the net result is correct in all ways.
This is different than the shortcut for Desire. The shuffles exist only to prevent manipulation before resolution. The shuffle does nothing after the first (if you treat it like one spell), the intent is to stop manipulation.

You can cascade to simply see the contents of your own library. As the cascade resolves, you can choose to reveal your library if you would like to see the contents. Just because your opponent wants to forfeit his right to it, does not mean he can deny you information that card text entitles you to.

One of cascade's fundamental intents is to provide information. Your opponent cannot deny you this right.

EDIT:

Inori: Did you even read what you quoted?

A reasonable time limit will be allowed for all shuffling and deck-searching that occurs during a game. Player should be allowed thirty seconds to conduct simple searches; more complicated searches may be allowed more time at the Judge’s discretion.

You are allowed a time for shuffling and searches, defined here. Also, note reasonable.

Argument:
We will assume that searching, like Cascade, provides two advantages. The Primary: Redemption of Card Advantage and the Secondary: Information increase. Just as you can search, and you can fail to find, you can cascade and fail to find. The primary source (generally the impetus to cast the spell) may be chosen not to occur, or may not occur. The secondary, which generates public information (or private, depending on the search), gives this information to each players and each player is entitled to it, if he or she wants it, as defined in the card text. Just as I can not choose to forfeit my opponent's right to public information when I reveal my library, my opponent can not deny that to me.


If a Judge determines that a player’s shuffling time is excessive, that player will be subject to the appropriate provisions of the DCI Penalty Guidelines. Shuffling requirements specified in Section 21 apply.

Shuffling will be in a timely manner. No need to bold here, this rule will not be broken. Keep in mind that any sane judge would rule for enough time for complete randomization, as the contents and their previous order just became public information.

No problem here.

Definition: A player intentionally plays slowly in order to take advantage of the time limit.

You aren't intentionally playing slowly, the mechanics of the game require you to play in a manner that is consistent with the rules. This is still relatively quick, but it is a complex procedure that will inevitably take some time to resolve. You are resolving the abilities as quickly as can be expected with their intents and results.
Slave of Tibalt. Currently trading for foils of my bro. PM me. Tarmogoyf on Twitter. Follow me. Team GFG Guns, Fame, Glory Those that require a sig for the ego simply haven't had enough kind words thrown his or her way. Currently looking for prerelease Plains! People who have mailed me rares:
Show
Malpheas: THANK YOU FOR THE FOIL TIBALT, YOU BEAUTIFUL GUY, YOU! Suudsu2200: Armageddon! Sèance, Dominating Licid, Words of War, Gaea's Anthem, Momentous Fall, Nyxathid PM me to make it happen. Your username will end up here, as the cards you sent me. I reserve the right to order your usernames by the cards I liked the best. Oh, and if you send me some Islands in the package, I'll sign them and mail them back.
Doublepost
Slave of Tibalt. Currently trading for foils of my bro. PM me. Tarmogoyf on Twitter. Follow me. Team GFG Guns, Fame, Glory Those that require a sig for the ego simply haven't had enough kind words thrown his or her way. Currently looking for prerelease Plains! People who have mailed me rares:
Show
Malpheas: THANK YOU FOR THE FOIL TIBALT, YOU BEAUTIFUL GUY, YOU! Suudsu2200: Armageddon! Sèance, Dominating Licid, Words of War, Gaea's Anthem, Momentous Fall, Nyxathid PM me to make it happen. Your username will end up here, as the cards you sent me. I reserve the right to order your usernames by the cards I liked the best. Oh, and if you send me some Islands in the package, I'll sign them and mail them back.
The issue becomes degenerative after the first cascade, however. After perfect information is already revealed, what is the harm in, say, revealing two cards at a time? Four cards? Why not just flip the whole deck over?

Many mechanics in Magic demand shortcuts in order to speed up gameplay. For instance, a common example is the declaration of specific targets. When you try to Banefire someone, often you won't declare that the opponent is the target and not, say, yourself. Assuming there are no other legal targets in play.

A more mechanical example is when, on the first turn, you play a Borderpost, simply revealing a land from your hand, indicating that you had actually played the land, tapped it for mana, and then played the Borderpost. But it amounts to the same thing. (This may not actually be allowed at a competitive level, but I'm certain better examples exist.)

If you couldn't play Magic without these shortcuts, all games would take a lot longer and be slightly more annoying for human players. But as human beings, that are playing face-to-face, we can make deductions based on shared information or reasoning to make the game less redundant and more efficient.

There's some subjectivity involved in making this call, basically. But I think common sense calls this a stall tactic. And that shortcuts ought to be used to speed up the state of the game after the first or maybe second Cascade.

If you had a way of putting hidden cards back into your library somehow, this probably would require the full cascade again. But otherwise, not.
I'm tired of people trying to say this is illegal.

Yes, it is not the intent of cascade to allow this. But per the wording, doing it this way is not only NOT stalling, being forced to NOT do it this way is breaking the rules by denying you access to information. I can't believe this is even a discussion. Islands is right.

www.nogoblinsallowed.com

 

A creative hub for art and all things Magical, Dungeony, and Dragony!

 

Feel free to copy this into your sig, adding one to the generation number.

 

Generation=0

That rule 151 as quoted by inori makes it pretty clear that if you cascade into nothing turning over cards one... at... a... time... after a couple of those you would qualify for the "intentionally playing slow" bit that "compromises the integrity of the game".
It's definitely not illegal to cascade into nothing. It's definitely not illegal to do it on purpose. But it is defined as cheating if you are following the mechanics slowly to slow the game down.
This is the first topic of its kind that I have been exposed to, since I started playing Magic/reading threads about the game, and I must say that the responses have been interesting...

Assuming that no rules (Re: playing in a timely manner, sufficiently randomising your deck etc) are broken, and the time limit for randomising is adhered to, then is it "cheating" if you follow the rules (for Cascade)?

Or to put it another way, are you forced to take a time-saving 'shortcut', even if you dont want to? If you can be, then case closed. But otherwise...

~ 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. ;)
Or to put it another way, are you forced to take a time-saving 'shortcut', even if you dont want to? If you can be, then case closed. But otherwise...

Well, you certainly can be in other examples. Specifically, looping. Section 421 specifically deals with shortcutting loops, and you CAN be "forced" to use the shortcuts or be cited for stalling.

What I'm less sure of is whether the shortcut for Cascade into a known deck with no valid spells for the Cascade to "hit" is a legitimate shortcut or not.
I'm just a Pigment of your imagination.
As the cascade resolves, you can choose to reveal your library if you would like to see the contents.

First of all, you are removing the Cards in your Library from the Game.

Second, this is NOT optional; You do NOT "choose to" remove the Cards.
One of cascade's fundamental intents is to provide information. Your opponent cannot deny you this right.

Your right to know what Cards are in YOUR deck?

You mean, that YOU weren't paying attention while YOU were building YOUR deck?
Also, note reasonable.

Yes; Reasonable.

After you've determined that YOUR Deck doesn't have any NonLand Cards with Converted Mana Cost of X or less, then it IS reasonable to assume that your Deck STILL does NOT have any NonLand Cards with Converted Mana Cost of X or less.
You aren't intentionally playing slowly, the mechanics of the game require you to play in a manner that is consistent with the rules. This is CAN still relatively quick, but it is a complex procedure that will inevitably take some time to resolve.

Fixed.

Following the actions of Cascade CAN be a quick process, if it's done in a timely manner.
However, IF you are taking your time (ie. an UNreasonable amount of time) while removing each Card one-by-one, then it IS Slow Play.

It seems that your intention is to be a "That Guy"; Do NOT be a "That Guy".
One of cascade's fundamental intents is to provide information. Your opponent cannot deny you this right.

Fine. Nobody said you don't have a right to see the deck again. But why does it have to be one card at a time? What relevant "information" are you getting by revealing the deck one card at a time rather than just revealing the whole thing all at once. (This obviously is not applicable to the first Cascade, but on subsequent ones where it's already known there are no legal spells to hit.)

I'm tired of people trying to say this is illegal.

Nobody has said the deck is illegal. What's "illegal" is stalling with it.

Yes, it is not the intent of cascade to allow this. But per the wording, doing it this way is not only NOT stalling, being forced to NOT do it this way is breaking the rules by denying you access to information. I can't believe this is even a discussion. Islands is right.

Again, what information are you being denied by being forced to simply reveal the whole deck all at once rather than one card at a time?
I'm just a Pigment of your imagination.
Following the actions of Cascade CAN be a quick process, if it's done in a timely manner.
However, IF you are taking your time (ie. an UNreasonable amount of time) while removing each Card one-by-one, then it IS Slow Play.

It seems that your intention is to be a "That Guy"; Do NOT be a "That Guy".

Right on. Honorable play. Why play the game if you can't win with your own 'skills' and deck building?

Again, what information are you being denied by being forced to simply reveal the whole deck all at once rather than one card at a time?

Exactly. If you're shown the deck once already through the cascade effect what reason could be given to make you go through that process over and over again if NOT to slow the game play?
The order of the deck. For all your opponent knows, you have a vexing arcanix in your hand. It is relevant.

www.nogoblinsallowed.com

 

A creative hub for art and all things Magical, Dungeony, and Dragony!

 

Feel free to copy this into your sig, adding one to the generation number.

 

Generation=0

The order of the deck. For all your opponent knows, you have a vexing arcanix in your hand. It is relevant.

During cascade, you can't do anything and afterwards your library has been randomized.

It seems that your intention is to be a "That Guy"; Do NOT be a "That Guy".

I think that settles it.
The order of the deck. For all your opponent knows, you have a vexing arcanix in your hand. It is relevant.

The cards are put back in a random order.
Blonde moment, move along.

However, it is still important that your opponent know which cards are in your library, and while you can say "can't you reveal them all at once?" you still have to reveal every single card. However you want to slice it, you must reveal every card.

www.nogoblinsallowed.com

 

A creative hub for art and all things Magical, Dungeony, and Dragony!

 

Feel free to copy this into your sig, adding one to the generation number.

 

Generation=0

However, it is still important that your opponent know which cards are in your library, and while you can say "can't you reveal them all at once?" you still have to reveal every single card. However you want to slice it, you must reveal every card.

Quite right. Merely shuffling the library is too much of a shortcut if your opponent wants to inspect the cards.
However, it is still important that your opponent know which cards are in your library, and while you can say "can't you reveal them all at once?" you still have to reveal every single card. However you want to slice it, you must reveal every card.

The point of this thread is that the you should know the contents of your Deck.

And, once you have removed your entire Deck via Cascade, and your opponent knows the contents of your Deck, your opponent CAN request that you Shortcut the Actions the next Time you play a Spell with Cascade.

It's your opponent that's making the request, NOT you.
The point of this thread is that the you should know the contents of your Deck.

And, once you have removed your entire Deck via Cascade, and your opponent knows the contents of your Deck, your opponent CAN request that you Shortcut the Actions the next Time you play a Spell with Cascade.

It's your opponent that's making the request, NOT you.

Techincally don't both players have to agree to the shortcut for it to be used?

Though using cascade in this way is stalling and luckily it seems stalling has an extra wide definition so that Judges can stop such abuse.
… and then, the squirrels came.
This tactic, as described, seems to be the dictionary definition of "stalling".

Where's the controversy?

However, it is still important that your opponent know which cards are in your library, and while you can say "can't you reveal them all at once?" you still have to reveal every single card. However you want to slice it, you must reveal every card.

It's your opponent's choice though in that situation. It's not really possible to deny them information they already have (seeing as they already know the contents of your deck once you've cascaded it once, or at most 2-3 times).

Slow playing is defined by the intent. Shuffling slowly is not *explicitly* breaking a rule, but it's done with the intent of slowing down the game, which is why its qualified as slow play. Similarly, it's the intent which defines the slow play here. After the first cascade, its possible for the cascading player to skip to the shuffle, since the game state does not change with re-revealing. No new information is acquired (assuming the opponent acknowledges that he's seen as much of the contents of the deck as he wants to see), and revealing every card, while following the rules, is done with the express purpose of slowing the game down.
Slow playing is defined by the intent. Shuffling slowly is not *explicitly* breaking a rule, but it's done with the intent of slowing down the game, which is why its qualified as slow play. Similarly, it's the intent which defines the slow play here. After the first cascade, its possible for the cascading player to skip to the shuffle, since the game state does not change with re-revealing. No new information is acquired (assuming the opponent acknowledges that he's seen as much of the contents of the deck as he wants to see), and revealing every card, while following the rules, is done with the express purpose of slowing the game down.

Slow play is not defined by intent. Someone can be playing too slowly without trying to. This is filed under Tournament Error - Slow Play.

If they are playing too slowly on purpose, then they are Cheating - Stalling, which carries a much harsher penalty.
All Generalizations are Bad
The point of this thread is that the you should know the contents of your Deck.

