signofzeta
New Member
This thread isn't necessarily an accurate representation of the world, but I'd say it's pretty stacked against you so far.
sorry, that was bad.
hey, man, not everybody is square you know. Have you seen those guys who take lots of risks?
I don't know, but if I do see someone at a huge disadvantage, I'd allow him to gain a slight advantage over that huge disadvantage, deck recipe notwithstanding. Getting bad draws all the time, reorder the cards a bit in hopes to get a least a good draw. If both the player and his opponent are ok with it, I don't see why somebody should butt in, and be such a square and make the game boring for both of them.
Ok, with the intent to gain an advantage, basically, you are cheating if you are turning your unlucky draws, your constant unluck draws in to a more average draws by manipulating your disadvantaged deck so it goes up to par? As I said, nobody can shuffle perfect, and if someone has all the energies off to one side, it is most likely that the energies would stay together. That's a huge disadvantage, and you need to play through a few games just to split these energies apart, because if it's random, it will eventually split and not be grouped together game after game after game. So if they move the energies around, even, evenly distribute them, to remove any disadvantage they had, should be DQed, because they know that, their distrinution of energies and their poor shuffling techniques nets them 2 losses in a row, due to bad draws, hence the DQ doesn't really matter, since he's out anyway? I'd rather let a person reorder the deck if it seems like a bad hand would likely result constantly, and if it seems like that person can't shuffle properly, in order to make it so that I don't win due to pure luck alone. I would go to the casino for those games.
I believe that people should be allowed to manipulate their deck between matches. It's not really stacking unless you gain an advantage, but if everybody does it, then it doesn't matter. It eliminates boring games, and gives the best games. I think the only crucial deck manipulation is when you do it from the deck check stage. I sure ain't going to shuffle it for 2 hours just to get the lands apart. No sir. That ain't happening, until I learned the better mash shuffle, but if I am playing without sleeves, I have to do the inefficient overhand shuffle, and trust me, it takes me 2 or 3 games to finally get the deck into a random distribution. But after that, I don't see the point, but there is no harm done.
Is there any statistical proof that those who stacked their decks won every match, while also sufficiently shuffled? Then why does the no stacking rule even exist? Well my definition of stacking is, manipulating a deck so that it NEEDS to be FULLY randomized to unstack it. We all know that no deck can be fully randomized. It's highly impossible, but yet, the rules says it must be fully randomized. That is my definition of a stacked deck. A deck isn't stacked if a simple mash shuffle 12 times can remove the stack. I don't see any harm done, and I don't see why there should be such a rule that really doesn't do anything.
There is seriously a huge solution to shuffle the opponent's deck. It's such a simple solution, but a bunch of squares here would rather have that person DQed, because they just HAD to follow the rules to the letter, and be strict about it, especially with such a vague rule. Every deck manipulation between matches has an intent, it may be an intent to stack it to win, intent to take it from a very horrible mess to something average, or an intent to increase the performance ever so slightly that it makes no difference anyway. As that, these squares would rather go 2 and out, and give the opponent a bad game, because of a huge unlucky steamroll that happened due to bad draws.
Heck, if everybody were squares, and followed the rules to the letter, they'd be afraid to even do something to make the game more fun, but rather, they both having bad draws, and bad hands game after game, because nobody is a perfect shuffler, and the games just go on and on until somebody gets their ace pokemon out first in some turn over the 15th turn. At least if both parties are ok with some breaking of the rules, then it obviously means that the opponent doesn't mind. He'd probably get upset if his opponent get's DQed, because all that person wants to do is play, and wait until the matches for the other games are over just to wait for someone to play with, unless all they want is a W from a technicality, then I don't see why anybody would want to see some DQed, when they at least want to have fun, even if the advanage gained is not that significant, or that the intent was to decrease any disadvantage so that the opponent doesn't have to go through a boring one sided match.
Even for you, do you like to win through technicalities? Do you like to win from one sided matches? Do you like to win from even matches? For me, I prefer the third choice, and if i see my opponent feel unlucky, I will let that person do something to decrease that disadvantage, or unluckiness, but I know that most of you would love to win through technicalities. You would call cheat, even if it doesn't garner any significant advantage, ahem, moving one card to the top of the deck, shuffling, and then drawing that card, which doesn't happen all the time anyway, rather than play through someone anyway, who may or may not have that advantage anyway. If you want to get a W by not even playing, then what's the point? I mean, BORING.
Last edited: