Where's the love?
- Thread starter PokeDad
- Start date
- Status
discussing things here is fine.
I'm just saying that expecting judges to throw other judges "under the bus" is unlikely to happen, and expecting it to happen and getting upset that judges stick up for one another is an immature expectation.
Especially when the complaints are phrased as "most judges...", "incompetent" (when later on admitting that they were following the guidelines), and when details of the complaints shift as responses to them are made ("20 minutes between rounds" --- "Oh, well, it was really much longer than 20 minutes" - followed by the HJ giving actual data from timing where it was really 20 minutes all along except for one round with a pairing issue)
Speaking for myself, I take judging issues very seriously.
It's actually the whole reason that the Compendium exists! Because we were aware of judging issues that were rampant back in the old DCI days, when it was mostly MTG judges running Pokemon events and they had no idea of the intricacies of the game and were all making rulings by the seats of their pants, quite often the wrong rulings.
So the entire subject is near and dear to my heart.
But to be honest, it's hard to take serious nebulous, over-broad declarations that most if not all of the judges in the country are cretins that would have a hard time flipping a coin without putting their eye out.
So, if we want to have a civilized discussion about real issues and the pluses and minuses of how to go about making changes, I'm all for it! :thumb:
Jeremy Badeaux
New Member
If it helps, that post is from a topic about something that happened at Nats.
Even if it isn't always a Judge/PTO doing it, things have gotten to a point where it's a safe bet that anybody with any question about something that happened with judging will basically be attacked by somebody on these forums (in this case, being told that the deficiencies of the judge are the player's fault because he/she didn't call the HJ).
Lawman came in and did a great job of handling the situation.
Of course, I don't know how much merit the topic did or did not have, but neither did ColdCoates when he/she went into attack mode.
That topic did a great job of showing that no matter what happened, somebody will always find a way to blame the victim around these parts.
The overwhelming majority of PTOs/Judges that I've met are great and I'm not advocating that they should dogpile on any accusation of judging shenanigans, but in the same way that I wouldn't ask them to attack one another like rabid animals, I would also ask that the vocal few who attack the victim would step back and take a slightly more neutral approach to dealing with such topics.
I am sorry about contributing to the massive threadjack though. lol
Welcome to the internet.
People take up opposing positions to other people.
I think its a safe bet that there are arguments on other sites, except maybe the points of contention are different.
Am I right?
Do I agree with what everyone says on "my" side?
No. While calling over the head judge is a good thing to do if you don't agree with a judge's ruling, I don't take the position that "it's your fault".
On the other hand, it does greatly limit potential remedies.
The number one remedy that could have been taken at that point in time was in fact to appeal to the head judge.
It's like someone saying:
"I crashed into a wall and the car didn't keep me from breaking my leg"
"Did you put your foot on the brakes to try to stop or slow down?"
"No, but the airbag and seal belt should have kept me from breaking my leg".
Maybe so, but the first order of business is to know to press on the brake next time!
People take up opposing positions to other people.
I think its a safe bet that there are arguments on other sites, except maybe the points of contention are different.
Am I right?
Do I agree with what everyone says on "my" side?
No. While calling over the head judge is a good thing to do if you don't agree with a judge's ruling, I don't take the position that "it's your fault".
On the other hand, it does greatly limit potential remedies.
The number one remedy that could have been taken at that point in time was in fact to appeal to the head judge.
It's like someone saying:
"I crashed into a wall and the car didn't keep me from breaking my leg"
"Did you put your foot on the brakes to try to stop or slow down?"
"No, but the airbag and seal belt should have kept me from breaking my leg".
Maybe so, but the first order of business is to know to press on the brake next time!
MrMeches
New Member
Sometimes I think we ALL lose focus on what is really trying to be accomplished, Bridging the Gap between Player and Judge to make a more solid Game for everyone!
Judges defend Judges just as much as Players defend Players. It is easy to find faults and designate how horrible things were, as Judges and Staff, we could point this out of some players actions... the only thing is you won't be Judging again for awhile.
I recommend in the Future, instead of the collective "WE" going at it with one another about how poor this or that was, we try to focus on what can be done to help IMPROVE our beloved game. That is what TPCi really wants, not a bunch of "children" (and I am talking all sides) in the classroom pointing fingers about who put the tack in Teacher's Chair.