And, once you have removed your entire Deck via Cascade, and your opponent knows the contents of your Deck, your opponent CAN request that you Shortcut the Actions the next Time you play a Spell with Cascade.

It's your opponent that's making the request, NOT you.

You are not expected to know the contents of your decklist and DCI floor rules prevent having a copy of it that you may consult in match, ie, outside notes.

Because of this, the public information of the decklist is relevant information for both players.

Just because I may remember the contents of my deck, does not mean that I may be forced forfeit public information.

For the same reason that my opponent can insist on a reveal, so can you.
That simple.
Slave of Tibalt. Currently trading for foils of my bro. PM me. Tarmogoyf on Twitter. Follow me. Team GFG Guns, Fame, Glory Those that require a sig for the ego simply haven't had enough kind words thrown his or her way. Currently looking for prerelease Plains! People who have mailed me rares:
Show
Malpheas: THANK YOU FOR THE FOIL TIBALT, YOU BEAUTIFUL GUY, YOU! Suudsu2200: Armageddon! Sèance, Dominating Licid, Words of War, Gaea's Anthem, Momentous Fall, Nyxathid PM me to make it happen. Your username will end up here, as the cards you sent me. I reserve the right to order your usernames by the cards I liked the best. Oh, and if you send me some Islands in the package, I'll sign them and mail them back.
Because of this, the public information of the decklist is relevant information for both players.

Just because I may remember the contents of my deck, does not mean that I may forfeit public information.

That simple.

You are of course permitted to look at the cards, but that doesn't give you permission to stall.

If you are spending an unreasonable time resolving the cascades, you are guilty of Slow Play. If you are intentionally spending an unreasonable time resolving the cascades, you are guilty of stalling.

Given that you built your deck, you are playing with your deck, you have presumably played with your deck in the past, and you have already seen the entirety of your deck on a previous full-deck-cascade, the amount of time you can spend looking at your deck before it becomes unreasonable is very small.
You are not expected to know the contents of your decklist and DCI floor rules prevent having a copy of it that you may consult in match, ie, outside notes.

Because of this, the public information of the decklist is relevant information for both players.

Just because I may remember the contents of my deck, does not mean that I may be forced forfeit public information.

For the same reason that my opponent can insist on a reveal, so can you.
That simple.

That's fine. You can reveal the library again. But you haven't explained why you think it is justified to reveal the library one card at a time after it's already known that there's no card that matches rather than just flipping it over all at once, then shuffling after everyone has gleaned whatever info they "needed" from it.
I'm just a Pigment of your imagination.
You are not expected to know the contents of your decklist and DCI floor rules prevent having a copy of it that you may consult in match, ie, outside notes.

Because of this, the public information of the decklist is relevant information for both players.

Just because I may remember the contents of my deck, does not mean that I may forfeit public information.

That simple.

Since you submit the deck with a decklist in any tournament, you SHOULD know the contents of your decklist. Claiming that you cannot know your own deck is bull, and you know it. Second, the argument here on behavior has much to do with the SECOND time you perform this action, not the first, where it is revealed, after you rfg your entire library (which you cannot possibly forget, Islands) that you have no nonland cards with cmc 2 or less. By reiterating the step by step behavior, you are intentionally stalling.

No. Obviously it isn't infinite, but each cascade spell will take 5+ minutes for the resolve and shuffle. Next turn, the same. etc.

Should force 1-0-1 wins.

This right here indicates that you refuse to take a shortcut.

51. Shortcuts
A shortcut is an action taken by players to skip parts of the technical play sequence without explicitly announcing them. Shortcuts are essential for the smooth play of a game, as they allow players to play in a clear fashion without getting bogged down in the minutia of the rules. Most shortcuts involve skipping one or more priority passes to the mutual understanding of all players; if a player wishes to demonstrate or use a new shortcut entailing any number of priority passes, they must be clear where the game state will end up as part of the request.

So do not claim that the rules force you to repeat the actions in toto as has been claimed (although I do not say by you) in the other thread.
"Possibilities abound, too numerous to count." "Innocent, unbiased observation is a myth." --- P.B. Medawar (1969) "Ever since man first left his cave and met a stranger with a different language and a new way of looking at things, the human race has had a dream: to kill him, so we don't have to learn his language or his new way of looking at things." --- Zapp Brannigan (Beast With a Billion Backs)
First, planning on running out the clock to force 1-0-1 match results is prima facie stalling. Maybe the judge will realize that was your intent. Maybe not. But it's still stalling.

