The thing is, if you just want to find your 1st place player, you could just play by Single Elimation and ignore Swiss.
The point of swiss should be that losing a game wont remove you from the tournament, but it essential is doing that, if the prices are for the X-0 only anyway.
So the argument against IDs is really that they provide a point. Course you can ID and then you get 0 points each, you dont play, all done, draw is 0 points.
The deal with draw = 1 point is actual an incentive to play slow, get in time and all the bad things nobody likes.
If a draw would simply be 0 points for each player, all that problems would go away instantly ; as no player has any reason to go for the time, either win or lose, draw is the same as losing.
As for the ID to get to the top 8. You just draw with a player to get into the top 8, in which you might have to play against that guy ANYWAY, so just play it out NOW and have someone else get the chance to hit the top 8.
The whole point is, an ID is just "not playing" , and thats not cool, its just crap for anyone else.
The ID "problem" gets even more crazy if you count 3 byes in for a "good" player.
Say your tournament has 8 rounds, they get 3 byes and they draw the last 2 games, so they are 3-0-2 and 3 byes make it 6-0-2 ; which looks way "stronger" as they actual played only 3 games ; as byes mean 100% OP Score its even more ridiculous.
So the advantage is much bigger, its not really fair to do so, its just a system you play, its not "magic".
Pretty easy solution would be to have 0 points for a draw, as easy as that.
Advantages are pretty obvisious, and we get much better results that actual mean something.
As for IDs the most stupid result can be this.
Someone just IDs with EVERY opponent, they dont play a single game of magic ; and still they are not last place. Isnt that stupid ? Yea, thats the system we use, its just stupid.
The problem is that your success rate stems from the order in which you play your matches, instead of the decks/play themselves.
I don't think that is a problem though. Someone whose rounds go Win-win-win-loss, should be getting better rewards than someone who goes loss-win-win-win. Since the first guy played against the better players all day (except maybe the first round), and the other guy just players who lost already.
I kinda see what OP is saying. On an LGS level in a 3 round tourney if you 2-0, then ID into top 8 (which is fine) means only 2 -3 rounds of magic gets played. For some people that actually like you know, playing the game, this is disappointing.
How is that disappointing for people that like playing the game? If that person goes 2-0, they don't have to ID. If they go 1-1 they can still play the last round and try to get 3rd/4th place.
Not necessarily, though the OMW is a somewhat balancing act. The person who went 3-1 with their loss in the 4th round could have faced opponents who end up 0-4, 1-3, 2-2, and 3-1 while the guy who is 3-1 and lost first round had opponents who went 4-0, 2-2, 2-2, and 3-1 (3-0 player pair down). I mean if you just want to get say top 16 at a big GP it's statistically better for you to draw your first round. I don't think there is a much better system for competitive play unfortunately.
The thing is, if you just want to find your 1st place player, you could just play by Single Elimation and ignore Swiss.
The point of swiss should be that losing a game wont remove you from the tournament, but it essential is doing that, if the prices are for the X-0 only anyway.
So the argument against IDs is really that they provide a point. Course you can ID and then you get 0 points each, you dont play, all done, draw is 0 points.
The deal with draw = 1 point is actual an incentive to play slow, get in time and all the bad things nobody likes.
If a draw would simply be 0 points for each player, all that problems would go away instantly ; as no player has any reason to go for the time, either win or lose, draw is the same as losing.
As for the ID to get to the top 8. You just draw with a player to get into the top 8, in which you might have to play against that guy ANYWAY, so just play it out NOW and have someone else get the chance to hit the top 8.
The whole point is, an ID is just "not playing" , and thats not cool, its just crap for anyone else.
The ID "problem" gets even more crazy if you count 3 byes in for a "good" player.
Say your tournament has 8 rounds, they get 3 byes and they draw the last 2 games, so they are 3-0-2 and 3 byes make it 6-0-2 ; which looks way "stronger" as they actual played only 3 games ; as byes mean 100% OP Score its even more ridiculous.
So the advantage is much bigger, its not really fair to do so, its just a system you play, its not "magic".
Pretty easy solution would be to have 0 points for a draw, as easy as that.
Advantages are pretty obvisious, and we get much better results that actual mean something.
As for IDs the most stupid result can be this.
Someone just IDs with EVERY opponent, they dont play a single game of magic ; and still they are not last place. Isnt that stupid ? Yea, thats the system we use, its just stupid.
Except 0 points for a draw heavily punishes control decks. Draws are all ready bad enough, there's no need to make them worse and really, there's nothing too bad about ID's in the first place. The solution? Win your games!
Right, I have to win my games and the people who draw do not. That's the entirety of the problem!
0 points for playing too slowly is fine (and this is speaking as someone who plays control decks more often than average), but at fnm level I can see a lot of under the table collusion for players who are about to draw, and that's bad too.
Right, I have to win my games and the people who draw do not. That's the entirety of the problem!
0 points for playing too slowly is fine (and this is speaking as someone who plays control decks more often than average), but at fnm level I can see a lot of under the table collusion for players who are about to draw, and that's bad too.
the people who are drawing have already won their games thats why they are x-0
Right, I have to win my games and the people who draw do not. That's the entirety of the problem!
0 points for playing too slowly is fine (and this is speaking as someone who plays control decks more often than average), but at fnm level I can see a lot of under the table collusion for players who are about to draw, and that's bad too.
the people who are drawing have already won their games thats why they are x-0
If I ID, then I have to win one less game than you do. It's shocking that someone could be smart enough to play card games but unable to comprehend this point. I really feel like I shouldn't have to repeat it.
Not necessarily, though the OMW is a somewhat balancing act. The person who went 3-1 with their loss in the 4th round could have faced opponents who end up 0-4, 1-3, 2-2, and 3-1 while the guy who is 3-1 and lost first round had opponents who went 4-0, 2-2, 2-2, and 3-1 (3-0 player pair down). I mean if you just want to get say top 16 at a big GP it's statistically better for you to draw your first round. I don't think there is a much better system for competitive play unfortunately.
This can happen, but statistically, it is more likely a X-0 player will play players with better records than the X-1 player does. The "penalty" for that is terrible breakers and often not being able to draw in if you get even a single loss.
Right, I have to win my games and the people who draw do not. That's the entirety of the problem!
0 points for playing too slowly is fine (and this is speaking as someone who plays control decks more often than average), but at fnm level I can see a lot of under the table collusion for players who are about to draw, and that's bad too.
the people who are drawing have already won their games thats why they are x-0
If I ID, then I have to win one less game than you do. It's shocking that someone could be smart enough to play card games but unable to comprehend this point. I really feel like I shouldn't have to repeat it.
That is not true at all. If I go 4-0 and then draw the last round and you go 3-1 and then win your last round, I still won as many games as you, and it is more likely I played other undefeated players as well.
I'm pretty sure all the people whining about IDs are just people who can never place at tournaments and feel more entitled to place with their record of L,L,W,W,W,W over the guy who went W,W,W,W,D,D even though the later had to play against the best players in the room all day and still managed to win 100% of his games played (as apposed to only 67%).
