Worlds 2009 In Review

[NoPoke]

I'll use a good example from Worlds 04. My round 3 opponent had just topdecked a Gardevoir EX to put me in a very bad spot. She was down by a prize, but about to take it. She takes the longest turn in HISTORY ( I have a guaranteed return KO on her bench with a Blaziken EX, but it in turn gets KOed by Gardevoir EX ) and eats up nearly 2 and a half minutes of time before KOing me with 15 seconds left on the clock. I go, Oracle, Delcatty, *TIME* attach to Blaziken, firestarter, retreat, snipe something on her bench to win.

Now, say after a minute and a half of her turn, a judge runs in, sees her taking her time, issues a 3 minute time extension, or at the very least, insists she speeds up. I CLEARLY DO NOT WANT THIS! I'd opt out 100% of the time. If this was Steve, OOPS! No choice! I wouldn't know its 3 minutes either. ANNNNNND I lose the game because of unwanted judge intervention.

That is a no win for any judge. Just how would you have felt if she had taken that extra 15 seconds and time was called on her turn?

I would have insisted that she makes a play! The clock does decide some games. Sometimes the clock gives the win to a player that would lose the long game and sometimes it doesn't. If I'm interfering it is because I want the match determined at the tables and not by the clock.

 

[GrandmaJoner]

i hate it when judges unnecessarily interfere on the game when both players have no problem with what is going on...that example that chris stated about him vs jason at nationals just infuriates me. I ref and play soccer at high levels, and as a ref the most important rule to keep in mind is 'common sense.' As a player, it is extremely annoying and completely unnecessary when refs want to be the star of the show and make the main focus themselves by being flamboyant, making too many calls, and throwing out too many cards.

This isn't the main point in this thread but its just something that caught my eye and really puts damper on the game imo.

 

[PokePop]

Kieth: There is a HUGE difference between "Stalling" and "Time Management". 99% of the time players complain about "being stalled" they lost because their opponent was aware of the game state and time left and played their turns accordingly. They didn't take unusually long turns or actions. As long as a player isn't taking 45 seconds between plays ( an example ) and is being active in game ( playing cards, etc ) it isn't "stalling". Time awareness and management is a huge skill in this game, and to put it bluntly, 95% of players are terrible at it.

What you call time management, some would call gaming the clock. It's a thin line from time management to gamesmanship.

And there is a big difference between "playing out every scenario" and "making good movies". I'm not calling for hour and a half time limits, I'm saying that for a game in top cut to go to 50 minutes is par for course last season. If all Steve's defense for how he butchered handling our game was that "no game should go 50 minutes anyways ( outside of roughly 50% of games played in that format if left untimed )" than I'm going to clearly take offense to that. Because it is simply a terrible misconception of how that format was played, and that sort of lack of familiarity is EXACTLY the type of thing I take issue with. I'm sure Steve can make all of the correct rulings regarding card interaction and catch game state infractions just fine, but the difference between a good judge, and one I want judging my match involves knowing things besides simple card interactions.

Meganium45 hits this on the nose, but I'll second it. Half of the judge meetings went into discussion of how this would be handled. You're tagging Steve wtih enforcing policy. This is something that also happens to SD-Pokemon on these forums quite often as well.

Another aggrivating thing: KNOW THE CARDS. Especially the good ones! Nats 08 was a great example ( Nats 09 I cannot comment on having not played in the main event. ) I had judges have to pick up and read what popular cards even did. These are cards that had been in the spotlight the entire format. I understand if some kid has an Octillery on the bench and the card needs re-read. But to have to pick up and read Gallade by Nationals is simply outrageous.

I'll disagree strongly with this one. I always read the card. It can be a card that I use in my favorite deck. It doesn't matter. I'm going to read it before I make a ruling. Most times I just confirm what I already know. But every once in a while...
It's the right thing for a good judge to do. To find fault in it is just incorrect.

