This could potentially be a contentious issue, so I will try to clearly separate facts from my opinion in the OP.
The following statements are facts:
There was a PTQ yesterday in Houston, TX.
There were 284 players at the PTQ for 9 rounds of swiss.
The eventual winner of the PTQ was deck checked in round 6 and was found to have 6 copies of Elvish Archdruid in his deck.
He was only deck checked because he had 4 Elvish Archdruids in play and he revealed a 5th one off of Garruk, Caller of Beasts's +1.
On the registration sheet he wrote 4 Elvish Archdruid, 2 Avacyn's Pilgrim.
He was only given a game loss for this infraction.
The winner also received a separate infraction for playing with unmarked Innistrad checklist cards.
The winner was also playing with clear sleeves.
The odds of drawing an Elvish Archdruid in your opener with only 4 in the deck are ~40%. The odds of drawing one with 6 in the deck are ~54%.
The following statements are my opinion:
It's incredibly difficult to top 8 a 9 round PTQ unless you have really good luck, or you cheat... Having 2 extra copies to draw the most crucial card in the deck clearly gave this player a significant advantage in the first 5 rounds of the tournament, which in turn makes it much easier to make top 8 (which basically required 8-1 at this tournament, only one 7-2 player made it). The player should have received a harsher penalty for this. Especially once he received another infraction. I do not know if he attempted to take advantage of the fact that his checklist cards were unmarked.
He claims that his friend was supposed to give him the Avacyn's Pilgrims but just didn't, but I'd like to know how he "accidentally" ended up with 6 Archdruids instead. At no point during the deckbuilding process should one go "well, I don't have this card so I'll just play 6 copies of this other card instead".
Also, he played 5 rounds of Magic before he was caught and there's no way to not notice that there are extra copies of a card in your deck when you are siding and unsiding like that.
Also, I find his wins in the top 8 to be suspect. He was playing with clear sleeves and always seemed to have his sideboard cards. Of course this could just be chance but I am more likely now to attribute it to some foul play on his part.
IMHO there should be harsher penalties for this kind of behavior. I believe that this player intentionally cheated the system at a very large PTQ where the judges were too overloaded to do frequent deck checks, was caught and received only a slap on the wrist, and then proceeded to win the whole tournament. Now he's going to Dublin to cheat with the best of them.
Said it before, will say it again: As long as the penalties for cheating are as lax as they are, people will continue to cheat. The upsides to cheating massively outweigh the downsides.
I think a lot of judges just don't have the pair to make a DQ. I've seen many cases at GPs where there is outrageously marked cards, drawing two, etc. if you get caught, warning or game loss. Big deal. They probably won every game up until that point by cheating, so it's worth it.
I think a lot of judges just don't have the pair to make a DQ. I've seen many cases at GPs where there is outrageously marked cards, drawing two, etc. if you get caught, warning or game loss. Big deal. They probably won every game up until that point by cheating, so it's worth it.
This isn't an issue at all. This is an issue with a fair punitive system, using Blackstone's formulation:
"It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer"
Without being there, it is difficult to determine whether there was actual cheating going on. That is an issue for the Judges inspecting the player's deck. But most players will agree that the rules as they are are relatively fair. If I accidentally draw 2, I shouldn't have my whole day (and entry fees) taken away from me. If I was playing my foil Figure of Destinys because they were the only ones I had, I shouldn't be DQ'd.
A DQ is rightfully a long and intensive process, to ensure that a player being DQ'd is being DQ'd for the right reasons. Often times, it will take until an event has finished to finish DQ investigations on particular players.
Any judge will start asking questions when a player has more than 4 of a particular card in his or her deck. It is incredibly suspicious. However, whoever was the Head Judge determined that this was not a cause for an immediate DQ (aka, not cheating).
Bringing this up with Wizards is how to get action on this. Not trying to lambast the Judge Program and whoever this player is on a Magic Forum.
I agree entirely that players shouldn't be DQ'd for minor offences or for incidents when it couldn't be established whether they were definitely cheating or just made a mistake/were ignorant of the rules. But surely when a player breaks the rules in a way - innocently or otherwise - that increases their odds of winning as significantly as running 6 copies of a non-basic land, they should be DQ'd. I can't see how they could have let him continue under those circumstances. I'm not suggesting he necessarily be banned, but it sounds like an entire competition - that a lot of players would have been heavily invested in - was warped by a guy playing outside of the rules. I say all this with the caveat that I'm taking the OP's word for this entire incident, but if all of the above was accurate, this sounds like a serious misstep by the judges. Even if this guy was just totally ignorant of the max-of-4 rule, he should have been DQ'd so that the integrity of the competition remained intact, and he would have known better next time.
I just wanted to add that, whilst I stand by my feelings on the issue, I hope it doesn't come across as though I'm slamming judges or the work they do as a whole. I've a lot of appreciation for what they do, really I do. But it does feel like, on this occasion, the guys running the events may have got it wrong.
The Magic Infraction Procedure Guideline covers this issue. It says:
Quote from MIPG »
Tournament Error — Deck/Decklist Problem Definition
A player commits one or more of the following errors involving their deck:
• The deck and/or decklist contain an illegal number of cards for the format.
• The deck and/or decklist contain one or more cards that are illegal for the format.
• A card listed on a decklist is not identified by its full name, and could be interpreted as more than one card.
Truncated names of storyline characters (legendary permanents and Planeswalkers) are acceptable as long as they are the only representation of that character in the format and should be treated as referring to that card, even if other cards begin with the same name.
• The contents of the presented deck and sideboard do not match the decklist registered.