Also, for the record, I often opt to play it out and NOT ID into top8s just because I like playing legacy so much. If you don't like IDing: don't ID. Its really that easy.
I'm pretty sure all the people whining about IDs are just people who can never place at tournaments and feel more entitled to place with their record of L,L,W,W,W,W over the guy who went W,W,W,W,D,D even though the later had to play against the best players in the room all day and still managed to win 100% of his games played (as apposed to only 67%).
Thats a very wrong assumption, as its just about the spirit you start playing.
Either you just play for the win, in which case you just take the ID as its playing the system, you get your win (as the draw is essentially a free win for both players, for doing absolute nothing, very very bad).
In any other sport an ID is very unsporting, its highly discouraged, and if 2 players decide to go ID its incredible bad for their reputation.
In magic however, its "history" and players just do it.
Theirs not much reason for it, other than "its allways like that".
If you truly draw in a hard fight game, that might be an justified 1 point, it wont do much, but its totally fair.
BUT that very rarely happens. More often than not, its the 1 guy that knows he is losing and just slow-plays and otherwise cheats the system ; which this 1 point actual encourages, so its very bad for the game.
Even controll decks wont ever go in the time, if they play with a reasonable plan and not slow as hell.
If you play the super-crazy ultra controll, like Standstill, in which the concept actual forces both players to just go-draw-go and hope for the hand full of counterspells to push the win, then its a stupid bad matchups anyway.
Even worse, the draw even makes this exact problem EVEN WORSE.
Why you may ask ?
I tell you.
Say a tournament in legacy has 10 standstill players out of 1000 players.
If 4 of these players randomly get paired against each other, its pretty likely that they might end up 0-0-1 , they might not even finish 1 game.
Guess what happens next round ?
These 4 players will just face the other standstill player, as pretty much no other deck in legacy will end with a draw (unless they are super slow-player, its just incredible rare).
So what exactly does the 1 point give us ?
1 point for Draws means this :
Players are encouraged to play slow, even when they know they are losing, they want to "cheat" into the 1 point.
Players are encouraged to ID into the top 8, as the 1 point will "guarantee" the win for both players.
Match making will put 2 players that draw a game against each other, which will further make "cheating" the results more of a thing. (example you ID even on round 5 of 8, as you know your next opponent will be someone that also did a draw, against which you might have a favourable matchup)
A draw means the players are not playing magic, they just dont play and get 1 point. In the extreme example of a player not playing a single game, they will still not be last place, which is just a joke, and in fact encouraged some players to cheat the system in this way to archive more points to qualify.
In a 8 player FNM the top 2 players in an ID actual means you can simply play in Single Elimation, as a lose allready means Game Over, while without a draw for points, it means another player has a chance to become 2nd place (and if they actual draw for real, they would even have a chance to get 1st in an extreme case).
So the list is long of problematics for Draw = 1 point.
And whats its actual "positive" ?
Well, nothing. A draw is just crap, its worthless, you didnt win, you dont deserve anything.
You are not rewarded for your slow play, and if the opponent knows a draw means 0 points, they will look at your slow play even harder and call a judge for slow play more often ; which has a good teaching influence on the players to give them the message : "Play at a reasonable pace, not slow, it wont give you any advantage, playing slow is just bad for you."
A chance in the system is very unlikely, but still, it would totally improve the tournament and also make the game a more reasonable "professional" game.
And face it, its not uncommon that a local store will discourage IDs , especially in a PreRelease and FNM, lots of locale stores (at least 10 i know of) discourage it by giving less price to the ID guys, result is, they wont ID, they play it out and everyone in the event is happy about it (even the guy that loses).
Its a learning process, and maybe we will get to the point that draw really means 0 points ; it just needs to be on the daily discussion plan over and over again.
TheOnlyOne652089, your perception of non-intentional draws is out of touch with reality. Non-intentional draws happen all the time. The most common place I have had non-intentional draws is in casual drafts, like prereleases, where neither of us knows all the cards/rules that well. It would be very disappointing if neither player got any credit for our well fought (but slow) games. I've gotten draws in in legacy playing tempo decks against "turn 1 kill combo decks" like storm or reanimator. The last, and only, time I have ever gotten a draw with UWr miracles I then played against Dredge, D&T, Maverick, Elves and Jund all in the draw bracket. All slow landstill decks right?
You also seem to have the false notion that if you go 4-0 and the double drawing is easy. Its not. Starting out 4-0 in a 6 round tournament is far, far harder than going losing the first round and then going even 5-1. IDing is not a free win for doing nothing. Its basically just saying, I am so much farther ahead of everyone because I have been doing so well, I don't even NEED a win to still be on top. Often times even if they guy that started out 4-0 ends 5-1 or 4-2, he will still be in the top 8 because statistically, the highest seed should always have the highest chance to have the best breakers. It's only improving your odds of good breakers though, no guarantee that they will be good enough to put you in the top8. An ID is just the guarantee. The guy that starts out 4-0 is very deserving of a top place. IDing is just the safest way to insure he gets the top spot he deserves.
Again, if you want to play magic, don't ID. The "IDing means I don't get to play magic" thing is bogus. If if the 1st/2nd are locked up in a 8man FNM, the tournament doesn't just end. Play your opponent regardless of prizes.
Do you know what not having a point for draws does? In basically every drawing game that is not being heavily spectated, it means everytime 2 players are about to draw, they have to figure out who should get the win. There's no reason for the players to sign 1-1-1 on their slip, when neither player gets anything. Maybe they agree to split prizes and give one player the win. Maybe one players bribes the other. Maybe they just argue that the one in a better board position should be given the win. Everytime I have been in one of those get X packs for X wins, draws count of nothing, this happens every time. Often players even agree to split prizes in the last round and just give one of the players a win because it takes any risk away.
You say you want to do away with the draw point because it encourages slow play? Well taking away the point encourages the use outside factors to decide the winner of a match (also not allowed). But Slow play is a onesided thing, and the opponent can call a judge to enforce its rules. Using outside factors is not going to go uncaught 99.9% of the time since its 2 players discreet mutual agreement.
as we use them for a draft later on for the same day
Thats against wizards rules.
You cant buy boosters and play with them.
But you can do whatever you want with your prices, open them or draft with them.
If you start a draft, everyone has to have the same product, thats all about it.
For an FNM you can also use other boosters, as long as everyone has the same product.
As long as you arent holding prize packs back and selling them to start a draft then it should be ok, but if you arent giving out prize packs and using them for draft thats against rules.
The problem is that your success rate stems from the order in which you play your matches, instead of the decks/play themselves.
This is it. Basically people would like to minimize the impact of non-player factors such as random pairings. Personally, I cannot imagine how anyone would think there is no problem with a system wherein participants in a tournament that supposedly wants to reward the "best player", are given an incentive to "not play". I think it's fine to say "there are problems with the current system but there is no good way to solve them", but to simply wave it all away seems remarkably oblivious.
TheOnlyOne652089, your perception of non-intentional draws is out of touch with reality. Non-intentional draws happen all the time. The most common place I have had non-intentional draws is in casual drafts, like prereleases, where neither of us knows all the cards/rules that well. It would be very disappointing if neither player got any credit for our well fought (but slow) games. I've gotten draws in in legacy playing tempo decks against "turn 1 kill combo decks" like storm or reanimator. The last, and only, time I have ever gotten a draw with UWr miracles I then played against Dredge, D&T, Maverick, Elves and Jund all in the draw bracket. All slow landstill decks right?
It might happen, but overall you have to play slow to begin with and then the game should not give you 1 point for playing slow, the system should have a clear message and that is : "If you dont win, you get nothing."
As i said a draw will just encourage players to play slow and thats just never a good thing. The game should encourage you to speed up, finish your game in time and getting in the extra time is the worst you can possible get to. Right now, players intentionally slow-play to get into time, and thats just bad.
If you clearly win game 1 and then the rest of the games dont end, its fine, but as soon as players can get into a "draw" and get rewarded for that, its just a waste of time for everyone.
You also seem to have the false notion that if you go 4-0 and the double drawing is easy. Its not. Starting out 4-0 in a 6 round tournament is far, far harder than going losing the first round and then going even 5-1. IDing is not a free win for doing nothing. Its basically just saying, I am so much farther ahead of everyone because I have been doing so well, I don't even NEED a win to still be on top. Often times even if they guy that started out 4-0 ends 5-1 or 4-2, he will still be in the top 8 because statistically, the highest seed should always have the highest chance to have the best breakers. It's only improving your odds of good breakers though, no guarantee that they will be good enough to put you in the top8. An ID is just the guarantee. The guy that starts out 4-0 is very deserving of a top place. IDing is just the safest way to insure he gets the top spot he deserves.
The "double draw" example says you start with 3 byes aswell, auto-wins with 100% opponent score, which are in itself a gigantic advantage allready and then on top of that, you get to draw 2 games pretty much all the time, as your OP-score is that much better than the "normal" players (due to byes and draw against the other to 0 dudes).
Again, if you want to play magic, don't ID. The "IDing means I don't get to play magic" thing is bogus. If if the 1st/2nd are locked up in a 8man FNM, the tournament doesn't just end. Play your opponent regardless of prizes.
Ofcourse you can, nobody debates it. Its just that the system as it stands encourages players to not play magic. If you can draw in the prices, you just draw in the prices, not doing so is highly counter intuitive. The system should make playing magic the "normal" way.
If you badly dont want to play, you can ID, but you wont get rewarded for doing so.
If you play a game with the opponent and you cheat about the winner, thats a thing for judges, but then we can clearly punish players for doing so ; right now, ID is just normal and its annoying abd it doesnt do any good to the game.
Do you know what not having a point for draws does? In basically every drawing game that is not being heavily spectated, it means everytime 2 players are about to draw, they have to figure out who should get the win. There's no reason for the players to sign 1-1-1 on their slip, when neither player gets anything. Maybe they agree to split prizes and give one player the win. Maybe one players bribes the other. Maybe they just argue that the one in a better board position should be given the win. Everytime I have been in one of those get X packs for X wins, draws count of nothing, this happens every time. Often players even agree to split prizes in the last round and just give one of the players a win because it takes any risk away.
Thats wrong, simply because nobody plays "alone" , you will allways have other players beside your table, so if you truly think players would just because draw = 0 points CHEAT the result, then you highly overvalue the 1 point anyway.
For the normal player that 1 point doesnt matter for the day, its just a thing to ID into the finish ; so the tables that potentially get into the top 8 will be spectated anyway, cmon, be realistic, these are the tables everyones watches.
If someone trys to cheat the result, they get a clear and heavy punishment ; so yea maybe someone trys to pull it off, but the punishment is big enough that this wont be a thing, as the advantage for doing so is small or non existent, if you truly cant win the game and it would be a draw, you both actual lost, thats it.
You say you want to do away with the draw point because it encourages slow play? Well taking away the point encourages the use outside factors to decide the winner of a match (also not allowed). But Slow play is a onesided thing, and the opponent can call a judge to enforce its rules. Using outside factors is not going to go uncaught 99.9% of the time since its 2 players discreet mutual agreement.
In the real world thats a much bigger step to take.
If you are in a game, your intuitive idea is to win the game.
If you can win, you do so.
If you cant win, and your opponent is still trying their best to win.
So in the case that nobody can win, you BOTH have to agree to cheat, otherwise it doesnt work.
In slow-play however, only 1 guy has to cheat, the other doesnt have a choice.
This means, yes, the 1 point for the draw encourages players to slow-play, each of them and only 1 has to make the choice to slow-play and its super annoying to play against someone that slow-plays, its bad for the game and nobody enjoys that.
So if a draw means 0 points, we wont slow-play, theirs nothing we gain, so we speed up as much as we can to get the win if you can. If the opponent cant win the game, they might just concede, as theirs nothing to gain for them, they just waste time for 0 points anyway, so yes, thats actual real "concede" and it means the other player wins. Its not a cheated win, a player has any right to concede at any moment.
The result of this is, that you play it out, but taking the "draw" is pointless, a player in the case has to concede and give the other dude 3 points, thats the actual thing that happens, but you have a clear winner and you removed the slow-play aspect.
The good about this is, the 2 players have to make the choice together, they actual have to agree to do so , someone concedes if they want to, or they dont.
The spirit however is to do your best to make the tournament that neither player is encouraged to cheat. If you produce a situation where both players have to agree to cheat, its a much more unlikely thing to happen (and for judges its also easier to see a pattern and spectators will also see whats going on during the game) ; the slow-play hurts a tournament more than concede during an actual game does.
So in the end a "natural" real draw might be its special case, but its truyl rare to happen, at least if neither player is encouraged to slow-play.
IDs however mean, you get rewarded for NOT playing, and thats just complete bogus.
Not playing should absolute NEVER be in your advantage.
You can still ID, but it means 0 points for both players, thats the intuitive way that people actual agree for fairness (for doing nothing you get rewarded nothing).
I'm pretty sure all the people whining about IDs are just people who can never place at tournaments and feel more entitled to place with their record of L,L,W,W,W,W over the guy who went W,W,W,W,D,D even though the later had to play against the best players in the room all day and still managed to win 100% of his games played (as apposed to only 67%).
Thats a very wrong assumption, as its just about the spirit you start playing.
Either you just play for the win, in which case you just take the ID as its playing the system, you get your win (as the draw is essentially a free win for both players, for doing absolute nothing, very very bad).
In any other sport an ID is very unsporting, its highly discouraged, and if 2 players decide to go ID its incredible bad for their reputation.
You mean kinda like like how in the NFL teams that have already locked up a top spot for the playoffs will rest their players? Yeah it's not a draw... it's more like a concede (that they have to play out with backups). But those games often have a lot of meaning for other teams. Would you be just as upset if these players conceded their games to their friends to let them get into the Top8 with them?
I'm pretty sure all the people whining about IDs are just people who can never place at tournaments and feel more entitled to place with their record of L,L,W,W,W,W over the guy who went W,W,W,W,D,D even though the later had to play against the best players in the room all day and still managed to win 100% of his games played (as apposed to only 67%).
Thats a very wrong assumption, as its just about the spirit you start playing.
Either you just play for the win, in which case you just take the ID as its playing the system, you get your win (as the draw is essentially a free win for both players, for doing absolute nothing, very very bad).
In any other sport an ID is very unsporting, its highly discouraged, and if 2 players decide to go ID its incredible bad for their reputation.
You mean kinda like like how in the NFL teams that have already locked up a top spot for the playoffs will rest their players? Yeah it's not a draw... it's more like a concede (that they have to play out with backups). But those games often have a lot of meaning for other teams. Would you be just as upset if these players conceded their games to their friends to let them get into the Top8 with them?
The situation doesnt exist where you can concede, thats why people ID to get that 1 point (or its just stupid rare).
In short, with 8 players, the top 2 will just ID all the time, as theirs absolute no reason for them not to, the system encourages them to do so ; and they will just price split, if they want to, they play it out in private who gets the boosters, nobody can do anything against that.
Whole point is to avoid this, they have to play, someone has to win, and the loser might drop the to 3rd place, which gives the other players a shot, instead of making the 8-men essentially a single elimination 2 round tournament.
In bigger tournaments with more rounds and byes the situation becomes even bigger. But it just works the way it does as a draw means 1 point, for doing absolute nothing, you get 1 point ; which is simply not fair, as for nothing, you should receive nothing.
If you concede you get 0 points, so you will most likely not get into the top 8, as you need that 1 point.
As i have no idea how NFL works, i cant really tell anything about it.
The NFL works kinda like a Swiss Magic tourney. you play 14 games, or "rounds", and then the top teams play each other in Single Elimination to see who wins in the Superbowl.
So, if the Steelers are 13-0, but have one more game, they are a lock for the finals. So, for that 14th game, they can rest their starters for said finals. Let's say they play against the Seahawks, who are 12-1, and are one win away from finals record. The Steelers put in their 3rd string players (basically conceding the game) so that they can rest their top players. It's just like an ID, because Pittsburgh is basically giving the Seahawks a win to get into the finals, but it is an acceptable strategy because then Pittsburgh's starting lineup is fresh and rested. The win doesn't matter to Pittsburgh, and does matter to Seattle. According to your logic, that "win" should not count for Seattle because Pittsburgh didn't play to their full potential (i.e. Slow Playing to time) and basically gave Seattle their seat in the finals, while denying it to, say, the Ravens who were 11-2 but would have gotten in had Seattle lost, because they won against the Jaguars and ended 12-2 while beating Seattle earlier in the year.
I mean, this sort of situation comes up less in the NFL because they don't pair according to record, but it is a good analogy.
The main point I was trying to make is, Magic is not unique in the situation where you have sub-optimal play, or something similar when it's beneficial.
It happens in a sport where people are paying to watch, and the players are making millions. Yes, they try to minimize it by scheduling what will hopefully be more important games later in the season but it's impossible to predict the future.
No matter what you do there will be situations where someone will draw or concede to "get in". Imagine you do make draws 0 points... now those two guys are playing in a late round and it goes to time. One of them is basically forced to concede, otherwise they both get zero. There is almost no benefit to forcing a double zero there (other than hoping to win out on tie breakers), so you create a situation where chances are the more timid player loses out. Even outside of that you could run into a pair down situation were X-0 guy is paired against his X-1 friend... maybe they do the math and figure out that chances are they both get in if they both go to X-1, so the X-0 guy concedes... X-1 guy just "got something" for doing nothing, which is exactly what you wanted to avoid.
In short, with 8 players, the top 2 will just ID all the time, as theirs absolute no reason for them not to, the system encourages them to do so ; and they will just price split, if they want to, they play it out in private who gets the boosters, nobody can do anything against that.
This is not the case. The last 2 small tournaments I went to were an 8man and a 10man. I was in the finals of both, and neither me or my opponents even mentioned IDing. Playing just seemed too obvious. If people like playing the magic and not much is on the line (basically every 8man) they play it out. But if people don't like playing magic or if the difference of 1 boosterpack is "too risky" for them, let it be a 2 round tournament. The 2-0s in that 8man did the best in that tournament, they deserve to be the winners anyways.
It's also worth remembering, similar to the NFL analogy, the player/team that does the best in the swiss, gets rewarded by being to rest for the last round by IDing or benching their best players so they are prepared for the finals.
They are not being rewarded for not playing, they are being rewarded for playing significantly better than everyone else and winning a higher % of their games.
No matter what you do there will be situations where someone will draw or concede to "get in". Imagine you do make draws 0 points... now those two guys are playing in a late round and it goes to time. One of them is basically forced to concede, otherwise they both get zero. There is almost no benefit to forcing a double zero there (other than hoping to win out on tie breakers), so you create a situation where chances are the more timid player loses out. Even outside of that you could run into a pair down situation were X-0 guy is paired against his X-1 friend... maybe they do the math and figure out that chances are they both get in if they both go to X-1, so the X-0 guy concedes... X-1 guy just "got something" for doing nothing, which is exactly what you wanted to avoid.
Its not really "normal" that you get paired down, and even more rare, that you can simply concede and make top 8.
So give me an actual example of your scenario for say 8 players, 16 players or a bigger Grand Prix in which that works out. If its just something that happens once in a full moon, we can just ignore it.
Its a constructed scenario that simply doesnt exist, so it pretty much doesnt matter in that regard.
What happens pretty much all the time is an ID for the finals, thats like 100% of the time, so thats the situation that matters the most, as it happens in real life.
If someone concedes the other wins, theirs no way to avoid that, as theirs no way to disallow a concetion in a game like magic.
Sure you can disallow concedes in a super professional game, and we could argue that the rules could disallow them in a high level of play (say Pro Tour, Grand Prix etc.) ; as everyone that starts in that tournament should be on a professional level anyway.
So the general idea and docma to follow should be: "Do anything by the rules to avoid someone to get an advantage for doing nothing". Rules should never make it an advantage to not play magic, thats just bogus.
The whole idea of "draw means 0 points" is that players will play faster, theirs simply no reason to draw.
As it stands we exchange the situation in which players are encouraged to slow-play against the situation in which players are encouraged to win and not to slow-play.
In the end theirs no solution that doesnt allow any options to "play the system" ; but abusing the current one is just everday life ; while doing so with 0 points is not the choice of 1 player alone, if you "force" another player to concede, its allready possible and punished by the rules (bribery and all that).
The whole idea of "draw means 0 points" is that players will play faster, theirs simply no reason to draw.
As it stands we exchange the situation in which players are encouraged to slow-play against the situation in which players are encouraged to win and not to slow-play.
Sometimes it's just not possible to play 3 games between 2 decks in the time allowed.
I remember a PTQ many years ago where I was playing Rakdos aggro and my opponent was playing a white lifegain deck that was having some success at the time. Even though I was playing a super fast aggro deck those games took forever because I had to deal 40+ damage instead of 20. If I remember right I won the match 1-0-1. In a similar situation at a GP I was playing B/W aggro against OwlingMine and we went to turns. Both of those decks are pretty quick, but at a high level of play there are going to be tons of interactions between players... interactions take time, and in that case when you're drawing 3+ cards a turn it takes a lot of time.
