Pokémon TCG: Sword and Shield—Brilliant Stars

How i got kept out of Top4(Read)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Lawman said:
So, its the Judge's fault the kid played with sleeves that could be seen thru and the japanese backs could be seen? :nonono: It is ALWAYS the PLAYER'S responsibility to have a correct deck list, properly filled out with 60 cards, proper sleeves and card dex refs/outside refs for foriegn cards. Maybe some folks need to read the tourney rules again :/

Keith
Click to expand...

Okay, maybe I shoud reread this post or type it when I'm more fully alert. Sorry about that. But anyways, I'm just saying that because when judges do events here, they check for deck count AND check sleeves. Because if they checked the sleeves, they would've been able to let him know about the japanese card and such. There are times when the player wouldn't be able to noticed that the sleeves can show the back of cards.

And the last line, I should've said I was referring to the writing on his arm to help him remember.
 
I'm not going to comment on the ruling that was made once the issue was discovered.
I don't feel that I have the full info the judges would have had since I wasn't there and didn't see the cards and how exactly they looked.

However, regarding "if only they had done a proper deck check, they could have alerted the player..."
I'm sorry, deck check or no, if a player is using Japanese backed cards, they need to be aware if their sleeves allow the backs to be seen, even slightly. It's not like a player is taken by surprise that they have Japanese cards or that they have translucent sleeves.
Totally not on the judges in that regard.

Appropriate penalty? That I can't say without getting "the rest of the story"
 
PokePop said:
I'm not going to comment on the ruling that was made once the issue was discovered.
I don't feel that I have the full info the judges would have had since I wasn't there and didn't see the cards and how exactly they looked.

However, regarding "if only they had done a proper deck check, they could have alerted the player..."
I'm sorry, deck check or no, if a player is using Japanese backed cards, they need to be aware if their sleeves allow the backs to be seen, even slightly. It's not like a player is taken by surprise that they have Japanese cards or that they have translucent sleeves.
Totally not on the judges in that regard.

Appropriate penalty? That I can't say without getting "the rest of the story"
Click to expand...

Good call.
 
Exactly.. like not to be harsh or anything, because it was a tough break and we could had some really good matches if you had more crystals maybe, but in my opinion, the judges had to make a decision about the problem and a lot of people might not agree on it, but a lot more others do agree. A judge's choice can never be fully agreed upon by everyone, but thats why we have them.. so they can make a judgement on a controversial situation. Having a panel of them also allows them to make a more ... unbiased judgement I guess? But all in all, it was a tough break, and tough luck; it happens. Like I said to Kant, dont let this get you down, I've been hit with some pretty harsh judgements too, but I've learned to take them as a lesson that this IS a competitive tournament and strict rules must be applied in order for things to be fair. Good luck in nats and BR.

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

*oh ... Greg won the Regionals... he beat me.
 
Last edited:
It wasn't your fault at all for the japanese cc thing the person who checked your deck should have noticed that
 
Prime said:
Then again, the judges should have caught the sleeve problem in the beginning with deck checks.
Click to expand...

This is exactly why I'm totally against this (what I hear is now an acceptable) method of not doing deck checks pre-tournament because they "take too much time." I got to dish out a game loss today for an Illegal Decklist + Illegal Deck because we didn't do deck checks before the tournament.

I know time is something that must be worked around, but some things you just need to suck it up and do.
 
I have a serious problem with putting out prizes and actually have lost a States due to this, so I TOTALLY sympathize with you for writing down PUT OUT PRIZES. I can't POSSIBLY imagine how that should give you a warning of any kind!
 
Yeah they should have said something before the tournament.
When I play Japanese Cards I make SURE the back is Solid enough so you can not see the cards.

At least they didn't DQ you for "marked cards"

I don't see having a problem with a prize reminder but er writing on yourself may look
suspicious. This is why people use Play Mats :D
 
Mystery Thing said:
... They DQed for that? That's really harsh... We had a game loss in the first round of the T4 in the Seniors for somebody playing with 57 cards (and the desklist only had 59). Granted, having fewer cards is not an advantage AT ALL and having an extra could potentially be an advantage. But even at that, it does say it has to have clearly been a "significant" advantage to warrent a DQ.