Penalty: Game Loss
Judges as a rule CANNOT generally deviate from the IPG. The main reason for this is that if decisions are all made on-the-cuff, incredible avenues for favoritism open up. What if this person's a friend of theirs? What if they know this person from their LGS and know him to be a generally shady character? Changing the ruling for either of these reasons is a huge potential issue, and thus judges are not supposed to "deviate".
If the judge conducted an Investigation, and was able to determine confidently that this player was trying to take advantage of the fact they were knowingly running 6 copies of Elvish Archdruid, then we get into Unsporting Conduct -- Cheating, but there is no indication of that from the report (and never could be without a proper investigation).
A DQ is rightfully a long and intensive process, to ensure that a player being DQ'd is being DQ'd for the right reasons. Often times, it will take until an event has finished to finish DQ investigations on particular players.
This is my thought as well. Often times we see the harsher punishments handed down well after the event is over and there is time to investigate it. I hope, given the OP's information is correct, that a much harsher punishment is to follow because this seems like clear cheating with only the most transparent excuses.
Judges as a rule CANNOT generally deviate from the IPG. The main reason for this is that if decisions are all made on-the-cuff, incredible avenues for favoritism open up. What if this person's a friend of theirs? What if they know this person from their LGS and know him to be a generally shady character? Changing the ruling for either of these reasons is a huge potential issue, and thus judges are not supposed to "deviate".
Good information, and agreed.
That said, it just means the rules should be changed. Game loss is probably the appropriate regular REL penalty. In competitive REL, penalties should be significantly harsher. Even in competitive, I could see 4 copies instead of the 3 written on a decklist being game loss, but something so blatant as having 6 copies of a card is just plain inexcusable. DQ at a minimum.
The idea that someone can do this and then be qualified to actually win the event is just... ridiculous.
To play devil's advocate: 6 archdruid vs. 4 archdruid & 2 pilgrim... realistically the difference in fixing is likely very, very small. He may have won regardless.
I agree that competitive REL should have much stiffer penalties then regular, I hope his PTQ win gets abolished and the second place player gets invited. I also think that Professional REL should be much higher then competitive, you are invited to a protour, you should know all the rules.
After incidents like this, the upper-level judges really should consider revising the penalty for TE-DDP to a match loss at Comp REL or higher if the four-of rule is violated.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
A mere ten days after the Mending, a young knight of Valeron and a young ranger of Eos made a discovery that would change Alara forever.
I can't agree with that - multiple Archdruids creates a far higher chance of powering out an early Craterhoof Behemoth or Garruk, Caller of Beasts. Two Archdruids is four mana. One Archdruid and one Pilgrim is two mana. That's a big difference when you're trying to hit big mana quickly. I do agree with the rest of your post though - in a PTQ environment, the penalties should be harsher than at FNM.
I'd also like to point out that the top tables of this particular event were ~50% Jund and so making his elves survive hardcast Bonfires is a really big deal too.
Said it before, will say it again: As long as the penalties for cheating are as lax as they are, people will continue to cheat. The upsides to cheating massively outweigh the downsides.
That said, it just means the rules should be changed. Game loss is probably the appropriate regular REL penalty. In competitive REL, penalties should be significantly harsher. Even in competitive, I could see 4 copies instead of the 3 written on a decklist being game loss, but something so blatant as having 6 copies of a card is just plain inexcusable. DQ at a minimum.
The idea that someone can do this and then be qualified to actually win the event is just... ridiculous.
To play devil's advocate: 6 archdruid vs. 4 archdruid & 2 pilgrim... realistically the difference in fixing is likely very, very small. He may have won regardless.
There needs to be lines drawn though. I played against a Junk Rites opponent whom I Slaughter Games'd for Thragtusk. Turns out he had 5 in his deck, one was from his last opponent whom had both the same sleeves as him that he Angel of Serenity'd. Was he playing with 5 Thragtusks? Yes he was, but it wasn't done on purpose. He shouldn't get a DQ for that, game loss sure for not being careful but not the end of his day.
Also there is a huge difference between 6 druid and 4 & 2. The fact that the druid isn't just mana dork but one that gets better with elves AND is a lord makes hitting multiple copies much, much better.
Red should be burn, Goblins, Dragons, draw/discard, and Standard-unplayable 5CMC cards with insane, lengthy effects that take 10 minutes to figure out what they do and another 20 to actually make their effects work on the field.
I went to a PTQ yesterday. I built my deck the night before, and got almost no sleep before the event. Still, I knew every single card I was playing by memory and how many I was playing. Even if I didn't, I surely would have known the numbers of most of those cards as I boarded in and out after game one of a match. Especially if I had TWO more copies of a key card than I was supposed to have in my deck.
I'm a good player, but I'm not on the same level as someone who can actually win a PTQ. I simply cannot believe this was an accident. He can't be a moron one minute, and the best player in the room the next. Obviously, he was just thoughtful and manipulative the whole time, and used that same cunning to fake being clueless as it suited him.
Yes, the guidelines for deck errors are clear cut, but intentional cheating is always a DQ. From what I've seen, these judges DID select the right punishment for this guy's offense. They just didn't identify the right offense.
This feels like it'll get out of hand quick. Does this story personally sound fishy? Sure, but that doesn't mean it's not 100% legit. Players make mistakes; stupid, stupid mistakes (one could even say that people are stupid). Being stupid does not mean you're trying to be "stupid" to gain an advantage. Before the IPG was even updated to reflect this (and I'm glad it was) cheating was basically knowing something was against the rules, and trying to gain an advantage from it.
It is very possible to run 6 copies of a card in your deck and not know that's against the rules. It is very possible to be running 6 copies of a card in your deck, and think you were only running 4. It is very possible to make a mistake in this game. Since I wasn't there to make the judgement call, and neither were you (the majority of the people reading this) then you can't say you're sure the player did or didn't cheat.
