This thread is for the discussion of my latest article, Off Topic: Wasting Time. We would be grateful if you would let us know what you think, but please keep your comments on topic.
Not to be negative, but eliminating the five turns seems terrible. Granted, if we had 0 turns now and someone said add 5, it likely wouldn't be very popular either. I think you approached it very poorly though. Games get complex, and basically calling everyone who goes to time an obnoxious bad player that we all should hate isn't going to fix much.
That said, I think a chess clock would fix most of these problems. When a player says "go" or some such, they click the clock, and its now the other guy's time to do EOT stuff and take his turn. Give each person 30 minutes, no turns, and a game (match?) loss if they time out. Likely fixes most problems, other than TOs having to get a bunch of chess timers.
"A rich man thinks all other people are rich, and an intelligent man thinks all other people are similarly gifted. Both are always terribly shocked when they discover the truth of the world. You, my dear brother, are a pious man." - Strahd von Zarovich
That said, I think a chess clock would fix most of these problems. When a player says "go" or some such, they click the clock, and its now the other guy's time to do EOT stuff and take his turn. Give each person 30 minutes, no turns, and a game (match?) loss if they time out. Likely fixes most problems, other than TOs having to get a bunch of chess timers.
Except that won't work. It just about works on Magic Online, but IRL it would be impossible since you'd have to stop your clock every time you passed priority. In chess the turn structure is "move-go". In magic each turn consists of many steps and phases.
And if anyone thinks 50 minutes is always long enough to finish a match they're the ones doing it wrong. The Wake mirror from Onslaught-era standard springs immediately to mind...
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
...the pinnacle of military deployment approaches the formless. If it is formless, then even the deepest spy cannot discern it or the wise make plans against it.
-- Sun Tzu, The Art Of War
I do have to agree that they need to work on the timing of rounds and such. A seven round sealed, takes about ten hours. Six round standard, eight. Where does all the extra time come from? Late players, or in later rounds people refusing to give up a very losing board position and pushing time each round well past an hour a round
@QmunkE: I hadn't thought about that, but that could mostly be shortcut, so that from one players end of turn to the next, time only runs off of the current players turn. Stack wars would need to pass back and forth, but we all know how awesome blue is these days, so standard would likely be fine with it. Legacy and Vintage (and maybe even Extended... don't know, haven't looked at Extended since Tempest was legal). might have more times where you need to have the clock running on the opponents turn (resolving Gifts Ungiven, playing Solidarity, etc), but even still, this isn't "click every time you pass priority" just "click every time the opponent goes into the tank." It still isn't a great answer, but for what the article brought up, it seems like a fitting solution.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"There's no such thing as a good play. There's the right play, then there's the mistake" -Jon Finkel
Removing 5 turns:
So when time is called, what do you do? Call the game a draw? try to call one player the winner or loser?
Remember- a complex game could go right to time, and if we cut off games at time, an otherwise speedy player only has to delay for a minute or so (enough to fly under a judge's radar) to hit time.
If it's a draw, the players can draw, or the turns should go quickly. If someone does have a clear advantage, they'll be able to win quickly. The problem isn't the 5 turns, it's when they turn into 10 minutes. No acceptable solution gets around the problem of each player taking that long of turns.
Although it's not addressed in the article, one thing I have noticed is that while both players might dramatically accelerate their pace of play to try to finish a game 3 in time, as soon as time is called, pace of play slows to a crawl, which can delay the tournament. Trying to squeak out a few extra turns when you both knew there were only 10 min left in the round, players will take all kinds of shortcuts, ignore complex situations, and generally play as fast as possible. Once time is called, both players slow down, since they now know the number of turns remaining, and can gain nothing by playing quickly--but they could lose the match if they miss something. My suggestion/solution is to have the judge(s), after calling time, go to any tables that haven't finished, verify that turns are being counted (some players miss that "time" was called), and watch the final turns if feasible, cautioning for slow play as needed.
I would argue that the response to this article thus far is missing the point.
In the article, Meyou is stating that he has issues with the time management with tournaments, from FNM to the large tournament level. He is not saying that the system is broken, he is saying there are ways we can improve the system and we should discuss them.
