Well... I Can't Outplay the Judges...

[old man]

The PTO of the event here.....
After talking with the HJ about this, he may come on here and adress some of this.
I will NOT say whether I think this was the correct penalty or not, IMO, I am backing my HJ for his determination in this matter.

To answer 1 question directly above, when Whicker drew the prize, he added it to his other cards and like a LOT of players, does a mini-shuffle of the cards in his hand.

To answer another one, the HJ did confer with 2 other judges at the event & they came to a consensus on the ruling & penalty. Yes they considered other options, such as a PL or MPL as well.

 

[Dark Weedle]

dont worry about it jordan just win regionals. or at least second to me ;o

 

[chriscobi634]

Sorry Vince I didn't mean to put you on the spot there I was trying to prove a point.

I'm known as a sloppy player in my area. NOT A CHEATER. I have called myself out on sloppy plays I've made like accidentally drawing 7 with Cosmic Power. Why would I openly admit to this? Because I think this is something that hasn't been addressed in it's own right. Sure penalties are given for break the rules, but I believe penalties should be given for accidentally break the rules or sloppy play. Accidentally can be seen as cheating and I know some will say " Some people will take advantage of this." But they can only be issued if the HJs is 100% sure that it was accidental.

Like this would be a perfect scenario to apply it, or if a player calls themselves out on it. I have seen some players notice their opponent is making an illegal move and will wait until it is irreversible to call a judge over. That way their opponent will be receive a Game Loss. This can also apply to board play. Like if Player B has an Unown G hiddenly attached to a Pokemon, waits for Player A to announce an attack like Damage Even then Player B reveals the Unown G. The "Sloppy Play" infraction would be given to Player B for not having a clear board.

Which takes to another point I have been to quite a few tourneys were space was limited so players were too close together were playing fields were over lapping. There should be a pre-set area involving measurements for players to play in. Like there is in playing fields for sports.

 

[SteveP]

Whicker, was the prize you drew added to your hand? Or was the error caught before that occurred? My son received a game loss for drawing a prize when he wasn't supposed to (he included weakness on Dusknoir's Damage Even) and added the prize to his hand before his opponent realized his pokemon was not knocked out. Since the prize card entered the hand, and it was impossible to determine which card that was, the game loss was given because the action could not be rewound. Mind you, this was in Juniors of a State Championship Swiss game. The reasoning for the game loss was because the game state could not be rewound. While it seems rather harsh, the fact that it was at a State Championship elevates the penalty guidelines, even in the case of Junior players.

The judge could've easily asked your kid which card was the prize card. If the judge believe he was honest, the situation was very reasonable to unwind, other than now knowing something new (if he didn't use Time Walk).

The rule that was applied to this particular situation was "if a player gained an advantage, consider escalating the penalty."

Too many judges get "uptight" with the notion that just because something is unwindable, it's automatically a game loss. This should NOT always be the case. It needs to be considered case-by-case, and ONLY if 1) the game-state is VERY disrupted (ie, shuffling discard into deck) or 2) a critical advantage was gained.

Not being there, it's only logical to assume the judge applied the "gained an advantage" rule. The disruption to the game-state was major, but reasonably unwindable, so no need for escalation in that reasoning.

 

[Lawman]

First of all, I was not at this state championship. So, I dont know all facts around this ruling. I will point out that the guidelines would call for a lesser penalty for drawing a prize card at the wrong time, even at a tier 2 event. BUT, these are guidelines and can be deviated from, when the circumstances allow.

For any judge to state that just bc a prize card was drawn incorrectly = irreversible broken gamestate is IMO, wrong. The fix may not be 100 % perfect, but a fix can be made in that instance, absent other factors that could mitigate or increase the penalty. If that was the standard only, I would have given out 3-4 GLs at 2 states. After accessing ALL the facts, gamestate, age group, etc .....there was only one ruling that in essence made a GL. You cannot play favorites (not accusing anyone of doing so here either....just a general statement), you just make the ruling you feel is proper. I even had one player comment after I made a PL ruling that they were afraid I would give them a GL for the action. It was a very similar action as the OP had, except it was during swiss rounds. I appreciated the players honesty in that comment. I explained clearly why I made the ruling, asked if either player had any Qs, then I wrote up the penalty.