This feels like it'll get out of hand quick. Does this story personally sound fishy? Sure, but that doesn't mean it's not 100% legit. Players make mistakes; stupid, stupid mistakes (one could even say that people are stupid). Being stupid does not mean you're trying to be "stupid" to gain an advantage. Before the IPG was even updated to reflect this (and I'm glad it was) cheating was basically knowing something was against the rules, and trying to gain an advantage from it.
It is very possible to run 6 copies of a card in your deck and not know that's against the rules. It is very possible to be running 6 copies of a card in your deck, and think you were only running 4. It is very possible to make a mistake in this game. Since I wasn't there to make the judgement call, and neither were you (the majority of the people reading this) then you can't say you're sure the player did or didn't cheat.
If it were me, I'd have noticed if I even had five copies of a card in my deck, and I would have noticed within the first few rounds, even if somehow that had gotten past me in deckbuilding. You're right that we should give the benefit of the doubt on some level, but we also shouldn't let that blind us to massive snorting elephants in the room hitting us with their trunks and stomping their feet trying to get us to open our eyes and notice.
This feels like it'll get out of hand quick. Does this story personally sound fishy? Sure, but that doesn't mean it's not 100% legit. Players make mistakes; stupid, stupid mistakes (one could even say that people are stupid). Being stupid does not mean you're trying to be "stupid" to gain an advantage. Before the IPG was even updated to reflect this (and I'm glad it was) cheating was basically knowing something was against the rules, and trying to gain an advantage from it.
It is very possible to run 6 copies of a card in your deck and not know that's against the rules. It is very possible to be running 6 copies of a card in your deck, and think you were only running 4. It is very possible to make a mistake in this game. Since I wasn't there to make the judgement call, and neither were you (the majority of the people reading this) then you can't say you're sure the player did or didn't cheat.
As others have said, even if it was an honest mistake it is one that is so fundamental to the game and that had almost assuredly greatly contributed to him doing well up to the point that his deck was checked, that it deserves a DQ anyway. If I were one of his opponents in the early rounds, especially one that went on to place well, I would be furious that I lost this deck.
As others have said, even if it was an honest mistake it is one that is so fundamental to the game and that had almost assuredly greatly contributed to him doing well up to the point that his deck was checked, that it deserves a DQ anyway. If I were one of his opponents in the early rounds, especially one that went on to place well, I would be furious that I lost this deck.
I don't see how it could be an honest mistake at all. I don't believe someone would put in two extra copies of a rare to "stand in" for 2 Avacyns Pilgrim and then just "forget" until your eleventh game in a row with that deck.
Either way, intent shouldn't matter. I don't fault the judges, I fault the IPG. Regardless of intent or not, if you have an illegal advanatge in your deck, you should be DQ'ed. The only exception I would agree with making would be if it is round 1 and you haven't had a game yet and you get deck checked, they can remove the extra cards and issue a game loss.
As soon as you draw your 7 and take your first turn though, it is grossly unfair to every opponent you play to allow you to reap the rewards of winning with an illegal deck, regardless of intent. On purpose, by accident, doesn't matter, he potentially cost every opponent of his a chance to get on the PT.
As others have said, even if it was an honest mistake it is one that is so fundamental to the game and that had almost assuredly greatly contributed to him doing well up to the point that his deck was checked, that it deserves a DQ anyway. If I were one of his opponents in the early rounds, especially one that went on to place well, I would be furious that I lost this deck.
Sure, you'd be mad that he did well, but turn the tables and you'd be mad if you were DQ'd for an honest mistake. You can personally tell me you would throw yourself onto your sword and drop from the event at 5-0 for doing such a grievous thing, but not everyone else would, and if it was an honest mistake then not everyone else should be penalized as if it wasn't an accident.
You're right, there was an advantage gained, and there is no way to make things right for the players who may or maynot have been beaten, other than to penalize the player accordingly in order to deter this kind of behaviour, and to penalize the infracting player. Other than that, an investigation should have begun and ended (apparently in the determination that the player had committed the error accidentally).
Some food for thought. What if the player was 1-0 when he was caught? What if he was 9-0? What if he was 1-6? What if they were 9 years old? What if they were 90? Should we be taking all these factors into consideration once we determine the integrity of the tournament wasn't compromised by cheating (intentionally taking an illegal advantage of something)? What if we discovered they never once cast a single copy of the druid until right then?
Although don't be confused with the difference between taking these into consideration when determining if this is cheating, and taking these factors into consideration when determining if this is a Deck/deck list problem. If we start adjusting the penalty from event to event, how is it fair that at one event I got a warning for being 1-6 and doing what I did, and at another I was 6-1 and I was removed from the event for what I did if both are determined to be accidental?
I don't see how it could be an honest mistake at all. I don't believe someone would put in two extra copies of a rare to "stand in" for 2 Avacyns Pilgrim and then just "forget" until your eleventh game in a row with that deck. .
You mean, it's totally inconceivable that someone could accidentally put 6 copies of a card into their deck? Like, there's no way they could think this is just allowed by the rules of the game because perhaps it's allowed in another game? Or perhaps they thought it was just allowed because they say their friend had 6 copies of a card called Shadow Born Apostle on the field once? Or maybe their opponent in a draft played 6 copies of a common so they just assumed it was a tournament thing?
I'm not saying it isn't fishy, or that the judges did or didn't make a mistake, but I can see how it could happen. Maybe you can too now.