Anyways, regarding your last example: CALL A JUDGE. Be proactive. 90% of these reports of people getting stalled, said player sits there twiddling their thumbs the whole 4 minute turn, signs the match slip, and runs off the complain online. A good judge should be able to look at a game state and tell if there is any realistic reason a player may need to think before a decision. 90% of the time, promoting an active requires no thought. You bring up who your attacking with next. But say your Claydol is dead, and you have a 2 card hand ( a night maintenance and a Power Spray ) and you have a Palkia and a Dialga on your bench, each with 1 energy and an energy gain. Your active is KOed. You need to count how many "outs" to a metal/water energy you have to influence which is the correct promotion. Now say the Palkia is the "correct" choice because you have 9 "water" ( between cyrus and roseanne's ) in the deck opposed to 6 metal. BUT! Your opponenet has a Luxray GL on the bench! They have a 4 card hand, no Claydol, and have used 2 Uxie. They need a Lightning, an Energy Gain, and a Luxray lvl X. How many Cyrus have they used? How many Energy Gain? Lightning??? SP Radar? If the odds of them having the return KO are too great, do you have to bring up the Dialga and take the lesser probability knowing that if they do return KO you lose anyways? You tell me I have 10 seconds to make that choice? Better yet, you tell me it is FAIR to give me 10 seconds to make that choice? MOST of the times, 90% of the game actions you take are near autopilot. But almost any act can be a difficult choice.

I, and I hope most judges, try to make allowances for these moments of decision. However, when every game action starts to take a prolonged time... Sorry, the "make a move" "interference" from the judge is correct. Heck, I've been given that warning myself from my partner BDS in a Prof Cup top cut. No one is immure.

I'll use a good example from Worlds 04. My round 3 opponent had just topdecked a Gardevoir EX to put me in a very bad spot. She was down by a prize, but about to take it. She takes the longest turn in HISTORY ( I have a guaranteed return KO on her bench with a Blaziken EX, but it in turn gets KOed by Gardevoir EX ) and eats up nearly 2 and a half minutes of time before KOing me with 15 seconds left on the clock. I go, Oracle, Delcatty, *TIME* attach to Blaziken, firestarter, retreat, snipe something on her bench to win.

Now, say after a minute and a half of her turn, a judge runs in, sees her taking her time, issues a 3 minute time extension, or at the very least, insists she speeds up. I CLEARLY DO NOT WANT THIS! I'd opt out 100% of the time. If this was Steve, OOPS! No choice! I wouldn't know its 3 minutes either. ANNNNNND I lose the game because of unwanted judge intervention.

Nopoke states exactly what I was thinking. You happened to be on the right side of those 15 seconds. It could have very easily been the other way around and then what?

 

[Ruiner]

Vince, it was Nationals 08, not Worlds 08, so whatever was told for Worlds staff ...different event entirely.

Also, lets go full benefit of the doubt, lets say Dave had Steve set with a headset and was told DIRECTLY what call to make even...it doesn't change the fact he was aggressive, overbearing and rude in his handling of it.

Also, even if there was some overriding mandate, it doesn't mean that mandate is good. So even if that isn't the judges fault at the event, I am of the belief that the judges do get together and debate how to handle "issues" like this, and I'd IMAGINE enough had to agree on that POOR decision to make it a "mandate" is that were in fact the case.

There is no such thing as "gaming a clock". If a player is making moves in a timely fashion, they are making moves in a timely fashion, NO judge should be able to intervene and tell players " don't make that move, it isn't relevant". A judge cannot enforce that players have to make GOOD plays. There is no way to "quantify" this "gaming a clock" without blurring way too many lines and causing as much bad as good. Want to know a good answer to "stalling"? Give games a time limit where they...finish? Magic does best 2/3 hour long matches for swiss...and they far more rounds than Pokemon does, and they get the events finished just fine.

I know some people are surely fed up by my constant Magic reference, but I've been getting into the game quite a bit lately, and I've been seeing a lot of things that they are doing which are both better and more efficient than what we have with Pokemon at the moment. Their structure and floor rules work extremely well, and have been proven for a very long time. It isn't a bad model to look at for ideas.

PokePop- in regards to being on the right or wrong side of those 15 seconds...I should have lost that game. My opponent handled time poorly and let her game slip away as a result. Had she played faster and beat me? I lost because she topdecked her Gardevoir EX. I won because she threw a game away. Her poor play. Had I needed MORE time, I would have asked her to speed up. MOST of the time, if you ask a player to speed up, they do. Again, most people are simply too passive to stand up for themselves in a game. A simple " I don't want to be rude, but time is running low, and your turns are taking a bit long, would you be able to speed up please? " results in a huge improvement almost every time.

Winning at this game is not just a series of cards played. In-game tactics are only a portion of the skills needed to win.

 

[Lawman]

Chris: I noticed you glossed over and never commented on your stall out on me in Rockville. I knew that your only "out" was the stall out draw. I even called a judge over at the end, trying to get time preserved for my last turn (and win). Oh, how I would have LOVED 15 secs. You denied that to me. You were not making any legit moves....you simply stalled. I know you have a loooong memory, but you are not the only one :wink:

As for your Worlds 04 example. I would have made the same call to prompt, if she took way too long to make a move. You would not have been happy if she burned the last 15 secs too!

