PDA

View Full Version : Penalty guide



cattdreams
04/27/2004, 12:58 AM
With the gym and staduim challenges looming and no guarentee on getting a penalty guide from nintendo, I thought it might be a good idea if we all discuss what are appropriate penalties for common infractions at each event. I'd like to remind people that we are not bound by dci guides, nor do we have any affliation with them anymore. not to say that their ideas were not good, but I think we can be free to be a bit more creative in these situations.


So lets get some people firing away with their main concerns and quick rulings that you think are appropriate.



-CattDreams

SteveP
04/27/2004, 10:58 AM
IMO, POP will probably develop Penalty Guidelines very close to the DCI ones. So, any judge who does NOT follow the DCI Penalty Guidelines in the interim is doing a BAD job of judging.

cattdreams
04/27/2004, 12:59 PM
thats funny, I have an almost exact opposite view, there's been absolutely no evidence that they'll have a penalty guide before the gym challenges, and I think that any judge who binds themselves to using only dci standards (once again, no longer affiliated with pokemon anymore) is a bad judge.

The dci penalty guide really has large gaps in degrees of penalties, in many cases they are either too light or too heavy.

I'd also like to point out that once again, the dci penalty guides, while a good start, are in fact arbitrary at this point. there is no official difference between giving a player a prize swap via dci rulings and say, a partial prize swap (one player draws a prize but the other does not add a prize).

meganium45
04/27/2004, 01:34 PM
Man, Steve, harsh with the accusation of "Bad Judges" so quickly. Anyone who follows the DCI guidelines is just like someone who uses the DCI software, they do so at their peril. The only thing we have to go by are the POP Floor guidelines, which offer little guidance. I am just thankful that noone has gotten stuck as of yet with technical differences....

Just shows the active judging group we have is, A) intelligent. B) fair and C) can think on their feet.

The key is consistancy. We need to be consistant as a group, or there will be chaos come Nationals, Stadiums and Worlds when it is truly shown that my style and judging is different than Steve Gillette's, whose is different than anyone from Florida....

It will frustrate an infuriate players, especially younger ones, who are used to playing under a specified regime.

M45

SteveP
04/27/2004, 01:35 PM
okay, so maybe BAD is not a good word (sorry for all the oximorons in this sentence :) ).

So, do you think we need something as comprehensive as the Compendium for Penalties? Do we really need to explain every little situation where a penalty can be applied?

Why is it that some people think it's wrong when judges apply harsher penalties than others?

Penalties SHOULD BE Guidelines. I really doubt that ALL judges can come to a unified agreement about how harshly to penalize, unless, POP develops those guidelines. Any discussions in this area will produce little, if any, universal agreements about the penalties.

I highly doubt that your OPINION about the "gaps" in the DCI Penalty Guidelines is shared by many other Pokemon judges. You see "gaps." I see "oppurtunities" for interpretation.

Adv1sor
04/27/2004, 01:37 PM
While we are not bound by the DCI guidelines I think that, for the sake of consistency, that is what we should use until we get something else from POP.

SteveP
04/27/2004, 02:07 PM
Let me rephrase.

Any judge who strays wildly from the historically practiced penalty guidelines (DCI) during this interim is suspect of being in-the-wrong.

I commend those who've strived to insite POP to produce a much-needed Penalty Guidelines document. Until that document is produced, I really think we need to practice the guidelines we used to practice (DCI).

sneaselsrevenge
04/27/2004, 08:24 PM
Well then, let's do it anyway for the new judges. My biggest concern is forgetting to place prizes.

bulbasnore
04/27/2004, 11:24 PM
So lets get some people firing away with their main concerns and quick rulings that you think are appropriate.


-CattDreams

Hey good thread. Sorry I missed it.

Here are some kinda recent issues I've seen off the top of my head, in no order:

Supporter straight to the discard.
Subsequent play of second supporter.

Failing to turn the card or place a marker for special conditions.
Subsequent failure to apply game effect.