Making draws 0 points instead of 1 point is going to punish more people than intentional draws possibly do.
Making draws 0 points instead of 1 point is going to punish more people than intentional draws possibly do.
It's not how many people get punished. It's what they get punished for. 1-point draws punish people based on who they get paired against and in what order (something they have no control over) and creates incentives to play slowly or even not play at all. 0-point draws punish players for not being able to complete their games (something they have some level of control over) and encourages players to play quickly and continue competing in the final round.
0 point draws are a major inducement for players to cheat. In many situations, the optimal play (from a game theoretical basis) will be to flip a coin, loser concedes, and hope you do not get caught. (Or using a less-detectable variant on this theme, like shuffle then clash, loser concedes).
You do not want a situation where, assuming players aren't good at cheating and have a 20% chance of being caught, outright cheating is the optimal play from a game theoretical perspective and the tournament structures reward it. It's seldom the optimal play in real tournaments because '40% chance of win, 40% chance of loss, 20% chance of DQ' is not usually a better outcome than a draw, but when you change that equation to '40% chance of win, 40% of loss, 20% DQ' vs '100% chance of a loss', there are a large number of tournament states where the former is a better outcome.
In short: Allowing IDs increases tournament integrity and decreases incentives to cheat.
0 point draws are a major inducement for players to cheat. In many situations, the optimal play (from a game theoretical basis) will be to flip a coin, loser concedes, and hope you do not get caught. (Or using a less-detectable variant on this theme, like shuffle then clash, loser concedes).
Right now players are simply used to ID into the finals. Thats how it "works" right now, so you just assume that it has to be that way.
If that suddenly changes, and you assume players will still go with it and "cheat" to archive the pseudo result doesnt really work.
If both players sit down in a top 16 game to get into the top 8, the tables will be "spectated" , even if its just the 2 opponent matches right next to you, in higher tournaments judges will be around.
So theirs just no way to make a bribe or anything, at least not more and not less than their allready is.
In fact, we just change an ID, which is a legal way to cheat into the finals, against actual playing ; if they dont play and cheat, yea, then they actual cheat, and should be punished accordingly (as someone that does so, deserves the DQ anyway).
The whole idea is that players are simply encouraged to play the game, win honestly or lose honestly ; no ID bull***** in which literally BOTH WIN, they dont play, so both LOSE if at all.
From its basic principle, a player should never be rewarded for doing nothing, especially BOTH players should not be rewarded for doing nothing. If they both decide not to play, then they both lose, if they truly want that, they can do it. If someone wants to win, they have to play ; if the opponent decides to concede, they can do that.
0 point draws are a major inducement for players to cheat. In many situations, the optimal play (from a game theoretical basis) will be to flip a coin, loser concedes, and hope you do not get caught. (Or using a less-detectable variant on this theme, like shuffle then clash, loser concedes).
Right now players are simply used to ID into the finals. Thats how it "works" right now, so you just assume that it has to be that way.
If that suddenly changes, and you assume players will still go with it and "cheat" to archive the pseudo result doesnt really work.
If both players sit down in a top 16 game to get into the top 8, the tables will be "spectated" , even if its just the 2 opponent matches right next to you, in higher tournaments judges will be around.
So theirs just no way to make a bribe or anything, at least not more and not less than their allready is.
In fact, we just change an ID, which is a legal way to cheat into the finals, against actual playing ; if they dont play and cheat, yea, then they actual cheat, and should be punished accordingly (as someone that does so, deserves the DQ anyway).
The whole idea is that players are simply encouraged to play the game, win honestly or lose honestly ; no ID bull***** in which literally BOTH WIN, they dont play, so both LOSE if at all.
From its basic principle, a player should never be rewarded for doing nothing, especially BOTH players should not be rewarded for doing nothing. If they both decide not to play, then they both lose, if they truly want that, they can do it. If someone wants to win, they have to play ; if the opponent decides to concede, they can do that.
I wasn't thinking we'd see collusion increase in 'win and T8' or 'draw and T8' scenarios, but much more in scenarios like 'second last round, need a win and a draw or better to T8', or 'last round, top 32 get 5 packs, top 16 get 8 packs, need a draw for T32 or a win for T16'.
If you want a tournament without IDs, the only plausible way to do it is to structure it as single or double elimination, and use the DCI guidelines for elimination round unfinished matches to determine winners (Floor Rules, 117). Giving players a match loss for going over time (and that is what 0 point draws are, a tournament official imposed match loss on both players) causes far more problems than IDs ever do.
Note that the DCI rules for unfinished matches in elimination rounds are extremely gameable by including certain cards - rule 117 makes people side in stupid cards like Meditation Puzzle and that colourless land with ETB: Gain 2 life.
It's not how many people get punished. It's what they get punished for. 1-point draws punish people based on who they get paired against and in what order (something they have no control over) and creates incentives to play slowly or even not play at all. 0-point draws punish players for not being able to complete their games (something they have some level of control over) and encourages players to play quickly and continue competing in the final round.
A player has zero control over an opponent who is terrible at piloting his deck. He has no control over how fast or slow his opponent want to play the game. A player should never be punished by receiving 0 points simply because he was paired with someone without a grasp on proper tournament play. You want to make the 1 point from any round other than the last important, it's not. A draw anywhere other than the final 3 rounds is as good as a loss. Why is that? Because the players and decks that GET DRAWS always lead to more draws and longer rounds.
Does losing in a early round suck in the prospects of winning? Yes. It sucks that your entire day can be dictated by the people you play and if they win after you beat them or get beaten by them. Anyone who has PTQ'd or other premier MTGO events can attest to the clear tension of playing out 10 hours and having your final spot dictated by others because you cannot draw. I've gone x-1 in a mtgo event and missed top 8 because of the lack of being able to draw. I've also made top 8 because of it.
If you want to disallow ID's you need a better tiebreak system other than a system dependent on you playing other players who win. Messing with draws is not the answer.
The point of swiss should be that losing a game wont remove you from the tournament, but it essential is doing that, if the prices are for the X-0 only anyway.
So the argument against IDs is really that they provide a point. Course you can ID and then you get 0 points each, you dont play, all done, draw is 0 points.
The deal with draw = 1 point is actual an incentive to play slow, get in time and all the bad things nobody likes.
If a draw would simply be 0 points for each player, all that problems would go away instantly ; as no player has any reason to go for the time, either win or lose, draw is the same as losing.
As for the ID to get to the top 8. You just draw with a player to get into the top 8, in which you might have to play against that guy ANYWAY, so just play it out NOW and have someone else get the chance to hit the top 8.
The whole point is, an ID is just "not playing" , and thats not cool, its just crap for anyone else.
The ID "problem" gets even more crazy if you count 3 byes in for a "good" player.
Say your tournament has 8 rounds, they get 3 byes and they draw the last 2 games, so they are 3-0-2 and 3 byes make it 6-0-2 ; which looks way "stronger" as they actual played only 3 games ; as byes mean 100% OP Score its even more ridiculous.
So the advantage is much bigger, its not really fair to do so, its just a system you play, its not "magic".
Pretty easy solution would be to have 0 points for a draw, as easy as that.