As it has been mentioned, TPCi has put in place a review system for Judges and it is an effective tool to help minimize these types of issues. However, I encourage "YOU" to use the Link for Customer Service that has been provided in multiple posts and let TPCi know. They do "hear" you and implement many of the ideas provided. I understand it is difficult when your not in the room when it is discussed, but they are discussed. The best way to approach it is in a Positive way though. Use specfic personal examples and if you have names, include them so they can address the person directly if needed.
The only additional thing I ask, let TPCi know what you ENJOYED as well! Give them something to know at least one thing went nicely.
Ultimately it is OUR Game they provide the avenue, but we drive the cars. It wasn't 800+ ppl from TPCi that made Nats so Great... it was each one of US... Staff and Player alike!
Fish
Judges defend Judges just as much as Players defend Players. It is easy to find faults and designate how horrible things were, as Judges and Staff, we could point this out of some players actions... the only thing is you won't be Judging again for awhile.
I recommend in the Future, instead of the collective "WE" going at it with one another about how poor this or that was, we try to focus on what can be done to help IMPROVE our beloved game. That is what TPCi really wants, not a bunch of "children" (and I am talking all sides) in the classroom pointing fingers about who put the tack in Teacher's Chair.
As it has been mentioned, TPCi has put in place a review system for Judges and it is an effective tool to help minimize these types of issues. However, I encourage "YOU" to use the Link for Customer Service that has been provided in multiple posts and let TPCi know. They do "hear" you and implement many of the ideas provided. I understand it is difficult when your not in the room when it is discussed, but they are discussed. The best way to approach it is in a Positive way though. Use specfic personal examples and if you have names, include them so they can address the person directly if needed.
The only additional thing I ask, let TPCi know what you ENJOYED as well! Give them something to know at least one thing went nicely.
Ultimately it is OUR Game they provide the avenue, but we drive the cars. It wasn't 800+ ppl from TPCi that made Nats so Great... it was each one of US... Staff and Player alike!
Fish
Well, after reading the entirety of this thread I'm not going to dice anyones post. I'm just simply going to make a big blanket reply.
I think it would be accurate to say that I am one of the fastest players in not only Florida, but maybe the entire country. I very rarely have my games go to time. I was absolutely shocked that my t128 game at nats went to sudden death.
With that being said, I don't buy the whole "I have no many options with my deck search that it's ok to take more than 30-45 seconds for my trainer." When you get to that state in the game, you know what you're after long before you even start your turn.
With that being said, there ARE a few occasions where (even a top tier player) doesn't know what to do. It's happened to me several times just this year. It is very unfortunate when that happens, but if the opponent doesn't say anything then I think it is best to leave the situation be.
My opinion bottom line:+
If your opponent is playing far slower than you would like, wait out the first turn and see if it persists. A lot of times the first deck search takes 1-2 minutes to establish prizes. if it persists call a judge. There have been many times in the past I've asked my opponent to speed up in the first ten minutes of the game.
My opinion bottom line 2:
If neither player is complaining about pace of play, I would say don't get involved. It's a no win situation.
I think the penalty guidelines are just fine, becuase they are just that... GUIDELINES!
I could be wrong, but I don't think they were designed to be followed as a "Bible" per say. They are there so judges have an idea of what to base their penalties on. I think over the course of the past few years that has been forgotten.
cut the judges some slack... without them we wouldn't have a game.
If you have a problem with something during a tournament, appeal to the head judge.
After the tournament?
[email protected]
I think it would be accurate to say that I am one of the fastest players in not only Florida, but maybe the entire country. I very rarely have my games go to time. I was absolutely shocked that my t128 game at nats went to sudden death.
With that being said, I don't buy the whole "I have no many options with my deck search that it's ok to take more than 30-45 seconds for my trainer." When you get to that state in the game, you know what you're after long before you even start your turn.
With that being said, there ARE a few occasions where (even a top tier player) doesn't know what to do. It's happened to me several times just this year. It is very unfortunate when that happens, but if the opponent doesn't say anything then I think it is best to leave the situation be.
My opinion bottom line:+
If your opponent is playing far slower than you would like, wait out the first turn and see if it persists. A lot of times the first deck search takes 1-2 minutes to establish prizes. if it persists call a judge. There have been many times in the past I've asked my opponent to speed up in the first ten minutes of the game.
