Community

Sep 19, 2010 -- 10:34PM, Jedcaj wrote:

Sep 19, 2010 -- 10:31PM, StormX wrote:

Sep 19, 2010 -- 10:03PM, evilweevil666 wrote:

Sep 19, 2010 -- 9:57PM, BeatusNox wrote:

@ 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.

Here's my issue with this sort of thought:

Suppose the person in question was running a poly deck, with 1 foil Emrakul in it, because the promo foil is cheaper than a non-foil most times.  Let's say an opponent notices this and loses, and then remarks to the judge about it.  The judge watches the poly player fidget with his deck a bit after playing Growth Spasm or something, simply because the player was nervous and being overly tidy due to the high level of play, but apparently this is cheating and the player is DQed.

How on Earth is that at all beneficial to the game environment? 

As long as we're playing the 1984 mindset, I can assume ANYTHING you do could be some sort of attempt to cheat in some form.  Look at your deck too long?  Obviously looking for foils to bend.  Looking at anything besides your hand?  Obviously trying to get outside signals to cheat.  Looking at your hand?  Stalling.  Not looking at anything because your eyes are closed?  You stacked your deck and you're trying to mentally picture the layout of your deck.  If you're looking hard enough for cheating, you'll find it, even if it's not actually there.

Obviously it's not as bad as sending an innocent person to jail for a crime they didn't commit, but how often are people DQ'ed for offenses that weren't actually cheating as opposed to those that were legitimately DQ'ed?  Is it worth DQ'ing 10 innocent people just to catch 1 cheater?

Once again, this is an extreme.

Please read up on how judges handle situations like these and your questions will be answered.

The quote from the SCG rep said all I need to see:

"my judges believe [you are] touching and manipulating your deck and cards in a way that makes us think [you are] cheating"

The bothersome part is the word "think".  That says they couldn't actually prove it, despite apparently watching for multiple rounds.

Do you ever want to be penalized for something because someone else that doesn't know you made an assumption about your behavior and apparently lacks any solid proof for such an assumption?

How about a speeding ticket because a cop THOUGHT you were speeding?  You can go contest the ticket if you want and get it taken off your insurance.  If you win.

Sep 19, 2010 -- 10:27PM, Jedcaj wrote:

Sep 19, 2010 -- 10:18PM, Rat_Bastardsen wrote:

Sep 19, 2010 -- 10:08PM, Jedcaj wrote:

No one was accountable. This is standard procedure. If you suspect cheating, you bring it up to a judge. The judges will investigate and if they find your suspicions to be founded they will issue the proper penalty. An audio recording would have only confirmed the judge's ruling.

If you're trying to say that the way Alex or the judges acted was unprofessional...

1. How would you know? Were you there?
2. The head judge mentioned that Chris was raising his voice to the judge, which is against the rules and will result in a harsher penalty if necessary.

1. No.  But if the OP had turned on a digital recorder, we could all listen to the conversations and the events that transpired and judge for ourselves.  Then we would know, all of us.

2. Tie this in with our little sub-discussion for me please.  Well, no, don't.  We're each in a slightly different argument here.  I'm saying, if Chris had turned on a digital recorder, we'd all know whether he actually did raise his voice to the judge.

My point isn't that complex - if something dodgy does go down in a situation like this one or many others, I'd rather be able to back up version of events with evidence.

You're suggesting that judges are not worthy of having any authority because the general public may disagree with how things are handled.

Our opinions of how things were said or handled are completely irrelevent, as the judges and Head Judge make the decision during the tournament and handle all consequences almost immediately. The digital recorder, in this instance, would do absolutely nothing during the entire resolution of the problem.

The fact is the judges have a good amount of control of how the tournament goes and the Head Judge has the final say. If you disagree with a floor judge, you can take it up with the Head Judge, but if the Head Judge backs up the floor judge that you have to take it as it is. You can get DQ'd or even put on temporary suspension for arguing with the Head Judge after a ruling is made.

If you disagree with this system, take it up with the DCI, but I doubt it will change anything as this is a working system that only fails to inexperienced player's ignorance of how the system works.

You respect authority an awful lot. 

If you disagree with the system, take it up with the system.  I'm up for that too, but I prefer to have options when the system is corrupt.

I don't have a problem with the DCI.  It's possible I might have reason to one day, but I don't now.  I do deal with authority in general very different than you do.

Maybe you honestly don't see my point of view, or maybe its something else, but I doubt its worth continuing.