So far, he's been mocked, his proposed ideas torn apart, and told flat out that he's wrong - he even makes light in his article that such behavior would not solve anything. How about instead of just saying "NO YUR WRONG THAT CAN'T POSSIBLY WORK GO AWAY!" we propose other solutions?
I think we can all agree that sitting around waiting for longer than you're actually playing is annoying. I will admit I don't have much experience in organizing tournaments, so hearing from a tourney coordinator would be nice.
As my own opinions, I tend to agree with Meyou - nothing is worse than fine-tuning a deck, finishing your match in 20 minutes, and then having to wait an hour for players who are slow-playing either intentionally or unintentionally. At my latest pre-release, there was a round that went almost 2 hours because there were 1-2 matches that were in a stalemate and the judges chose to let them play out their current games because "it was so close" and they didn't want to punish either player (who had 2-0 records at the time) by giving them a draw and decreasing their pack winnings. I was pretty furious and complained, but to no avail. They did eventually impose the 5 turn rule, about 20 minutes after the round ended but each player sat and took 5 minutes each turn.
I hope we can generate some more discussion on how to streamline tournaments.
Overall, finishing an event a bit (or even a large bit) quicker is nice, but it's way less improtant than protecting the game experience and the integrity of the event. And speeding the games up by force would only result in many bad plays. That's why there are no fixed timelimits for decisions. There has to be enough breathing space during the match, to give a good player the chance to play good magic.
I disagree. I think that the game experience and the integrity of the event are both damaged by slow events. I believe there are enough solutions available that could both tighten up playtime and still leave plenty of good Magic to be had.
I have to agree with Rakshim on this one. Folks are being unfairly harsh with Meyou for an article which frankly voices the frustration a LOT of people feel, and suggests some ideas on how to fix it. It annoys the crap out of me when the same 3 players run to time every round every week. Does that mean everyone should suffer with automatic draws when their games go long by simple virtue of good strong play with evenly matched decks? Maybe not. But should something be done? I think so. I am in a similar boat that he explains in his article. I am a married man, with a young child, who lives almost an hour from my local FNM store. It's ridiculous when a 4 round FNM that is SUPPOSED to start at 7pm doesn't end until after midnight.
Start the tournament on time. If people can't get there when they are supposed to, then that's unfortunate, but they have to miss out this week.
Perhaps imposing an additional time limit on the extra turns is an option. 5 extra turns, with a 1 minute per turn limit. You don't need to keep clocks the entire match. As others stated that would be aweful tough. But kick in a limit in those final few turns. Is that a perfect solution, no? But it would help.
Rather than attacking the writer, lets all try to understand the intent of the article, and see if there are any constructive ideas out there.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"They've done studies you know. 60% of the time, it works every time."
As I see it the "start when advertised" argument isn't ever going to work well because:
* FNM is supposed to be a fun place to play. It's not a PTQ, it's there to encourage people to play more Magic. Turning someone away for being 5 minutes late is not in the spirit of FNM.
* Stores are hardly going to turn people away when they're going to come and spend money.
Also, I'll echo previous sentiments about being penalised for slow play: if your local judge isn't making sure people are playing at a reasonable pace then the judge/TO is the person who needs to be told. They have a responsibility to uphold the tournament rules.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
...the pinnacle of military deployment approaches the formless. If it is formless, then even the deepest spy cannot discern it or the wise make plans against it.
-- Sun Tzu, The Art Of War
That's actually how it's done allready. It's just not possible right from the moment time is called, because at GP Level, this would need way too many table judges. But during extra turns, judges try their best to ensure the remaining games are finished in a reasonable time frame and once the number of running games had decreased, the last games will get their own judge at some point.
While I agree that this is what tends to happen at larger events, it's FNMs where I seldom see this. Usually the judge is also a store employee/owner; most usually camp out behind their desk/computer, coming out only for the rare judge calls--they multitask, staying busy with store business, or doing other things on the computer. Few are out observing play, watching the tournament, where they could observe slow play, or a change in the pace of play. However, this may not be something that is likely to change--employees are paid to work, and the store may want something more than 'ran the tournament' for their 4+ hrs of wages/time.
