Bluffing?

[Box of Fail]

Just one simple question;

If sharing written notes is deemed to be illegal and gives an unfair advantage to the informed player, which I'm sure we can BOTH agree is implicit in the rules, how is it that doing THE EXACT SAME THING with your mental notes, which provides for the exact same informed player unfair advantage, not against the rules? Same method (shared prior knowledge), same outcome.
If loading your die is deemed to be illegal and gives an unfair advantage to the cheating player, which I'm sure we can BOTH agree is implicit in the rules, how is it that doing THE EXACT SAME THING by getting insanely lucky with a legal die, which provides for the exact same lucky player unfair advantage, not against the rules? Same method (many heads), same outcome.

Notes will usually be more specific and can basically cover the whole match. You could argue that some of the game's finest players have outstanding memory, but I would say that's an innate advantage, as are strategic ability, bluffing, and focus - all of which are measured by the Pokémon TCG and are totally fair. Written notes allow everyone to remember what their opponent is playing equally.

To answer your question, just because no one has backed me up on this, yet, doesn't make me wrong. Following the crowd and not applying common sense (cause/effect=cause/effect) to the issue doesn't make you right. You can have 10,000 tweens on your side and find strength in your numbers; I'll be happy to stand on my own on my stance alone. How people are paired in a tournament is extraneous information meant to throw the reader off ('well, he's right about that, so he must be right about the other as well...') and subliminally persuade them to your side. And "everybody else does it" is, as it has always been, a flaky argument which I'm sure you wouldn't accept from your teen if you caught him/her getting into your liquor cabinet.

As I stated previously- I know you can't stop all of it. That doesn't ex post facto mean you should turn a deaf ear and blind eye to what you do see and hear.

Wayne

How people are paired in a tournament is EXTREMELY relevant to the topic at hand, because this is why people ask others for what deck their opponent is playing. People will look at their T32 opponent, go through the old pairings to find out who they played against, and ask those opponents what that player was playing.

I don't do this simply because I'm not willing to devote hours of playtesting and stuff to an eventual win. I'm more passive about this than others. Even if I know what my opponent is playing in top cut, I generally don't factor this into my early decisions unless it's a donk deck, or a deck that beats mine easily.

HOWEVER, I almost always tell others what certain players are playing, so you could say I'm giving them an unfair advantage. I admit to this, and will not stop doing this unless it becomes against the rules.

 

[waynegg]

If loading your die is deemed to be illegal and gives an unfair advantage to the cheating player, which I'm sure we can BOTH agree is implicit in the rules, how is it that doing THE EXACT SAME THING by getting insanely lucky with a legal die, which provides for the exact same lucky player unfair advantage, not against the rules? Same method (many heads), same outcome.

Both players would have the same odds with the unloaded die. Luck is one thing. Prior knowledge is completely different. What you are saying is cause 'a' (illegal loaded die)/effect (rigged outcome, lots of heads) and cause 'b' (legal die)/effect (insanely lucky, lots of heads) which isn't equivalent; what I said was cause 'a' (sharing written notes as to your opponent's deck)/effect (unfair advantage) and cause 'b' (sharing mental notes as to your opponent's deck)/effect (unfair advantage) which is the same.

Apples to oranges on the topic...

Notes will usually be more specific and can basically cover the whole match. You could argue that some of the game's finest players have outstanding memory, but I would say that's an innate advantage, as are strategic ability, bluffing, and focus - all of which are measured by the Pokémon TCG and are totally fair. Written notes allow everyone to remember what their opponent is playing equally.

Which is what the Spirit of the Game rule is all about discouraging...

Also, this is an unqualified statement. You have very little time in which to write during a match, so you aren't going to get everything and you won't be able to do your part of diligently watching the game state as your opponent plays if you do. During any given tournament I can from memory alone tell you every single play from both sides of the table for every game I play. I'm sure most others can too.

How people are paired in a tournament is EXTREMELY relevant to the topic at hand, because this is why people ask others for what deck their opponent is playing. People will look at their T32 opponent, go through the old pairings to find out who they played against, and ask those opponents what that player was playing.

It is irrelevant if you follow the spirit the rule was written in- that all players be on even footing and neither having the advantage over the other in this manner. Otherwise it would be perfectly fine to share written notes.

I don't do this simply because I'm not willing to devote hours of playtesting and stuff to an eventual win. I'm more passive about this than others. Even if I know what my opponent is playing in top cut, I generally don't factor this into my early decisions unless it's a donk deck, or a deck that beats mine easily.

