Opponent attaching/retreating rules

Discussion in 'Cards: Strategy and Rulings Discussion' started by pokemaster1970, Mar 7, 2011.

8 league13 468 60
  1. pokemaster1970

    pokemaster1970 New Member

    If a player attaches an energy card to a pokemon, then takes his hand/fingers off the energy card to go back to his pokemon hand, then decides he doesn't want that energy attached after all, is he allowed to go back after taking his hand/fingers off the attached energy card? The head judge ruled he could do it since he "didn't announce he was attaching energy". That makes no sense to me. Am I to believe that I can lay any card I want to , make any move I want to, and go back and undo them as long as I don't "announce" what I am doing? So if a player is retreating, takes his fingers/hand off the retreating pokemon, and then decides he doesn't want to do that, and brings the pokemon back to active, How is that possible??
  2. Kayle

    Kayle Active Member

    You're right, that isn't really fair, but most players do announce what they're doing as a matter of fact - just by habit (I certainly do).

    I think the general rule is if you take your fingers off, you need your opponent's permission to take it back. But the head judge is always the head authority.
  3. Scubadude

    Scubadude New Member

    We have enough BS on sharking for ruling procedures we should really get out of rule sharking . rule sharking is just a way to manipulate the rules to get easy wins. What would you rather have a good competitive match or winning on a technicality.
  4. pokemaster1970

    pokemaster1970 New Member

    Last I knew, a rule was a rule, not a "technicality". If Pokemon is going to have these rules for tournament play, and Judges to enforce these rules for "a good competitive match", then enforce the rules. Not too difficult is it??
  5. PokePop

    PokePop Administrator

    Where is this rule printed?
    Reference please.

    Official documents only. Not quotes from unofficial sources.
  6. pokemaster1970

    pokemaster1970 New Member

    Then what is the rule? That's my point, everybody seems to have a smart a$$ remark, but if there is no rule on this, then everybody should just start laying down cards without announcing a thing, and proceed to randomly change their minds when they feel like it.
  7. NoPoke

    NoPoke New Member

    let go = played is NOT a rule.
    let go = played is GOOD guidance
    let go = played is a REASONABLE expectation.

    Without being able to see what the judge saw and hear what the players said and see what the gamestate looked like and know any prior history and have walked past the players games in earlier rounds it is not possible to say why the HJ decided that let go = played was insufficient in your particular case. I can think of reasons but I won't expand on them here!

    As to the challenge "what is the rule?" Randomly changing your mind will likely bring the player into conflict with at least one rule. The rule on pace of play. (Other rules can be broken too by randomly changing your mind.)

    @scubadude: I don't see how calling the judge on such an issue is rules sharking. Players are allowed to call judges without having their motives immediately brought into question.

    pokemaster1970: have you tried asking the HJ why? ( it is hard to avoid your question appearing combative or implying that the HJ is incompetent so I do understand why you may have chosen to post here instead. Your opening post does read like you are trying to throw the HJ under the bus on this: not the first part which is a fair question to ask but the second part from lay any card I want to)
    Last edited: Mar 8, 2011
  8. MrMeches

    MrMeches New Member

    This is a class example of why I always tell the players to announce their moves. Wasn't there, so do not know if this occurred.

    For some reason, players become mute on Top Cut matches until an issue arises and then they decide to post on the Gym for a Judge Roast. This is why I teach my kids to announce every move so there is no question what is going on. This is a lost art in our society due to allowing electronics and actions speak for us.

    I agree with Ian on this one...

    Were both players announcing each move being done throughout the entirety of the game?

    Was the HJ asked why it was ruled as such?

    Did the HJ give an explanation? (remember it does not have to meet 'your' guidelines, but the guidelines set by P!P)

    Here is an important one, was the HJ consistent throughout the day with the same situation? A single player will not be able to fully know if this was consistent unless it happened regularly and multiple players voiced the opinion.
  9. pokemaster1970

    pokemaster1970 New Member

    "pokemaster1970: have you tried asking the HJ why? ( it is hard to avoid your question appearing combative or implying that the HJ is incompetent so I do understand why you may have chosen to post here instead. Your opening post does read like you are trying to throw the HJ under the bus on this: not the first part which is a fair question to ask but the second part from lay any card I want to)"

    The head judge said since he didn't announce the move, he could change it. The judge was sitting right there (it was a top cut match) My retort to him was, "so If I lay down an energy, I can randomly pick it back up whenever I want as long as I don't begin a different action all because I didn't announce the action/move?" He said "yes".
    This opens up a big bag of worms if people are allowed to do whatever they want as long as they don't announce their move. According to to the HJ and everything I've read on here, I can retreat, take my hands off the retreating pokemon, look at my board, and totally redo my moves as long as I don't announce my actions and begin a different action.
    If I sound combative, so sorry, these loose interepretations are frustrating as @#*%. There is little consistency in the "interpretations" from tournament to tournament. One day I'm told by a judge once your hands/fingers come off the cards, the action is done, and now this.

