What is the rule on Collusion?

Discussion in 'TCG News & Gossip Discussion' started by Adv1sor, Jan 14, 2004.

8 league13 468 60
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Adv1sor

    Adv1sor New Member

    No, it’s not a new Pokemon attack. :)

    The old WOTC floor rules forbid collusion. (This is making a concession of a game loss or a draw in return for a payment or a sharing of prizes.) Splitting a prize in exchange for concession was only permitted in the final match of the single-elimination portion of a tournament and could involve only the prizes associated with the first- and second-place prizes.

    I could not find any such rule at pokemontcg.com

    Has anyone found this type of ruling for the new Pokemon?
  2. PokePop

    PokePop Administrator

    It was always common practice to allow people to decide to draw at just about any point in the tournament.
    What kind of collusion are you talking about?
  3. Adv1sor

    Adv1sor New Member

    I understand that anyone can draw or concede a match at any time. That's not collusion.

    What I am talking about is offering an incentive to an opponent in return for his or her concession.

    For example, I say to my opponent, "concede this match and I will give you X% of the prizes that I win."

    This was explicitly against the rules under the DCI/WOTC with the one exception that I noted. It should, in my opinion, be against the rules today as well. However, I did not see any such rule listed.
  4. P_A

    P_A Active Member

    It might be a good idea to clarify that a little more in the rules. One of several problems resulted at a league I used to attend when a few people asked for an intentional draw in a tournament. The organizer of the tournament at the time saw it as colusion, when in reality it wasn't. Proper, concise wording with possible examples would help to dispell any doubt as to the real meaning. (Don't worry, it wasn't me, I already knew the real meaning.) With the upcoming City Championships, many of which possibly attended by multiple winners, this may be a real posibility of coming up.
  5. sneaselsrevenge

    sneaselsrevenge New Member

    If I remember right, you can agree to a draw, but you can't agree to lose for a share of a persons prize.
  6. meganium45

    meganium45 Active Member

    Ahh, but this is now a huge issue, with the point being you can win only one VIP package at states.

    I can foresee that there will be situations where a player who has already won an event, will be willing to lose in exchange for the box of cards as opposed to 18 packs.

    The winning player will agree, as 18 packs and a VIP package sounds pretty good.

    I would LOVE for PUI to make a ruling on this. As I have 3 City Championships set, and a group of players who I know will be at all 3, this will be extremely important for me.

    Thanks, and hope to see you ALL there!

  7. mysterioustrainer

    mysterioustrainer New Member

    As in terms of the City Championships the VIP package has to go to the person who wins the event overall and can't be passed down by anyone (judge or player). Now how the final match turns out, that is another story.

    At least that is my understanding how it should turn out...
    Last edited: Jan 14, 2004
  8. ukpokemonpro

    ukpokemonpro New Member

    Does nobody read the TO's hand book clearly states there that :

    "Engaging in bribery or collusion will result in both players being disqualified from the tournament and/or suspended from Pokemon Organised Play"

    It's there guys and gals so don't do it!
  9. Adv1sor

    Adv1sor New Member

    ukpokemonpro you are absolutely right!

    It is in there, just as you have stated.

    I looked for it but couldn't find it before.

    My sincere appologies to everyone for even bringing this up.

    The rules are clear on this topic and, in my opinion, just.

    Thank you ukpokemonpro.
    Last edited: Jan 14, 2004
  10. Mob2099

    Mob2099 New Member

    This will be a problem if asked and the answer is NO. I would think you wouldn’t want to ask or get an answer and let the players (1st and 2nd should be the only time collusion is done (especially for vip to get MAX participation)) work it out as they may, so as many people possible get the vip package and invite. I know I will be at 3-4 locations with one person in each age group and I would hate to lose or take a VIP package away for someone (knock on wood) because the 1st and 2nd place wasn’t allowed to work it out for them. I suggest the TO and Judges allow the players to handle it and hopefully no one will be too greedy.
  11. SteveP

    SteveP Active Member

    Advisor, just for clarification, your example is bribery. The person offering the incentive to concede would be guilty of bribery. Now, if the other player accepts, that's collusion, and the offeree would now be guilty of that infraction. However, under the old WOTC rules, the last two players in a single elimination round CAN agree to a prize split so long as one player concedes. It that case, the prizes are given out to first and second place by the TO, and then it's the responsibility of the players to split the prizes. However, in the case of the Free Trips, WOTC didn't allow that prize to be split or passed down to second place.