HOWEVER, I almost always tell others what certain players are playing, so you could say I'm giving them an unfair advantage. I admit to this, and will not stop doing this unless it becomes against the rules.

Then you admit to at the least not following the Spirit of the Game and at worst cheating and helping others to do the same.

 

[Victory Bell]

Then you admit to at the least not following the Spirit of the Game and at worst cheating and helping others to do the same.

I dont belive any notes were exchanged...
If Im told what my T2 opp is playing im now cheating and should get DQed? I dident ask...

 

[waynegg]

I dont belive any notes were exchanged...
If Im told what my T2 opp is playing im now cheating and should get DQed? I dident ask...

Telling or asking someone for the contents of another's deck is the same thing as thing as sharing notes taken during a match. It serves the same purpose and leads to the same outcome.

You're right. I should have qualified that. You have no control over what someone tells you of there own accord with no prompting.

 

[billbilski]

I was referring to the part of the post asking about having the bogus "reference card" displayed.
That is illegal.

I made no comment about answering questions between rounds about deck contents.
I'm not going to get into that foolishness.

Understand now. I thought you were answering his question, which was if someone asks if the opponent if he plays luxray lvx during a game, can he respond with a direct lie? My contention is that this is irrelevant to the game(explained in previous post) and does not need to be ruled. Can someone answer that question.

 

[waynegg]

Understand now. I thought you were answering his question, which was if someone asks if the opponent if he plays luxray lvx during a game, can he respond with a direct lie? My contention is that this is irrelevant to the game(explained in previous post) and does not need to be ruled. Can someone answer that question.

As to the "Are you playing Lux X in your deck" Q, simply refuse to answer, if you dont want to reveal anything in your deck. In fact, simply tell them that it is ag'st the rules for them to ask that Q. That usually shuts them up.

He answered it. My thought is that the asking player should be penalized. By not answering the question you may as well be confirming that it is in your deck and they will react by playing accordingly.

 

[Lawman]

Posted by Waynegg (to Box of Fail): "Then you admit to at the least not following the Spirit of the Game and at worst cheating and helping others to do the same."

Sorry, but that is incorrect. You cannot point to a single rule that he violated, unless you think talking about what your oppo played is ag'st the SotG. Please dont preach to people and tell them they are cheating when they arent. What you are advocating means that when I talk to friends after a rd and they say, how did it go, I can only say what I used and attacked with?? See, with your version of the rules (which is not correct), a player couldnt say "I played Jim and when I took out his Lux X, he was crippled". Geez, I just told you about my oppo's deck! How silly of me.

See how this plays out? Written notes are for your use and for that game only. The oppo has the RIGHT to read your notes. You can then reference those notes later when you type up a report. You cannot take the written notes and give them to player X to use in their match ag'st the same oppo.

Keith

 

[waynegg]

Posted by Waynegg (to Box of Fail): "Then you admit to at the least not following the Spirit of the Game and at worst cheating and helping others to do the same."

Sorry, but that is incorrect. You cannot point to a single rule that he violated, unless you think talking about what your oppo played is ag'st the SotG. Please dont preach to people and tell them they are cheating when they arent. What you are advocating means that when I talk to friends after a rd and they say, how did it go, I can only say what I used and attacked with?? See, with your version of the rules (which is not correct), a player couldnt say "I played Jim and when I took out his Lux X, he was crippled". Geez, I just told you about my oppo's deck! How silly of me.

See how this plays out? Written notes are for your use and for that game only. The oppo has the RIGHT to read your notes. You can then reference those notes later when you type up a report. You cannot take the written notes and give them to player X to use in their match ag'st the same oppo.

Keith

We'll see. I really think you are wrong on this one. The rule doesn't limit the notes and SotG violations have penalties to.

Oh, and now you are the slight of hand method of debate (using a seemingly related example as a distraction) with the talking about your game afterward example. Why don't you just stick to the subject. Deliberately asking for and giving specifics of someone's deck to gain an advantage over your opponent that isn't allowed by the spirit the rules were written in. Otherwise it wouldn't be prohibitted to share notes you take. If you perform the same type of action (sharing the inside line of someone's deck) and it leads to the same result (giving an unfair advantage to the violating player) it is a rules infraction.

