Worlds Judging... questionable conduct?

[Mystery Thing]

Here's a thought: double, triple, quadruple check your decklist. Outside of anything that did or didn't happen at Worlds, at a tournament of that level (grinder included), not having your decklist written down properly is inexcusable and completely your own fault. It's really not that difficult to count your cards properly, write them down properly, and double check your count.

That's really all I've got. As problematic decklists started being returned to me so I could reinsert them into the magical binder of lists, I was shocked at the number of lists that had 59 cards, 61 cards, illegible writing, and the like. We all know the importance of the decklist, so just do it right. If you have any thought that your numbers may be hard to read (some people just have bad writing - no knock against them, it's just how it is), then get a friend to write it up for you. Use a computer to type it up. Get a friend to look over it. Whatever it takes.

Any penalty you get for a bad decklist is completely your own fault.

 

[Lawman]

On a similar note SteveP, the PLAYER is always responisible for their deck and decklist. Even in the event a deckchecker misses an error on the list, when the deck is checked later, they better match up! It is the player's responsibility everytime.

This is worlds folks.....if you dont know a proper deck contains 60 modified legal cards, with certain restrictions ie special energy, star pokes, etc, then you probably shouldnt be trying the LCQ.

Keith

 

[Water Pokemon Master]

Walk a mile on one of the staff's shoes just ONCE and you will get a completely different view. The staff and volunteers bend over backwards and give give give to the game and the people so events like this go off as smoothly as they do. WOW.....glad a college student is able to psycho-analyze an entire group so quickly!
/end sarcasm

Keith

And I'm glad a lawyer is able to read my post correctly. I didn't say it was the "ENTIRE GROUP," in fact I even went out of my way to say it was a few people and that most of the judges were extremely professional. I also specifically said I was not characterizing the entire group. And yes, I do know that most of them bend over backwards... I'm not stupid, and I know what you guys do. You pretty much seemed to misunderstand my entire post. Perhaps I was unclear.

Let me expand upon my previous points. The event was very successful in terms of time management and overall quality, and ALL I was saying that there were certain judges acting like real jerks to everyone. That hardly means ALL the judges, and I do not see how you could read my post thinking that. I was talking about those who seemed to be "getting high" off the power they had. And don't tell me nothing like that ever goes on. No one is perfect, and power goes to many people's heads sometimes. If you want to turn a blind eye to something I was bringing up and do not want to perhaps examine the behavior of some of the more radical judges in the future, then that's your problem. All I know is I heard a NOTICEABLE amount of complaints this past weekend about how some of the judges were treating players and onlookers and experienced it myself a few times. But, I guess you're absolutely right in believing that nothing could ever possibly be wrong with anyone who works these events. I won't try to bring up anything I felt was wrong in the future since you seem to think everyone is perfect, and that there is no room for improvement.

What Keith said is perfect. AWESOME event, great time on this end. I played both weekend
days and had Z-E-R-O experiences like you have described. The judging was super! And
I'd like to personally thank EVERY judge for their efforts and good work.


Low class post wpm, but sadly par for the course when it comes to you

Just because nothing happened to YOU doesn't mean nothing happened to anyone else. Geez, common sense. Oh and yes, I'm just so low class; what a cliché response. You act like I specifically came into this thread out of the blue when I rarely post on the Gym just to start trouble. Because you know, I'm always complaining all the time about everything with events... you see it with me especially. Sorry, but I wisely pick and choose what to complain about... it's not a habit like with other people, and I'm not like some players who find a fault in every single event about every single aspect. As far as I can remember, this is the only time I have EVER brought up anything such as this. So maybe next time, you should cut out the pointless ad hominemems which only exist to insight anger.

The point of my post was to bring to your guys' attention that SOME of your judges did not act very professional, and indirectly, you should possibly consider paying more attention to the politeness/professionalism they display in the future (like perhaps emphasize that this is a KIDS event, and that you don't have to rip people's heads off). I don't complain for the sake of complaining... I complain when I think something can be improved in the future.

Geez.