Yes, players dont always ask for judges to come over. That doesnt change the rules. IF a judge sees an issue, they should deal with it. What I find amusing is the slow playing players that fall behind in a match and then ask the judge to watch their oppo's pace of play. I guess it is easier for a staller to recognize a stall job, eh?

One thing I respect the heck out of our newest World Champ, Stevie. He doesnt slow roll ANYONE. He had the chance to do that a looooong time ago and he played it out fairly and lost a big match. The best players in this game are experts and can play their decks like a fiddle. They can all play timely, when needed. It is when they dont that irks a staff. The stallers know who they are.

Keith

PS I guess you are one of the players that dont listen to their oppo's request to "speed up" I did that with you in Rockville and you sat there.

 

[NoPoke]

...... Again, most people are simply too passive to stand up for themselves in a game. ...

You will get no argument from me as a parent or judge on that one.

The extent of the passive behaviour is much more widespread in Pokemon with its younger age than say magic. The dci assumes that its players are old enough and experienced enough to look after themselves. That works great for magic. Its not such a good fit for Pokemon even though it does apply to many matches that are played out.

Back to back posts merged. The following information has been added:

i hate it when judges unnecessarily interfere on the game when both players have no problem with what is going on...

I accept that. Much of the time the judge intervention is unwelcome by one side, sometimes it is unwelcome by both. IF you feel that a judge got this wrong then tell the judge, HJ, or TO of the event, if you believe that any of those would get you marked for the event then tell POP. I know that I'm not past having to apologise to players when I get it wrong.

 

[meganium45]

Vince, it was Nationals 08, not Worlds 08, so whatever was told for Worlds staff ...different event entirely.

Given that I was on neither staff, but the judges shared with me some of the discussions, I am confident that this was still discussed, and decided.

Also, lets go full benefit of the doubt, lets say Dave had Steve set with a headset and was told DIRECTLY what call to make even...it doesn't change the fact he was aggressive, overbearing and rude in his handling of it.

Or, could that be interpreted as direct, and to the point. There is not one correct way to judge, nor is there one correct way to referee. Steve is assertive and straightforward in his style. Doesn't matter if it is you, me or anyone that he is judging. He sometimes has a softer edge with the Juniors. Nothing wrong with that. Just because you do not like it does not make it wrong. He stays straightforward not to be offsetting, but to be impartial.

Also, even if there was some overriding mandate, it doesn't mean that mandate is good. So even if that isn't the judges fault at the event, I am of the belief that the judges do get together and debate how to handle "issues" like this, and I'd IMAGINE enough had to agree on that POOR decision to make it a "mandate" is that were in fact the case.Once again, your opinion. These decisions are not lightly made. Once a decision is made, we follow it. We are a judging team at these events.

There is no such thing as "gaming a clock". If a player is making moves in a timely fashion, they are making moves in a timely fashion, NO judge should be able to intervene and tell players " don't make that move, it isn't relevant". A judge cannot enforce that players have to make GOOD plays. There is no way to "quantify" this "gaming a clock" without blurring way too many lines and causing as much bad as good. Want to know a good answer to "stalling"? Give games a time limit where they...finish? Magic does best 2/3 hour long matches for swiss...and they far more rounds than Pokemon does, and they get the events finished just fine. Chris. Really? No such thing as "gaming a clock". Your credibility in this just FLEW out this window.

I know some people are surely fed up by my constant Magic reference, but I've been getting into the game quite a bit lately, and I've been seeing a lot of things that they are doing which are both better and more efficient than what we have with Pokemon at the moment. Their structure and floor rules work extremely well, and have been proven for a very long time. It isn't a bad model to look at for ideas. Sure, but it is set up for older players, one division. Pokemon has different needs.

PokePop- in regards to being on the right or wrong side of those 15 seconds...I should have lost that game. My opponent handled time poorly and let her game slip away as a result. Had she played faster and beat me? I lost because she topdecked her Gardevoir EX. I won because she threw a game away. Her poor play. Had I needed MORE time, I would have asked her to speed up. MOST of the time, if you ask a player to speed up, they do. Again, most people are simply too passive to stand up for themselves in a game. A simple " I don't want to be rude, but time is running low, and your turns are taking a bit long, would you be able to speed up please? " results in a huge improvement almost every time.