My opinion bottom line 2:
If neither player is complaining about pace of play, I would say don't get involved. It's a no win situation.
I think the penalty guidelines are just fine, becuase they are just that... GUIDELINES!
I could be wrong, but I don't think they were designed to be followed as a "Bible" per say. They are there so judges have an idea of what to base their penalties on. I think over the course of the past few years that has been forgotten.
cut the judges some slack... without them we wouldn't have a game.
If you have a problem with something during a tournament, appeal to the head judge.
After the tournament?
[email protected]
I think the situation should be looked as a whole. I mean if a player is pushing the limits every chance they get, I mean taking 15 seconds every time is one thing. I would say a majority of my searches take maybe 10 seconds tops, I would certainly think taking 30 seconds for 1 tough search shouldn't be a problem expecially if I'm way under all my other times.
---------- Post added 07/05/2010 at 01:52 PM ----------
I know this is a joke, but I really do like it.
---------- Post added 07/05/2010 at 01:52 PM ----------
I know this is a joke, but I really do like it.
Jeremy Badeaux
New Member
I do agree that appealing to the HJ is the intelligent thing to do, but comparing a player not calling the HJ to a person crashing into a wall because they didn't hit the brake isn't exactly equal.
I'd say it's more like if somebody went to a car dealership and gets caught up in how busy everything is. They neglect to get the carfax report (maybe they got caught up in the commotion, maybe it just slipped their mind) and later find out that the car was stolen property.
Yes, the person neglected to do something important, but that doesn't mean that it was ok for the dealership to be selling stolen property in the first place.
I will go ahead and note that I am not accusing judges (or any other entity) of stealing things or attempting to sell stolen things, or any other related activity.
I seem to have this magical knack for attracting people who like to completely misrepresent obvious things for the sake of argument. lol
Not all blame has to be at one location only.
In this case, you could say that the blame is 20-30% customer (for not being an informed customer) and 70-80% dealership (for being the ones actually doing the wrong thing).
Yes, the customer does get some of the blame, but the majority still needs to be laid at the feet of the person who actually did something wrong.
Of course, when you only know one side of the story, you can't really place any blame anywhere. lol
I added some levity a while back in this topic (text the pairings each round to the players' cell phones or iPods) because even though I haven't judged in over two years, I know it's not an easy job. Peolpe are often questioning you, sometimes even your fellow judges and TOs. Some of the toughest calls are very subjective in nature, like the slow-play or stalling penalties.
Most judging calls are simple and straighforward. Some are borderline, and no matter what call is made, there will be "boos" from the players and crowd. On rare occassions, calls are absolutely wrong. When that happens, what's the proper justice? I guess it depends. If the judge realizes the mistake and repents, that doesn't necessarily make it right, but at least it's absolutely necessary if that judge wants to continue judging, or get any respect from the players.
IMO, if there's a "river" between the players and the judges, that's not necessarily a bad thing. In some competitive sports, there are rules that judges don't socialize with the players and vice-versa. Why? It's absolutely essential to help judges make impartial, unbiased rulings, or at least to give the appearance of such.
I like the analogies going on here (ie., car crash, car dealership). It shows how the opposing sides view judge-player interactions differently. Neither is wrong or right, just different perspectives.
Bottom line for me: Judges make mostly good calls and players are mostly sportsmen, even though there are rare exceptions.
Most judging calls are simple and straighforward. Some are borderline, and no matter what call is made, there will be "boos" from the players and crowd. On rare occassions, calls are absolutely wrong. When that happens, what's the proper justice? I guess it depends. If the judge realizes the mistake and repents, that doesn't necessarily make it right, but at least it's absolutely necessary if that judge wants to continue judging, or get any respect from the players.
IMO, if there's a "river" between the players and the judges, that's not necessarily a bad thing. In some competitive sports, there are rules that judges don't socialize with the players and vice-versa. Why? It's absolutely essential to help judges make impartial, unbiased rulings, or at least to give the appearance of such.
I like the analogies going on here (ie., car crash, car dealership). It shows how the opposing sides view judge-player interactions differently. Neither is wrong or right, just different perspectives.
Bottom line for me: Judges make mostly good calls and players are mostly sportsmen, even though there are rare exceptions.