Before anyone thinks I am busting the HJ's chops in this case, I am not. I support every HJ's ruling. They were there, I wasn't. I have HJ'd many events, including US Nats in 2008. The team moves on and all the judges support the others. In hindsight, if something could be done better, we use that as a learning tool and strive to not err in that way again. I made one error @ Nats. We did what we could at the time, but Dave talked to me on the side, between rds and discussed what could/should have been done to make things better. He didnt stomp on me. I am a better judge after this experience and the knowledge I gained has helped me and my judging teams since.

Keith

 

[Whicker]

To answer 1 question directly above, when Whicker drew the prize, he added it to his other cards and like a LOT of players, does a mini-shuffle of the cards in his hand.

This is what happened. My recall of the situation involved Clay (my opponent) discarding his Pachirisu, promoting a new Pokemon, and drawing a card before the error was caught. By then, I had already drawn the prize and added it to my hand.

Anyway, I'm generally very happy at the direction this thread has taken. Although I'm obviously convinced that the wrong call was made, I can see why the ruling was made and why some agree with it. I know this is a unique situation and I'm glad that my experience can help other judges think about such a situation in advance so they are better prepared if this is to happen at their tournament. I also think this is a great discussion and I extend my thanks to many of you for keeping things civil.

 

[SteveP]

This is what happened. My recall of the situation involved Clay (my opponent) discarding his Pachirisu, promoting a new Pokemon, and drawing a card before the error was caught. By then, I had already drawn the prize and added it to my hand...

Was the HJ aware of the discarded Pachy before making the game-loss ruling? If not, then you probably didn't present the facts he needed to make the normal prize-loss penalty. If your opponent did something that might have instigated the error on your part, that's certainly something the judge needs to know about, and consider when ruling.

Like Keith said, judges occasionally make mistakes. It's good to hear constructive and respectful criticism from the players. It make us all better.

 

[NoPoke]

The rule that was applied to this particular situation was "if a player gained an advantage, consider escalating the penalty."

Too many judges get "uptight" with the notion that just because something is unwindable, it's automatically a .....

In case anyone missed the implications of what SteveP is saying. It is my opinion that the rule I highlighted in red does not exist. With any Major error judges should consider the impact. The reason I don't like the red rule is that it encourages a mindset to always escalate penalties. The point that SteveP then goes on to make.

• Starting penalty
• Additional factors (previous history is one such)
• How good is the repair?
• Can the game continue in some approximation of its original course?

There is almost always an advantage gained from a MAJOR error, yet very few MAJOR errors come with a GL as penalty.

 

[Whicker]

Was the HJ aware of the discarded Pachy before making the game-loss ruling? If not, then you probably didn't present the facts he needed to make the normal prize-loss penalty. If your opponent did something that might have instigated the error on your part, that's certainly something the judge needs to know about, and consider when ruling.

Like Keith said, judges occasionally make mistakes. It's good to hear constructive and respectful criticism from the players. It make us all better.

The HJ was sitting at the table monitoring the two games taking place (this was top cut). He was the one who caught the error. Everything happened so quickly, but this is my best recollection, play by play:

Whicker has Uxie Lvl X active with 2 energies and has Snowpoint Temple in play. Clay has a Pachirisu active with 20 damage.
Whicker: "Zen Blade"
Clay: discards Pachirisu.
Whicker: looks down at prizes and hesitates, trying to remember which one was the enegy
Clay: promotes a Pokemon
Whicker: draws a prize. He does a mini-shuffle of his hand afterwards.
Clay: draws a card and begins thinking about the first move of his turn
Head Judge: (to Clay) "How much damage was on the Pachirisu?"
Clay: "20"
Head Judge: "Alright, hold on, the Pachirisu wasn't supposed to be knocked out."