Advantages are pretty obvisious, and we get much better results that actual mean something.
As for IDs the most stupid result can be this.
Someone just IDs with EVERY opponent, they dont play a single game of magic ; and still they are not last place. Isnt that stupid ? Yea, thats the system we use, its just stupid.
WUBRG#BlackLotusMatterWUBRG
👮👮👮 #BlueLivesMatter 👮👮👮
Not necessarily, though the OMW is a somewhat balancing act. The person who went 3-1 with their loss in the 4th round could have faced opponents who end up 0-4, 1-3, 2-2, and 3-1 while the guy who is 3-1 and lost first round had opponents who went 4-0, 2-2, 2-2, and 3-1 (3-0 player pair down). I mean if you just want to get say top 16 at a big GP it's statistically better for you to draw your first round. I don't think there is a much better system for competitive play unfortunately.
Except 0 points for a draw heavily punishes control decks. Draws are all ready bad enough, there's no need to make them worse and really, there's nothing too bad about ID's in the first place. The solution? Win your games!
0 points for playing too slowly is fine (and this is speaking as someone who plays control decks more often than average), but at fnm level I can see a lot of under the table collusion for players who are about to draw, and that's bad too.
the people who are drawing have already won their games thats why they are x-0
If I ID, then I have to win one less game than you do. It's shocking that someone could be smart enough to play card games but unable to comprehend this point. I really feel like I shouldn't have to repeat it.
This can happen, but statistically, it is more likely a X-0 player will play players with better records than the X-1 player does. The "penalty" for that is terrible breakers and often not being able to draw in if you get even a single loss.
That is not true at all. If I go 4-0 and then draw the last round and you go 3-1 and then win your last round, I still won as many games as you, and it is more likely I played other undefeated players as well.
I'm pretty sure all the people whining about IDs are just people who can never place at tournaments and feel more entitled to place with their record of L,L,W,W,W,W over the guy who went W,W,W,W,D,D even though the later had to play against the best players in the room all day and still managed to win 100% of his games played (as apposed to only 67%).
Also, for the record, I often opt to play it out and NOT ID into top8s just because I like playing legacy so much. If you don't like IDing: don't ID. Its really that easy.
Thats a very wrong assumption, as its just about the spirit you start playing.
Either you just play for the win, in which case you just take the ID as its playing the system, you get your win (as the draw is essentially a free win for both players, for doing absolute nothing, very very bad).
In any other sport an ID is very unsporting, its highly discouraged, and if 2 players decide to go ID its incredible bad for their reputation.
In magic however, its "history" and players just do it.
Theirs not much reason for it, other than "its allways like that".
If you truly draw in a hard fight game, that might be an justified 1 point, it wont do much, but its totally fair.
BUT that very rarely happens. More often than not, its the 1 guy that knows he is losing and just slow-plays and otherwise cheats the system ; which this 1 point actual encourages, so its very bad for the game.
Even controll decks wont ever go in the time, if they play with a reasonable plan and not slow as hell.
If you play the super-crazy ultra controll, like Standstill, in which the concept actual forces both players to just go-draw-go and hope for the hand full of counterspells to push the win, then its a stupid bad matchups anyway.
Even worse, the draw even makes this exact problem EVEN WORSE.
Why you may ask ?
I tell you.
Say a tournament in legacy has 10 standstill players out of 1000 players.
If 4 of these players randomly get paired against each other, its pretty likely that they might end up 0-0-1 , they might not even finish 1 game.
Guess what happens next round ?
These 4 players will just face the other standstill player, as pretty much no other deck in legacy will end with a draw (unless they are super slow-player, its just incredible rare).
So what exactly does the 1 point give us ?
1 point for Draws means this :
So the list is long of problematics for Draw = 1 point.
And whats its actual "positive" ?
Well, nothing. A draw is just crap, its worthless, you didnt win, you dont deserve anything.
You are not rewarded for your slow play, and if the opponent knows a draw means 0 points, they will look at your slow play even harder and call a judge for slow play more often ; which has a good teaching influence on the players to give them the message : "Play at a reasonable pace, not slow, it wont give you any advantage, playing slow is just bad for you."
A chance in the system is very unlikely, but still, it would totally improve the tournament and also make the game a more reasonable "professional" game.
And face it, its not uncommon that a local store will discourage IDs , especially in a PreRelease and FNM, lots of locale stores (at least 10 i know of) discourage it by giving less price to the ID guys, result is, they wont ID, they play it out and everyone in the event is happy about it (even the guy that loses).
Its a learning process, and maybe we will get to the point that draw really means 0 points ; it just needs to be on the daily discussion plan over and over again.
WUBRG#BlackLotusMatterWUBRG
👮👮👮 #BlueLivesMatter 👮👮👮
You also seem to have the false notion that if you go 4-0 and the double drawing is easy. Its not. Starting out 4-0 in a 6 round tournament is far, far harder than going losing the first round and then going even 5-1. IDing is not a free win for doing nothing. Its basically just saying, I am so much farther ahead of everyone because I have been doing so well, I don't even NEED a win to still be on top. Often times even if they guy that started out 4-0 ends 5-1 or 4-2, he will still be in the top 8 because statistically, the highest seed should always have the highest chance to have the best breakers. It's only improving your odds of good breakers though, no guarantee that they will be good enough to put you in the top8. An ID is just the guarantee. The guy that starts out 4-0 is very deserving of a top place. IDing is just the safest way to insure he gets the top spot he deserves.
Again, if you want to play magic, don't ID. The "IDing means I don't get to play magic" thing is bogus. If if the 1st/2nd are locked up in a 8man FNM, the tournament doesn't just end. Play your opponent regardless of prizes.
Do you know what not having a point for draws does? In basically every drawing game that is not being heavily spectated, it means everytime 2 players are about to draw, they have to figure out who should get the win. There's no reason for the players to sign 1-1-1 on their slip, when neither player gets anything. Maybe they agree to split prizes and give one player the win. Maybe one players bribes the other. Maybe they just argue that the one in a better board position should be given the win. Everytime I have been in one of those get X packs for X wins, draws count of nothing, this happens every time. Often players even agree to split prizes in the last round and just give one of the players a win because it takes any risk away.
You say you want to do away with the draw point because it encourages slow play? Well taking away the point encourages the use outside factors to decide the winner of a match (also not allowed). But Slow play is a onesided thing, and the opponent can call a judge to enforce its rules. Using outside factors is not going to go uncaught 99.9% of the time since its 2 players discreet mutual agreement.
As long as you arent holding prize packs back and selling them to start a draft then it should be ok, but if you arent giving out prize packs and using them for draft thats against rules.
This is it. Basically people would like to minimize the impact of non-player factors such as random pairings. Personally, I cannot imagine how anyone would think there is no problem with a system wherein participants in a tournament that supposedly wants to reward the "best player", are given an incentive to "not play". I think it's fine to say "there are problems with the current system but there is no good way to solve them", but to simply wave it all away seems remarkably oblivious.