EDIT: And I don't feel like discussing my observations any further, since I don't want to get into a fight with anyone who misunderstands my posts or intentions over something that was simply meant to be a "heads up." I feel I have made my points clear, so if you don't understand them, then just disregard them.

 

[FriedBlaziken]

All of the judges were fantastic. Only complaint I can make was this ruling on RPS cards.
I use Team Galactic's Wager, he decides to use cards.
He randomly picks one out after shuffling the cards and I choose rock. I win.
As soon as I was going to draw my cards, a judge comes up to me and tells me that it has to be redone as choosing randomly is not allowed.
I then proceeded to lose the wager, costing me the game.
Wouldn't it be fairer if my opponent was told not to do that in the future? JMO.

A friend of mine was not allowed to Telepass in a t16 match. Thats just disgusting IMO.

also whats this about a girl dropping in the t32?

 

[annisarich]

People on the rail can always intentionally or UNINTENTIONALLY give a "Tell" to a player or their opponent. This can happen just by even a brief reactional facial expression, sigh, hand pump or look of disgust etc.

Note watching Poker on TV the Gallery is removed from the table and they are in the dark so players cant see their faces.

I was happy to have been selected to work this event. I did my best on watching for any of this. I even told some folks that they could be hindering their favorite player by giving something away. They said they never thought of that and moved back a bit. I also moved a few ladies out of the area who were a bit smitten with a player. There were some flirty glances exchanged. I hope I did it with class but I did also want to make sure that they understood I was serious. Most folks seemed to be gracious in complying with requests by those working in my area to keep the player distractions to a minimum. I found most of the Audience to be classy and understanding. In the finals the Canadian contingent went out of their way to make sure they did not impact their player or his opponent. It was great to see people so concerned with the fairness of the game for BOTH players. (Thanks folks!)

 

[NoPoke]

WPM: By condemning a few in a very non specific way you condemn the whole group. As a psychologist you must know this??? I could be misreading your post but it still looks like a non specific and unhelpfull complaint, there is no way POP can act upon it as it is just too vague.

I know that at times I interrupted the spectators sight lines. Spectators wanted me to move out of the way and either asked politely or said nothing. For any judge to observe a match effectively someones view is going to be blocked. I don't think I blocked anyones view for more time than I absolutely had too but I know I blocked spectators views whenever I was observing from the rail side. sorry.

FriedBlaziken: I stopped several RPS 'games' using cards. I hope I got to them before the random selection was made, but I can't be certain. At the time I would be intent on stopping the random choice by one player and not looking to see if the opponent won or lost. I know that several players were not happy with this and I had to explain that if you use cards that not only must the choice not be random but it must not appear to be random either. I stopped lots of coin flips too where the flip was not high enough to guarantee rotation.

Telepass: The most probable error is to miss a cessation or other effect blocking telepass. I can't see any reason why a judge would prevent the use of Telepass when the game state allowed it. Puse the game to establish what is going on sure. But disallowing telepass without reason, I don't think that is very likely.

 

[Lawman]

WPM: Looks like you misunderstood my post, not the other way around! I simply stated that you condemned the entire group of "power hungry" judges. Oh, you didnt get that out of my post....hmmmmm. You never ID'd the "power hungry judges" either. Were they in red shirts? Yellow? Green? Lab coats? Makes a difference bc we had "judges" on staff and then we had "staff" and "interpretors" and "runners" and "volunteers". Did you state the age group this issue occurred in?

Look, for anyone that even slightly looked sideways at a ruling I made, a comment made to a player or spectator, I simply held up my badge so they could see my name. As for any ruling, I advised them that an appeal to the HJ could be made. I hide behind no one. I know several other judges did the same thing. We are there to enforce the rules fairly and in an unbiased manner. Most players still dont understand the spectator rule while still a part of the tourney. Yet, I enforce it every time I have an area for players to go to. (Not always possible at BRs and CCs).

