So This has been bugging me...

[homeofmew]

People have been telling me different things with this issue.
For instance If somone makes a move they can't make.

Like if someone use Celio's Network to get an ex.

as a judge do I say anything (if I am watching)
or is the the players responsibilty to call over a judge.

I always took things you can't do as an "automatic" type of thing you just can't do it? or does the judge don't say anything because of player responsibility?

some cards are not like this though, boost energy if you mess up it gets discarded.

[sdp]

the whole point of judging is if you see a wrong play you correct it....

[Big Daddy Snorlax]

What you are really discussing here is the topic of Active vs Passive judging. In active judging you would step in if you see the error. In passive judging you would only step in when called. I always run my tournaments using the active judging method. Nationals and Worlds were run using active judging. Here is the section of the Penalty Guidelines which discusses the topic:4.1. Active vs. Passive Judging
Whether to judge actively or passively is a question often raised by judges and Tournament Organizers alike. There is no well-defined answer as to which is better. Passive judging leaves the players to ensure that they are paying close attention to matches, calling judges when questions arise.

Active judging is more demanding of a judging staff, as it requires that judges actively tour the tournament area and pay close attention to their surroundings so that they can intervene when needed. In addition, active judging requires that a judge not spend too much time overseeing one match or player, as the participants must be assured that every match is being adjudicated equally. Active judging provides the added benefit that many errors can be caught early enough to avoid the need to assign a penalty. In addition, active judging may reduce cheating, as players are less inclined to engage in illegal activities with judges freely roaming the match area.

POP does not dictate whether active or passive judging should be used at an event, and all players, regardless of what style of judging is being used, are still responsible for their own games.

At the outset of an event, the Tournament Organizer or Head Judge must announce whether active or passive judging will be used for that event.

In all cases, regardless of active or passive judging, cheating offenses and unsporting conduct should always be investigated immediately and penalized as soon as possible to prevent future instances of these types of infractions.

BDS

[NoPoke]

...........Active judging provides the added benefit that many errors can be caught early enough to avoid the need to assign a penalty.........

What are peoples views on this sentance within 4.1? You are an active judge and you see an error, so you step in. Do you always assign a penalty or not?

[homeofmew]

What you are really discussing here is the topic of Active vs Passive judging. In active judging you would step in if you see the error. In passive judging you would only step in when called. I always run my tournaments using the active judging method. Nationals and Worlds were run using active judging. Here is the section of the Penalty Guidelines which discusses the topic:


I appricate this, and I am glad to know that the big events use Active judging
in which I do. thanks :)

[PokePop]

What are peoples views on this sentance within 4.1? You are an active judge and you see an error, so you step in. Do you always assign a penalty or not?
If I catch it in the act or when it's still reversible, I usually Caution.
It's only when it's repeated (sometimes many times for minor infractions like discarding the Basic before searching the deck for Swoop!) that I escalate to Warnings or Penalties.

[meganium45]

The idea of "passive" judging frankly offends me.

We are not going to see every mistake - but to ignore the ones we do see?

If, as a judge, you see a mistake, do not let the mistake carry on.

It is our job as judges to make sure the game is played correctly.

How about this - noone calls the judge, the player realized the judge sees the play, does not say anything, so the player keeps making the same misplay all day.

When the player is finally corrected - their defense is...well Judge X saw me do this several times, and did not say anything!!! I thought I was playing the card right!

Do you give the judge a warning too?

M45

[rokman]

Even though I am not even old enough to be giving advice on Judging, but I completely agree with M45 here. That is my complete philosophy when I am judging.

[Noah121]

On a similar question, what if a spectator sees someone make a misplay? Do they have the right to call a judge over and get the situation corrected, or is spectation of matches not allowed by other players or non-players?

[PokePop]

Spectators are certainly allowed to bring something to the attention of a judge. As long as they don't interfere in the match.

[Tego]

A nice general rule is that everyone who's inside a match can communicate with each other, and everyone who is outside it can communicate with each other.

Inside the match: the players in the match
Outside the match: everyone else

The only persons who can break this rule are the judges. They can talk to the players who are inside the match. If someone who isn't inside the match nor judging whishes to point out an error to the players inside the match, he or she has to go to a judge. Address the problem to the judge, which you are allowed to, and the judge will pass it on to the players in the match, which he/she is allowed to.