Anyways, back on topic, I'll not speak out on the replace the cards thing, but instead on this (apparently new) policy that deck checks on EVERYBODY before the tournament even starts are optional. We didn't do them here at the Western Canada ones either (my appeals fell on deaf ears :frown: ), and our 59-card decklist would have been avoided had they been done.

I realize that they can take a LONG time to do, but they really had darn well better do them on everybody at Nationals (all of them).
Click to expand...

Okay first to this. Having 57-59 cards is a lot easier to fix then having 1 too many. Because you dont know which card to take out if they have 61. If they have under 60 you can just give a caution/warning and replace the missing cards with Basic Nrgy.

Pokekid - If all those fact are indeed correct. I think a warning should of worked. If they were sure it wasnt intentional and you could indeed see thru a bit. I think that they should of done 1 of the following. I think asking you to resleeve to back that they felt were okay would be 1. 2 you 100% Should of been allowed to replace them with ENG ones. Since it still is the same card. If the cessation crystal were on you deck list they shouldnt be ruling for you to put basic energy in the deck to replace them. 3 If none of your opp. said anything because I think they would of been able to tell that the same way as the judge would then I also agree that the penalty was too harsh. I personally think a Warning, Resleeve/Replace Cards would of been the right ruling IMO if those are all the facts.

I do think the writing on the arm tho is a Caution atleast.

Drew
 
I was watching this from the sides, they wouldn't let us come near, but it was rediculous. They spent a HUGE amount of time looking through Pokekids deck, checking out the entire thing, while the other player got a 5 minute treatment.

Heck, if you look long enough something will be found wrong. One judge looks through the deck, checks it, the second judge goes for it... then the other guy looks through it, decides he is unhappy with the cases.... I mean come now! The judges were informed at the beginning of the tournament that pokekid was using Japanese cards....

Interesting IMO. But whatever, Pokekid will win nationals, unless of course the judges find "something else wrong" out of the blue in the top 8. What next, one sleeve "feels" slightly thicker due to an imbalance of paint on the sleeve? I wouldst be surprised.

Ive played in both Canada, US and Europe, and this is by far the worst judging call I have seen in my life. Caution? Sure, that, remove cards and game loss? Please, gibe me a break. And seeing what happen with Kant..... the judges are not calling things straight.
 
Last edited:
Interesting series of events here in the Toronto area. I was on the judging team here, and co-head judge. As a result, I know about most of the hijinx that went on yesterday. But not all. I can't comment on what happened with Kant's match with the opponent drawing an extra prize since I wasn't the one dealing with the problem, and only found out a bit at the tail end of the judging process. The one thing I can comment on with Kant's brother is that he had steps written down on his arm to do with his deck - not stuff like, "remember prizes" (which is a mandatory play step that is necessary in pokemon), but steps that you would take with that particular deck, essentially coaching to do such and such in such and such order. Originally I had a bit of advice on that issue, considering it as just a matter of a person being forgetful, just as BDS ruled. However the rest of the judging staff - ALL of them felt that certain things might not be appropriate to be written down on your arm. And although their input was not solicited, or even taken into consideration in judging this matter, many of the other players mentioned they felt the same way, before and after this was judged upon. No one that I know was around when those words were written on Kant's brother, or Sebastian's arms. No one can prove that wasn't written on there by another person - or not. I was asked to give the results of the ruling to the players regarding what the judging staff discussed. During the event, Sebastian would have got the lighter of the 2 penalties since his arm displayed only minor notes which seemed innocent of any intent to coach. However in the end, when writing up the infractions regarding the days activities, Sabastian didn't receive a warning. The worst thing that happened was he had a game that was delayed, and he had to go wash off his arm. I consider that subject closed. I will not comment further on that point, unless POP would like to discuss what happened, at which time, I will be glad to give the judges point of view on this matter. By all means if you like, discuss it amongst yourselves all you like. I however will not comment further about that in this thread.

I've kept the best 'til last. Just so I can mention all I need to say, I'll make a post later when I have more time to be online.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top