Stores which allow players to come late or start late will continue to attract players who are late--if I call 5 min before the tournament starts, saying I'll be there 15 min late, and you hold the tournament for me, I'll probably think I can do that again. And everyone else will figure they can too--why not stop for a bite to eat, or at another store to trade for a little? You always start late anyway.
Stores that always start on time, and delay rarely (say only 7 showed up on time that week, and they need 8 to sanction--more than likely, the store will wait for the 8th) will only attract players who can be on time; if you miss out one week, you'll try harder to be on time next week--or you'll stop coming to that FNM if you can't get there on time.
There is way too much ranting for a good article and some of your statements are really bad.
This is probably the worst statement overall. You are punished for slow play, if you play slow. If your match happens to go into time, but both players played at a good pace, there is nothing to penalize.
And there are rules and judges to make sure the game developes at a reasonable pace. All the rant in paragraph 12 completely ignores them.
But away from the rant, let's take a look at the ideas aka the real content.
Multiple Bracket events
They are already used, see GP's. Having multiple brackets with different starting times is a really bad idea. First, it could be used to gain an advantage by avoiding/aiming for certain opponents. Second, it won't help at all for 1-day events. The only benefit would be, that players, who would have to drop because of time issues would probably get 1 more game done. For everyone else, the time won at the beginning and during rounds will be lost in an incredible long waiting period when you put the brackets back together. Also, using swiss parings and minimum numbers of rounds play on your system would most likely end up in an event, that finishes even later than before.
Instant Access
Up to a certain limit a good idea. As far as I know, it's already doable. I have seen this being done multiple times at medium sized constructed events (50-100 players) but I'm not a TO, so I don't know, how much effort is necessary for the TO to do it and if it's actually legal under current rules.
Cutting the extra turns
There is a reason, why the 5 extra turns exist and a big part of this reason is, to dampen the impact on slow playing players on the game result. As much as you rant about it, there always will be players playing slower than other and some will even do it on purpose. The bad thing is, for a judge, this is really hard to spot sometimes. Same situation for the opponent. Most of the time, he isn't even trained to recognize such things and not every stalling action is easy to spot. Having a certain ensured number of turn in the end won't solve this problem but it will dampen the impact and therefor protects the integrity of the event to a certain degree.
Oh and would completely destroy a large part of mind-gaming which is an important part of the game.
Overall, finishing an event a bit (or even a large bit) quicker is nice, but it's way less important than protecting the game experience and the integrity of the event. And speeding the games up by force would only result in many bad plays. That's why there are no fixed time-limits for decisions. There has to be enough breathing space during the match, to give a good player the chance to play good magic.
This is a great post that responds to the various deficiencies in the article. I disagree with one part of this quote only (the part that I have italicized and made bold) There is a difference, which I don't think you recognize, between playing Magic while taking up all the time you can legally and slow playing. One is a valid strategy while the other is defined in the rules as unsportsmanlike and illegal. There is nothing wrong with a player seeing he is 1-0 with ten minutes left in the round and taking the legal amount of time to shuffle at each cracked fetchland and each path to exile while trying to get into turns. It is a valid strategy that has won me, or tied me, more than one match I would have otherwise lost if I was playing as fast as I could.
There is no rule that states that you have to play as fast as possible, only that you play at a reasonable pace.
I personally like the five turn extension, it gives the match a forced climax if it hasn't had one already. Without it the 50min would be too easy to manipulate, but my appreciation for the five turn clock has been stated by others and more eloquently.
There is nothing wrong with a player seeing he is 1-0 with ten minutes left in the round and taking the legal amount of time to shuffle at each cracked fetchland and each path to exile while trying to get into turns. It is a valid strategy that has won me, or tied me, more than one match I would have otherwise lost if I was playing as fast as I could.
There is no rule that states that you have to play as fast as possible, only that you play at a reasonable pace.
This is one instance where I personally have a problem with the current rules. This shouldn't be allowed. In best practice, people should play at the same pace no matter what the "time situation" is.