Winning at this game is not just a series of cards played. In-game tactics are only a portion of the skills needed to win.Would some of this be characterized as "gaming a clock"? At least be consistant.

My replies in bold above.

Vince

 

[Lawman]

I agree Vince....Chris' arguements took a hit when he said no one "games the clock". Geez, if that is the case, why do we even have a penalty for slow play and stalling????

Keith

 

[M_Liesik]

I know (of course from not being there on staff) but from talking to people that I respect and trust (Keith and Steve being among them) that the handling of the slow play and stalling issues at Worlds 2008 was not a judgment that Steve was doing out of hand, but something that was told by the staff to not only be attentive to, but exactly how to handle the situation were it to occur.

From what you have said Chris, it sounds EXACTLY like what was directed of the judges at Worlds 2008.

Just an FYI, I ran the judge meetings at Nats and Worlds 08. I gave this directive. I can't speak to the manner in which Steve communicated to Chris and Jason during the match as I wasn't there to see it, but he was following the game tempo directions given to him by the folks running the event.

I can appreciate Chris's concern about a judge "interfering" in a match where both players are fine with the pace. I'll discuss the matter with Dave and Dan to see if we want to make any policy changes with this in mind.

 

[Yoshi-]

Before Round 1 I wasnt sure about my sleeves as well, and I just ASKED a judge to check them, and I immediantly had 2 Judges that checked my sleeves card for card, pointed out 2 of them that I should replace, and told me to replace one from Dusknoir with the Sleeve of an NRG card so it doesnt seem intentional.

They were really kind, took a lot of time for this and did it very carefully.

And even though it IS a joke that we were given Sleeves that dont work, a pro player like Gino should notice something like this IMO. I mean the sleeves had totally different colors on the edge right? How can one not notice thaat :/

 

[Diaz]

Chris: I noticed you glossed over and never commented on your stall out on me in Rockville. I knew that your only "out" was the stall out draw. I even called a judge over at the end, trying to get time preserved for my last turn (and win). Oh, how I would have LOVED 15 secs. You denied that to me. You were not making any legit moves....you simply stalled. I know you have a loooong memory, but you are not the only one

You shouldn't have posted that comment in the first place; it screams bias and personal grudge. That hurts your credibility and makes it seem like your aurging with chris specificly and not arguing the point.

I can appreciate Chris's concern about a judge "interfering" in a match where both players are fine with the pace. I'll discuss the matter with Dave and Dan to see if we want to make any policy changes with this in mind.

I’m glad something productive can come of this discussion, and fully support looking into letting players chose to take a time extension in the same way they can chose to take a prize penalty. Also, I feel that a major issue is letting players know how much of a time extension is being given. I don’t feel that judges should give out time extentions without clarification of why or how long these extension are given. The judges are there to make sure the games are played fairly, if there isn’t anything unfair about how time is being handled, the judge shouldn’t have to step in.

And even though it IS a joke that we were given Sleeves that dont work, a pro player like Gino should notice something like this IMO. I mean the sleeves had totally different colors on the edge right? How can one not notice thaat :/

How did you not notice that 2 cards your deck were marked before you had the judge check? It's really not that hard to miss. I know I didn't look closely enough at my new regi-sleeves before the grinder. You don't expect something like that to come from pop themselves, and the mistake could happen to anyone

 

[Yoshi-]

My sleeves had a slight scratch and not a complete color difference :/
Dunno but IMO a player should always check something like this, its just too important...

 

[Lawman]

You shouldn't have posted that comment in the first place; it screams bias and personal grudge. That hurts your credibility and makes it seem like your aurging with chris specificly and not arguing the point.


I’m glad something productive can come of this discussion, and fully support looking into letting players chose to take a time extension in the same way they can chose to take a prize penalty. Also, I feel that a major issue is letting players know how much of a time extension is being given. I don’t feel that judges should give out time extentions without clarification of why or how long these extension are given. The judges are there to make sure the games are played fairly, if there isn’t anything unfair about how time is being handled, the judge shouldn’t have to step in.


How did you not notice that 2 cards your deck were marked before you had the judge check? It's really not that hard to miss. I know I didn't look closely enough at my new regi-sleeves before the grinder. You don't expect something like that to come from pop themselves, and the mistake could happen to anyone

Diaz: Then Chris shouldn't have called out Steve personally as his whipping boy! If he wants to discuss in general and say "Judge X" did this during a match at Nats/Worlds....that is fine to discuss. Then, IF Steve wanted to post and comment about being the judge, all is fair. Being scalded in the public forum is a way to get one's dander up.

