You could also cut your deck, place both halves right next to each other, then push them together using your good hand and the other arm as a back-stop. It would mimick a mash shuffle, so it shouldn't be too difficult.
This so far seems to be the best idea to me. I'll be practicing this and see how it works out. If it doesn't, I'll likely have a judge be a rather permanent spectator to my games.
I'm a Rules Advisor now
"Simple questions" usually need rather complex answers, while complex questions often come down to no more than a simple "yes" or "no".
Pile shuffling does create randomization, so long as you don't mana weave while you're doing. You need to do it more than once, and you should not use 5 stacks of 12. You need a number that divides oddly into 60. I use 7 stacks. Then randomly restack the stacks before doing the second pile shuffling. Pile shuffle face down, obviously.
Since the honus to provide randomization now rests on you and your opponent an opponent cannot claim a deck is insufficiently randomized; they are required to shuffle your deck, not just provide a cut.
However if you are disabled you can indeed tell the HJ at an event you need assistance shuffling each round and a judge will be provided to assist you. This happens at SCGO's, PTQs, etc. The judge may not be thrilled but its a thing.
Pile shuffling is not random because people cannot do anything "randomly". It doesn't matter if you mana weave or not. It's not random because you can tell where a certain card ends up because you know where it starts and the pile shuffling doesn't disrupt that.
You must present a randomized deck. There is no requirement that the opponent randomizes your deck for you, nor that they actually shuffle. Remember, pre-releases (and most events) are conducted at Regular REL. The requirement to shuffle your opponent's deck is only for Competitive REL
Pile shuffling is not random because people cannot do anything "randomly". It doesn't matter if you mana weave or not. It's not random because you can tell where a certain card ends up because you know where it starts and the pile shuffling doesn't disrupt that.
You must present a randomized deck. There is no requirement that the opponent randomizes your deck for you, nor that they actually shuffle. Remember, pre-releases (and most events) are conducted at Regular REL. The requirement to shuffle your opponent's deck is only for Competitive REL
I would like for you to explain to me if you're using unmarked sleeves and pile shuffling face down into un-even stacks how you would keep track of a card with 100% consistency. Rain man could probably do this because it requires establishing a count and incrementing, then decrementing, then multiplying based on the quantity of stacks you've used. However that is only possible if you pile shuffle into each stack in a consistent manner. If you randomly distribute the cards so your stacks end up un-even, using no pattern itd be impossible to handle the math without someone sitting beside you making notes as you went. Finally, if you pile shuffled face down and had no knowledge of the prior order of cards then there is no way to establish you have insufficiently randomized. The quickest test to evaluate your randomization technique would be to review the deck after you've performed the pile using steps above... note the card order... then ask you to randomize again. Review the contents and order again. If it ends up the same, or mostly the same then indeed you failed at randomizing your deck. A judge might make a snap decision based on card distribution but you could appeal to the head judge and make your case.
As far as competitive versus regular REL, you're right. Opponents can just cut in regular REL. That's a mild issue in this circumstance and as everyone agreed should be vetted out in advance with the HJ.
It's pretty simple to track the card. Let's say it's card #1 (i.e. the top card before you pile). #1 becomes the bottom of it's given pile. When you pile into 7 piles, the first 3 piles have 8 cards, the last 4 have 7. Number the pile from 1-7. #1 is the 8th card down in pile 1. Now, put those piles together "randomly", for instance 5, 2, 6, 1, 7, 3, 4. #1 is the 31st card down (7+8+7+8=30). Now, pile them again. #1 is the 4th card down in the 3rd pile. Now put the piles together gain, perhaps in this "random" order: 3, 4, 1, 5, 7, 2, 6. #1 is the 4th card in your deck.
You give me how you put the cards back together into a single deck both times, and I can tell you where any card in the deck is located when you present. Obviously, you have to be really good if you want the entire order of the deck, but tracking a few cards is very easy.
If I know that you started with a Sphinx's Revelation as your top card, which could be determined by how you piked up your cards, I can observe how you pile shuffle and immediately know where that card is in your deck. You present, I call a judge, tell them where the card is, and you get DQed.