 

[SteveP]

If that's true, I think your argument is valid that the penalty should not have been escalated. Your misplay was a direct result of your opponent's misplay.

Another mitigating circumstance was that the judge was doing "active" judging. The main intent of active judge is trying to prevent penalties and correcting errors.

But, this all assumes that what you said above is true and accurate.

 

[The Doctor]

This is Dr. D posting at this time. I have given every one ample opportunity to post to this post and give their points of view. I purposefully did not post until now in-order to give others an opportunity to give their opinions. At this time I wish to give my view as the judge at this match as well as the HJ for the tournament.

Before I continue though I want to stress that I have no bias toward either player. I have played against and judged both players for many years. I think they are both exceptional players. I don't believe that either player was gaming or showing unsportsmanlike behavior during the game. At the beginning of the tournament I announced that this event is very important and every player should take his/her time in playing but that in the end this is a game and every one should have fun.


Below is the situation as I saw it:

We were in the top cut at the top 16. We were in the second game of match play with Jordan up 1-0.

Jordan had snow point stadium in play with an Uxie Lv X active against Clay's Pacharisu (HP 70) with 20 damage on it. Jordan had previously used Azelf's time walk power to see his prizes and arrange them. Jordan then used Uxie's Zen Blade attack for 60 damage and stated Pacharisu was KO'ed. Clay then picked up Pacharisa to put it in the discard pile. I grabbed his hand to stop him and asked him how much damage was on Pacharisu to see if it was truly KO'ed. He realized at that point that it still had 10HP remaining and put it back in the active position. During this time Jordan had drawn a prize that he knew and began shuffling it through his hand. At this point I began the process of unwinding the game state if possible and making a ruling.


I was the only judge that saw this turn but I could not tell which card was the drawn prize. At this point Clay had not promoted a new active Pokemon or drawn a card. Unwinding his part was easy. Unwinding Jordan's side was much more difficult. I asked Jordan what the prize was that he had drawn and he revealed an energy card. I did look at Jordan's hand and did not see any specific card that looked overly helpful but at the same time I do not play that specific deck and don't know all the intricacies of how the cards in the deck work together especially since I could only evaluate the cards in his hand. The problem that I had has been mentioned above. He knew exactly what he had as prizes and as such drew the one must beneficial to him. This by definition gives him a significant advantage that I could not unwind. I am not questioning his honesty as an individual but I put myself in Clay's position and could not just let it go at that.

This is obviously a Game Play - Major error in a Tier 2 event. Per Penalty guidelines this would be a prize penalty unless the HJ determined that the error gave a significant advantage and then the penalty should be escalated one step. In this case a multi-prize penalty is the minimum penalty. Because this was a major error and corresponding penalty I discussed this with the other judges present. As a group we agreed that this was a major error as mentioned above. The question then became how severe the penalty was.

At this point I take full responsibility for the ultimate decision. There was an extensive discussion about match play vs Swiss rounds. Ultimately I felt that if this error had occurred during Swiss play I would have assessed a penalty of Multi-prize penalty. It would be too harsh a penalty to give a game loss during Swiss rounds but since this was match play a game loss penalty was a balance. This ruling was ultimately my ruling with the assistance of the other judges at the tournament. It was a judgment call that was thought-out carefully and made with trepidation but felt to be as fair as possible.


I hope this has helped every one understand my thought process. There will obviously be many people who disagree with my ruling and I respect you for thinking through the situation and making a decision. Please remember though that it is easy to make decision in retrospect especially when you don't have the ramifications of your decisions affecting both players. I still believe that this decision was an appropriate judgment decision. I also believe that other judges could make other rulings in the same situation that are equally appropriate. I do appreciate everyone's opinions above and I believe that those opinions will help me in the future when making rulings.

Thanks
Dr D.

 

[TheDarkTwins]

This is Dr. D posting at this time. I have given every one ample opportunity to post to this post and give their points of view. I purposefully did not post until now in-order to give others an opportunity to give their opinions. At this time I wish to give my view as the judge at this match as well as the HJ for the tournament.