Sure, you'd be mad that he did well, but turn the tables and you'd be mad if you were DQ'd for an honest mistake. You can personally tell me you would throw yourself onto your sword and drop from the event at 5-0 for doing such a grievous thing, but not everyone else would, and if it was an honest mistake then not everyone else should be penalized as if it wasn't an accident
Intent shouldn't matter. If I step offsides on purpose or by accident in football, the penalty is the same. If I travel by accident or on purpose in basketball, the penalty is the same. If I pass across both lines in hockey by accident or on purpose, the penalty if the same.
Part of playing at Comp REL is not to make those kinds of mistakes. Not that I would believe it for a second, but if you legitimately are unable to adhere to the 4 card rules and accidentally slide 2 more copies of a card you already play 4 of, then you are not ready to play at Comp REL levels.
How many times do we need to see people getting rewarded for breaking the rules before we drop the "Well, it was just an honest mistake" schtick? Apparently you can play with a 58 card deck, play a deck with more than 4 copies of a card, drop more than 1 land a turn, change your life total late game, and play cards without paying all their mana cost, and just yawn, go "sorry", lose a single game (after you've already beaten and eliminated 5-6 other players), and go on with your day.
If we start adjusting the penalty from event to event, how is it fair that at one event I got a warning for being 1-6 and doing what I did, and at another I was 6-1 and I was removed from the event for what I did if both are determined to be accidental?
I don't think anyone is saying change the rules event to event. We're saying change the rules to be more fair to the opponent who frankly get screwed everytime this happens, which is WAY more than it should.
I mean, honestly, knowing the penalty is only a game loss, who wouldn't stack their deck and see how far they can run with it? It's way to easy to game the penalty system in your favor. And the worst thing is, if this amount of cheating is caught, God only know how many people are getting away with it.
And I disagree, intent should matter. In all those sports, if someone makes a mistake like that, they're not ejected from the event. They get to keep on playing. If they do it again and again, they're penalized more and more, and the penalty is a deterrent to commit those infractions that are fitting of the crime committed (at least in the eyes of the DCI and myself).
And I disagree, intent should matter. In all those sports, if someone makes a mistake like that, they're not ejected from the event. They get to keep on playing. If they do it again and again, they're penalized more and more, and the penalty is a deterrent to commit those infractions that are fitting of the crime committed (at least in the eyes of the DCI and myself).
The get the same penalty regardless of intent. MTG should be the same, and the penalties need to be ramped WAY up. How many people do you think should lose a PTQ and miss out on the Pro Tour because of the same guy cheating? 5? 10? 15? 20?
As long as the situation stays the way it is, cheating will continue to be rampant. If I was a less scrupulous person, and I just saw a guy win a PTQ with a 6-of in his deck, you can be damn sure I'd be sliding in 6 or 8 copies of the key card in my deck. As it is now, there's no reason NOT to cheat.
Sure, you'd be mad that he did well, but turn the tables and you'd be mad if you were DQ'd for an honest mistake. You can personally tell me you would throw yourself onto your sword and drop from the event at 5-0 for doing such a grievous thing, but not everyone else would, and if it was an honest mistake then not everyone else should be penalized as if it wasn't an accident.
You're right, there was an advantage gained, and there is no way to make things right for the players who may or maynot have been beaten, other than to penalize the player accordingly in order to deter this kind of behaviour, and to penalize the infracting player. Other than that, an investigation should have begun and ended (apparently in the determination that the player had committed the error accidentally).
Some food for thought. What if the player was 1-0 when he was caught? What if he was 9-0? What if he was 1-6? What if they were 9 years old? What if they were 90? Should we be taking all these factors into consideration once we determine the integrity of the tournament wasn't compromised by cheating (intentionally taking an illegal advantage of something)? What if we discovered they never once cast a single copy of the druid until right then?
Although don't be confused with the difference between taking these into consideration when determining if this is cheating, and taking these factors into consideration when determining if this is a Deck/deck list problem. If we start adjusting the penalty from event to event, how is it fair that at one event I got a warning for being 1-6 and doing what I did, and at another I was 6-1 and I was removed from the event for what I did if both are determined to be accidental?
The point is that a player with enough skill to win a PTQ can't make a mistake that big by accident. Plus, he got in trouble for other "accidents" like not marking his checklist cards, and was using clear sleeves... something I'd never even imagine doing simply for how suspicious it looks. The point is that judges have to use their judgment to determine whether or not someone cheated intentionally, and it's the quality of that judgment that's being called into question here.
I've seen people doing well in big events basically get DQed when altered cards they had were replaced with basic lands. I guess they should have just stuck two more non-altered ones in when building the deck, because, then, they would only have gotten a game loss, and still have the unaltered two in the deck before being found out.
Hindsight is 20/20, and we're using that here to question the judgment call made, so that, if this is really as egregious as it appears, it will be remembered the next time such a situation occurs by anyone reading this. No one's saying to boot the judges who made this call out of Magic. Far from it. We're only questioning the individual call itself. That seems a worthwhile pursuit to me, considering the evidence.
I disagree with Valarin about intent not being relevant. Though, on some level, I think facts need to be considered more highly than vague guesses about another person's mindset at higher levels of competitive play while dealing with opponents who've shown themselves capable of mentally playing on those levels.
That said, it just means the rules should be changed. Game loss is probably the appropriate regular REL penalty. In competitive REL, penalties should be significantly harsher. Even in competitive, I could see 4 copies instead of the 3 written on a decklist being game loss, but something so blatant as having 6 copies of a card is just plain inexcusable. DQ at a minimum.
The idea that someone can do this and then be qualified to actually win the event is just... ridiculous.