There is a big difference between

A "I played Jim and when I took out his Lux X, he was crippled"

and

B "Man I have to face Jim next round and I saw that you played him. What is he using and what techs do I need to be concerned with." -or- "Man, I see you're playing Jim this round, if you take out his Luxray and watch out for these tech a, b, c, d you stand a good chance of taking him out even though his deck would normally stomp you if you didn't know that because yours could feed into his strategy"

And then on top of that advising people to use these underhanded tactics is really poor.

What you are advocating means that when I talk to friends after a rd and they say, how did it go, I can only say what I used and attacked with??

There are many things you could say...

I won
I lost
It was fun
I/He couldn't get the deck going
It was a really tough/easy match
I/HE had an Energy drought the whole game.
I/HE got behind early and just never could recover.
etc.

You don't HAVE to divulge the contents of either deck to have that conversation.

Let me just boil it down like this and be through with it.

If this is true

From Section 7
Notes taken during a match may not be given to other players during the course of the tournament.

as well as this

From Section 5.2
Players who are still participating in a tournament may not watch other games still in progress, as this provides an unfair advantage to those players during later matches.

How is it, in the spirit in which these two rules were written, then hunky dorey to do the same exact thing by simply telling your friend the ins and outs of the person's deck whom they are about to face, from knowledge you gleaned while playing said opponent. The rules are implicit that this type of behavior is disallowed. Why would it be allowed by another means that establishes the same cause and effect type of relationship. If it were allowable, then there would be absolutely no need for that part of section 7 or for the whole of section 5.2 because giving or gaining that information before the match in the manner being discussed "provides an unfair advantage to those players".

 

[Lawman]

Wayne: There is nothing underhanded in my arguments. You are quite passionate about your arguments. The problrm though is the myopic way of thinking. One thing is set in stone and there is no other way.

The rules you keep citing deal with written notes (7) and scouting during a round (5). Scouting is disallowed. Sharing of written notes is disallowed. How does this stop a social element of the game???? Players can talk in the hallway. Once a deck is played in a tourney, it is public knowledge. IF a player played say, Ness or Steve S., they WILL tell their friends how they did and what was played. I guarantee it! If I was ever told to enforce that type of rule, I'd probably hang up my judging shoes, and I have judged quite abit (look at sig).

Saying my arguments are "underhanded" dont score many points with me. I am pointing out the ways a player can LEGALLY discuss his matches. There is nothing wrong with that. There is a great social aspect to this game that would be lost if your version of this rule was applied. We are supposed to have FUN in this game. Sounds like you would like it to be less fun.

Keith

 

[waynegg]

Wayne: There is nothing underhanded in my arguments. You are quite passionate about your arguments. The problrm though is the myopic way of thinking. One thing is set in stone and there is no other way.

I never said your arguments are underhanded, I said the tactic of sharing another's deck information is underhanded. Read. Don't skim.

Scouting is disallowed. Sharing of written notes is disallowed. How does this stop a social element of the game????

This is like a dot to dot puzzle of a triangle. Two of the lines are already connected and all you have to do is draw that last line. Are you really telling me you can't see how to draw that line? You can't see that asking for the contents of another's deck IS a form of scouting?! Here is Websters:

Verb1.scouting - exploring in order to gain information

And you can't see how sharing your first hand knowledge from your very recent memory is the same thing as sharing knowledge from your very recent written notes? Really?!

That isn't a 'social element of the game'; that's collusion which until recently had its very own section in the rules. It was very clear that it isn't supposed to happen.

If I was ever told to enforce that type of rule, I'd probably hang up my judging shoes, and I have judged quite abit (look at sig).

If that's all it would take for you to stop judging, that's pretty sad in my opinion. Being that you have judged that much, I would think you were well aware of the collusion rule and the fact that it isn't supposed to take place. Maybe you skimmed over it too...

Saying my arguments are "underhanded" dont score many points with me. I am pointing out the ways a player can LEGALLY discuss his matches. There is nothing wrong with that. There is a great social aspect to this game that would be lost if your version of this rule was applied. We are supposed to have FUN in this game. Sounds like you would like it to be less fun.

I'm not trying to score points with you, and I don't feel it necessary to shine you up to be correct. I have given you plenty of evidence to support the preponderance of likelihood that the rules prohibit sharing of information in this manner. We'll find out later for certain, one way or the other. If I end up being wrong, I'm big enough to say that I was wrong, are you?

There is a great social aspect to this game, I agree. I disagree however that scouting or sharing your experience facing someone else's deck, as to the particulars of that deck, are a social aspect. That's collusion, or cheating if you will. There are an almost infinite number of possibilities of subjects to be social about without allowing for players to gain unfair advantages over others in the process.

