So I was playing under the new best-of-3 rules with only a few matches remaining in Swiss. In the current match, my opponent and I have each won 1 game, and as we are setting up for the 3rd game he says to me (this is not an exact quote, but the essence of what he said):
He had been annoyed at my refusal, but his offer left me with a lingering annoyance at his casual attempt to involve me in clear collusion. So later I looked up the exact rule (in the Pokémon General Event Rules):
And I wondered how much similar collusion of this nature is now going on during these big tournaments? Perhaps the general announcements before the tournament should warn against this sort of collusion (since newer players may not be aware that this is a rule violation), and specify what penalty would apply. Perhaps a larger penalty should be applied against the player who suggested the collusion, and a lesser penalty against the player accepting the collusion.
[Or should TPCi consider a rule change? After all, since intentional mutual ties are now allowed, should intentional mutual non-ties be allowed? In both cases, the players are trying to wiggle points to advance in the tournament, but one case is legal and the opposite case is not.]
I told him no, let’s just play the game and let the results stand. He was clearly annoyed with me, and I said: It sounds too much like collusion. The 3rd game was completed, which he won, so he won our match but later did not advance to top 32."If time is called and our game is not completed, then a tie wouldn’t give either of us enough points to still have a chance for advancing to the top 32. So shall we agree that if this game is not finished we will roll a die and the winner of the roll will be declared the winner of the game and match?" (Or perhaps he meant the loser of the roll would simply scoop if the 3rd game was unfinished.)
He had been annoyed at my refusal, but his offer left me with a lingering annoyance at his casual attempt to involve me in clear collusion. So later I looked up the exact rule (in the Pokémon General Event Rules):
That is absolutely clear. I was thinking about what I should have done, or what I would do in future tournaments if a similar suggestion is made by my opponent. I think I should simply raise my hand for a judge and say to my opponent: "Let me see if your offer is OK with a judge." (And if the judge ignorantly says it’s OK, then I would request that the head judge be asked.)10.2 Random Determination
Players my never determine the outcome of a match through a random means (flipping a coin, rolling dice, etc.)
And I wondered how much similar collusion of this nature is now going on during these big tournaments? Perhaps the general announcements before the tournament should warn against this sort of collusion (since newer players may not be aware that this is a rule violation), and specify what penalty would apply. Perhaps a larger penalty should be applied against the player who suggested the collusion, and a lesser penalty against the player accepting the collusion.
[Or should TPCi consider a rule change? After all, since intentional mutual ties are now allowed, should intentional mutual non-ties be allowed? In both cases, the players are trying to wiggle points to advance in the tournament, but one case is legal and the opposite case is not.]