Box of Fail
New Member
See, this is what I have a problem with. It is absolutely okay for a player to miss a worlds invite because they were not given 'adequate' time to make an extremely complex and game-deciding decision. Clearly, if you need to take several circumstances into consideration before making the decision whether to Cyrus for the Spray or the Poké Turn, and thus exceed the supposedly unreasonable time limit, you are not skilled enough to play said SP deck. Remember, the time limits are NOT designed to allow players to play to the best of their abilities. They are designed to pile pressure onto an already nerve-wracking decision and require players to adapt to the restriction. The time limit is not meant to adapt for rational player needs. Players are supposed to adapt to the time limit, not vice-versa. The fact that you have trouble deciding on a crucial part of the game at hand does not and should not justify taking up the reasonable amount of time for making that decision as per your standards. If you are forced to play without the time to evaluate every option at your disposal and deduce the most logical play, then so be it. That is not a problem to the game, just something to be considered when making your deck choice.
Well said! Ditto!
If two slower-than-normal players are playing each other, and the pace of the game is going slow, regardless whether both players are slow, the judge can, and probably should, give a caution. The rules are very clear that game-play needs to be "lively." IMO, complexity is not a valid excuse to play "unlively," nor is the excuse that both players are playing "unlively."
OK, now we're getting into something that can be discussed and options reviewed.
Before I get started, I'll note that while I don't have the top table experience that top tier players have, I have some and in fact was given a slow play caution by my very own partner, BDS, because I was taking too long thinking over my options in a complex deck against an eeveelutions deck, also a complex deck, so I do get where you're coming from.
However, he was right to give me the caution,.
We have competing needs here.
There is a need for players to be able to review their choices and options and make the best decisions.
There is also a need for events to move along in a timely fashion. There are venue restrictions as well as the bulk of the other players (who would be waiting around for long periods) to be considered.
With small events, these competing needs can be somewhat flexibly dealt with, since there are only a few rounds and the venue time limits are unlikely to be bumped into.
However, as events get large, either a big Cities or States, most Regionals, and certainly US Nationals, the needs of the venue and the flow of the event start to take on pretty major importance. At Worlds, getting off schedule can cause major issues. They are going to meet their schedule and if you can't help them meet that schedule, then you aren't going to be staffing that event again!
So, bottom line, untimed rounds are off the table.
They've already extended the time limit from 30 minutes to 40 minutes (for Swiss) and I think they were using 75 minutes for elimination rounds, correct?
Personally, I've seen games going to time dropping from 30-40% of Masters to less than 5%, so I think the time changes have had a positive impact on the game.
Also, as noted by other judges, the first few turns of a round are treated differently for deck searches as it is known that players need the opportunity to review their deck contents and formulate their basic strategy.
OK, so beyond that, the most common suggestion that I'm seeing from players is that if both players are happy with the pace of play, judges should stay out of it. Would that be fair to say?
The issue with that can be with lower age groups, especially JRs, and non-top tier players, who could be taken advantage of by more experienced players.
Now, I'm not saying this makes it a deal breaker, but I am saying that it is something that has to taken into account.
Comments on these points?
Before I get started, I'll note that while I don't have the top table experience that top tier players have, I have some and in fact was given a slow play caution by my very own partner, BDS, because I was taking too long thinking over my options in a complex deck against an eeveelutions deck, also a complex deck, so I do get where you're coming from.
However, he was right to give me the caution,.
We have competing needs here.
There is a need for players to be able to review their choices and options and make the best decisions.
There is also a need for events to move along in a timely fashion. There are venue restrictions as well as the bulk of the other players (who would be waiting around for long periods) to be considered.
With small events, these competing needs can be somewhat flexibly dealt with, since there are only a few rounds and the venue time limits are unlikely to be bumped into.
However, as events get large, either a big Cities or States, most Regionals, and certainly US Nationals, the needs of the venue and the flow of the event start to take on pretty major importance. At Worlds, getting off schedule can cause major issues. They are going to meet their schedule and if you can't help them meet that schedule, then you aren't going to be staffing that event again!
So, bottom line, untimed rounds are off the table.
They've already extended the time limit from 30 minutes to 40 minutes (for Swiss) and I think they were using 75 minutes for elimination rounds, correct?
Personally, I've seen games going to time dropping from 30-40% of Masters to less than 5%, so I think the time changes have had a positive impact on the game.