Stores which allow players to come late or start late will continue to attract players who are late--if I call 5 min before the tournament starts, saying I'll be there 15 min late, and you hold the tournament for me, I'll probably think I can do that again.
This statement is exactly why I have a problem with the first in my post. If Player A does this consistantly and is never called out for it, Players B & C might think, "hey, I think I'll slow play after winning game 1 and take the match." In my opinion, this type of play shouldn't be allowed. Perhaps a rule could be made to give players who go to time in X amount of matches over the course of Y actions be given a warning. Those who get Z amount of warnings be given a match loss or suspension from a tournament or some other punishment (having to call the other players significant others to explain to them why their husbands/wives/girlfriends/boyfriends aren't home yet). This way, you wouldn't be punished for having a match or two go to time now and then, but you would be punished if you consistantly did so.
I know not all slow players are trying to slow it down. Some are new and haven't played much Magic - these players will likely learn and improve play over time. We were all n00bs at one time, so I can forgive that.
What I can't forgive are jerks who take "all of the legal time possible" to shuffle their deck, consider an action, or tap a land just so they can slow down a match round.
My suggestion/solution is to have the judge(s), after calling time, go to any tables that haven't finished, verify that turns are being counted (some players miss that "time" was called), and watch the final turns if feasible, cautioning for slow play as needed.
This is entirely what happens at premier events.
2. Late-adds are commonplace at larger events, as long as the second round hasn't been paired (SCG events, etc.) Talk to your local owner.
3. If your opponent is playing slow, then you should be the one to hurry him up, and then ask the TO/Judge to ask him/her to play faster.
4. At Premier-sized tournaments, 25 minute turnarounds are as good as it gets. Let's look at what has to happen:
a) The extra time from time extensions (deck checks, and penalties) occurs. The average deck check is +10 minutes.
b) Five extra turns occurs. (5 minutes)
c) The results have to be taken to the stage and entered into the computer (1 minute)
d) The new round pairings have to be printed. At GP DC, this was 50 or more sheets of paper per side (3 minutes)
e) The pairings need to be posted (2 minutes)
f) Players need to find their pairings and seats. At the 450 table GP DC main event, all of the pairings boards were crowded, and players had long walks to their tables. (10 minutes)
This is a 21 minute round turnaround assuming NO time extensions were given.
5. In short, I don't think that you've been on the organizer end of premier events, and it shows in your writing. While you may have experience with FNMs, large events are very different.
Honestly, I could not focus on any of your points because I was just thinking the entire time how insane it is that you have to call your wife between every match.
Maybe this is petty, but it was truly distracting for me..
Honestly, I could not focus on any of your points because I was just thinking the entire time how insane it is that you have to call your wife between every match.
Maybe this is petty, but it was truly distracting for me..
Ha. No, I don't have to call my wife between every match.
This article is experiencing some serious overreactions (sp) from its readers.
1. Chess clock idea has been officially decided against for at least a decade at this point. let it die.
- 1a. "strategically" slow-playing in your 1-0 position doesn't test or prove your skill, so by all means go ahead and do it. Some people play to improve their game while others seek to rely on exploiting rules on time constraints.
2. 5 extra turns is more often than not redundant and defeats the purpose of a time limit. "You only get 50 minutes, BUT if you don't succeed we'll give you more time." Why have time limits but offer more time anyway?
3. I feel the tone of the article sets itself up to be criticized by readers. In many spots it's too apologetic, then is too pushy at other times. Poor use of time at sanctioned events is a big issue, and is perhaps too complicated an issue to discuss it in a 1-page personal testimony.
4. Point 3 attracts vultures to pick apart the article, figuratively speaking.
The problem here is, that I honestly feel that your ideas aren't thought through very well. Imho, if you want to form an article from an idea, you need to invest some more thinking, background research and discussion in privat.
Of course it's good to have ideas but there is a difference between informaly talking about it and writing and publishing an article.
And, that is why I write these articles. I fully realize I take a risk of being wrong when I go down roads uncharted. Nobody talks about these areas. It is my hope people learn from these articles and from the forum posters. I've learned a lot from forum posters.
Nobody else seems to be willing to write about these other areas of Magic. This includes Wizards and other writers. Whether wrong or right, at least they are getting written about.