Sep 19, 2010 -- 10:31PM, StormX wrote:

Here's my issue with this sort of thought:

Suppose the person in question was running a poly deck, with 1 foil Emrakul in it, because the promo foil is cheaper than a non-foil most times.  Let's say an opponent notices this and loses, and then remarks to the judge about it.  The judge watches the poly player fidget with his deck a bit after playing Growth Spasm or something, simply because the player was nervous and being overly tidy due to the high level of play, but apparently this is cheating and the player is DQed.

How on Earth is that at all beneficial to the game environment? 

As long as we're playing the 1984 mindset, I can assume ANYTHING you do could be some sort of attempt to cheat in some form.  Look at your deck too long?  Obviously looking for foils to bend.  Looking at anything besides your hand?  Obviously trying to get outside signals to cheat.  Looking at your hand?  Stalling.  Not looking at anything because your eyes are closed?  You stacked your deck and you're trying to mentally picture the layout of your deck.  If you're looking hard enough for cheating, you'll find it, even if it's not actually there.

Obviously it's not as bad as sending an innocent person to jail for a crime they didn't commit, but how often are people DQ'ed for offenses that weren't actually cheating as opposed to those that were legitimately DQ'ed?  Is it worth DQ'ing 10 innocent people just to catch 1 cheater?

If you intend to play in a large tournament, you should come prepared.   The rules are in place for a reason.  Just because you may not be  cheating when you do something that cheaters do, doesn't mean you should  get the benefit of the doubt.  Having one foil in a deck is as bad as having super worn and dirty sleeves that could be used to recognize certain cards. 

In some states it's illegal to have radar detectors or certain license  plate covers.  Why?  Because people who drive at unsafe speeds use them  to avoid being pulled over.  So if you buy a radar detector just because  it's an interesting electronic, then go the states where they're  illegal, don't complain when you get in trouble.  It's on you to  know the rules and abide by them.  It's not on the police/judges to give you a  pass because you claim your intentions are honorable if your actions are the same as someone who has bad intentions--especially if said actions are specifically against the rules.

Sep 19, 2010 -- 10:53PM, the_rooster wrote:

Sep 19, 2010 -- 10:31PM, StormX wrote:

Here's my issue with this sort of thought:

Suppose the person in question was running a poly deck, with 1 foil Emrakul in it, because the promo foil is cheaper than a non-foil most times.  Let's say an opponent notices this and loses, and then remarks to the judge about it.  The judge watches the poly player fidget with his deck a bit after playing Growth Spasm or something, simply because the player was nervous and being overly tidy due to the high level of play, but apparently this is cheating and the player is DQed.

How on Earth is that at all beneficial to the game environment? 

As long as we're playing the 1984 mindset, I can assume ANYTHING you do could be some sort of attempt to cheat in some form.  Look at your deck too long?  Obviously looking for foils to bend.  Looking at anything besides your hand?  Obviously trying to get outside signals to cheat.  Looking at your hand?  Stalling.  Not looking at anything because your eyes are closed?  You stacked your deck and you're trying to mentally picture the layout of your deck.  If you're looking hard enough for cheating, you'll find it, even if it's not actually there.

Obviously it's not as bad as sending an innocent person to jail for a crime they didn't commit, but how often are people DQ'ed for offenses that weren't actually cheating as opposed to those that were legitimately DQ'ed?  Is it worth DQ'ing 10 innocent people just to catch 1 cheater?

If you intend to play in a large tournament, you should come prepared.   The rules are in place for a reason.  Just because you may not be  cheating when you do something that cheaters do, doesn't mean you should  get the benefit of the doubt.  Having one foil in a deck is as bad as having super worn and dirty sleeves that could be used to recognize certain cards. 

In some states it's illegal to have radar detectors or certain license  plate covers.  Why?  Because people who drive at unsafe speeds use them  to avoid being pulled over.  So if you buy a radar detector just because  it's an interesting electronic, then go the states where they're  illegal, don't complain when you get in trouble.  It's on you to  know the rules and abide by them.  It's not on the police/judges to give you a  pass because you claim your intentions are honorable if your actions are the same as someone who has bad intentions--especially if said actions are specifically against the rules.

Completely invalid analogy on your part.

A more apt one would be me getting a speeding ticket for having a vanity plate issued by the state, because a study showed people with vanity plates are more likely to speed.

Because in my example, someone is being punished for using a product as-is from WotC.  Yes they can be altered in all sorts of ways, but that's a completely separate issue.

My example is one specifically where someone is being punished for using cards for the game as they were made by WotC.  Think about that.  If it's going to be allowable to DQ someone officially for having foils, then at the very least WotC should offer the ability to exchange any foil for it's non-foil version, and I suppose vice-versa, because I don't want to be DQ'ed because I was lucky enough to pull a foil Baneslayer instead of a non-foil one.