Between-round prize loss penalties "following" a player through IDs

[raxl]

I've got an interesting one to share with the class today. (In this case I'm pretty sure I know what the answer is, but think it's worth sharing, since neither I nor any of the staff at the event knew what to do.) I was head judge of a City Championship yesterday and, in a random deck check at the end of round 3 of 5, discovered a player with a 59-card list and matching 59-card deck. (They borrowed the deck and there was presumably a card left in the other player's deckbox. Oops!) The resolution seemed pretty clean --- they found a matching sleeve and inserted the basic energy of the choice, I updated their decklist to include the basic energy, and I assigned them a prize loss for the beginning of their next game.

However! They ID'ed their next game, as well as their final round game, to guarantee a top 8 slot at 3-0-2. So... what happens to the prize penalty? I couldn't find anything on this in the penalty guidelines or other resources, and the more experienced judge who happened to be around and the PTO didn't know what to do either. We phoned an even more experienced judge and followed that judge's advice: First, because the player didn't set up for a game in round 4 or 5, there was no chance to assign the penalty that they had earned; the penalty shouldn't just go away, so I assigned it at the first chance I had, which was game one of their top cut match. Second, I did not communicate to the player that the penalty would follow them; I think they would have ID'd regardless because it guaranteed them top 8, but the logic behind not doing so was to avoid having them game the system. I didn't and don't love either possible solution to the second issue --- either saying "hey, just so you know, you'll now get this penalty next round unasked" or surprising them at the start of their top 8 match --- but the logic of avoiding altering their behavior is compelling. (Had the player directly asked, I don't think I would have been comfortable lying. I might have given a non-answer of the form "If you ID your next match also, you will get to find out!" but that feels disingenuous. Luckily, that did not come up.)

Is this documented somewhere that we couldn't find at the time? If it isn't, should it be? I'd be surprised if it hadn't come up before and didn't come up again.

(My experience level: Cities head judge, States/Regionals judge)

 

[LOLZ]

I've got an interesting one to share with the class today. (In this case I'm pretty sure I know what the answer is, but think it's worth sharing, since neither I nor any of the staff at the event knew what to do.) I was head judge of a City Championship yesterday and, in a random deck check at the end of round 3 of 5, discovered a player with a 59-card list and matching 59-card deck. (They borrowed the deck and there was presumably a card left in the other player's deckbox. Oops!) The resolution seemed pretty clean --- they found a matching sleeve and inserted the basic energy of the choice, I updated their decklist to include the basic energy, and I assigned them a prize loss for the beginning of their next game.

However! They ID'ed their next game, as well as their final round game, to guarantee a top 8 slot at 3-0-2. So... what happens to the prize penalty? I couldn't find anything on this in the penalty guidelines or other resources, and the more experienced judge who happened to be around and the PTO didn't know what to do either. We phoned an even more experienced judge and followed that judge's advice: First, because the player didn't set up for a game in round 4 or 5, there was no chance to assign the penalty that they had earned; the penalty shouldn't just go away, so I assigned it at the first chance I had, which was game one of their top cut match. Second, I did not communicate to the player that the penalty would follow them; I think they would have ID'd regardless because it guaranteed them top 8, but the logic behind not doing so was to avoid having them game the system. I didn't and don't love either possible solution to the second issue --- either saying "hey, just so you know, you'll now get this penalty next round unasked" or surprising them at the start of their top 8 match --- but the logic of avoiding altering their behavior is compelling. (Had the player directly asked, I don't think I would have been comfortable lying. I might have given a non-answer of the form "If you ID your next match also, you will get to find out!" but that feels disingenuous. Luckily, that did not come up.)

Is this documented somewhere that we couldn't find at the time? If it isn't, should it be? I'd be surprised if it hadn't come up before and didn't come up again.

(My experience level: Cities head judge, States/Regionals judge)

Despite this sounding silly.... I would make this player and his/her Rd 4 opponent set up and tell them to set up as they are playing a real game. Once they are set up and before the clock starts, inform the other player of the prize card penalty and than issue that prize card penalty. Than let them decide to ID. Starting prize count being 6-5 may influence the ID or not. Let the effect of the penalty resolve before moving on to the next step, to ID or not ID.

Edit- I should also mention the only 2 parts of the Guidelines that discuss penalties issued between rounds are the following.

6.5. Game Loss
The Game Loss penalty is generally used when a mistake has been made that has a severe impact on the game state, to the point where the game is irreparably broken and unable to continue. This penalty is also used for other major procedural errors or problems.
When issuing a Game Loss penalty during an active game, the game is recorded as a loss for the player receiving the penalty. In extreme cases where significant errors have been made by both players in a game, a Game Loss penalty may be issued to both players simultaneously. A game terminated in this manner is not a tie; it is recorded as having no winner.
If this penalty is issued between rounds, the penalty is applied to the player’s next game.

7.3. Deck or Team Problems
...
If decklist or deck problems are caught between rounds, the penalties listed below should be used. The player is restricted as to what changes can be made, as outlined below.

 

[NoPoke]

You are correct, it sounds silly.

Apply the prize penalty to the next round and let them ID. No need to force a redundant set up in order to apply a prize card penalty to an actual game. Don't defer the penalty to the first round of the cut.

 

[Griff]

One question I have about this might be silly as well as it might just be related to me playing too much of another card game lately however is it normal practice for the judge to ask for a players deck and deckcheck them as a round is concluded? I am used to waiting for players to present their decks to their opponent at the beginning of a round, then taking their deck for checking and issuing a time extension. This seems to maximize the chance in catching any possible changing of cards to gain an advantage.

 

[PokePop]

Yes, that is done.
While you lose the opportunity to catch a stacked deck, you prevent causing long rounds due to a long time extension.
Its a trade off that can be important in a one day event that has match play.

 

[ShadowCard]

I cannot find the rules to say whether an ID has to come after set up or if it can be done before set up. If players want to ID before even seeing the starting hands and opponent's set up, is there something to say they cannot do that?