If I were on a process improvement team, high level judge, or Wizards employee reading this article, I would note how uninformed even experienced Magic players are about certains aspects of larger tournaments. This inexperience could be a large barrier for getting more players into tournaments. Therefore, some kind of action should be taken to correct this deficit.
Again, nobody wants to take the risk of being wrong and they will continue to stray away from these topics.
I am willing to take that risk because at least something is being written about them.
Again, nobody wants to take the risk of being wrong and they will continue to stray away from these topics.
I am willing to take that risk because at least something is being written about them.
Ok, for Neon-chan and others who have simply picked apart the article:
Are there any time issues you've noted with large events? Do you have any suggestions on how to fix them?
I understand that "the integrity of the game" is important, but are there seriously NO methods of better practice to reduce the waiting times?
I'll throw another one out. If completely taking away the "extra turns" is impossible, why not reduce the minutes in round (to say 40) and increase the number of extra turns to 10 or 15 with only 30 seconds - 1 minute allowed per round. That could possibly defeat the "I'm up 1-0 and want to slow play" idiocy.
Also, could Wizards update their tournament software somehow for easier reporting or round generation? I don't have much experience here, but when the Judge commented earlier, it sounded like the fastest turnaround possible was 21 minutes from the end of last match. Is there no technology that can help with this? Maybe electronic bands or badges (or both) where a player could walk up to a judge, give them a result, get scanned and have it instantly entered so that after the last match the next round could start much sooner. Obviously, this might not be feasible for small events due to cost, but for larger events (like a PTQ) it could help speed things along.
Every once in a while, I would question if the whole effort to play at a Magic FNM was really worth it.
As opposed to a Yu-Gi-Oh FNM.
I would get it if this was a midparagraph game name drop and you were being paid by WotC, but you say Magic again next sentence and you're not, respectively. So, well, what gives?
edit:
Is there no technology that can help with this? Maybe electronic bands or badges (or both) where a player could walk up to a judge, give them a result, get scanned and have it instantly entered so that after the last match the next round could start much sooner. Obviously, this might not be feasible for small events due to cost, but for larger events (like a PTQ) it could help speed things along.
Yeah, having more cash outlay requirements to run PTQs is a great idea.
(Maybe I'm opposed because I tend to play bad slow decks and appreciate the five minutes to grab food)
5.[aka read my other post for 1-4] Aside from the article's unintentional generalizations, several time issues needlessly plague FNM's. In theory FNM shouldn't have to suffer problems of this nature due to its small size and friendlier environment.
Allow me to rephrase the author's primary concern on his behalf - if FNM attendance size is a fraction of the size of an event's, why does it take just as long to keep things moving? Can any procedural changes outside of gameplay streamline the process, or even be universally agreed upon?
The biggest point of this article that I agree with is that people are afraid of being wrong rather than change, and even this debate shows it. No one habitually late or slow wants to hear suggestions to improve the time slot of the FNM experience, and TO's aren't always happy to hear suggestions on how they should do their job.
Regarding start time - This is something you should bring up with the TO. If the players want a strict start time, make it known. I always arrive half an hour before FNM is scheduled to start, and it is lame when it takes a full hour before R1. On the opposite side, in order to even sanction FNM, you need 8 people, and sometimes waiting is the ONLY way to hit 8. Would you rather start late, or not at all?
Regarding Play Time - I have been on all sides of this issue. Some days I play mono-red and finish a round in 20 minutes, and wait an hour for the next round. Some times everyone finishes within a half hour and the next round starts promptly. Other times, I play UW control and get a mirror match, and we go to time, and end up drawing after 5 turns anyway. Still other times I go to time and 1 player ekes out victory on Turn4 because of some masterful gameplay. I don't see how removing the 5 turns or shortening rounds will alleviate any of this. Matches will still go to time, matches will still be decided on the last turn of the game, and matches will still end in draws. But shortening rounds DOES penalize complex decks.
Basically, it really sounds like you want to play casually, but decide to play casually at FNM instead of at a kitchen table.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
He fights you not because you've wronged him, but because you're there.
