Mulligan Charade - Who Shows First?

[Box of Fail]

That's a horrible Idea. Whoever said that the mulligan had to be shown before set-up? The player already gets to draw an extra card, he shouldn't also have the additional advantage of seeing the hand to use to determine what to start with...

No, I'm saying that this is how the rule should be CHANGED, so that the mulligan is even more of a disadvantage, allowing the player who does not mulligan another advantage (potentially more substantial than the extra card even) and making mulligans even worse luck. It would also solve the problem of determining who should show first instead of promoting staring contests.

 

[waynegg]

20 seconds, 20 minutes, 20 years. If someone isn't going to show theres before you show yours. It doesn't matter.

You guys are left with Option 1 that I had listed before, that is really the same as Option 2, Option 3. I started this thread with WHO SHOWS FIRST. Under the currently worded rules that have been administered here in the last 6 months, WHO SHOWS FIRST isn't defined.

People keep repeating the rules, and we keep saying the rules favor the person who has the lowest amount of scruples.

No, I'm saying that this is how the rule should be CHANGED, so that the mulligan is even more of a disadvantage, allowing the player who does not mulligan another advantage (potentially more substantial than the extra card even) and making mulligans even worse luck. It would also solve the problem of determining who should show first instead of promoting staring contests.

So would this, and without adding more advantage

Once the basic is set (if at least one player has one), it doesn't really matter "who shows first". The active can't be changed.


Player 1: "I have a mulligan."
-then- -------------------------------} happens during the first 20 sec
Player 2: [sets his starting basic]
-then-
Player 1: [shows Player 2 his hand and redraws]

-or-

Player 2: [sets his starting basic]
-then- -------------------------------} happens during the first 20 sec
Player 1: "I have a mulligan"
-then-
Player 1: [shows Player 2 his hand and redraws]

It makes no difference. All that Player 2 knows in either of these scenarios is that Player 1 has a mulligan. The mulligan hand isn't actually shown until after Player 2 has set his basic. There is no gain this way other than getting to draw an extra card. Nothing else could possibly be gained that isn't an inherent factor of getting to draw an additional card as Player 1's hand is a random variable and is in no way dictated by what he drew the first time. If you think anything else can be gained, then you aren't willing to see it from outside the box you are sitting in.

In the case where each player has a basic, the fact that only an active is placed initially is also irrelevant as they have all the way until the coin flip to add Pokemon to their bench.

In the case where both players have a mulligan, they have both announced it and then shown each other. Then they restart.

And that isn't your option 1:

OPTION 1: NO CHANGE. Both players put down a starting pokemon, when ever they "happen" to do it. Staring Contest for top angling players. Yeah, we can put 2 minutes or 20 seconds on , but ultimately it goes back to the TITLE of this THREAD we started in JANUARY. WHO SHOWS FIRST. Many folks would just show, they aren't extreme anglers. Who is the judge going to penalize if both players refuse to give information but wants to find out about the information from there opponent. Insane. The person most willing to wait will get that little percentage of information.

because now the rules would reflect a specific order in which each of these actions are to take place. A change.

 

[NoPoke]

Where do we go from here is the real question.

OPTION 1: NO CHANGE. ........staring contest....... Who is the judge going to penalize

The staring contest isn't just slow play it is no play at all. Intentional too which makes it stalling. If players refuse to play then both can expect a game loss or a DQ.

Who places first? The current rule book is silent: it doesn't care. If players care enough to put the tournament at risk then they should not expect to remain in the tournament for long.

I do see the stalemate as an inevitable outcome from a particular interpretation of the rule book. If that interpretation is widespread then no game can ever start. None, both players should always wait. Since games have to start I conclude that anyone who holds to the stalemate as being intended by the rulebook or even allowed by the rule book is incorrect. Just because the rulebook doesn't say you cant do something does not mean that you can.

No player has the right to elevate their own needs above those of anyone else in the room.

 

[Lawman]

20 seconds, 20 minutes, 20 years. If someone isn't going to show theres before you show yours. It doesn't matter.

You guys are left with Option 1 that I had listed before, that is really the same as Option 2, Option 3. I started this thread with WHO SHOWS FIRST. Under the currently worded rules that have been administered here in the last 6 months, WHO SHOWS FIRST isn't defined.

People keep repeating the rules, and we keep saying the rules favor the person who has the lowest amount of scruples.