I will say this...Chris posted from a personal experience, so did I. Did his post scream "personal bias and grudge"? I have talked to Chris about this match. He admitted to me, in his own words, "I stalled you out. I did what I could to get the draw. Nothing personal". I spoke to him at that tourney in '04 and since then also.

Let me ask you this, since you have played for awhile. Have you ever seen any "game the clock" in a Pokemon TCG tourney??? I have. Yet, Chris claims one cannot "game the clock". Kinda makes his arguement fall a little flat, eh?

Keith

 

[PokeDad]

Yes. Bring back BDS and Dave 100% They both have done a ton of work to this game, and deserve to be the face of it. Not only that but they are beyond qualified for the task. I have nothing against Nick and Tracy, they are both very good at what they do...the problem is, what they do is probably not best for the Pokemon TCG.

I love every tournament, and am always impressed by the incredible job that is done by the folks putting on the show. US National and World Championships are without fail awesomely impressive.

I have a degree in marketing, I do a lot of trade show marketing. I have been awarded three consecutive years, over thousands of other trade show exhibitors each year, by Exhibitor Magazine for exhibitor excellence.

I love Dave and BDS. I do not think that Nick and Tracy should be allowed to handle a microphone at a Pokemon tournament.

Dave and BDS are the real deal, they are able to communicate effectively, with passion, and they are sincere, credible, and compelling. Nick and Tracy did not possess an ounce of sincerity, I found their cheer to be false, I did not find them compelling at all. It was painful, to me, listening to their blather.

Either force Nick and Tracy to build decks, play in BRs. CC, and States, while simultaneously building a party of 6 level 50 Pokemon to battle with, before auditioning to try to get their gig back, so they don't sound so foreign and fake - or just save your money and give us the better product. Let Dave and BDS handle the microphone.

I don't know Nick and Tracy, I'm sure they are great folks and they can work the crowd into a frenzy at a Mary Kay or Amway convention, they'll do just fine without Pokemon. With love for the game, and a concern for the best possible product, please keep communications in-house.

 

[SD PokeMom]

*stands up and applauds john's post*

'mom

 

[G-Dog4377]

Who's John?
No offense or anything, I've just gotten tired of not knowing who anyone is ever talking about in these more personal threads.

 

[Lawman]

John is PokeDad's RL name. He is a long time volunteer at big events and we have gotten to know him quite well. John/PokeDad is a great fella!

Keith

 

[ryanvergel]

Last names! Agh!

Q: Will it be consistent that if there is some weird, unforeseen circumstance that compels a player to scoop their cards/"concede"(like many did R1 of LCQ during the fire alarm) that the game will be restarted completely?

I loved everything about this year's worlds except the announcement that it's going to move to Hawaii. I think it will be extremely difficult for people to go, even invite winners, due to cost. We are effectively more than doubling travel costs for anyone with a rating invite from NA- which is a huge block, and it will also hurt the LCQ and anyone who wants to go to worlds just because it's worlds. I don't know how I could afford to spend a thousand dollars on airfare, a few hundred minimum for hotel stay, expensive food prices, and increased travel time/jet lag for like 90% of the playing world.

 

[ultimatedra]

I just thought i should point out, That "Pokemon Sunday" in japan recently aired the episode with coverage from the World championships. Here is the youtube link. Thank to slimceagirl for recording it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUYAYZr0oHU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8uCBAEmy_Ew

 

[ChaosJim]

Just an FYI, I ran the judge meetings at Nats and Worlds 08. I gave this directive. I can't speak to the manner in which Steve communicated to Chris and Jason during the match as I wasn't there to see it, but he was following the game tempo directions given to him by the folks running the event.

I can appreciate Chris's concern about a judge "interfering" in a match where both players are fine with the pace. I'll discuss the matter with Dave and Dan to see if we want to make any policy changes with this in mind.

If we have one legitimate concern a month addressed because of healthy discussion and a good presentation of the problem, just think how good Pokemon will be for Worlds '11.

I think we've come a long way, and its very positive to actually see the reason changes arise on a public board like this.

I think the problem with trying to address 'gaming a clock' is this: Vince Villain is playing against Innocent Inchy. If Inchy, when the clock is running low, plays every card in his hand because he feels like it (and is fact a very mediocre player with a leg up), most judges would be wrong to think he is gaming the clock, and knowing his moniker wouldn't call him on it. If Vince Villain however was gaming the clock, it could be the exact same set of moves as II, but judges would need knowledge from too far outside the game.