<+RicoSuave> andy doesn't like grass on his playing field
<+RicoSuave> the easiest answer is to flip em over and play in the mud
<BrassMan> OBV
<BrassMan> WAIT WHAT?
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
That said, I think a chess clock would fix most of these problems. When a player says "go" or some such, they click the clock, and its now the other guy's time to do EOT stuff and take his turn. Give each person 30 minutes, no turns, and a game (match?) loss if they time out. Likely fixes most problems, other than TOs having to get a bunch of chess timers.
You lost me there. If this is true, why play in the tournament at all? Are you unable to find people to play with just for fun?
Except that won't work. It just about works on Magic Online, but IRL it would be impossible since you'd have to stop your clock every time you passed priority. In chess the turn structure is "move-go". In magic each turn consists of many steps and phases.
And if anyone thinks 50 minutes is always long enough to finish a match they're the ones doing it wrong. The Wake mirror from Onslaught-era standard springs immediately to mind...
-- Sun Tzu, The Art Of War
So when time is called, what do you do? Call the game a draw? try to call one player the winner or loser?
Remember- a complex game could go right to time, and if we cut off games at time, an otherwise speedy player only has to delay for a minute or so (enough to fly under a judge's radar) to hit time.
If it's a draw, the players can draw, or the turns should go quickly. If someone does have a clear advantage, they'll be able to win quickly. The problem isn't the 5 turns, it's when they turn into 10 minutes. No acceptable solution gets around the problem of each player taking that long of turns.
In the article, Meyou is stating that he has issues with the time management with tournaments, from FNM to the large tournament level. He is not saying that the system is broken, he is saying there are ways we can improve the system and we should discuss them.
So far, he's been mocked, his proposed ideas torn apart, and told flat out that he's wrong - he even makes light in his article that such behavior would not solve anything. How about instead of just saying "NO YUR WRONG THAT CAN'T POSSIBLY WORK GO AWAY!" we propose other solutions?
I think we can all agree that sitting around waiting for longer than you're actually playing is annoying. I will admit I don't have much experience in organizing tournaments, so hearing from a tourney coordinator would be nice.
As my own opinions, I tend to agree with Meyou - nothing is worse than fine-tuning a deck, finishing your match in 20 minutes, and then having to wait an hour for players who are slow-playing either intentionally or unintentionally. At my latest pre-release, there was a round that went almost 2 hours because there were 1-2 matches that were in a stalemate and the judges chose to let them play out their current games because "it was so close" and they didn't want to punish either player (who had 2-0 records at the time) by giving them a draw and decreasing their pack winnings. I was pretty furious and complained, but to no avail. They did eventually impose the 5 turn rule, about 20 minutes after the round ended but each player sat and took 5 minutes each turn.
I hope we can generate some more discussion on how to streamline tournaments.
I disagree. I think that the game experience and the integrity of the event are both damaged by slow events. I believe there are enough solutions available that could both tighten up playtime and still leave plenty of good Magic to be had.
Start the tournament on time. If people can't get there when they are supposed to, then that's unfortunate, but they have to miss out this week.
Perhaps imposing an additional time limit on the extra turns is an option. 5 extra turns, with a 1 minute per turn limit. You don't need to keep clocks the entire match. As others stated that would be aweful tough. But kick in a limit in those final few turns. Is that a perfect solution, no? But it would help.
Rather than attacking the writer, lets all try to understand the intent of the article, and see if there are any constructive ideas out there.
"That doesn't make sense."
* FNM is supposed to be a fun place to play. It's not a PTQ, it's there to encourage people to play more Magic. Turning someone away for being 5 minutes late is not in the spirit of FNM.
* Stores are hardly going to turn people away when they're going to come and spend money.
Also, I'll echo previous sentiments about being penalised for slow play: if your local judge isn't making sure people are playing at a reasonable pace then the judge/TO is the person who needs to be told. They have a responsibility to uphold the tournament rules.