If we ADD a tourney RULE for set up to include the 20 secs., then it doesnt matter who shows 1st. If neither places an active or declares the mulligan, they will both get tagged with a slow play or stalling penalty. Not real hard to deal with. You either play or get a penalty. The tourney moves on. Why do you think you have the right to make the other player place 1st?

Keith

 

[Twosips]

No, I'm saying that this is how the rule should be CHANGED, so that the mulligan is even more of a disadvantage, allowing the player who does not mulligan another advantage (potentially more substantial than the extra card even) and making mulligans even worse luck. It would also solve the problem of determining who should show first instead of promoting staring contests.

You're basically advocating for inserting more luck based results into the game which I would think most people would be against. You can reduce your chance of bad luck by putting in 20 or 30 basics but a deck with 10 - 15 basics is gonna get mulligans from time to time and do you really think matches should be decided on whether or not people mulligan? (I know that is a bit of hyperbole but that is the direction you are advocating by saying the non-mulligan player should get more of an advantage than they already do by getting to draw an extra card.)

 

[Jeremy Badeaux]

If everything happens how Slow Deck wants, we'd get to hear, "It isn't fair that I have to announce my mulligan first after the opponent won the flip. This system should have never existed and it just complicates setup too much".

People have managed to deal with the mulligan announcements without any issues for over a decade.
You have yet to show how it suddenly became bad at right this moment and you definitely haven't demonstrated what makes the current mulligan rules unfair.
You keep shouting that the mulligan rules are unfair and that it gives an unintended advantage, but most people see it as an intended advantage, so you just keep repeating yourself.

 

[SLOW DECK]

If we ADD a tourney RULE for set up to include the 20 secs., then it doesnt matter who shows 1st. If neither places an active or declares the mulligan, they will both get tagged with a slow play or stalling penalty. Not real hard to deal with. You either play or get a penalty. The tourney moves on. Why do you think you have the right to make the other player place 1st?

Keith

Been on vacation, Grand Canyon was cool.

20 seconds, seriously how would 20 seconds be administered.
- What if I go 20 seconds, and my opponent goes 21 seconds. Who's timing.
- If I am timing, and I go 19.45 seconds, announce my mulligan, then my opponent doesn't say anything until 20.15 seconds... Does I get a 3 card PRIZE PENALTY. LOL.

Players know that judges are NEVER AROUND. Judges seem to think THEY ARE ALWAYS AROUND.

People have managed to deal with the mulligan announcements without any issues for over a decade.
You have yet to show how it suddenly became bad at right this moment and you definitely haven't demonstrated what makes the current mulligan rules unfair.
You keep shouting that the mulligan rules are unfair and that it gives an unintended advantage, but most people see it as an intended advantage, so you just keep repeating yourself.

Jeremy, please let me know how often in the first decade that first turn DONKS have been as common as they are now. ..... The only knowledge that I have highlighted is the knowledge of an EXTRA CARD IS COMING. I put out in #1 what the issue was.

Again, this isn't about looking at there mulligan hand. This isn't about Drawing the Mulligan, it is only about knowing the information of if you are going two cards or one cards extra.

-----------0------------0---------------
This issue is really simple:
I have two(2) Pokemon in my Hand but NO (0) Energy
One Pokemon is can potentially DONK a lone basic for 1 energy. Aggressive Choice
One is at Starter/ Set up Pokemon, Safe Choice
I have 16 energy in my deck
The probabily of getting one of the 16 energies with top deck(1 card) only is 30%
The probabily of getting one of the 16 energies with top deck and Muligan(2 cards) is 52%

Do I :
1. Put Down my Donk Pokemon, with a 30% chance of getting an energy that might let me Donk.
2. Put Down my Starter Pokemon, with a 0% chance of getting a Donk, but more conservative play.
3. Wait to see if I will be getting a Mulligan Card, thus know I will get a 52% chance of getting an Energy needed to DONK a basic.

Number 3 should not be any OPTION, but ANGELING WILL WAIT. I can't make this case any clearer.

Again, pokemon is card game played by mature people (kid's too, but I think Masters at most events out number juniors and seniors combined). High Level Pokemon Play, like High Level Poker, is about gaining and concealing information for the top level players. I wish people stop marginalizing this FACT. Thus by my opponent placing a False basic, we deny the "long staring" information angler the extra information that they will or will not be geting 2 cards, rather than one for there first turn. Right now the person willing to Stare STEALS this information from those who WOULDN'T WAIT, and shows mulligans promptly.