Before I continue though I want to stress that I have no bias toward either player. I have played against and judged both players for many years. I think they are both exceptional players. I don't believe that either player was gaming or showing unsportsmanlike behavior during the game. At the beginning of the tournament I announced that this event is very important and every player should take his/her time in playing but that in the end this is a game and every one should have fun.


Below is the situation as I saw it:

We were in the top cut at the top 16. We were in the second game of match play with Jordan up 1-0.

Jordan had snow point stadium in play with an Uxie Lv X active against Clay's Pacharisu (HP 70) with 20 damage on it. Jordan had previously used Azelf's time walk power to see his prizes and arrange them. Jordan then used Uxie's Zen Blade attack for 60 damage and stated Pacharisu was KO'ed. Clay then picked up Pacharisa to put it in the discard pile. I grabbed his hand to stop him and asked him how much damage was on Pacharisu to see if it was truly KO'ed. He realized at that point that it still had 10HP remaining and put it back in the active position. During this time Jordan had drawn a prize that he knew and began shuffling it through his hand. At this point I began the process of unwinding the game state if possible and making a ruling.


I was the only judge that saw this turn but I could not tell which card was the drawn prize. At this point Clay had not promoted a new active Pokemon or drawn a card. Unwinding his part was easy. Unwinding Jordan's side was much more difficult. I asked Jordan what the prize was that he had drawn and he revealed an energy card. I did look at Jordan's hand and did not see any specific card that looked overly helpful but at the same time I do not play that specific deck and don't know all the intricacies of how the cards in the deck work together especially since I could only evaluate the cards in his hand. The problem that I had has been mentioned above. He knew exactly what he had as prizes and as such drew the one must beneficial to him. This by definition gives him a significant advantage that I could not unwind. I am not questioning his honesty as an individual but I put myself in Clay's position and could not just let it go at that.

This is obviously a Game Play - Major error in a Tier 2 event. Per Penalty guidelines this would be a prize penalty unless the HJ determined that the error gave a significant advantage and then the penalty should be escalated one step. In this case a multi-prize penalty is the minimum penalty. Because this was a major error and corresponding penalty I discussed this with the other judges present. As a group we agreed that this was a major error as mentioned above. The question then became how severe the penalty was.

At this point I take full responsibility for the ultimate decision. There was an extensive discussion about match play vs Swiss rounds. Ultimately I felt that if this error had occurred during Swiss play I would have assessed a penalty of Multi-prize penalty. It would be too harsh a penalty to give a game loss during Swiss rounds but since this was match play a game loss penalty was a balance. This ruling was ultimately my ruling with the assistance of the other judges at the tournament. It was a judgment call that was thought-out carefully and made with trepidation but felt to be as fair as possible.


I hope this has helped every one understand my thought process. There will obviously be many people who disagree with my ruling and I respect you for thinking through the situation and making a decision. Please remember though that it is easy to make decision in retrospect especially when you don't have the ramifications of your decisions affecting both players. I still believe that this decision was an appropriate judgment decision. I also believe that other judges could make other rulings in the same situation that are equally appropriate. I do appreciate everyone's opinions above and I believe that those opinions will help me in the future when making rulings.

Thanks
Dr D.

While it is hard to rewind this, it is for sure NOT a game loss under any circumstance. I think that if you felt that one player gain a significant advantage then you can do either Multi-Card or Prize Penalty. I also think that you could give a warning if you felt that you were being told the truth. If you didn't then a prize penalty is the way to go. I feel that is a bit harsh, but what do I know. I had this happen to me during Nationals and I was only given a Warning and told I HAD to take that as my next prize when I took one and I had to show my opponent what the card was.

Drew

 

[Lawman]

Dr. D: First of all, thx for posting your side. You didnt have to. PUI and your PTO have your back.

With that said, IMO, review the guidelines again. 6.5. Game Loss
This penalty should almost never be given out to a player who has not previously received a lesser
penalty for the same infraction, unless it is the penalty recommended in this document. If this
penalty is issued in-between rounds, the penalty is applied to the player’s next game.