[NoPoke]

Well I'm an active judge, if there is a small judge team then I'm also an active HJ. But if there is a large judge team then I'd be a passive HJ. Passive only in that I wouldn't be spending my time patrolling the floor.

Passive judging isn't that bad I just don't think passive judging is at all appropriate in the 10- division even at an event like worlds where it might be reasonable to assume tht all competitors are famililiar with how to play!

So just for fun lets compare Passive Judging with Active. Yes its straw man time *grin*

Tournament details.
60 players , 3 judges, one of which is HJ.

ACTIVE 3 judges patrol the play area.
at any given time they are watching 3 matches
at any given time 27 matches aren't being watched.


PASSIVE 3 judges sit at a table waiting to be called.
at any given time they are watching 0 matches
at any given time 30 matches aren't being watched.


If you compare the number of matches not being watched then there isn't much to choose between the two styles! 90% vs 100%

[FLAME SUIT ON!]
[edit reconstructed straw man because of my dodgy math LOL]

[Fireborn]

* 4 judges patrol the play area.
* at any given time they are watching 4 matches
* at any given time 56 matches aren't being watched.

That might be true, but when a judge is patrolling the area, they might catch someone misplaying a card, correct it, walk on, see another misplay, correct it, etc. As a judge I can't watch two matches exactly at the same time, but I can move my gaze between at least 4 games, and see what the players are doing, if you know what I mean. Because it takes time to take actions on your turn, as an active judge you can pay attention to more than 1 match at the time, really.

[NoPoke]

That might be true, but when a judge is patrolling the area, they might catch someone misplaying a card, correct it, walk on, see another misplay, correct it, etc. As a judge I can't watch two matches exactly at the same time, but I can move my gaze between at least 4 games, and see what the players are doing, if you know what I mean. Because it takes time to take actions on your turn, as an active judge you can pay attention to more than 1 match at the time, really.


Thats an awfull lot of correcting and misplays. Even given your ability to watch four matches at once the math is still 60% unwatched!

This is from personal experience but usually when I'm walking the floor I don't see many errors that require my intervention. So I might just as well be sitting down somewhere comfortable! This does bring me to a big downside to active judging: Its very tiring. At UK Nationals last year I was on my feet and moving for more than 12 hours. I'm certain that I wasn't as alert at the end of that day watching the finals as I would have been if I had been more passive in my judging style.


[edit for dodgy math!]

[P_A]

Speaking about correcting - 60 person tournament = 30 matches. If each judge can look at aprox 4 matches during a round, you've covered over half - compared to none. No one expects a judge to see absolutely every play, but you can catch a few more by active judging than passive. I know what you mean by saying it's pretty tiring by the end of the day, I'm exhausted. I only use active judging. Flame suit on? Good, hope this doesn't hurt too much: Isn't that what you get paid the big bucks (errr, ...... judge support box) for?

[NoPoke]

P_A: I must have been on my feet for far too long today... forgot to divide the number of players by two to get matches. DOH! That wasn't the particular straw man I was trying to set up LOL

[dld4a]

Active is far better. If you only catch one error then it is worth it. Even if you do not catch any errors your active presence may prevent one or several. Passive should only be use if the judging staff is too small. i.e. one person who needs to attend to the computer or match slips. IMO

[NoPoke]

You know the more I think of active vs passive the less certain I am that active is best. Now I'm not saying that passive is best rather that the difference isn't clear-cut. The straw man I was setting up is that the math doesn't tell you about how a good active judge behaves. The best judges tend to gravitate towards the areas that will be generating the need for judges and away from those that don't generate calls of 'Judge!'. But even with a passive style the judges shouldn't be distant from the play area and will be able to observe the field.

Now unless you are a table judge which is the ultimate active judging style. There is little difference for the majority of players if the judge staff are walking the play area or sitting down at a table waiting to be called. It is certanly easier to see a hand go up when you are waiting on the podium than it is when you are on the floor with your back to many players.

Even using the passive style if you are called to adjudicate a disturbance where sportsmanship or gamesmnship could be involved then I'd expect a good judge to linger in the vacinity rather than leave after the adjudication was given.