From my observations at many many events (not just Worlds).....the only time I've observed "attitude" from a staff member was when "attitude" was shown 1st by the player/parent or spectator. I had a father of a MA (both playing the grinder.....1 in each of the rooms) come to the rail at the end of a round and ask me if I was the judge that GAVE his son a loss when he (son) was ahead by 2 prizes at the end of time. I said no, but where was he seated. It then came out that the player was LATE to his seat (not there when the 30 min clock had started.....so he missed the 2 min set up time) and it was noted on the match slip. The rules are clear that a player LATE to a match cannot win on time. I explained that very nicely to the dad, who continued to insist that was wrong (even though the DAD was in the other room). He finally turned and left the conversation w/ a F bomb. I asked for his name....he walked away. I followed him to the hallway and asked for him to come with me to talk to the "blue shirts" (aka Dave Schwimmer). I am pretty sure the dad's tune changed when Schwimmer finished up with him. No staff member should ever have the f-bomb dropped on them.

I support the team that I was a part of. You attack any part of that team, you attack me. I will defend my team. Granted, we are human and at times, an error may be made on a ruling or the perceived leniency/harshness of said ruling. Again, the guidelines are there, but they are guidelines. We can and do deviate when it is the proper thing to do. Some people got GLs for cosmic powering after a psy lock/cess crystal was active, others got warnings or PPs. It depended on each circumstance and how well it could be rewound (if at all). Trust me, on those issues where more than a warning could be given (PP, GL, DQ), the HJ ALWAYS gets called in to confer.

Keith

 

[SteveP]

On a similar note SteveP, the PLAYER is always responisible for their deck and decklist. Even in the event a deckchecker misses an error on the list, when the deck is checked later, they better match up! It is the player's responsibility everytime.

This is worlds folks.....if you dont know a proper deck contains 60 modified legal cards, with certain restrictions ie special energy, star pokes, etc, then you probably shouldnt be trying the LCQ.

Keith

The deckchecker didn't miss the error, he/she caught it.

It seems kind of weird to do a decklist-only check. This is the kind of short-cut that caused the penalty - an unnecessary game-loss, IMO.

There's an assumption that decks/lists are checked BEFORE the tournament starts, then randomly BETWEEN rounds during the tournament - unless something is suspicious.

If you accept decklists without doing a formal deck check, then you proceed to check all of the lists after the players have starting playing, bad things can happen.

Short-cuts are sometimes bad, as was evidenced here. The ruling was correct, but the ruling should've never had to be made in the first place.




Judges should be used to getting "boo-ed" at. It happens in most other competitive events when the spectators/players don't like the call. Responses to WPM's post show that some judges don't like to be "boo-ed" at. :nonono:

I'm an active, easily-exciteable spectator. I'll cheer when I see good calls and boo when I see bad calls. :tongue::wink:



I cheer because CO has the Worlds JR Champ!

 

[Heatherdu]

When the tournament is as big as this, deck checks at registration are just impossible. There simply is not time. So my family deck checks each other. Good thing too because my JR son was randomly selected TWICE during the LCQ. He passed both times.

 

[TomShea]

Player respoPlnsibility

Steve you are way off base on the subject of deck checks. Optional deck checks are offered as a service for the players. This still DOESN'T relieve the player of the responsibility of presenting a LEGAL deck EACH and every round. Players should keep an extra copy of their decklist at a tourney as big as nats or worlds with them. They NEED to be checking thier sleeves in between rounds as well as double counting their deck to ensure that they have 60 cards. Just because the deck that we check at the beginning of the tournament is legal doesn't mean that it still is legal in round 3, 6 or 8 for that matter.

We are not talking about a Battle Road or even City Champs this is Worlds. Players can show up with their cards, so why can't they be expected to have a decklist that actually matches the cards that they are playiingz? Why can't we expect them to bring along extra sleeves that match the color they are playing to ensure that they are not playing with ones that become marked? When a player presents thier deck they are saying that they are ready to battle with a legal deck. We need to hold them to that standard. The responsibility to follow the rules rests with the player not the judges. When players don't follow the rules it is because they failed to do so not the judges.

