Mulligan Charade - Who Shows First?

[NoPoke]

Q1: no you can't
Q2: no you don't have to.

The declare mulligan prior to placing basics may have been abused in the past. I'm aware of discussion of its abuse at least. The scenario I remember was where neither player has a basic but otherwise likes thier hand. The player hopes for the opponent to declare a mulligan and give them that crucial starting basic or the extra card might influence the choice of starter where they have a pair. The latter case is close to the Magikarp vs Voltorb donk that SLOW DECK opened with.

What I can't recall is if the discussion was framed within the context of the Wotc start procedure which was very different to what we use now.

 

[billbilski]

Rob, I would never assume that keith or any judge would instantly penalize for this, but their reply has constistently been that it was angling,dubious and thus worthy of penalty. My concern is the disconnect between what the players in good faith have been doing and the actual ruling - ultimately hoping that a clear ruling as to the nature of some of these actions will be made uniform and understandable to all involved.

Keith, We have been made to play as per placemat arrangement since last years States. This was done very formally and announced as a rule we needed to adhere to. Judges were patient and never penalized anyone, but it was enforced verbally to the point everyone is on the same page now. The fact that you and many other judges differ on this, shows the need for clarity on the point in question. I hope no judges are taking any of this discussion personally. I have had no qualms with judging whatsoever. I only hope that the issues in the bluffing and now this thread lead to a better understanding of what is acceptable and everyone can feel comfortable that no "suprise" rulings cause major issues. Either these things are wrong and hence follow the warning/penalty phase or they are considered a "grey" area in the judging world and need to be clearly defined across the entire pokemon community and determined to be legal or illegal. The debate is good, but at the end of the day I hope some of these issues aren't left to independent judging decisions when they can simply be better defined in the rulebook.....

 

[ChaosJim]

I liked the old WotC mechanic.

The coin flip happened before you had your starting hand.
The player going first resolved mulligans.
The player going second drew any extra cards, then had a chance to resolve mulligans.

This meant that the player going 2nd, if they had a mulligan also, could really draw 2 cards before declaring their mulligan.

I don't remember thinking of it as complex at the time, but its been about 8 years.

 

[prodigal_fanboy]

I agree with that. Only thing I also pointed out is that he may be looked at differently for awhile since this "confession" only came out this week. As an analogy to what I do for a living....I am a criminal defense atty. Client A was charged and admits to shoplifting a few times a few yrs ago at Wal-Mart. Although he has finished his probation and has no more thefts for the last 2-3 yrs, dontcha think loss prevention officers at Wal-Mart are still going to watch him when he comes in????

Sure, they'll watch him a bit closer. Judges might watch Joker a bit closer. Maybe I over-reacted to your post, but it sounded like you were implying judges would be all over him in light of it, which I don't think would be or should be the case.

 

[Ditto]

Since this happened during US National winner Michael Diaz's Top 16 match versus George Win, I think it's worth reviving the topic. Relevant excerpt below.

1-1
Well, I knew I was close to that guaranteed invite, so I was gonna play my heart out this game
Game 3, both of us were reallllly on edge at the start of this game, so much so in fact, that neither of us wanted to put out our basic first. Personally I was worried about an Ambipom donk, with my lone basic in hand being a Garchomp, so I figured if he put out his basics first I would have a better chance of him not starting with an Ambipom if he had it in his hand. He laid his only basic, so I put down my Garchomp and began setting my prizes when he flipped his ‘basic’ over, which was actually an electric energy. ????????????????. I just looked at the board in disbelief then looked to the judge to see what would happen. She looked kind of surprised too and verified what had just happened then she went to some other judges to ask for a ruling. No one at the table was really sure of what the penalty was, and the judges deliberated for about 10 minutes. They came back and talked about some stuff, and issued a triple prize penalty. Wow. I went pretty surprised about it, but apparently it was some spirit of the game issue and it was severe. So I drew my 3 prizes and ended up going 1st. I attached and passed. He dropped Clefairy/Lucario/Turn the lucario, bench it, Set up for 4? Spray. Scoop.
I felt bad that the game ended that way because of how epic the other 2 games were, I just wish we could have played out that game to see what would have happened. I go into top 8 a little shaken

As you can see, there is clearly a situation presented where knowing whether your opponent has a mulligan or not gives you an unfair advantage in play.