Another possible approach to alleviating this that has not been mentioned is to disqualify players for intentional under-performance, like they do in competitive fighting games:
http://www.eventhubs.com/news/2013/jul/30/major-tournaments-shoryuken-eventhubs-and-mad-catz-speak-out-against-collusion-coverage-will-be-determined-rule-inclusion-future/
It might happen, but overall you have to play slow to begin with and then the game should not give you 1 point for playing slow, the system should have a clear message and that is : "If you dont win, you get nothing."
As i said a draw will just encourage players to play slow and thats just never a good thing. The game should encourage you to speed up, finish your game in time and getting in the extra time is the worst you can possible get to. Right now, players intentionally slow-play to get into time, and thats just bad.
If you clearly win game 1 and then the rest of the games dont end, its fine, but as soon as players can get into a "draw" and get rewarded for that, its just a waste of time for everyone.
The "double draw" example says you start with 3 byes aswell, auto-wins with 100% opponent score, which are in itself a gigantic advantage allready and then on top of that, you get to draw 2 games pretty much all the time, as your OP-score is that much better than the "normal" players (due to byes and draw against the other to 0 dudes).
Ofcourse you can, nobody debates it. Its just that the system as it stands encourages players to not play magic. If you can draw in the prices, you just draw in the prices, not doing so is highly counter intuitive. The system should make playing magic the "normal" way.
If you badly dont want to play, you can ID, but you wont get rewarded for doing so.
If you play a game with the opponent and you cheat about the winner, thats a thing for judges, but then we can clearly punish players for doing so ; right now, ID is just normal and its annoying abd it doesnt do any good to the game.
Thats wrong, simply because nobody plays "alone" , you will allways have other players beside your table, so if you truly think players would just because draw = 0 points CHEAT the result, then you highly overvalue the 1 point anyway.
For the normal player that 1 point doesnt matter for the day, its just a thing to ID into the finish ; so the tables that potentially get into the top 8 will be spectated anyway, cmon, be realistic, these are the tables everyones watches.
If someone trys to cheat the result, they get a clear and heavy punishment ; so yea maybe someone trys to pull it off, but the punishment is big enough that this wont be a thing, as the advantage for doing so is small or non existent, if you truly cant win the game and it would be a draw, you both actual lost, thats it.
In the real world thats a much bigger step to take.
If you are in a game, your intuitive idea is to win the game.
If you can win, you do so.
If you cant win, and your opponent is still trying their best to win.
So in the case that nobody can win, you BOTH have to agree to cheat, otherwise it doesnt work.
In slow-play however, only 1 guy has to cheat, the other doesnt have a choice.
This means, yes, the 1 point for the draw encourages players to slow-play, each of them and only 1 has to make the choice to slow-play and its super annoying to play against someone that slow-plays, its bad for the game and nobody enjoys that.
So if a draw means 0 points, we wont slow-play, theirs nothing we gain, so we speed up as much as we can to get the win if you can. If the opponent cant win the game, they might just concede, as theirs nothing to gain for them, they just waste time for 0 points anyway, so yes, thats actual real "concede" and it means the other player wins. Its not a cheated win, a player has any right to concede at any moment.
The result of this is, that you play it out, but taking the "draw" is pointless, a player in the case has to concede and give the other dude 3 points, thats the actual thing that happens, but you have a clear winner and you removed the slow-play aspect.
The good about this is, the 2 players have to make the choice together, they actual have to agree to do so , someone concedes if they want to, or they dont.
The spirit however is to do your best to make the tournament that neither player is encouraged to cheat. If you produce a situation where both players have to agree to cheat, its a much more unlikely thing to happen (and for judges its also easier to see a pattern and spectators will also see whats going on during the game) ; the slow-play hurts a tournament more than concede during an actual game does.
So in the end a "natural" real draw might be its special case, but its truyl rare to happen, at least if neither player is encouraged to slow-play.
IDs however mean, you get rewarded for NOT playing, and thats just complete bogus.
Not playing should absolute NEVER be in your advantage.
You can still ID, but it means 0 points for both players, thats the intuitive way that people actual agree for fairness (for doing nothing you get rewarded nothing).
WUBRG#BlackLotusMatterWUBRG
👮👮👮 #BlueLivesMatter 👮👮👮
You mean kinda like like how in the NFL teams that have already locked up a top spot for the playoffs will rest their players? Yeah it's not a draw... it's more like a concede (that they have to play out with backups). But those games often have a lot of meaning for other teams. Would you be just as upset if these players conceded their games to their friends to let them get into the Top8 with them?
The situation doesnt exist where you can concede, thats why people ID to get that 1 point (or its just stupid rare).
In short, with 8 players, the top 2 will just ID all the time, as theirs absolute no reason for them not to, the system encourages them to do so ; and they will just price split, if they want to, they play it out in private who gets the boosters, nobody can do anything against that.
Whole point is to avoid this, they have to play, someone has to win, and the loser might drop the to 3rd place, which gives the other players a shot, instead of making the 8-men essentially a single elimination 2 round tournament.
In bigger tournaments with more rounds and byes the situation becomes even bigger. But it just works the way it does as a draw means 1 point, for doing absolute nothing, you get 1 point ; which is simply not fair, as for nothing, you should receive nothing.
If you concede you get 0 points, so you will most likely not get into the top 8, as you need that 1 point.
As i have no idea how NFL works, i cant really tell anything about it.
WUBRG#BlackLotusMatterWUBRG
👮👮👮 #BlueLivesMatter 👮👮👮
So, if the Steelers are 13-0, but have one more game, they are a lock for the finals. So, for that 14th game, they can rest their starters for said finals. Let's say they play against the Seahawks, who are 12-1, and are one win away from finals record. The Steelers put in their 3rd string players (basically conceding the game) so that they can rest their top players. It's just like an ID, because Pittsburgh is basically giving the Seahawks a win to get into the finals, but it is an acceptable strategy because then Pittsburgh's starting lineup is fresh and rested. The win doesn't matter to Pittsburgh, and does matter to Seattle. According to your logic, that "win" should not count for Seattle because Pittsburgh didn't play to their full potential (i.e. Slow Playing to time) and basically gave Seattle their seat in the finals, while denying it to, say, the Ravens who were 11-2 but would have gotten in had Seattle lost, because they won against the Jaguars and ended 12-2 while beating Seattle earlier in the year.
I mean, this sort of situation comes up less in the NFL because they don't pair according to record, but it is a good analogy.
"normality is a paved road: it is comfortable to walk, but no flowers grow there."
-Vincent Van Gogh
things I hate:
1. lists.
b. inconsistencies.
V. incorrect math.
2. quotes in signatures
III: irony.
there are two kinds of people in the world: those who can make reasonable conclusions based on conjecture.
It happens in a sport where people are paying to watch, and the players are making millions. Yes, they try to minimize it by scheduling what will hopefully be more important games later in the season but it's impossible to predict the future.
No matter what you do there will be situations where someone will draw or concede to "get in". Imagine you do make draws 0 points... now those two guys are playing in a late round and it goes to time. One of them is basically forced to concede, otherwise they both get zero. There is almost no benefit to forcing a double zero there (other than hoping to win out on tie breakers), so you create a situation where chances are the more timid player loses out. Even outside of that you could run into a pair down situation were X-0 guy is paired against his X-1 friend... maybe they do the math and figure out that chances are they both get in if they both go to X-1, so the X-0 guy concedes... X-1 guy just "got something" for doing nothing, which is exactly what you wanted to avoid.