I'm done as I stated, but make neither assumptions nor inferences as to what I think. Before I close, there is one question which has been posed multiple times:

Question as to playing the same player twice in a tournament: It wouldn't be an unfair advantage to use the information you gleaned in your first match-up. Both players would have prior knowledge of the others' deck, and therefor would be on even ground.

Connect the dots, Keith. It's just a triangle.

 

[Box of Fail]

We'll see. I really think you are wrong on this one. The rule doesn't limit the notes and SotG violations have penalties to.

Oh, and now you are the slight of hand method of debate (using a seemingly related example as a distraction) with the talking about your game afterward example. Why don't you just stick to the subject. Deliberately asking for and giving specifics of someone's deck to gain an advantage over your opponent that isn't allowed by the spirit the rules were written in. Otherwise it wouldn't be prohibitted to share notes you take. If you perform the same type of action (sharing the inside line of someone's deck) and it leads to the same result (giving an unfair advantage to the violating player) it is a rules infraction.

There is a big difference between

A "I played Jim and when I took out his Lux X, he was crippled"

and

B "Man I have to face Jim next round and I saw that you played him. What is he using and what techs do I need to be concerned with." -or- "Man, I see you're playing Jim this round, if you take out his Luxray and watch out for these tech a, b, c, d you stand a good chance of taking him out even though his deck would normally stomp you if you didn't know that because yours could feed into his strategy"

From personal experience, the vast majority of cases I have seen or been involved with myself (as a source of, as you put it, "underhanded" information) are much closer to example A. However, if a player goes up to me and says straight to me, "I think I will play X next round. what is he playing?" I will tell them, friend or total stranger, unless I genuinely dislike them. I will NOT go into their techs & stuff. Just the general deck, which definitely includes the main line and if they play Claydol in SP, etc. I won't tell you if my R3 opponent ran Ambipom because you're playing Luxchomp. I do chat about my matches, without being concerned whether I am affording my audience an unfair advantage that could potentially win them a crucial game.

And then on top of that advising people to use these underhanded tactics is really poor.

Accusing Keith of using smoke and mirrors in his straightforward post is not becoming of someone who tries to guilt-trip him in the same post.

There are many things you could say...

I won
I lost
It was fun
I/He couldn't get the deck going
It was a really tough/easy match
I/HE had an Energy drought the whole game.
I/HE got behind early and just never could recover.
etc.

What about someone like me, who runs Shuppet? An "energy drought" confirms in most instances I am not running Shuppet, since it only needs one energy card through the whole game. An even better example would be Gyarados.

If I'm your buddy, and you know I'm running Dialga, and my opponent is known for running Uxie-donk, saying it was a tough match confirms that they are trying something new.

You don't HAVE to divulge the contents of either deck to have that conversation.

Let me just boil it down like this and be through with it.

If this is true

as well as this

How is it, in the spirit in which these two rules were written, then hunky dorey to do the same exact thing by simply telling your friend the ins and outs of the person's deck whom they are about to face, from knowledge you gleaned while playing said opponent. The rules are implicit that this type of behavior is disallowed. Why would it be allowed by another means that establishes the same cause and effect type of relationship. If it were allowable, then there would be absolutely no need for that part of section 7 or for the whole of section 5.2 because giving or gaining that information before the match in the manner being discussed "provides an unfair advantage to those players".
As I said, it may indeed be because memory is meant to be a part of tournament play. If I get my matches muddled up, and say my R3 opponent played Toxicroak promo when it was actually my R2 opponent, what good does it do you? Notes do not allow for this sort of error.

Replies are in bold....

 

[Vulpix Yolk]

This is a very clever strategy and I'm going to have to use it sometime. I don't see why it would be illegal if you didn't lie.

 

[astewart]

Personally i think that most players are cool with bluffing. If you don't like how people are smarter then you when you play, dont play tourneys. Like Darth Pika said "Bluffing is a part of card games, simple as that. The game is about out smarting your opponent." Like personally when i play i dont usually talk, thats just me, i think thats intimidating (Maybe thats just me ) but seriously i personally think that apart of pokemon is to out smart your opponents and maybe this sounds wrong but bluffing is apart of almost every card game and seriously what 10 year old kid is gonna call over the judge and be like "JUDGE!!!! MY OPPONENT IS USING INTENDED ACTIONS TO DECIEVE ME!!! Like come on i think everyone is taking this way to seriously, Steven (World champ) even said that his little bluff was one of the best moves he made in pokemon so idk its kinda 50-50 for me ATM

 

[PokePop]

There is a huge difference between implying something / allowing your opponent to infer intent and outright lying and misrepresentation.