Now, we've seemed to deem that playing down anything other than a Basic Pokemon is not the correct fix (though seems perfectly legit to me), however we have not figured out what the correct way to solve this very real problem is.

By declaring a mulligan before basics are played the non mulligan player is gaining an unfair advantage that THEY SHOULD NOT HAVE. Laying down a "placeholder" card solves this problem, but some people don't seem to like that. So what do you propose then if that is not acceptable?

Laying down a placeholder card is not dubious, as it merely intends to keep the gamestate from being broken. I can accept that the reason this is not an appropriate fix is because the rules allow for only a Basic to be played down, but again I ask, so what are we going to do then to fix it?

A clear problem exists so any posts dismissing the issue are spam. How about we actually be productive?

 

[xcfrisco]

A clear problem exists so any posts dismissing the issue are spam. How about we actually be productive?

In the fighting game community, specifically the street fighter ones, counter-picking often occurs (Counter-picking meaning you wait until your opponent picks his character and you, being the jack of all trades player that you are, will then choose a character with a favorable match-up against your opponents character). Unfortunately, what occurs and is super lame is when BOTH player implement/want to implement the counter-picking strategy and they just sit around waiting for the other person to pick their character. This is lame because it holds up the tournament and is just waste a time for the most part.


This is where the blind select rule comes into play and also aids in preventing people from outright getting counter-picked. In blind select, Player A will whisper into the judges ear what character he is going to choose. Player B then chooses his or her character and the judge enforces that Player A choose the character which was whispered. In most tournaments, either Player A, Player B or the judge can enact blind select before the match starts. This helps prevent that scenario where time is wasted from one of the opponents sitting around and doing nothing at the character select screen.


I can see a similar rule implemented in pokemon when its a really important match (as described in your post) or if you believe /know your opponent is a "counter-picker" by pokemon standards. As an example of implementing this rule, Player A would show the judge his hand and whisper what he intends to play as his active and what he intends to bench before Player B does anything. Player B then fills out his position and the judge makes sure Player A stays true to his word. The only issue here is the judge's availability of course, but seeing as this is before any of the matches has started (during the set-up phase), this shouldn't be too much of a problem imo.


Or you could just not be lame and not care about people who counter-pick or stall for favorable board positions. Man up and beat that counter picker to a pulp. Show them that you can beat him no matter who he starts with

 

[PokePop]

By declaring a mulligan before basics are played the non mulligan player is gaining an unfair advantage that THEY SHOULD NOT HAVE.

What advantage? I don't see it. You haven't stated what the advantage is.
Saying there is an advantage is not the same thing as showing what the advantage is.
Explain it to me.
I'm just not seeing it.

Say you have a Mulligan.
What does that say to the other player?
That you have no Basics in this hand.
What does it say about your next hand?
NOTHING.
You could have one, two, three, or four Pokemon in that starting hand.
What is this advantage? I'm not seeing it.
Until you demonstrate what the problem is, I'm not seeing what needs to be fixed.

Laying down a placeholder card is not dubious, as it merely intends to keep the gamestate from being broken.

It is dubious and I'll tell you why. Now the mulligan player has 100% certainty of what Pokemon the opponent will be starting with.
That, to me, is incredibly valuable information.
"Oh, they have an Unown Q start. Guess I will start with my Uxie after all and hope for the donk"
This is a broken gamestate now, because of the false start.

A clear problem exists so any posts dismissing the issue are spam. How about we actually be productive?

I'm not dismissing the issue, but you haven't convinced me.
And since I'm on the Rules Team among other groups that have feedback on tournament rules and penalty guidelines, I'd suggest you try to convince me.

 

[PokePop]

Note: If the big problem is showing your hand before they place a basic, here's the solution:

Say, "I have a Mulligan. I'll reveal my hand after you place your basic".

Ta daaa.

No dubious action.
Problem solved.
Am I missing anything?

 

[darthtace]

Here's exactly what the rule book says:

1. Shake hands with your opponent.

2. Shuffle your 60-card deck and draw 7 cards.

3. Check to see if you have any Basic Pokemon in your hand.
Then it says in a small box underneath "What do you do if you don't have a Basic Pokemon card in your hand? (the problem here is this shouldn't be a little sub-script of "in the rare case of" it's a major game-play issue, and thus should be addressed as such)
Then show your hand to your opponent, shuffle it back into your deck, and draw 7 new cards. Your opponent continues his or her set-up and can choose to draw an extra card after setting aside his or her Prize cards (etc...)