    Nevertheless, it's certainly within the rules to ask a player to concede or draw, so long as no tangible incentive is offered. And yes, you CAN concede to a family member or friend to enable them to win the tournament. If collusion occured in this case, it would be VERY hard to prove, and if I were the Head Judge, I'd be hard-pressed to pursue it further.

    Finally, allowing city champs to play again WILL cause some problems, I predict.
    Last edited: Jan 14, 2004
  12. HypnosProjectHQ

    HypnosProjectHQ New Member

    And my question to clear this all up... I am planning to go to AT LEAST 2 if not 3 City Champs. If I would win at one, could I draw my final match at a second or third tournament so that the person I am playing can get the VIP package AS LONG AS I do not get anything in return? Correct?
  13. SteveP

    SteveP Active Member

    HPHQ, it depends if there's a top 8 round (single elimination). You CAN'T draw in the Top 8 rounds, only in the swiss rounds. In the Top 8 rounds, you can only concede (you can also concede in the swiss rounds).

    And to answer your question, YES, you can draw/concede in order to allow another to win the tournament, whether you've already won a prior tournament or not. People might frown upon this and call it unsportsmanlike, but you CAN'T be penalized for doing it. It's totally within the rules.

    Collusion is kind of like a conspiracy theory. It's hard, and often impossible to prove.
    Last edited: Jan 14, 2004
  14. DaytonGymLeader

    DaytonGymLeader New Member

    Steve, that's incorrect. You can draw in the final of a T8. However, the winner is decided by the two parties. With Magic on the PTQ Scene, that happens quite often.
  15. farbsman

    farbsman New Member

    Looks like some people need to freshen up on there Tournament rules

    That is direct from the Pokemon Organized Play Floor Rules
    Last edited: Jan 14, 2004
  16. meganium45

    meganium45 Active Member

    I am sure this will be clarified soon.

  17. SteveP

    SteveP Active Member

    DGL, are you talking about the final 2 prize split rule? I've never really completely understood that rule. It was explained to me by a certified DCI judge that the players have to agree you gets first. Then the players are awarded their prizes and THEY split it accordingly. At far as how the final match is reported, I've heard it is reported as a non-match, not effecting the ratings. If that's indeed the case, then I'd assume the final match is not really a DRAW or a CONCESSION, ratings-wise that is. But, I've never seen this situation come up in real life, so I don't know for sure.
    Last edited: Jan 14, 2004
  18. P_A

    P_A Active Member

    I don't think it is a matter of those people needing to brush up on their tournament rules so much as this: that the tournament rules need to show examples to clairify the issue. When the infraction occurs, then the head judge has something to show the offending parties why their action is considered wrong. Collusion to one person may not be considered so by another. Similar to what I said earlier, a concise, easily understandable ruling with proper examples is needed.
  19. DaytonGymLeader

    DaytonGymLeader New Member

    Steve, the match is recorded as a Draw for ratings purposes. There's a neat little checkbox for that in Reporter. When the winner is reported to the DCI, it's not reported via the software, but manually by the TO to the DCI. That's how they know who to send the check to. This actually happens more often than not, mostly in side events for Pokemon.

    From Dictionary.com./The American Heritage Dictionary:
    col·lu·sion, n., A secret agreement between two or more parties for a fraudulent, illegal, or deceitful purpose.
    Last edited: Jan 14, 2004
  20. SteveP

    SteveP Active Member

    Thanks DGL for the lesson of the final-2 prize split.

    Regarding DGL's collusion definition from the dictionary, it's a bit of a paradox. You can't easily penalize something that's secret (you don't know about the details). Plus, it's not illegal, fraudulant, or deceitful to concede or draw a match. So, collusion would be tough to prosecute in the case of players conceding/drawing to enable others to win the top prize.
    Last edited: Jan 14, 2004
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page