|
4 years ago ::
Oct 19, 2009 - 5:05PM
#141
|
|
|
"Forever tainted" is probably a bit harsh, but I agree in general with the sentiment. Assuming Kibler found out about the mistake between the quarters and semis, the honorable thing to do would have been to scoop to Burton and split the difference in prize money with Evangelos.
How in the world is that the honorable thing to do? (Conceding that is - you might be right about splitting the prize money). Conceding to Burton doesn't help Papatsarouchas at all, and I don't see why Burton getting a free win is better than Kibler getting one. At that point the damage was done, Kibler continuing to play out the tournament is absolutely the right thing to do. The issue of what should have happened in the match is definitely a more complex one. I feel bad for Papatsarouchas losing in that way, but on the other hand it was his mistake that cost him the match. You gotta play your own cards correctly if you want to win the pro tour.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Oct 19, 2009 - 6:17PM
#142
|
Date Joined:
Jul 18, 2007
|
Fair point. The real solution, of course, would be to "rewind" the match to the point of the infraction, then continue from there. Failing that, they could just replay the offending game from the start. Given that there aren't provisions for that, it's difficult. (Also, perhaps the fact that Evangelos conceded the game trumps all other considerations.) I see your point about my solution being unfair to the other half of the draw; Ikeda would have faced an opponent who had only survived one match, not two. That said, I'm glad you agree that some sort of prize money split should have been offered. (Maybe it was; I don't pretend to know what goes on behind the scenes.) It seems like (from reading the coverage) it was in fact an honest mistake on the part of both players, in which case there's really no reason (and really no means) to punish Kibler. Like I said, it's a real dilemma.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Oct 19, 2009 - 10:48PM
#143
|
Date Joined:
Sep 14, 2009
|
It seems like (from reading the coverage) it was in fact an honest mistake on the part of both players, in which case there's really no reason (and really no means) to punish Kibler.
Like I said, it's a real dilemma.
That's not how bastardx saw it:
In the interview Kibler kinda gave himself away knowing Angel of Despair would trigger but found it very convenient it didn't so he said nothing.
So no, it does not appear to be a case where both players made and honest mistake. It appears to be a situation where one player made an honest (if very bad) mistake, the other player noticed it, and chose not to say anything to his advantage.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Oct 20, 2009 - 2:38AM
#144
|
Date Joined:
Dec 14, 2007
|
Pretty annoying that Randy keeps talking about how 'innovative' Grove of the Burnwillows + Punishing Fire is when it's the most obvious combo that everyone thought of as soon as it was spoiled. community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/758... Also... is there a way to change the style of the boards back? I haven't been here in a few months and this is just horrendous. Do we not have autocard anymore?
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Oct 20, 2009 - 4:35AM
#145
|
Date Joined:
Feb 27, 2007
|
I guess it boils down to an issue of responsibility; whose job is it, exactly, to ensure the rules are enforced? The players? The judge? The spectators? Some combination thereof?
I don't claim to have the answers here, but I think it's important to ask the questions.
Both players have a responsibility to notice the trigger. The judge should step in once it's clear to him that they missed it.
If Kibler thought it was a "may" trigger he is not at fault. (If it had been a "may" trigger the judge shouldn't do anything). If Kibler knew it was a mandatory trigger he should have been disqualified for cheating. He can't claim to have forgotten about the existence of the trigger when he actively played around it. (In the interview he said that he did play around it).
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Oct 20, 2009 - 6:08AM
#146
|
Date Joined:
Oct 20, 2009
|
You list my name "Hofmann" in your article "Pro TourAustin Finals: Top Extended Deck Lists" with "e" instead of "a". Please correct this. Sincerely yours Mike Hofmann
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Oct 20, 2009 - 8:58AM
#147
|
Date Joined:
Mar 25, 2009
|
That is not to say that Brian Kibler didn't know his opponent needed to blow something up. But I think that it is perfectly fair for him not to say anything.
The DCI rules, which everyone agrees to, specifically say that is NOT fair. So if he did that, even if you think it SHOULD be fair, it would still NOT be fair because it would be a rules violation. Kibler's win is forever tainted.
So, you took a part of my post to judge what I was saying, instead of the whole thing. The point is that if Kibler thought it was a "You may..." trigger then he is not required to say anything. And it is impossible to prove that he did not know it was a "You may..." trigger, unless there was some point where an Angel of Despair was played with no other targets on the board, and Kibler said, "You have to kill something," which is very unlikely. Perhaps he knew something needed to be blown up, but you could never prove that, so it falls into the gray areas of the rules. Besides, if you can't remember to blow something up with your own Angel of Despair, you really don't deserve to win the match.
 Check out Ars Arcanum, my stat based series on Magic Limited, over at PureMTGO. Here is a link to the archive: http://goo.gl/Zvh6Q
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Oct 20, 2009 - 5:13PM
#148
|
Date Joined:
Jul 16, 2007
|
Only fair to assume he thought it was a 'may', rather than assume he cheated.
|
|
|