I still don't see the harm in making the knowledge of IF YOU ARE GOING TO GET A MULLIGAN CARD OR NOT, ONLY AFTER YOU PLACE YOUR STARTING POKEMON.


I apologies for larger font, but I wanted to remake my argument in it's own section.

 

[Lawman]

Real easy answer Rob....IF a 20 second rule was used, you place your basic and if they dont declare w/in 20 secs, ....CALL A JUDGE. You will get one. Now, if both of you are doing the stare down with no actives placed, the judge can tag BOTH of you with a slow play penalty.

Do we really need to go this far? It is a game. SotG. Play fair. Place your active. Declare your mulligan TIMELY. Yes, your deck FAILED to give you a basic, you get a DISADVANTAGE. The player whose deck worked to give them a basic or more than 1 SHOULD get an advantage.

Keith

 

[Jeremy Badeaux]

Players know that judges are NEVER AROUND. Judges seem to think THEY ARE ALWAYS AROUND.



Jeremy, please let me know how often in the first decade that first turn DONKS have been as common as they are now. ..... The only knowledge that I have highlighted is the knowledge of an EXTRA CARD IS COMING. I put out in #1 what the issue was.

You don't remember during the Neo block, when everybody was getting, "tyrogued"?
When everybody ran babies, including Tyrogue, and a good chunk of people ran ND Caterpie with Dark Energy (the original wording was different) just to donk Totodiles and/or babies?

A whole lot of major events ended with complaints about somebody getting donked in top cut.

Donks were stupidly common.

Slow Deck, part of the reason that so many of the ideas are getting shot down is because judges know that they are not always around, so some of the proposed changes are impossible to enforce.
I do like how you keep trying to make it an us vs. them issue though.

 

[xcfrisco]

snip

You're highly exaggerating your statistics. No current competitive deck plays 16 mono energy with the ability to donk with a basic pokemon. I have a post like 3 pages back the better highlights the percentages (they're pretty much half of what you stated).

And again

1.) you dont get to go first unless you play sableye (opposing player may play sableye too in which either play can go first), which means that, lol, YOU may get donked before you even have a chance to draw your first card post mulligan!

2.) Your opponent may start with a HP basic (as is the case with the most popular deck atm ie LuxChomp/any SP deck) that is very, very difficult to donk.

3.) Your opponent may start with more than one basic pokemon



Honestly Slow Deck, you're aruging about an issue that AT THE MOST only affects 1 out of like every 100 games (ie 1%) in competitive pokemon, all factors considered (its probably less than that). And this is in a metagame where donks are COMMON! It was bound to happen that sooner or later a high-profile match could be influenced by this outcome, that's just the nature of statistics. Does it warrant an alteration of the rules in place, especially with all the guidleine that the SOTG tells the players to follow?

Imo no, but hey, everyone and their mom who's a top player probably already stalls to gain unnatural advantages through the rules imposed in the game anyway. This is no different.


I like Lawman's proposed solution and implementation of said solution. If you think you're opponent is stalling, call a judge. If both people are stalling, the judge will eventually walk over when one match is holding up an ENTIRE TOURNEY and give them both a warning. If they do it again, kick them out of the tournament. We'll see just how important that 1%, 10%, whatever arbitrarily low percentage, advantage is when it can potantially get you DQ'd from a tourney :thumb:

 

[SLOW DECK]

Keith, there are WOLVES and SHEEP. WOLVES will push the rules, SHEEP will obey them and the SOTG.

Keith, 20 seconds is real easy and really silly.

It doesn't take anyone more than 5 seconds to figure out that they have a mulligan. So why 20 seconds.

Keith, the alternative rule let's everyone be WOLVES. Just allow us to swith our starting pokemon after the declaration of the MULLIGAN, but BEFORE DRAWING THE MULLIGAN CARD.

The WOLF starring player who would take the full 20 seconds isn't advantage over the SHEEP player would would decare mulligand or starters ASAP.

Us SHEEP want a level playing field in playing this game with the WOLVES.

---------- Post added 08/11/2010 at 04:10 PM ----------

Honestly Slow Deck, you're aruging about an issue that AT THE MOST only affects 1 out of like every 100 games (ie 1%) in competitive pokemon, all factors considered (its probably less than that).