As an alternate example, choosing Tidewater Minion as the target of its ": Untap target permanent." is a legal play, but doing so repeatedly for no other purpose than to kill time is exactly what the stalling penalty is for. (And if someone wants to bring up the loop rules, let me point out that it is possible to add Seeker of Skybreak and switch between those two in an aperiodic sequence.)
No, I am not a judge. That's why I like to quote sources such as the rules that trump judges.
I think any arguments about maybe not knowing what's in your deck are disingenuous, or at least not relevant to this situation.

The OP makes it clear that this situation is about intentionally adding cascade cards from that sideboard that you know will not find anything and then use those in order to take excessive time so that the game will end in a draw.

There's a world of difference between "I play a cascade card and forgot that my library no longer has any nonland cards with lower CMC" and "I know what my deck contains and will thus add cascade cards in order to waste time so that we can't complete the game".
First, planning on running out the clock to force 1-0-1 match results is prima facie stalling. Maybe the judge will realize that was your intent. Maybe not. But it's still stalling.

As an alternate example, choosing Tidewater Minion as the target of its ": Untap target permanent." is a legal play, but doing so repeatedly for no other purpose than to kill time is exactly what the stalling penalty is for. (And if someone wants to bring up the loop rules, let me point out that it is possible to add Seeker of Skybreak and switch between those two in an aperiodic sequence.)

That is not analogous.

That does not change the information pools of either player.
Slave of Tibalt. Currently trading for foils of my bro. PM me. Tarmogoyf on Twitter. Follow me. Team GFG Guns, Fame, Glory Those that require a sig for the ego simply haven't had enough kind words thrown his or her way. Currently looking for prerelease Plains! People who have mailed me rares:
Show
Malpheas: THANK YOU FOR THE FOIL TIBALT, YOU BEAUTIFUL GUY, YOU! Suudsu2200: Armageddon! Sèance, Dominating Licid, Words of War, Gaea's Anthem, Momentous Fall, Nyxathid PM me to make it happen. Your username will end up here, as the cards you sent me. I reserve the right to order your usernames by the cards I liked the best. Oh, and if you send me some Islands in the package, I'll sign them and mail them back.
There's a world of difference between "I play a cascade card and forgot that my library no longer has any nonland cards with lower CMC" and "I know what my deck contains and will thus add cascade cards in order to waste time so that we can't complete the game".

I agree. I think if ALL of us wound up in this situation it'd be REAL easy to figure out what your opponent was doing. If you never even encountered a card with the cascade effect in the first game, then suddenly in game two you are facing cascade cards that don't reveal anything relevant, in MHO you'd have to be pretty dense not to see that you were being jackpotted.
That does not change the information pools of either player.

Neither does your situation, unless you are willfully forgetful.
That is not analogous.

That does not change the information pools of either player.

If there are no cards in the library that can be chosen by the cascade ability, the difference between spreading out the library and revealing its cards one at a time also does not affect the information pools. The only difference is the amount of time killed. Hence, stalling.
No, I am not a judge. That's why I like to quote sources such as the rules that trump judges.
EDIT:

Inori: Did you even read what you quoted?

No. I've been posting answers in RQ&A for over four years without ever actually reading any of the rules I quote.
That is not analogous.

That does not change the information pools of either player.

Cascading again doesn't tell you anything new in most situations; generally you've seen all the cards that have come off the top of the library since you last cascaded. And your opponent will presumably not care, since you're the one trying to slow the game down and he's the one trying to speed it up. If he wants to go through the pile again and try to figure out what you've drawn since the last Cascade, he can, but he probably won't.

In any case, it seems likely to be a worthless strategy anyway. I'm not sure how you plan to sideboard in twelve (overcosted to compensate for the Cascade effect) cards that don't do a whole lot and survive long enough to cast more than three or four of them. There's also the slight problem of what to do if you lose game one (since you've dedicated most of your sideboard to silly stalling effects instead of useful cards). Follow that up with the fact that, regardless of your rules-lawyering, the consensus is strongly on the side that your behavior does constitute stalling (since you are in fact trying to take advantage of the time limit, by your own admission), and most sane judges are likely to show you the door if you try it. I certainly would do so if you tried this stunt in a tournament I was judging.