I met many of the judges at Nationals for the first time this year. This group is truly great. They are passionate, enthusiastic, committed, and motivated to do a great job ensuring that these events are run fairly. Let's not confuse the issue here folks. Players are responsible to follow the rules. Judges simply adjudicate the rules. No penalities are given, penalities are earned. Some of you may not appreciate the delivery and do confuse the situation as being bad that someone got penalized wrongfully. Penalities are never popular. Judges don't like assessing penalities either. It simply isn't fun. These folks were at worlds to have fun too.

From what I have read on this board it seems to me that Worlds was a huge success. Hats off to the staff for running a fast, fun, FAIR event. I look forward to working WITH you this upcoming year as well.

Tom Shea
PTO New England

 

[SteveP]

When the tournament is as big as this, deck checks at registration are just impossible. There simply is not time.

Not impossible, just resourse-intensive.

IMO, if you're not going to check decks/lists at registration, don't start checking only the decklists AFTER players have started playing.

Back to back posts merged. The following information has been added:

TomShea, go back and read lazorman's original post. This appears to be more of a legibility problem rather than an actual deck/list problem. We're talking about a SR here, someone who probably doesn't have very good penmanship. Plus, for a deck checker to see a list with what "appears" to have 8 Call Energy and 8 DRE, that "should" raise a red flag that maybe that "8" really is a "4" - maybe he just read it wrong. That could've easily been verified without issuing a game loss - Worlds or not.

I agree with EVERYTHING you say in your post about player-responsibility. I'm talking about the TO's responsibility to do a "correct" deck check, if they do one, not a short-cut version. That's all.

 

[Lazorman55]

Ok guys, i didnt mean to cause this kind of fuss.

I guess some of you guys read what i wrote wrong, or i just didnt explain it well enough.
My deck contained 60 cards, not 68.
I WAS running 4 DRE and 4 call energy.
But from what the judge told me, he read 8 DRE and 8 call energy, causing my decklist to have an illegal 68 cards.
While my DECK, had a legal 60 cards.
I know this is the lcq, but I nor my friends understand why I must recieve a gameloss for someone's mistake.

 

[Lawman]

Wrong SteveP! Judges don't like someone coming onto a public board spouting off info (usually 2nd hand hearsay info) and saying "Judge XYZ got it totally wrong". Unless it was YOU that was involved, don't go trolling on the boards. If it was your situation, state that. Dont just say......"the judges ruled this in this way and that was total b.s." That is what usually gets the judges' dander up.

Judges accept that they are human and errors can and will be made. I have yet to meet the "perfect person". We can take the heat when it is warranted. I dont think I have seen a post here where the Judge was wrong and the player/spectator was right. The rules are the rules. The judges just enforce them.

Keith

Back to back posts merged. The following information has been added:

Ok guys, i didnt mean to cause this kind of fuss.

I guess some of you guys read what i wrote wrong, or i just didnt explain it well enough.
My deck contained 60 cards, not 68.
I WAS running 4 DRE and 4 call energy.
But from what the judge told me, he read 8 DRE and 8 call energy, causing my decklist to have an illegal 68 cards.
While my DECK, had a legal 60 cards.
I know this is the lcq, but I nor my friends understand why I must recieve a gameloss for someone's mistake.

Did they check your deck before the penalty was issued? Simply having an illegal deck does not equate to a GL. Especially when, if you had printed neater, there wouldnt have been an issue at all.

Keith

 

[SteveP]

I know this is the lcq, but I nor my friends understand why I must recieve a gameloss for someone's mistake.

Being illegible was your mistake. I recommend typing your decklist next time. This problem could've been avoided by you, first and foremost.

The ruling was NOT a mistake as I originally posted. But, the game-loss ruling could've been avoided by a bit of due-diligence from both parties.

 

[TomShea]

deck lists

No Steve I did get that. In these days of computers and such people can easily print out their deck lists. I am one of the worlds worst handwriters in the history of the planet. I used to play lots of competitive magic back in the day. It took me a while to hand write my decklists. It can be done. Players STILL NEED TO accept responsibility for their actions. What I am saying my seem hard. Yeah it would be easier for us to simply verify the list with the player, why penalize a little guy who can't write too well. Becuase it is THIER responsibilty to hand in something that the staff can work with.