To play devil's advocate: 6 archdruid vs. 4 archdruid & 2 pilgrim... realistically the difference in fixing is likely very, very small. He may have won regardless.
There are no Game Loss penalties at Regular REL. At Regular REL, you just fix the problems and tell them not to do it again. It's Warnings and DQs (and preferably rarely if ever the latter).
The get the same penalty regardless of intent. MTG should be the same, and the penalties need to be ramped WAY up. How many people do you think should lose a PTQ and miss out on the Pro Tour because of the same guy cheating? 5? 10? 15? 20?
As long as the situation stays the way it is, cheating will continue to be rampant. If I was a less scrupulous person, and I just saw a guy win a PTQ with a 6-of in his deck, you can be damn sure I'd be sliding in 6 or 8 copies of the key card in my deck. As it is now, there's no reason NOT to cheat.
Intent does matter though. Wasn't there that big scandal with American football where whole teams were getting suspended because they were putting bounties on certain players (yet "playing fair" over the course of the game)? What if a soccer player "accidentally" fractured another player's bone with a kick, and was later found out to actually have done it on purpose? Would/should the penalties be different? (Note: I'm not a sports expert)
The point is that a player with enough skill to win a PTQ can't make a mistake that big by accident. Plus, he got in trouble for other "accidents" like not marking his checklist cards, and was using clear sleeves... something I'd never even imagine doing simply for how suspicious it looks. The point is that judges have to use their judgment to determine whether or not someone cheated intentionally, and it's the quality of that judgment that's being called into question here.
I've seen people doing well in big events basically get DQed when altered cards they had were replaced with basic lands. I guess they should have just stuck two more non-altered ones in when building the deck, because, then, they would only have gotten a game loss, and still have the unaltered two in the deck before being found out.
Hindsight is 20/20, and we're using that here to question the judgment call made, so that, if this is really as egregious as it appears, it will be remembered the next time such a situation occurs by anyone reading this. No one's saying to boot the judges who made this call out of Magic. Far from it. We're only questioning the individual call itself. That seems a worthwhile pursuit to me, considering the evidence.
I disagree with Valarin about intent not being relevant. Though, on some level, I think facts need to be considered more highly than vague guesses about another person's mindset at higher levels of competitive play while dealing with opponents who've shown themselves capable of mentally playing on those levels.
Are you honestly suggesting that Judges start making rulings based on hunches? Is that what you really want to start happening? What if one sees a player running 57 cards that they know to be shady from their LGS? Should they be DQd?
I'd personally prefer it if that overwhelming power and responsibility be left out of the hands of the few. I'd love to see some of the DQs that would be submitted to Wizards of the Coast.
"Why did <player X> get banned?"
"Because he had a decklist problem, and was playing with clear sleeves."
"Makes sense, good job."
Where does it stop? Shady-looking characters? If a judge recently has a personal problem with another player and sees them having a DDLP issue, do they have the right to DQ them? You're suggesting giving judges complete power with no oversight (not that I'm recommending oversight for Judges, because either is a terrible solution).
The best-case is to have set-in-stone rules that allow judges the right to conduct their own investigations in cases of cheating, and only DQ if they see that there's a problem. Circumstantial evidence is always circumstantial.
OmegaLegacy, I should be clear that I'm playing devil's/DCI's advocate here because typically no one does, or everyone ignores it. I was on the Bertoncini "ban"-dwaggon back when it happened and I personally regret being so quick to judge. I still feel he got what was coming to him, and I'm glad the DCI acted at some point, but I would personally be very content with someone getting away with it to commit an offense again later so that we were certain they were up to no good rather than DQ and possibly suspend someone for an honest mistake, much like what happened with Bertoncini.
The offenses and their details are recorded by the DCI, and will be kept in the event they happen a bunch more. The person will receive a longer suspension for all these if they're ever determined to be cheating. This means that either they won't do it again since they realize they're being monitored, or they will and they'll just get 1... 2... 3 years suspended from playing their game in a sanctioned capacity.
But you raise a good point. Did the judges make the right call? Did they ask the right questions? Did they give away more or less information when investigating that hey should have? I'm not them, I wasn't there, I don't know them, so I don't know. Hopefully they're asking these same questions, and working to improve for the future to maintain the integrity of ALL the events we all play in, in the future.
There are no Game Loss penalties at Regular REL. At Regular REL, you just fix the problems and tell them not to do it again. It's Warnings and DQs (and preferably rarely if ever the latter).
Ehh... actually game losses "can" happen, but they should be as rare as DQ's, so I would rather not try to teach about them. Game losses at regular are reserved for gross repeat offenses after multiple warnings in order to educate with a penalty since verbal education isn't getting through to them. I HIGHLY advocate that NO experienced judge go around issuing game losses at regular before talks with an experienced judge. So yeah, a good rule of thumb is no game losses at Regular, lets stick with that, and teach that.
Intent does matter though. Wasn't there that big scandal with American football where whole teams were getting suspended because they were putting bounties on certain players (yet "playing fair" over the course of the game)? What if a soccer player "accidentally" fractured another player's bone with a kick, and was later found out to actually have done it on purpose? Would/should the penalties be different? (Note: I'm not a sports expert)
There's a big difference between intentionally trying to injure someone and cheating at MTG. We're not talking assault/physical injury. What the football team did probably should have landed them in jail.
I'll just ask you, straight up, do you think it is fair for the 5 guys he beat with an illegal deck to have lost? Do you think receiving 1 game loss in round 5 of the event was a suitable punishment for what he did? And do you believe that it is acceptable to believe that in a Comp REL event players can accidentally play 10+ games of MTG without noticing 6 copies of the main engine of their deck?