Not putting out prizes (prize patrol).

Pickup up selected Oracle cards with deck in hand?

Looking at hand then declaring if you'll take the 1st or 2nd turn after winning flip.

So what do people think?

'snore

bulbasnore
04/27/2004, 11:27 PM
Well then, let's do it anyway for the new judges. My biggest concern is forgetting to place prizes.

Good one. I remind them before saying go, then walk through all games looking for missing prizes (prize patrol).

Biffed it myself at Fountain Valley CC and was judged 5th turn. Prize swap.

cattdreams
04/29/2004, 03:43 AM
A prize swap is pretty harsh, I perfer not to give them out if possible, though I have been known to, (e.x. I was the judge in bulba's formentioned fv cc biff)

as for some of the above mentioned

supporter straight to discard, That to me is a warn only.

playing two supporters in a single turn, if you can rewind it, I'd have to say a nullify of the second supporter card effect,discard of second supporter, plus a warning, if you cant rewind it, then a prize swap.

looking at hand and then deciding to go first or second, I'd have to say mulligan, let the other player choose start position.

failing to properly mark a special condition, generally speaking, warning only, though this is one of the offenses that I ramp up on real quick,

A good judge needs to be dynamic, so the above are not my set in stone rulings, alot depends on the situation, but it is a jumping off point.

also, I think it's very important to communicate with the other judges in your group, anyone with a warning should be observed more closely, and second offenses should be harsher than the first.

I will also note, that when cutting to the top 8, I think the rulings should be more strict, I'm much less likely to give a warning durring one of the final matches.

I would really like to hear other judges variants of the above rulings, and dont be afraid to voice what might be considdered unconventional, we're here for ideas, so we can work with eachother. While some may or maynot say that my juding style is a bit wild at times, I feel that as a judge, I'm there to keep the field level, not to tip the scales in favor of another. So I keep my rulings just, and within the legal limits. keeping with those ideals, I've never ever had a player complaint about my rulings, which is more than I can say for some of my critics.

Adv1sor
04/29/2004, 06:49 AM
If the error can be corrected without giving the offending player any advantage, then I say you go with a warning for the first offense. However, if the player has gained some advantage that canít be undone, then I feel that a prize swap or a match loss is an appropriate penalty at the larger tournaments.

For example, a player uses TV reporter but forgets to discard a card. If this is caught before that player draws another card and before his or her opponent plays a card then I would have the offender discard a card and go on with just a warning. However, if the offending player draws another card or his or her opponent plays a card, then the offender has gained an advantage that can not be undone. Here I would opt for a prize swap.

I have sometimes seen players accidentally pick up two cards when drawing a card for their turn and casually place the second card back on top of their decks. For this offense I would, again award a prize swap. The offender has gained an advantage that cannot be undone. Even if you take the card from the top of the deck and place it at the bottom or shuffle the deck, the damage has already been done.

Forgetting to put out prizes should result in a warning to both players, regardless of who forgot. However, if a player has used a search card in a game where they forgot to put out prizes then I would warn the other player but rule a prize swap against the player that used the search card.

Executing a mulligan without first showing your opponent your hand should result in a match loss as this error can easily give the offender an insurmountable advantage if they have intentionally ditched a bad hand.

If a player commits the same offense twice in one tournament then I would think that we should move the penalty up one notch from whatever was done on the prior offense. (Warning, Prize Swap, Match Loss, Ejection.)

Guidelines should be just that. Not hard and fast rules. However, at the higher level tournaments the enforcement levels should be stricter.

SteveP
04/29/2004, 11:41 AM
I have sometimes seen players accidentally pick up two cards when drawing a card for their turn and casually place the second card back on top of their decks. For this offense I would, again award a prize swap.

Under DCI guidelines, this was a caution. Plus, you show the opponent what the card is and place it back on TOP of the deck (don't reshuffle or place it within the deck). I ALWAYS have to correct players who think you either place the card in the middle of your deck, or reshuffle.


