Time +1

[kristi]

This is an idea that my local TO (Prof Clay) told me about and we have discussed it. The idea is that after time is called, the player whose turn it is finishes their turn, and then their opponent gets one more turn. This would hlep to eleminate stalling because neither player would want time to be called on thier turn, thus, speeding up thier play. It would also decrease the amount of rushing that goes on because if time is called on your opponent's turn, then you get another turn. I wouldn't want to hurry my opponent if it ment that I got to have an additional turn. It's just an idea, but I think that it would be good for the game.

 

[Serebii1997J]

I like the idea.
I believe they have this in Japan.

 

[Lawman]

Many folks have discussed this idea before (look for SlowDeck's thread and sig....30+1). It was a nice idea with 30 min rds. Now, with 40 min swiss rds, stalling should be less of an issue. Plus, you dont see as much Gardy X sitting on the bench ready to snipe when time is called.

Keith

 

[JandPDS]

The change to 40 min rounds had pretty much made the proposed time called +1 rule pointless.

 

[SLOW DECK]

I guess I should change my Signature to 40 AND ONE? Probably not.
40 Minutes is better than 30+1 Minutes, which is better than 30minutes. 40 minutes is more natural time for just about any game.

Now is the "AND ONE" pointless?

The "AND ONE" should be in the judge’s tool box if they observe slow play at the end of the match. The judge should probably stop thinking about INTENT of the slow play, but the effect. Prompt, consistent, and deliberate actions are good, "excessive" thinking and legal but curious game state checks, such as counting cards in discard piles, I believe should prompt a judge to give the AND ONE extension.

Slow Play: Excessive Shuffling, Excessive Thinking, Excessive Game State Checks, and Excessive Search times. Etc.
Non - Slow Play: Executing any legal actions available to player, promptly. If a player executes legal Pokémon power, trainer, supporter search, there should be no judging of IF that action is needed, only if it is executed promptly given the game situation.

+Judge the effect not the intent of Slow Play.
+The "AND ONE" should not be a penalty, rather a judge’s observation of slow play. If there is determination of malice, the judge can make it into a penalty situation.
+ There should be no RUSHING a player, and a moment of thinking through a turn should be fine, and not slow play, because both players hand done this through out the match, and the player who is ahead should still plan his move. A losing player who is behind executes his turn in lightning tune, that should not influence a judge in declaring an "AND ONE". The player who is behind might not have the luxury of thinking through the turn like they would normally.
+ Although a player should not be rushed, a nervous player who executes too slowly is an example of Slow Play without malice, but with effect.
+ If the judge sees that the player who is behind, is also spends several moments in thought and is slow in execution of their turn, that should be a factor in not awarding the "AND ONE".
+ Judge should not rule on the one only one perceived observation of a slow play occurrence, because the judge thought about a needless delay might not contemplate the players understanding of the game state. If the player spends a dozenl extra moments thinking or then shuffles his deck excessively etc. Then you have observed slow play.
+ Finally, the judge should not have prejudice against the player who is ahead! They didn't observe the game from the start, and there is a reason that one player is up on prizes over the other.