-- Sun Tzu, The Art Of War
While I agree that this is what tends to happen at larger events, it's FNMs where I seldom see this. Usually the judge is also a store employee/owner; most usually camp out behind their desk/computer, coming out only for the rare judge calls--they multitask, staying busy with store business, or doing other things on the computer. Few are out observing play, watching the tournament, where they could observe slow play, or a change in the pace of play. However, this may not be something that is likely to change--employees are paid to work, and the store may want something more than 'ran the tournament' for their 4+ hrs of wages/time.
Stores which allow players to come late or start late will continue to attract players who are late--if I call 5 min before the tournament starts, saying I'll be there 15 min late, and you hold the tournament for me, I'll probably think I can do that again. And everyone else will figure they can too--why not stop for a bite to eat, or at another store to trade for a little? You always start late anyway.
Stores that always start on time, and delay rarely (say only 7 showed up on time that week, and they need 8 to sanction--more than likely, the store will wait for the 8th) will only attract players who can be on time; if you miss out one week, you'll try harder to be on time next week--or you'll stop coming to that FNM if you can't get there on time.
This is a great post that responds to the various deficiencies in the article. I disagree with one part of this quote only (the part that I have italicized and made bold) There is a difference, which I don't think you recognize, between playing Magic while taking up all the time you can legally and slow playing. One is a valid strategy while the other is defined in the rules as unsportsmanlike and illegal. There is nothing wrong with a player seeing he is 1-0 with ten minutes left in the round and taking the legal amount of time to shuffle at each cracked fetchland and each path to exile while trying to get into turns. It is a valid strategy that has won me, or tied me, more than one match I would have otherwise lost if I was playing as fast as I could.
There is no rule that states that you have to play as fast as possible, only that you play at a reasonable pace.
I personally like the five turn extension, it gives the match a forced climax if it hasn't had one already. Without it the 50min would be too easy to manipulate, but my appreciation for the five turn clock has been stated by others and more eloquently.
This is one instance where I personally have a problem with the current rules. This shouldn't be allowed. In best practice, people should play at the same pace no matter what the "time situation" is.
This statement is exactly why I have a problem with the first in my post. If Player A does this consistantly and is never called out for it, Players B & C might think, "hey, I think I'll slow play after winning game 1 and take the match." In my opinion, this type of play shouldn't be allowed. Perhaps a rule could be made to give players who go to time in X amount of matches over the course of Y actions be given a warning. Those who get Z amount of warnings be given a match loss or suspension from a tournament or some other punishment (having to call the other players significant others to explain to them why their husbands/wives/girlfriends/boyfriends aren't home yet). This way, you wouldn't be punished for having a match or two go to time now and then, but you would be punished if you consistantly did so.
I know not all slow players are trying to slow it down. Some are new and haven't played much Magic - these players will likely learn and improve play over time. We were all n00bs at one time, so I can forgive that.
What I can't forgive are jerks who take "all of the legal time possible" to shuffle their deck, consider an action, or tap a land just so they can slow down a match round.
This is entirely what happens at premier events.
2. Late-adds are commonplace at larger events, as long as the second round hasn't been paired (SCG events, etc.) Talk to your local owner.
3. If your opponent is playing slow, then you should be the one to hurry him up, and then ask the TO/Judge to ask him/her to play faster.
4. At Premier-sized tournaments, 25 minute turnarounds are as good as it gets. Let's look at what has to happen:
a) The extra time from time extensions (deck checks, and penalties) occurs. The average deck check is +10 minutes.
b) Five extra turns occurs. (5 minutes)
c) The results have to be taken to the stage and entered into the computer (1 minute)
d) The new round pairings have to be printed. At GP DC, this was 50 or more sheets of paper per side (3 minutes)
e) The pairings need to be posted (2 minutes)
f) Players need to find their pairings and seats. At the 450 table GP DC main event, all of the pairings boards were crowded, and players had long walks to their tables. (10 minutes)
This is a 21 minute round turnaround assuming NO time extensions were given.
5. In short, I don't think that you've been on the organizer end of premier events, and it shows in your writing. While you may have experience with FNMs, large events are very different.
/I judged at GP DC.
Did you find your car keys? Can't find them unless you look for them.
Change doesn't happen when a person says "this is just how it is."
Change happens when people look at things, discuss things, and propose ideas.
Maybe this is petty, but it was truly distracting for me..