7.1.2. Major
When game state has become irreversibly confused due to game-play errors, it is appropriate for
the judge to issue a higher-level penalty. Major game-play error penalties are also appropriate for
minor game-play errors that have left the game too confused to reset.
In addition to the assigned penalty to the offending player, a Caution should be issued to the
player’s opponent for not properly keeping track of game state and rules.
Examples of Game-Play Error: Major include:
• Shuffling your deck mid-game without the use of a card effect.
• Insufficiently randomizing your deck.
• Failing to place Prize cards at the beginning of the game*
• Drawing a Prize card without Knocking Out a Pokémon.
• Drawing too many Prize cards after Knocking Out a Pokémon.
• Forgetting to place damage counters on a Pokémon from a mandatory effect, such as
Poisoned.
• Using a Poké-Power when a card prevents its use.
Recommended Starting Penalty:
Tier 1: Warning
Tier 2: Prize Card

By the very definiton of the GL, POP recommends that we use that for extreme situations. IMO, your situation with Whicker WAS rewindable...ergo, NOT a GL. (Guidelines recommend tier 2 = PP) In fact, you say as much when you state that IF this done in Swiss, you would have issued a PP or, at WORST, a MPC. (I, as HJ in TN had a very similar scenario and I went with a PL in Swiss). There is nothing in the guidelines that state we judge more harshly because this is SEF. You state that you in fact, went up 2 steps just because it was SEF of a Tier 2 event. You "expected" better play from the top cut competitors. You also need to factor in the fact that these players have been playing ALL day and now into the late evening. (Same with the Judges....we aren't perfect). You also stated that you had no prior history with either player, that you felt both were honest and neither was trying to use gamesmanship. Please use this post as a tool, not as a criticism.

Keith

 

[MrMeches]

Keith... whereas you and I see eye to eye on most things... some of your post should be handled through PM and not blatantly posted on the boards. Support the Judges as a Universal Team.

Neither of the people posting after Dr. D was actually there and you can only review so much in words than in person. My suggestion would be to cautiously step into the HJ shoes and see their perspective. The thread was dead... so let it RIP. by fanning the flames, it can only get worse. If you have questions over this, PM him directly.

Fish

 

[meganium45]

'cause Keith, you get me to come on board behind you and state that I support the judge in that situation.

They took all of the steps to determine what, if anything could be done.

The ultimate problem here, is as the doctor surmised, is that the offending player not only quickly took a prize improperly, where he knew what the prize was, and then immediately shuffled his hand, making the situation unrewindable.

Was it a tough call? Heck yes.

Was it on the "option to go greater" side of the penalty guidelines?

Yes.

The issue here is whether or not significant advantage was gained, to the extent that the judge has to determine the game broken.

The judge did determine this.

Would you or I have ruled a Prize Penalty, or Multiple Prize Penalty? Probably.

Is there a scenario where either you or I would have issued a game loss in this circumstance? Probably.

Both items were in the offending player's control. The actions of the player responsible for both errors is what is at stake here.

Given that the offender laid out a different story initially than what is being told both by the opponent and by the table judge and HJ of this event, I am going to side with their discretion here.

Man, tough call though.

@Drew - this could be a game loss easily. The penalty guidelines are just that...guidelines...there are enough other factors here that I am not willing to state that the judge went over the top.

@lawman...using ergo...really...talk about inflammatory language!!!

@fish...the Doctor opened this dead thread up...he posted his explanation and that has caused the "surge" in reaction...

Vince

 

[Lawman]

@ Fish: IF the good Doctor didnt want feedback, he shouldn't have posted. HE is the one that dreadged up a dead horse. I only gave my opinion. I gave the relevant parts of the guidelines. You know I support the team. I even said so in other posts. I wasn't there.

@Vince: I understand your take. The HJ claimed the player wasnt being dishonest to him at the event. A bit of a faulty recall after the fact on a tourney report by any player doesnt always equate to lying.