OmegaLegacy, I should be clear that I'm playing devil's/DCI's advocate here because typically no one does, or everyone ignores it.
There's no need for a devils advocate. The facts are clear: The rewards gained by cheating vastly outweigh the punishments. As the IPG stands now, given what you can get away with, it's almost silly NOT to cheat. Lax rules encourage it.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
The following statements are facts:
There was a PTQ yesterday in Houston, TX.
There were 284 players at the PTQ for 9 rounds of swiss.
The eventual winner of the PTQ was deck checked in round 6 and was found to have 6 copies of Elvish Archdruid in his deck.
He was only deck checked because he had 4 Elvish Archdruids in play and he revealed a 5th one off of Garruk, Caller of Beasts's +1.
On the registration sheet he wrote 4 Elvish Archdruid, 2 Avacyn's Pilgrim.
He was only given a game loss for this infraction.
The winner also received a separate infraction for playing with unmarked Innistrad checklist cards.
The winner was also playing with clear sleeves.
The odds of drawing an Elvish Archdruid in your opener with only 4 in the deck are ~40%. The odds of drawing one with 6 in the deck are ~54%.
The following statements are my opinion:
It's incredibly difficult to top 8 a 9 round PTQ unless you have really good luck, or you cheat... Having 2 extra copies to draw the most crucial card in the deck clearly gave this player a significant advantage in the first 5 rounds of the tournament, which in turn makes it much easier to make top 8 (which basically required 8-1 at this tournament, only one 7-2 player made it). The player should have received a harsher penalty for this. Especially once he received another infraction. I do not know if he attempted to take advantage of the fact that his checklist cards were unmarked.
He claims that his friend was supposed to give him the Avacyn's Pilgrims but just didn't, but I'd like to know how he "accidentally" ended up with 6 Archdruids instead. At no point during the deckbuilding process should one go "well, I don't have this card so I'll just play 6 copies of this other card instead".
Also, he played 5 rounds of Magic before he was caught and there's no way to not notice that there are extra copies of a card in your deck when you are siding and unsiding like that.
Also, I find his wins in the top 8 to be suspect. He was playing with clear sleeves and always seemed to have his sideboard cards. Of course this could just be chance but I am more likely now to attribute it to some foul play on his part.
IMHO there should be harsher penalties for this kind of behavior. I believe that this player intentionally cheated the system at a very large PTQ where the judges were too overloaded to do frequent deck checks, was caught and received only a slap on the wrist, and then proceeded to win the whole tournament. Now he's going to Dublin to cheat with the best of them.
Proud member of Fires Rf Salvation
Currently Playing:
BPack RatB
Modern:
WURRWU ControlRUW
Legacy:
UHigh TideU
UGTurbo EldraziGU
EDH:
RWURuhan Planeswalker ControlUWR
RGBProssh, Skyraider of KherBGR
This isn't an issue at all. This is an issue with a fair punitive system, using Blackstone's formulation:
"It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer"
Without being there, it is difficult to determine whether there was actual cheating going on. That is an issue for the Judges inspecting the player's deck. But most players will agree that the rules as they are are relatively fair. If I accidentally draw 2, I shouldn't have my whole day (and entry fees) taken away from me. If I was playing my foil Figure of Destinys because they were the only ones I had, I shouldn't be DQ'd.
A DQ is rightfully a long and intensive process, to ensure that a player being DQ'd is being DQ'd for the right reasons. Often times, it will take until an event has finished to finish DQ investigations on particular players.
Any judge will start asking questions when a player has more than 4 of a particular card in his or her deck. It is incredibly suspicious. However, whoever was the Head Judge determined that this was not a cause for an immediate DQ (aka, not cheating).
Bringing this up with Wizards is how to get action on this. Not trying to lambast the Judge Program and whoever this player is on a Magic Forum.
GX Tron XG
UR Phoenix RU
GG Freyalise High Tide GG
UR Parun Counterspells RU
BB Yawgmoth Token Storm BB
WB Pestilence BW
The Magic Infraction Procedure Guideline covers this issue. It says:
Judges as a rule CANNOT generally deviate from the IPG. The main reason for this is that if decisions are all made on-the-cuff, incredible avenues for favoritism open up. What if this person's a friend of theirs? What if they know this person from their LGS and know him to be a generally shady character? Changing the ruling for either of these reasons is a huge potential issue, and thus judges are not supposed to "deviate".
If the judge conducted an Investigation, and was able to determine confidently that this player was trying to take advantage of the fact they were knowingly running 6 copies of Elvish Archdruid, then we get into Unsporting Conduct -- Cheating, but there is no indication of that from the report (and never could be without a proper investigation).
GX Tron XG
UR Phoenix RU
GG Freyalise High Tide GG
UR Parun Counterspells RU
BB Yawgmoth Token Storm BB
WB Pestilence BW
Reprint Opt for Modern!!
FREE DIG THOROUGH TIME!
PLAY MORE ROUGE DECKS!
Good information, and agreed.
That said, it just means the rules should be changed. Game loss is probably the appropriate regular REL penalty. In competitive REL, penalties should be significantly harsher. Even in competitive, I could see 4 copies instead of the 3 written on a decklist being game loss, but something so blatant as having 6 copies of a card is just plain inexcusable. DQ at a minimum.
The idea that someone can do this and then be qualified to actually win the event is just... ridiculous.
To play devil's advocate: 6 archdruid vs. 4 archdruid & 2 pilgrim... realistically the difference in fixing is likely very, very small. He may have won regardless.
Dega midrange 1-0
Emille, Seven-Sting Dancer Shalin Nariya
I'd also like to point out that the top tables of this particular event were ~50% Jund and so making his elves survive hardcast Bonfires is a really big deal too.