Use at your peril for two reasons.

1. You may not be clear on where the line is and if you go over it, you're setting yourself up for a potential DQ.
2. Different judges will have different ideas about where the line is. A particular judge may find that you are over the line where other judges in the past have not. At that point, when you try to argue against your DQ, you will have very shaky ground to stand on and it will be upheld.

Take this as straight up advice.
When it's well done and within the rules, I'm a fan of it.
But from the discussion above, a lot of you are wrong about where the line is and are not as skilled at doing it legally as you think you are.

 

[thephoenix]

If someone bluffs you, or plays you in a way that they can not only direct their own game flow, but yours as well, do exactly what I and numerous others that have suffered from a bluff or direction do. Shake your opponents hand, let them know that it was a great game, and learn from it. Figure out how you got played, and go from there. This game is about strategy...learning your opponent, directing the game, and going for the win. Stating that faking someone out is unsportmanlike would be like a football player crying to a ref when he goes to chase the ball carrier and someone jukes out of the way and runs the opposite direction.

If someone outright lies, thats a different case, but even then, suggestion is NOT against the rules. I've sat and pulled energy cards and raised my eyes or went "ooooh, good stuff". It's suggestion. It's not a lie in the slightest as I'm not saying WHAT is good stuff. Like the "oh, shoot"...he didn't say what it was that he was "oh, shoot"ing about. I've sat and said stuff like "Ah, hell..." and stared at my prizes but I'm not lying about what is in there.

Just play the game. If you lose because you got controlled, learn from it.

 

[astewart]

There is a huge difference between implying something / allowing your opponent to infer intent and outright lying and misrepresentation.

Use at your peril for two reasons.

1. You may not be clear on where the line is and if you go over it, you're setting yourself up for a potential DQ.
2. Different judges will have different ideas about where the line is. A particular judge may find that you are over the line where other judges in the past have not. At that point, when you try to argue against your DQ, you will have very shaky ground to stand on and it will be upheld.

Take this as straight up advice.
When it's well done and within the rules, I'm a fan of it.
But from the discussion above, a lot of you are wrong about where the line is and are not as skilled at doing it legally as you think you are.

nono, i completly agree, i mean lying defenitly isent a cool thing to do, but all im trying to point out is really alot of players that do even believe the lie to begin with are the ones that got screwed over in the long run. at worlds a few years back someone had a dusknoir translation without it in there deck, he eventually went on to being DQ'd. that is oviously lieing and not a good thing to do, While compared to someone (for example) using priemer ball for nothing then Azelfing and alowing the opponent to spray that even though you know you have the win with lets say a bright look but had to get rid of the spray (I know who would spray the zelf to begin with??) but thats what i call a GOOD bluff!, a good bluff is not a lie, it's a statement that might not be completely true at that very moment, but has a possibility of being true if you wanted it to be for example if you see a baltoy and you have a cyrus next turn you could know that that thet are going to get a claydol. and you already have a spray AND a cyrus meaning you grab maybe an energy gain over a powerspray making your opponent go into a claydol and you having a spray and lets say next turn you use that energy gain that you got with the cyrus on Garchomp C LVX and one shot the dol. A lie will always be a lie, you can't turn it around. So like i said earlier, If someone is trying to bluff you, you pretty much have be smart enough to potentially notice this bluff and play around it. me for example, when i play a game, (a serious game) im VERY quiet. and with this i could care less about what my opponent does when it comes to things like a sigh or deep breaths or something, but thats just me.

 

[Hippowdon SaveSand]

I never lie or bluff. I just do what the cards say and use them to win six prizes.

 

[jeffrey123]

I always bluff.

Good opponents do

 

[Bellawesome]

I lie sometimes.

I tell them they look/smell good, and their deck is the play. Usually works.

 

[Politoed666]

It is your opponent's decision whether to give credence to your actions. You cannot outright lie about any game situation, but there is no reason you cannot say "oh shoot" while searching your deck, or doing anything else for that manner.

Personally, I frequently manipulate my facial expression, eye contact, playing style, etc. to inspire nervousness or the tendency to make misplays in my opponent. I often say things to hint that the game state is different than it is, in regards to something that is not public knowledge. There's nothing wrong with that. It's simply strategic card playing, and you'll find it in any card game.