Also, as noted by other judges, the first few turns of a round are treated differently for deck searches as it is known that players need the opportunity to review their deck contents and formulate their basic strategy.
OK, so beyond that, the most common suggestion that I'm seeing from players is that if both players are happy with the pace of play, judges should stay out of it. Would that be fair to say?
The issue with that can be with lower age groups, especially JRs, and non-top tier players, who could be taken advantage of by more experienced players.
Now, I'm not saying this makes it a deal breaker, but I am saying that it is something that has to taken into account.
Comments on these points?
To be honest, I have only had one bad call against me. It cost me the match, and possibly the tournament. But, even though that happened, I just let it go. It's Pokemon, a card game for players of all ages. Sure, sometimes the judges may make a bad call, but not because they want the other player to win, it may be because you did not tell the judges what was going on in throughly. I believe there are no bad judges, they do this for the players. They could play, but no, they do it for you.
-Kyroid
-Kyroid
I guess we could all play scrub decks like Shuppet
I played Holton at Nats and had no problem with him or his rate of play, not a huge fan of his Aarons Collection though.annisarich
New Member
Ask a certain Pitcher for a certain team in Detroit how to handle the mistakes a human official can make.
BTW that call stood and thats official. ;-)
BTW that call stood and thats official. ;-)
ShuckleLVX
Active Member
Didn't he get a car out of that though?
vanderbilt_grad
New Member
Judges get love in the reports threads all the time. Just look at the props. A huge number of them usually have someone or even all the staff at a given event. You just don’t see random threads that are like “My local judge is AWESOME!”
On the other hand folks who want to highlight a particular problem usually would rather create a specific thread rather than derail a report or have the issue buried in a longer post. That’s why there are always complaint threads.
OP is doing things to improve consistency. That’s why you see things like the Judge’s Seminar at Nats, good staff like Lawman being chosen to run Nats, and even things like Biggie posting here. The issue in this thread though is that there is a perception that NOT ENOUGH is being done. That there are bad judges (and no I’m not talking about YOU if you are a judge reading this) … and that these same folks keep causing problems year after year. Most players are annoyed by bad new judges (and I’ve been one of those myself) but they are exasperated when mistakes get made over and over again usually by the same experienced folks … or about things like how slow play is called that seem to linger year after year. They complain … and nothing seems to happen. That post about the Blue Wall of Silence was spot on. That’s exactly the atmosphere that’s being created by staff in these threads.
IMHO there is no need for anyone on staff to jump in and rush to defend all judges. It just makes staff here look silly. There are problems. Denying it makes you as much a part of the problem as the guys who don’t take the time to do a good job like you do. I hate these threads on the gym because the are exactly the opposite of customer service. Regardless of the validity of the complaints all the rush to defense by staff does is make the folks who have legitimate grievances feel worse and feel less like playing the game or trusting the folks running it.
Take the high road. Listen. Tell folks that you know things aren’t perfect but that OP is working to make it better.
On the other hand folks who want to highlight a particular problem usually would rather create a specific thread rather than derail a report or have the issue buried in a longer post. That’s why there are always complaint threads.
OP is doing things to improve consistency. That’s why you see things like the Judge’s Seminar at Nats, good staff like Lawman being chosen to run Nats, and even things like Biggie posting here. The issue in this thread though is that there is a perception that NOT ENOUGH is being done. That there are bad judges (and no I’m not talking about YOU if you are a judge reading this) … and that these same folks keep causing problems year after year. Most players are annoyed by bad new judges (and I’ve been one of those myself) but they are exasperated when mistakes get made over and over again usually by the same experienced folks … or about things like how slow play is called that seem to linger year after year. They complain … and nothing seems to happen. That post about the Blue Wall of Silence was spot on. That’s exactly the atmosphere that’s being created by staff in these threads.
IMHO there is no need for anyone on staff to jump in and rush to defend all judges. It just makes staff here look silly. There are problems. Denying it makes you as much a part of the problem as the guys who don’t take the time to do a good job like you do. I hate these threads on the gym because the are exactly the opposite of customer service. Regardless of the validity of the complaints all the rush to defense by staff does is make the folks who have legitimate grievances feel worse and feel less like playing the game or trusting the folks running it.
Take the high road. Listen. Tell folks that you know things aren’t perfect but that OP is working to make it better.
- Status