Yes, this is a tough call to make. BUT, it IS fixable. That is all I was saying. The guidelines mention the recommended penalty. I quoted that. If this was unrewindable and non-fixable, the recommended penalty would be GL. IF it needed to be escalated for other reason, that means a DQ.

I will end by saying something that I have said countless times before. Play sloppy, make errors and suffer the penalty. Play clean and have no worries.

We have ALL made mistakes judging before. What you learn from them makes you a better judge. I'm not saying the HJ here erred. I was not there. He made the call he felt right about at the time. BTDT. I know you were there Fish, so it is a bit more personal for you, although you weren't the HJ.

Keith

 

[speeder]

It is important for these kinds of situations to be discussed in the open so that all of us who judge can benefit from the discussion. At the end of the day, it is more beneficial for the players and especially the judges to know how these decisions are made. There haven't been any personal attacks made by the player to the judge in this thread, and a blind "support" by other judges for the decision made isn't productive. I'm not taking sides, as there are much more experienced judges than me in this thread. I am just thankful for the open discussion of the situation so I can improve my own judging. How do we benefit the players if we're not always educating ourselves? That's who we are doing this for.

My $0.02 cdn.

 

[NoPoke]

Speeder, I'm not sure that an open forum like the gym is the correct place for a full discussion. Perfectly good place to raise the issue but I don't think much discussion can take place here. (Sorry pokegym)

blind support by other judges is exactly the right response. But blind support alone would not be. There is a world of difference between those two. I support the decision made at the event, what other option is there if we are to avoid total anarchy?

I hope that Dr. D has access to the official forums.

 

[TheDarkTwins]

'cause Keith, you get me to come on board behind you and state that I support the judge in that situation.

They took all of the steps to determine what, if anything could be done.

The ultimate problem here, is as the doctor surmised, is that the offending player not only quickly took a prize improperly, where he knew what the prize was, and then immediately shuffled his hand, making the situation unrewindable.

Was it a tough call? Heck yes.

Was it on the "option to go greater" side of the penalty guidelines?

Yes.

The issue here is whether or not significant advantage was gained, to the extent that the judge has to determine the game broken.

The judge did determine this.

Would you or I have ruled a Prize Penalty, or Multiple Prize Penalty? Probably.

Is there a scenario where either you or I would have issued a game loss in this circumstance? Probably.

Both items were in the offending player's control. The actions of the player responsible for both errors is what is at stake here.

Given that the offender laid out a different story initially than what is being told both by the opponent and by the table judge and HJ of this event, I am going to side with their discretion here.

Man, tough call though.

@Drew - this could be a game loss easily. The penalty guidelines are just that...guidelines...there are enough other factors here that I am not willing to state that the judge went over the top.

@lawman...using ergo...really...talk about inflammatory language!!!

@fish...the Doctor opened this dead thread up...he posted his explanation and that has caused the "surge" in reaction...

Vince

I would have to disagree, a game loss is ONLY suppose to be a last resort. There were PLENTY of things that could of been done before a Game Loss. The game state while broken was rewindable and therefor should have been. A prize loss WAS the correct ruling but instead it was a game loss which IMO is way too harsh. However as we are most likely going to continue to disagree, let's agree to do that. :thumb:

Drew

 

[yoyofsho16]

You should have gone and played with gino..........or take lessons from poke pop!
Since I wasn't there, the only thing I can say is man up bro. Weather it's a good call or a bad call, it's done. I'm sure you have had calls go your way ( in fact I know you have), so think of it as karma and move on.

This post won the thread several pages ago.

When calls are made that issues an opponent a game loss, we might feel bummed that we won that way, but ultimately we cheer inside, it is human nature. If your opponent gets a game loss in a 50/50 matchup, you feel somewhat happy, even if most of you was sad.

Would you be as angry if your opponent had been given the GL? Probably not, but it still happened to someone.

We all have gotten calls our way, most of us have gotten them against us. That's just how it all plays out.