Proud member of Fires Rf Salvation
Currently Playing:
BPack RatB
Modern:
WURRWU ControlRUW
Legacy:
UHigh TideU
UGTurbo EldraziGU
EDH:
RWURuhan Planeswalker ControlUWR
RGBProssh, Skyraider of KherBGR
Spam warning.
-Memnarch
Modern Junk Primer
Legacy ANT Primer
L1 Judge
There needs to be lines drawn though. I played against a Junk Rites opponent whom I Slaughter Games'd for Thragtusk. Turns out he had 5 in his deck, one was from his last opponent whom had both the same sleeves as him that he Angel of Serenity'd. Was he playing with 5 Thragtusks? Yes he was, but it wasn't done on purpose. He shouldn't get a DQ for that, game loss sure for not being careful but not the end of his day.
Also there is a huge difference between 6 druid and 4 & 2. The fact that the druid isn't just mana dork but one that gets better with elves AND is a lord makes hitting multiple copies much, much better.
I'm a good player, but I'm not on the same level as someone who can actually win a PTQ. I simply cannot believe this was an accident. He can't be a moron one minute, and the best player in the room the next. Obviously, he was just thoughtful and manipulative the whole time, and used that same cunning to fake being clueless as it suited him.
Yes, the guidelines for deck errors are clear cut, but intentional cheating is always a DQ. From what I've seen, these judges DID select the right punishment for this guy's offense. They just didn't identify the right offense.
It is very possible to run 6 copies of a card in your deck and not know that's against the rules. It is very possible to be running 6 copies of a card in your deck, and think you were only running 4. It is very possible to make a mistake in this game. Since I wasn't there to make the judgement call, and neither were you (the majority of the people reading this) then you can't say you're sure the player did or didn't cheat.
If it were me, I'd have noticed if I even had five copies of a card in my deck, and I would have noticed within the first few rounds, even if somehow that had gotten past me in deckbuilding. You're right that we should give the benefit of the doubt on some level, but we also shouldn't let that blind us to massive snorting elephants in the room hitting us with their trunks and stomping their feet trying to get us to open our eyes and notice.
Reprint Opt for Modern!!
FREE DIG THOROUGH TIME!
PLAY MORE ROUGE DECKS!
I don't see how it could be an honest mistake at all. I don't believe someone would put in two extra copies of a rare to "stand in" for 2 Avacyns Pilgrim and then just "forget" until your eleventh game in a row with that deck.
Either way, intent shouldn't matter. I don't fault the judges, I fault the IPG. Regardless of intent or not, if you have an illegal advanatge in your deck, you should be DQ'ed. The only exception I would agree with making would be if it is round 1 and you haven't had a game yet and you get deck checked, they can remove the extra cards and issue a game loss.
As soon as you draw your 7 and take your first turn though, it is grossly unfair to every opponent you play to allow you to reap the rewards of winning with an illegal deck, regardless of intent. On purpose, by accident, doesn't matter, he potentially cost every opponent of his a chance to get on the PT.
Sure, you'd be mad that he did well, but turn the tables and you'd be mad if you were DQ'd for an honest mistake. You can personally tell me you would throw yourself onto your sword and drop from the event at 5-0 for doing such a grievous thing, but not everyone else would, and if it was an honest mistake then not everyone else should be penalized as if it wasn't an accident.
You're right, there was an advantage gained, and there is no way to make things right for the players who may or maynot have been beaten, other than to penalize the player accordingly in order to deter this kind of behaviour, and to penalize the infracting player. Other than that, an investigation should have begun and ended (apparently in the determination that the player had committed the error accidentally).
Some food for thought. What if the player was 1-0 when he was caught? What if he was 9-0? What if he was 1-6? What if they were 9 years old? What if they were 90? Should we be taking all these factors into consideration once we determine the integrity of the tournament wasn't compromised by cheating (intentionally taking an illegal advantage of something)? What if we discovered they never once cast a single copy of the druid until right then?
Although don't be confused with the difference between taking these into consideration when determining if this is cheating, and taking these factors into consideration when determining if this is a Deck/deck list problem. If we start adjusting the penalty from event to event, how is it fair that at one event I got a warning for being 1-6 and doing what I did, and at another I was 6-1 and I was removed from the event for what I did if both are determined to be accidental?
You mean, it's totally inconceivable that someone could accidentally put 6 copies of a card into their deck? Like, there's no way they could think this is just allowed by the rules of the game because perhaps it's allowed in another game? Or perhaps they thought it was just allowed because they say their friend had 6 copies of a card called Shadow Born Apostle on the field once? Or maybe their opponent in a draft played 6 copies of a common so they just assumed it was a tournament thing?
I'm not saying it isn't fishy, or that the judges did or didn't make a mistake, but I can see how it could happen. Maybe you can too now.
Intent shouldn't matter. If I step offsides on purpose or by accident in football, the penalty is the same. If I travel by accident or on purpose in basketball, the penalty is the same. If I pass across both lines in hockey by accident or on purpose, the penalty if the same.
Part of playing at Comp REL is not to make those kinds of mistakes. Not that I would believe it for a second, but if you legitimately are unable to adhere to the 4 card rules and accidentally slide 2 more copies of a card you already play 4 of, then you are not ready to play at Comp REL levels.
How many times do we need to see people getting rewarded for breaking the rules before we drop the "Well, it was just an honest mistake" schtick? Apparently you can play with a 58 card deck, play a deck with more than 4 copies of a card, drop more than 1 land a turn, change your life total late game, and play cards without paying all their mana cost, and just yawn, go "sorry", lose a single game (after you've already beaten and eliminated 5-6 other players), and go on with your day.