You might not understand this, but you just conceed the argument to me. If matters ever, it should matter always. I am a darn good player, and am CURSED to worry about slight percentages, like many top players do. Every turn is a several different scenarios, probabilities and likelihoods are processed in our brains. We make our moves by trying to interpret and optimise the play around these risk. Yes it is slight.

It bothers me that a WOLF will wait it out, and I won't. I thought having a false basic was an honorable way not to have a needless waiting game. Judges call that move deceitful. Jason K, says in post 2 that it was the best and honorable solution. I get the feeling like some us play like savants, and are cursed to worry about the WOLVES who are willign to wait out to gain that small but distinct advantage. Where others (probably thankfully) can't even see any any advantage given to their opponent who is waiting for them to give that "bit" of information. I won't deny that worry about small percentiles can't be like "not seeing the forest for the trees" in the general game issue, but under the general construct of the rules, the optimal play at that moment of the start of the game is to WAIT until your opponent acts, before you give any information. If both players take that position, we are left with a Stalemate.

 

[AyameHikaru]

Actually, according to another Professor I talked to (That Judged at Nats this year) you CAN change your active up until you draw extra cards for mulligans/coin flip. That has always been my understanding as well, so I don't really see what the fuss is about.

 

[SLOW DECK]

Actually, according to another Professor I talked to (That Judged at Nats this year) you CAN change your active up until you draw extra cards for mulligans/coin flip. That has always been my understanding as well, so I don't really see what the fuss is about.

Us silly folks always played it once you played a basic, you couldn't change once they declared there mulligan. Oh, well ignore this thread. Thanks everyone. WOLVES and SHEEP are on equal footing.:thumb:

 

[PokePop]

Actually, according to another Professor I talked to (That Judged at Nats this year) you CAN change your active up until you draw extra cards for mulligans/coin flip. That has always been my understanding as well, so I don't really see what the fuss is about.

NO NO NO NO NO!

A simple check of the Compendium's Game Play section on "Starting the Game" will show that you can NOT do this.

I'm a bit disturbed that it is being taught.

 

[PokePop]

Just checked.
It's actually mentioned in TWO different rulings.

You CAN NOT change your active!

 

[SLOW DECK]

Oh, rats.

The WOLVES still will get the edge on us SHEEP.

Again, Either False Starter or Switch Active would make this segment fair to the SHEEP and the WOLVES.

Now the WOLVES wait for the SHEEP to declare, and get the small edge in a small percentage of these times.

 

[AyameHikaru]

Just checked.
It's actually mentioned in TWO different rulings.

You CAN NOT change your active!

Oh dear. ^^; I'll bring that up next league.

 

[Jeremy Badeaux]

Keith, there are WOLVES and SHEEP. WOLVES will push the rules, SHEEP will obey them and the SOTG.

So are you saying that you want people to ignore spirit of the game because of some small chance of something happening that may or may not yield any actual advantage?

You plainly state that sheep are the ones who follow SOTG and follow it up by saying that we should make everybody wolves, so I'm kind of curious why you think we should throw sportsmanship out the window in favor of gamesmanship.

If Jason K wants to place his illegal false basic at the start of a match and get a penalty for it that greatly outweighs any slight advantage he could have gained, then let him.

There are plenty of games that foster an atmosphere of gamesmanship, but pokemon is not one of them (thankfully).

Your entire side has been based on the notion that it is an unfair advantage, but whenever you guys have been called upon to show how it is unfair, all you do is show that there is an advantage while ignoring the part that was actually being disputed.
Mulligans were intended to yield an advantage and the constant refusal to show how that advantage is, "unfair" hurts your argument a good deal.

As a sidenote: I've never known of Pokemon Organized Play as being fond of your, "wolves" (probably why there are so many rules against that sort of behavior).

 

[darthtace]

This thread needs to die. I'm tired of seeing it. There's already a ruling, Pop says he'll look into it at the next rules meeting, let's just stop talking about it and wait to hear what they decide?

 

[SLOW DECK]

JEREMY, I would not get that advantage, because I am a SHEEP. You say there is supposed to be an advantage, you must be a WOLF. The only way you get an this sligh advantage is if you wait until you opponent places the basic first.

Guarantee both the WOLVES and SHEEP this advantage by allow folks to trade there active before the lay there prizes and after the opponent declares the active.
OR
Rules Allow placeing a false starter card until the opponent places their starter or false mulligan. Thus no knowledge is given before you decide upon your starter.