I never mentioned byes, and was not considering them. They are different issue entirely. For all my statements, assume no one has any byes.
This is not the case. The last 2 small tournaments I went to were an 8man and a 10man. I was in the finals of both, and neither me or my opponents even mentioned IDing. Playing just seemed too obvious. If people like playing the magic and not much is on the line (basically every 8man) they play it out. But if people don't like playing magic or if the difference of 1 boosterpack is "too risky" for them, let it be a 2 round tournament. The 2-0s in that 8man did the best in that tournament, they deserve to be the winners anyways.
It's also worth remembering, similar to the NFL analogy, the player/team that does the best in the swiss, gets rewarded by being to rest for the last round by IDing or benching their best players so they are prepared for the finals.
They are not being rewarded for not playing, they are being rewarded for playing significantly better than everyone else and winning a higher % of their games.
Its not really "normal" that you get paired down, and even more rare, that you can simply concede and make top 8.
So give me an actual example of your scenario for say 8 players, 16 players or a bigger Grand Prix in which that works out. If its just something that happens once in a full moon, we can just ignore it.
Its a constructed scenario that simply doesnt exist, so it pretty much doesnt matter in that regard.
What happens pretty much all the time is an ID for the finals, thats like 100% of the time, so thats the situation that matters the most, as it happens in real life.
If someone concedes the other wins, theirs no way to avoid that, as theirs no way to disallow a concetion in a game like magic.
Sure you can disallow concedes in a super professional game, and we could argue that the rules could disallow them in a high level of play (say Pro Tour, Grand Prix etc.) ; as everyone that starts in that tournament should be on a professional level anyway.
So the general idea and docma to follow should be: "Do anything by the rules to avoid someone to get an advantage for doing nothing". Rules should never make it an advantage to not play magic, thats just bogus.
The whole idea of "draw means 0 points" is that players will play faster, theirs simply no reason to draw.
As it stands we exchange the situation in which players are encouraged to slow-play against the situation in which players are encouraged to win and not to slow-play.
In the end theirs no solution that doesnt allow any options to "play the system" ; but abusing the current one is just everday life ; while doing so with 0 points is not the choice of 1 player alone, if you "force" another player to concede, its allready possible and punished by the rules (bribery and all that).
WUBRG#BlackLotusMatterWUBRG
👮👮👮 #BlueLivesMatter 👮👮👮
Thing is, double elim takes longer to play out than Swiss, and doesn't work with every number of players.
Sometimes it's just not possible to play 3 games between 2 decks in the time allowed.
I remember a PTQ many years ago where I was playing Rakdos aggro and my opponent was playing a white lifegain deck that was having some success at the time. Even though I was playing a super fast aggro deck those games took forever because I had to deal 40+ damage instead of 20. If I remember right I won the match 1-0-1. In a similar situation at a GP I was playing B/W aggro against OwlingMine and we went to turns. Both of those decks are pretty quick, but at a high level of play there are going to be tons of interactions between players... interactions take time, and in that case when you're drawing 3+ cards a turn it takes a lot of time.
Making draws 0 points instead of 1 point is going to punish more people than intentional draws possibly do.
It's not how many people get punished. It's what they get punished for. 1-point draws punish people based on who they get paired against and in what order (something they have no control over) and creates incentives to play slowly or even not play at all. 0-point draws punish players for not being able to complete their games (something they have some level of control over) and encourages players to play quickly and continue competing in the final round.
You do not want a situation where, assuming players aren't good at cheating and have a 20% chance of being caught, outright cheating is the optimal play from a game theoretical perspective and the tournament structures reward it. It's seldom the optimal play in real tournaments because '40% chance of win, 40% chance of loss, 20% chance of DQ' is not usually a better outcome than a draw, but when you change that equation to '40% chance of win, 40% of loss, 20% DQ' vs '100% chance of a loss', there are a large number of tournament states where the former is a better outcome.
In short: Allowing IDs increases tournament integrity and decreases incentives to cheat.
Right now players are simply used to ID into the finals. Thats how it "works" right now, so you just assume that it has to be that way.
If that suddenly changes, and you assume players will still go with it and "cheat" to archive the pseudo result doesnt really work.
If both players sit down in a top 16 game to get into the top 8, the tables will be "spectated" , even if its just the 2 opponent matches right next to you, in higher tournaments judges will be around.
So theirs just no way to make a bribe or anything, at least not more and not less than their allready is.
In fact, we just change an ID, which is a legal way to cheat into the finals, against actual playing ; if they dont play and cheat, yea, then they actual cheat, and should be punished accordingly (as someone that does so, deserves the DQ anyway).
The whole idea is that players are simply encouraged to play the game, win honestly or lose honestly ; no ID bull***** in which literally BOTH WIN, they dont play, so both LOSE if at all.
From its basic principle, a player should never be rewarded for doing nothing, especially BOTH players should not be rewarded for doing nothing. If they both decide not to play, then they both lose, if they truly want that, they can do it. If someone wants to win, they have to play ; if the opponent decides to concede, they can do that.
WUBRG#BlackLotusMatterWUBRG
👮👮👮 #BlueLivesMatter 👮👮👮
I wasn't thinking we'd see collusion increase in 'win and T8' or 'draw and T8' scenarios, but much more in scenarios like 'second last round, need a win and a draw or better to T8', or 'last round, top 32 get 5 packs, top 16 get 8 packs, need a draw for T32 or a win for T16'.
If you want a tournament without IDs, the only plausible way to do it is to structure it as single or double elimination, and use the DCI guidelines for elimination round unfinished matches to determine winners (Floor Rules, 117). Giving players a match loss for going over time (and that is what 0 point draws are, a tournament official imposed match loss on both players) causes far more problems than IDs ever do.
Note that the DCI rules for unfinished matches in elimination rounds are extremely gameable by including certain cards - rule 117 makes people side in stupid cards like Meditation Puzzle and that colourless land with ETB: Gain 2 life.
A player has zero control over an opponent who is terrible at piloting his deck. He has no control over how fast or slow his opponent want to play the game. A player should never be punished by receiving 0 points simply because he was paired with someone without a grasp on proper tournament play. You want to make the 1 point from any round other than the last important, it's not. A draw anywhere other than the final 3 rounds is as good as a loss. Why is that? Because the players and decks that GET DRAWS always lead to more draws and longer rounds.
Does losing in a early round suck in the prospects of winning? Yes. It sucks that your entire day can be dictated by the people you play and if they win after you beat them or get beaten by them. Anyone who has PTQ'd or other premier MTGO events can attest to the clear tension of playing out 10 hours and having your final spot dictated by others because you cannot draw. I've gone x-1 in a mtgo event and missed top 8 because of the lack of being able to draw. I've also made top 8 because of it.
If you want to disallow ID's you need a better tiebreak system other than a system dependent on you playing other players who win. Messing with draws is not the answer.
My wife was on MTV with this video.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUutIZg2EpU