I don't think anyone is saying change the rules event to event. We're saying change the rules to be more fair to the opponent who frankly get screwed everytime this happens, which is WAY more than it should.
I mean, honestly, knowing the penalty is only a game loss, who wouldn't stack their deck and see how far they can run with it? It's way to easy to game the penalty system in your favor. And the worst thing is, if this amount of cheating is caught, God only know how many people are getting away with it.
And I disagree, intent should matter. In all those sports, if someone makes a mistake like that, they're not ejected from the event. They get to keep on playing. If they do it again and again, they're penalized more and more, and the penalty is a deterrent to commit those infractions that are fitting of the crime committed (at least in the eyes of the DCI and myself).
The get the same penalty regardless of intent. MTG should be the same, and the penalties need to be ramped WAY up. How many people do you think should lose a PTQ and miss out on the Pro Tour because of the same guy cheating? 5? 10? 15? 20?
As long as the situation stays the way it is, cheating will continue to be rampant. If I was a less scrupulous person, and I just saw a guy win a PTQ with a 6-of in his deck, you can be damn sure I'd be sliding in 6 or 8 copies of the key card in my deck. As it is now, there's no reason NOT to cheat.
The point is that a player with enough skill to win a PTQ can't make a mistake that big by accident. Plus, he got in trouble for other "accidents" like not marking his checklist cards, and was using clear sleeves... something I'd never even imagine doing simply for how suspicious it looks. The point is that judges have to use their judgment to determine whether or not someone cheated intentionally, and it's the quality of that judgment that's being called into question here.
I've seen people doing well in big events basically get DQed when altered cards they had were replaced with basic lands. I guess they should have just stuck two more non-altered ones in when building the deck, because, then, they would only have gotten a game loss, and still have the unaltered two in the deck before being found out.
Hindsight is 20/20, and we're using that here to question the judgment call made, so that, if this is really as egregious as it appears, it will be remembered the next time such a situation occurs by anyone reading this. No one's saying to boot the judges who made this call out of Magic. Far from it. We're only questioning the individual call itself. That seems a worthwhile pursuit to me, considering the evidence.
I disagree with Valarin about intent not being relevant. Though, on some level, I think facts need to be considered more highly than vague guesses about another person's mindset at higher levels of competitive play while dealing with opponents who've shown themselves capable of mentally playing on those levels.
There are no Game Loss penalties at Regular REL. At Regular REL, you just fix the problems and tell them not to do it again. It's Warnings and DQs (and preferably rarely if ever the latter).
Intent does matter though. Wasn't there that big scandal with American football where whole teams were getting suspended because they were putting bounties on certain players (yet "playing fair" over the course of the game)? What if a soccer player "accidentally" fractured another player's bone with a kick, and was later found out to actually have done it on purpose? Would/should the penalties be different? (Note: I'm not a sports expert)
Are you honestly suggesting that Judges start making rulings based on hunches? Is that what you really want to start happening? What if one sees a player running 57 cards that they know to be shady from their LGS? Should they be DQd?
I'd personally prefer it if that overwhelming power and responsibility be left out of the hands of the few. I'd love to see some of the DQs that would be submitted to Wizards of the Coast.
"Why did <player X> get banned?"
"Because he had a decklist problem, and was playing with clear sleeves."
"Makes sense, good job."
Where does it stop? Shady-looking characters? If a judge recently has a personal problem with another player and sees them having a DDLP issue, do they have the right to DQ them? You're suggesting giving judges complete power with no oversight (not that I'm recommending oversight for Judges, because either is a terrible solution).
The best-case is to have set-in-stone rules that allow judges the right to conduct their own investigations in cases of cheating, and only DQ if they see that there's a problem. Circumstantial evidence is always circumstantial.
GX Tron XG
UR Phoenix RU
GG Freyalise High Tide GG
UR Parun Counterspells RU
BB Yawgmoth Token Storm BB
WB Pestilence BW
The offenses and their details are recorded by the DCI, and will be kept in the event they happen a bunch more. The person will receive a longer suspension for all these if they're ever determined to be cheating. This means that either they won't do it again since they realize they're being monitored, or they will and they'll just get 1... 2... 3 years suspended from playing their game in a sanctioned capacity.
But you raise a good point. Did the judges make the right call? Did they ask the right questions? Did they give away more or less information when investigating that hey should have? I'm not them, I wasn't there, I don't know them, so I don't know. Hopefully they're asking these same questions, and working to improve for the future to maintain the integrity of ALL the events we all play in, in the future.
Ehh... actually game losses "can" happen, but they should be as rare as DQ's, so I would rather not try to teach about them. Game losses at regular are reserved for gross repeat offenses after multiple warnings in order to educate with a penalty since verbal education isn't getting through to them. I HIGHLY advocate that NO experienced judge go around issuing game losses at regular before talks with an experienced judge. So yeah, a good rule of thumb is no game losses at Regular, lets stick with that, and teach that.
There's a big difference between intentionally trying to injure someone and cheating at MTG. We're not talking assault/physical injury. What the football team did probably should have landed them in jail.
I'll just ask you, straight up, do you think it is fair for the 5 guys he beat with an illegal deck to have lost? Do you think receiving 1 game loss in round 5 of the event was a suitable punishment for what he did? And do you believe that it is acceptable to believe that in a Comp REL event players can accidentally play 10+ games of MTG without noticing 6 copies of the main engine of their deck?
There's no need for a devils advocate. The facts are clear: The rewards gained by cheating vastly outweigh the punishments. As the IPG stands now, given what you can get away with, it's almost silly NOT to cheat. Lax rules encourage it.