Ha. No, I don't have to call my wife between every match.
That would be truly insane.
1. Chess clock idea has been officially decided against for at least a decade at this point. let it die.
- 1a. "strategically" slow-playing in your 1-0 position doesn't test or prove your skill, so by all means go ahead and do it. Some people play to improve their game while others seek to rely on exploiting rules on time constraints.
2. 5 extra turns is more often than not redundant and defeats the purpose of a time limit. "You only get 50 minutes, BUT if you don't succeed we'll give you more time." Why have time limits but offer more time anyway?
3. I feel the tone of the article sets itself up to be criticized by readers. In many spots it's too apologetic, then is too pushy at other times. Poor use of time at sanctioned events is a big issue, and is perhaps too complicated an issue to discuss it in a 1-page personal testimony.
4. Point 3 attracts vultures to pick apart the article, figuratively speaking.
And, that is why I write these articles. I fully realize I take a risk of being wrong when I go down roads uncharted. Nobody talks about these areas. It is my hope people learn from these articles and from the forum posters. I've learned a lot from forum posters.
Nobody else seems to be willing to write about these other areas of Magic. This includes Wizards and other writers. Whether wrong or right, at least they are getting written about.
If I were on a process improvement team, high level judge, or Wizards employee reading this article, I would note how uninformed even experienced Magic players are about certains aspects of larger tournaments. This inexperience could be a large barrier for getting more players into tournaments. Therefore, some kind of action should be taken to correct this deficit.
Again, nobody wants to take the risk of being wrong and they will continue to stray away from these topics.
I am willing to take that risk because at least something is being written about them.
Ok, for Neon-chan and others who have simply picked apart the article:
Are there any time issues you've noted with large events? Do you have any suggestions on how to fix them?
I understand that "the integrity of the game" is important, but are there seriously NO methods of better practice to reduce the waiting times?
I'll throw another one out. If completely taking away the "extra turns" is impossible, why not reduce the minutes in round (to say 40) and increase the number of extra turns to 10 or 15 with only 30 seconds - 1 minute allowed per round. That could possibly defeat the "I'm up 1-0 and want to slow play" idiocy.
Also, could Wizards update their tournament software somehow for easier reporting or round generation? I don't have much experience here, but when the Judge commented earlier, it sounded like the fastest turnaround possible was 21 minutes from the end of last match. Is there no technology that can help with this? Maybe electronic bands or badges (or both) where a player could walk up to a judge, give them a result, get scanned and have it instantly entered so that after the last match the next round could start much sooner. Obviously, this might not be feasible for small events due to cost, but for larger events (like a PTQ) it could help speed things along.
I would get it if this was a midparagraph game name drop and you were being paid by WotC, but you say Magic again next sentence and you're not, respectively. So, well, what gives?
edit: Yeah, having more cash outlay requirements to run PTQs is a great idea.
(Maybe I'm opposed because I tend to play bad slow decks and appreciate the five minutes to grab food)
Allow me to rephrase the author's primary concern on his behalf - if FNM attendance size is a fraction of the size of an event's, why does it take just as long to keep things moving? Can any procedural changes outside of gameplay streamline the process, or even be universally agreed upon?
The biggest point of this article that I agree with is that people are afraid of being wrong rather than change, and even this debate shows it. No one habitually late or slow wants to hear suggestions to improve the time slot of the FNM experience, and TO's aren't always happy to hear suggestions on how they should do their job.
Regarding Play Time - I have been on all sides of this issue. Some days I play mono-red and finish a round in 20 minutes, and wait an hour for the next round. Some times everyone finishes within a half hour and the next round starts promptly. Other times, I play UW control and get a mirror match, and we go to time, and end up drawing after 5 turns anyway. Still other times I go to time and 1 player ekes out victory on Turn4 because of some masterful gameplay. I don't see how removing the 5 turns or shortening rounds will alleviate any of this. Matches will still go to time, matches will still be decided on the last turn of the game, and matches will still end in draws. But shortening rounds DOES penalize complex decks.
Basically, it really sounds like you want to play casually, but decide to play casually at FNM instead of at a kitchen table.