It's pretty simple to track the card. Let's say it's card #1 (i.e. the top card before you pile). #1 becomes the bottom of it's given pile. When you pile into 7 piles, the first 3 piles have 8 cards, the last 4 have 7. Number the pile from 1-7. #1 is the 8th card down in pile 1. Now, put those piles together "randomly", for instance 5, 2, 6, 1, 7, 3, 4. #1 is the 31st card down (7+8+7+8=30). Now, pile them again. #1 is the 4th card down in the 3rd pile. Now put the piles together gain, perhaps in this "random" order: 3, 4, 1, 5, 7, 2, 6. #1 is the 4th card in your deck.
There's been a misunderstanding. You're assuming after establishing 7 stacks I distribute cards to stacks in order 1,2,3,4,5,6,7. Now, that has to be done to seed the stacks of course. Since this is a game 2 scenario (alleged in your example that you determined they put a certain card in a certain position while collecting the play stack) how about if the opponent took their play cards into a stack and placed this under the old library. Top X cards are unknown, but if you stopped and took notes you could estimate position where the play stack begins and lets say it was made obvious what card was at the top of the playstack, etc.
Now we have a library with x% unknown and random, and x%... kind of known, kind of not random. At this point we're where every deck starts before randomization post-game, to be fair.
I seed 7 stacks from the top x% of unknown and random cards. The quantity of which is also potentially unknown unless you counted the deck during initial shuffling (I could be blowing you out with a 61 card deck). Now this is where you missed a critical piece of information. I begin randomly distributing cards to the 7 stacks, in no order. Let's say I take 7 cards off the top next and hand them out 2,5,3,4,1,7,6. Then I collect 5 cards and distribute them 6,7,3,5,1. Then I grab 3 cards and go out to stacks 2,3,4. And so on I take a random number of cards off my old merged library and apply them to 7 stacks. I'm not careful to avoid returning to the same stack, nor could I keep track of which ones I've been to unless I stop and count them. Now I pick up the stacks in any order, and its true that this isn't really random and is very easy to account for. I then create another series of stacks of any number that isn't 7. I could make 3,4,5,6, or even a crazy 9 stacks. I distribute cards again by grabbing a handful of cards off the top of the new library. Its important to note I'm not counting the pickup. I apply them again in random. Pick back in up some arbitrary and not really random order. Let's say I provide a few cuts to the deck where I just grab and re-stack it.
At this point can you solve the location of the original top card of the played stack without asking me to slow down during each step and writing everything down? I don't think so, and any judge observing this shuffle technique from a one-handed player would be satisfied. I know I would if I lost count during the randomization process, and I during college I aced quantitive methods (100s) and I'm a DBA for a living. Keeping track of large volumes of numbers is something I get paid a lot of money to do.
You give me how you put the cards back together into a single deck both times, and I can tell you where any card in the deck is located when you present. Obviously, you have to be really good if you want the entire order of the deck, but tracking a few cards is very easy.
If I know that you started with a Sphinx's Revelation as your top card, which could be determined by how you piked up your cards, I can observe how you pile shuffle and immediately know where that card is in your deck. You present, I call a judge, tell them where the card is, and you get DQed.
Do you still think you could do this in the above example easily enough? Or would you be happy I've randomized?
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?
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.
OP: please dont listen to anyone trying to trick you into thinking that pile shuffling randomises your deck - it doesnt.
~ Tim
I agree that the typical way pile shuffling is performed is not random.
You have the burden to prove you could invalidate a pile shuffling effect where disregard is given to the volume being distributed each time you move to do so from the source stack, provided there are no marked cards and its being done blindly.
I don't know how badly hurt your hand is, but you could also try doing the mash shuffle similar to what someone above suggested only use your good hand to push the cards into the other half thats just being kinda held in place with your bad hand so they don't slide on the table, or even just use both hands to kinda slide them together on the table.
Hey guys, the site in this banner is a good way to get magic cards in your spare time. Its free to use, and its legit, my buddy has gotten a couple boosters from here. So click the banner above and check it out, I'd appreciate it.