4. Put one of your Basic Pokemon (not any card) face-down in front of you, as your active Pokemon.

Here's the thing. You don't lay basics before your mulligan in the rule-book. You lay them after, laying basics is number 4.

Thus, according to the rules, there's no argument here.

However, placing mulligans as a sub-text in the rules seems rather irresponsible. They are a major game-play mechanic, and if there is one thing that is not consistent across the board in the first place, it's how set-up should be done in every game. I think that the rules should read like this:

3. Each player checks to see if they have any Basic Pokemon in their hand. If not, they must IMMEDIATELY declare a mulligan, and allow their opponent (if they do not also declare a mulligan) to continue their set-up. After your opponent plays their active Pokemon, show your hand to your opponent, shuffle your hand into your deck, etc...

This clears up all issues. So what if it gives your opponent an advantage? So does going First or Second (depending on the deck). Who cares?

 

[Ditto]

What advantage? I don't see it. You haven't stated what the advantage is.
Saying there is an advantage is not the same thing as showing what the advantage is.
Explain it to me.
I'm just not seeing it.

Say you have a Mulligan.
What does that say to the other player?
That you have no Basics in this hand.
What does it say about your next hand?
NOTHING.
You could have one, two, three, or four Pokemon in that starting hand.
What is this advantage? I'm not seeing it.
Until you demonstrate what the problem is, I'm not seeing what needs to be fixed.

Here's the advantage (or the easiest/common/etc. one).

Player A has two pokemon in their hand and is deciding which one to set as their active. Player A has a "starter" pokemon that they usually start with and is the safe bet. However, Player A also has their main attacking pokemon in their hand and their hand is also pretty good. Player A may be able to just go right into attacking, or even get a donk rather than having to setup with their "starter" pokemon. Player A really needs 1 card of several available options in their deck though to make it worth starting with their attacking pokemon and not their "safe" "starter" pokemon.

Before Player A has made their decision, Player B mulligans. Now Player A knows that they will get an extra card to work with, plus the card they would have already drawn on their turn. Now they have doubled their chances of getting any copy of any of those cards they need to make starting with the attacking pokemon worth it.

Player A should not have the knowledge of doubling their chances. In this situation, by mulliganing, Player B has allowed Player A to change their active pokemon choice, which they shouldn't have the ability to do.

That seems very complicated and detailed, however it is a very common situation in the game.

It is dubious and I'll tell you why. Now the mulligan player has 100% certainty of what Pokemon the opponent will be starting with.
That, to me, is incredibly valuable information.
"Oh, they have an Unown Q start. Guess I will start with my Uxie after all and hope for the donk"
This is a broken gamestate now, because of the false start.

I'm not dismissing the issue, but you haven't convinced me.
And since I'm on the Rules Team among other groups that have feedback on tournament rules and penalty guidelines, I'd suggest you try to convince me.

How do they know that their opponent has an Unown Q start? The basics are still facedown and unknown to the opponent. There is no gain to Player B in the above situation by placing down a "placeholder" pokemon.

That being said, I realize that the "placeholder" solution is not a technically viable solution due to the wording of the rulebook, to which I accept. However, there is still the problem that the "placeholder" solution was trying to fix, and it is still left unfixed, and needs to be fixed.

 

[PokePop]

Re the placeholder Pokemon: Well it seems that in the game at Nats, the player that got penalized waited until the cards were flipped over to reveal that he had put an L energy down.
So in that case, a real example of this, he would have gained knowledge of his opponent's basic.

As for the advantage of knowing that they will get to draw an extra card... so be it.
It's one of the downsides of mulliganing.

They still don't know how many basics the other player will get to play down, so there may not be a donk situation anyway and now they have hurt their first few turns development if they don't get the donk.

 

[xcfrisco]

Here's the advantage (or the easiest/common/etc. one).

Deciding whether or not to start with Sableye is probably the best example (Your only one special dark away from donking, deciding whether or not to go first, etc).

 

[Ditto]

Re the placeholder Pokemon: Well it seems that in the game at Nats, the player that got penalized waited until the cards were flipped over to reveal that he had put an L energy down.
So in that case, a real example of this, he would have gained knowledge of his opponent's basic.