A more severe infraction might be looking at prize cards. Depending on when it happened (before or after search cards are played), the penalty could be serious. But, in the case of only having one prize left, and you've previously played search cards, it would only be a Caution, and you'd show your opponent the prize.


Also, do remember that if you're playing multi-game matches, the game-loss (not match-loss) penalty should take the place of most prize-swap penalties, although I wouldn't call it totally wrong if a judge chose to occasionally use the prize-swap penalty in multi-game matches.

Adv1sor
04/29/2004, 12:32 PM
Under DCI guidelines, this (drawing an extra card) was a caution.

You are right Steve, but I think it should be a stronger penalty. Knowing what the next card is in my deck can often influence my decisions. This should warrent more than just a warning.

SteveP
04/29/2004, 02:38 PM
You are right Steve, but I think it should be a stronger penalty. Knowing what the next card is in my deck can often influence my decisions. This should warrent more than just a warning.

I guess it's a judgement call. But, be prepared to defend your harsher ruling. Repeated offenses could obviously warrant a harsher penalty. And, I suppose if the player has a TV Reporter and Copycat in their hand, you could make the "knowledge" argument. But even then, if I determined that the glance was totally unintentional and/or accidental, I'd be hard-pressed to give anything more than a Caution. JMO.

PokePop
04/29/2004, 04:36 PM
I'm with Steve on this. I tend to avoid being harsh unless dealing with repeat offenses.

NoPoke is right, we need to discuss the framework first.
I would make a minor change to his penalty categorys:

PENALTIES

Caution
Warning
Prize Loss (either Opponent draws a prize OR offender places an extra)
Prize Swap (should this be a seperate category)
Hand Loss (should this be a seperate category)
Game Loss
Match Loss
DQ

I've always felt the swap was a very harsh swing and to go from no penalty (other than warnings) all the way to that with nothing inbetween doesn't make sense to me.

bulbasnore
04/29/2004, 11:20 PM
PENALTIES

Caution
Warning
Prize Loss (either Opponent draws a prize OR offender places an extra)
Prize Swap (should this be a seperate category)
Hand Loss (should this be a seperate category)
Game Loss
Match Loss
DQ

I've always felt the swap was a very harsh swing and to go from no penalty (other than warnings) all the way to that with nothing inbetween doesn't make sense to me.

Yah, it was meant to simulate a game loss in a non-match play environment. So, let's go with that more granular penalty setup. Good call.

Let's pick one method of prize loss maybe? I think 'opponent draws a prize' is more likely to decide the game right there (game loss if last prize). So, what about just going with 'offender places a prize from bottom of deck'.

Also, hand loss is that really an awarded penalty? Is it not the effect of an unwindable game misplay? Isn't it something a judge would 'let stand' in an unwindable situation that didn't warrant a prize loss or worse? May I suggest we move it therefore? Also, might this not extend to loss of other misplays (double supporter, e.g.)? Maybe rephrase a bit.


Caution
Warning
Loss of misplayed cards/turn (Unwindable)
Prize Loss (Offender places an extra)
Prize Swap
Game Loss
Match Loss
DQ

OK, comments?

bulbasnore
04/29/2004, 11:26 PM
The current floor rules don't specify that the player going second MUST show their hand when they muligan.

Hmm. Is this an error or intentional. Has this been supplemented with a ruling or discussed around here at least?

DaytonGymLeader
04/29/2004, 11:42 PM
Q. In a sanctioned Tournament, does the player going second have to show his hand in the event they have no Basics at the start of the game? The Floor Rules don't explicitly say that they have to.
A. Yes, you still reveal your hand before you shuffle it back into your deck. The rules from the rulebook still apply unless specifically stated otherwise. (Oct 16, 2003 PUI Rules Team)

Adv1sor
04/30/2004, 10:58 AM
But even then, if I determined that the glance was totally unintentional and/or accidental, I'd be hard-pressed to give anything more than a Caution. JMO.

I agree.

If I could make such a determination then certainly nothing more than a warning.