Again the staff isn't to blame for this penalty being assesed it is the player who is at fault. You are focusing on how the player felt recieving the game loss. Let's move that to imagine how the judge felt having to deliver the message to the player that they were recieving the game loss due to the player's actions of passing in a bad list? Do you think that the judge had a good time doing that? How many people played in this event? Everyone else passed in a legible legal list. Where is the problem here?
Player's need to follow all the rules otherwise it isn't fair for those that do. Again it is easier to help the little guy by fixing the list, is that really fair to everyone else who takes the time to properly fill out their lists? At what level do we really enforce ALL the rules?

Tom Shea
PTO New England

 

[Lazorman55]

Wrong SteveP! Judges don't like someone coming onto a public board spouting off info (usually 2nd hand hearsay info) and saying "Judge XYZ got it totally wrong". Unless it was YOU that was involved, don't go trolling on the boards. If it was your situation, state that. Dont just say......"the judges ruled this in this way and that was total b.s." That is what usually gets the judges' dander up.

Judges accept that they are human and errors can and will be made. I have yet to meet the "perfect person". We can take the heat when it is warranted. I dont think I have seen a post here where the Judge was wrong and the player/spectator was right. The rules are the rules. The judges just enforce them.

Keith

Back to back posts merged. The following information has been added:



Did they check your deck before the penalty was issued? Simply having an illegal deck does not equate to a GL. Especially when, if you had printed neater, there wouldnt have been an issue at all.

Keith

No, they did not check my deck.
Next time i will infact type my decklist, because i am afraid it will happen again.
I was just so shocked because it hadnt happened through ANY other event ive been to, which includes battle roads, cities, states, regionals(all in florida)
But i will try typing up my decklist.
thanks.

 

[SteveP]

Keith, he had a legal deck. His decklist was illegible, so he says. The deckchecker said his decklist said had 8 Calls and 8 DRE's. Wouldn't that raise a red flag if you were checking the decklist, especially if those 8's were a bit illegible?

Circumstances on BOTH ends caused this unnecessary game loss - the poor penmanship of the player, and the short-cut version of a deckcheck.

 

[Lazorman55]

No Steve I did get that. In these days of computers and such people can easily print out their deck lists. I am one of the worlds worst handwriters in the history of the planet. I used to play lots of competitive magic back in the day. It took me a while to hand write my decklists. It can be done. Players STILL NEED TO accept responsibility for their actions. What I am saying my seem hard. Yeah it would be easier for us to simply verify the list with the player, why penalize a little guy who can't write too well. Becuase it is THIER responsibilty to hand in something that the staff can work with.

Again the staff isn't to blame for this penalty being assesed it is the player who is at fault. You are focusing on how the player felt recieving the game loss. Let's move that to imagine how the judge felt having to deliver the message to the player that they were recieving the game loss due to the player's actions of passing in a bad list? Do you think that the judge had a good time doing that? How many people played in this event? Everyone else passed in a legible legal list. Where is the problem here?
Player's need to follow all the rules otherwise it isn't fair for those that do. Again it is easier to help the little guy by fixing the list, is that really fair to everyone else who takes the time to properly fill out their lists? At what level do we really enforce ALL the rules?

Tom Shea
PTO New England

Another judge who was doing deckchecking even AGREED that it infact did look like a 4 not an 8.
But by that time i had already recieved the GL.

 

[SteveP]

A game loss is a severe penalty. From the player's testimony of the events, it appears that the SYSTEM failed him too. Sure, he should've avoided the situation in the first place by writing neatly, but when the situation came up, the SYSTEM in-play failed because of the short-cut.

 

[Lawman]

Good luck to you Lazorman55! Take this as a lesson learned.

On a side note, my son found a deck with 59 cards in the LCQ (his oppo in rd 2) and alerted the judges as they were coming to get the deck. The list only had 59 cards too. Illegal deck + illegal list = GL. I, along with several others, advised him to do pile shuffles of all his oppo's just to look for this type of error.

Keith