As for the advantage of knowing that they will get to draw an extra card... so be it.
It's one of the downsides of mulliganing.

They still don't know how many basics the other player will get to play down, so there may not be a donk situation anyway and now they have hurt their first few turns development if they don't get the donk.

I brought that up as more proof that this should be in discussion, not really to discuss that particular example. I would agree that waiting until after pokemon were flipped over should have resulted exactly the way it did if not harsher.

However, if Player A had already placed their basic, then they wouldn't have gained this advantage. It's not just a byproduct of a mulligan, it's Player A not placing their active down as they should.

 

[Rainbowgym]

As you can see, there is clearly a situation presented where knowing whether your opponent has a mulligan or not gives you an unfair advantage in play.

NO there is not.
Here I see a player who doesn't realize you can place down extra basics after you laid down your prizes.

Even worse, this player "thinks" his opponent will not start with Ambipom if he has one in hand, which is already a wrong assumption.

Even more worse, delaying a game with only 1 basic in hand which will be your active anyway.

 

[Ditto]

NO there is not.
Here I see a player who doesn't realize you can place down extra basics after you laid down your prizes.

Even worse, this player "thinks" his opponent will not start with Ambipom if he has one in hand, which is already a wrong assumption.

Even more worse, delaying a game with only 1 basic in hand which will be your active anyway.

I'm talking about the general problem, not the specific situation.

 

[Master_Whiscash_77]

There's another problem specifically with showing a mulligan before your opponent chooses a basic. This is not affected by declaring the mulligan before your opponent chooses, only actually showing the cards in your hand.

Player A is playing Kingdra.
Player B is playing Luxchomp.
Assume neither player knows what the other is playing.

Player A draws no basics in their opening hand, but has a Kingdra (or Seadra).
Player B has Luxray GL, Garchomp C, Double Colorless, Crobat G, 3 useless cards (we'll say basic energy).

Player A sees they have a mulligan and shows Player B before Player B has chosen a basic. Player B now knows that Player A is playing Kingdra. Now they know if they start with Luxray they may be able to donk or at least cripple Player A if Player A starts with a Horsea.

Thus, by revealing the mulligan to Player B, Player B has been given an advantage over his opponent which would not be present had Player A waited to show his mulligan until after Player B chose his basic.

 

[FunnyBear]

NO there is not.
Here I see a player who doesn't realize you can place down extra basics after you laid down your prizes.
way.

LOL, you are talking about a national champion.

Even worse, this player "thinks" his opponent will not start with Ambipom if he has one in hand, which is already a wrong assumption.
.

Knowing that the opponent has a single basic is a good reason to start with Ambipom. As it is not a free retreater its not the best starter if you are not going to donk the opponent, so its a good assumption.

Even more worse, delaying a game with only 1 basic in hand which will be your active anyway.

Again, playing every legal angle is what separates champions from the rest of us.

 

[PokePop]

There's another problem specifically with showing a mulligan before your opponent chooses a basic. This is not affected by declaring the mulligan before your opponent chooses, only actually showing the cards in your hand.

Player A is playing Kingdra.
Player B is playing Luxchomp.
Assume neither player knows what the other is playing.

Player A draws no basics in their opening hand, but has a Kingdra (or Seadra).
Player B has Luxray GL, Garchomp C, Double Colorless, Crobat G, 3 useless cards (we'll say basic energy).

Player A sees they have a mulligan and shows Player B before Player B has chosen a basic. Player B now knows that Player A is playing Kingdra. Now they know if they start with Luxray they may be able to donk or at least cripple Player A if Player A starts with a Horsea.

Thus, by revealing the mulligan to Player B, Player B has been given an advantage over his opponent which would not be present had Player A waited to show his mulligan until after Player B chose his basic.

The solution to this has been given.
Declare your Mulligan, but don't show it, until the Active has been set.
This can be dealt with within the current rules.

 

[Kayle]

Say, "I have a Mulligan. I'll reveal my hand after you place your basic".

Problem solved.

end of thread found.

 

[Ditto]

end of thread found.

Except the whole issue is that the opponent knows you have a mulligan before they play their pokemon. So TELLING them you have a mulligan before they play their pokemon doesn't solve anything.