    @ Fish: I was anything but mute during that match, and after, rest assured.
    Last edited: Mar 8, 2011
  10. PokePop

    PokePop Administrator

    I will say that that is an interesting concept and reasoning from the Head Judge.
    I would have asked him, "So, basically, you have just told me that I should not ever announce any of my actions or moves because it will only hurt me. Keeping quiet and possibly confusing our opponents, but allowing myself to retake actions is the way you want everyone to play?"
    His response to that would be interesting.

    This is based on your telling of the story, of course.

    Now, it's perfectly within guidelines for a judge to hold this position, but if he's going to hold that position, I'd tell him that he will never hear me announce an action ever again.

    This, of course, will put his players at a disadvantage when they go to play at US National or Worlds where the judges, when a dispute comes up, reward players for being clear in their actions and give less credence or leeway to players who are unclear.
  11. Scubadude

    Scubadude New Member

    Anything that a players catches and says oh wait i didn't mean to do that is a fixable something minor like putting up the wrong pokemon for active or attaching to the wrong pokemon . If anyone says no you took your hand off or now you already put up X guy is a big rule shark. Something like that which is easily fixable should not receive a penalty. I don't know PIP rules like the back of my hand but I hope there isn't something in the rule book that says once you take your hand off a card you can't go backwards. I understand at high level events people need to be aware of things like that but still trying to get game losses or give yourself a deliberate advantage comes across like a you know what. In addition to that it only makes the player who tried to rule shark to do the same to you then you have a very cut throat game which i am sure wont be fun for either player.
  12. kwisdumb

    kwisdumb New Member

    Making your opponents stick to their decisions is not rule sharking. No one made you send up that Pokemon instead of that other Pokemon. It was a deliberate choice that you chose to make. I'm not really seeing what you're trying to get at, Scubadude. I don't see this type of behavior as inappropriate at all.
  13. Kayle

    Kayle Active Member

    On one hand it's like "My mind slipped and I put up the wrong one!" And I do that all the time. ALL THE TIME.

    On the other, though, if you are doing something you are not sure of, you should start moving the cards (indicating that you are taking action) but hold on to them while you consider. Don't finalize until you are sure, if you can help it.

    I will just ask my opponent if I can take back my move in the former example. If they say yes, cool. If they say no, cool.
  14. pokemaster1970

    pokemaster1970 New Member

    You made my EXACT point for me, and that's exactly what I told the HJ. He just shrugged his shoulders like, "do what you gotta do man." Needless to say I didn't announce anything after that, and if he's judging at any of the state tournies (which he shouldn't), I won't be announcing squat there either. I am teaching my daughter the same lesson. I can only go by what the judges tell me to do, and if one tells me one thing (keep hands/fingers on cards), and another tells me something completely different (must announce move), then I will use both to my advantage.

    I was in the same boat as Kayle. If someone did make a mistake , then it's up to the opponent to decide if it's o.k or not. If I'm playing in a Top Cut match, then heck no, but if it's a noob, or I know the game is already won in my favor, I will actually help the individual so they can learn from this and improve as the tourny goes on.

    And I don't understand "rule shark". If a player can't follow the rules and play within the integrity of the game, how am i being a rules shark for holding someone to the same standards I hold for myself? I don't ask for takebacks, because I don't feel anyone should have to give them, so I bite the bullet, and make sure I never make that mistake again.

    Thanks for your point Kwisdumb. I couldn't have put it better myself........
  15. kwisdumb

    kwisdumb New Member

    Kayle brings up two great points:

    - If you have a problem with making decisions too hastily, take a page out of chess' book and sit on your hands, or keep your hands under the table, etc. This will help you to not make fast decisions, as you can train yourself to only touch cards when you're ready to make your decision.

    - Also, if you DO make a mistake, it's totally within your right to ask for a take back. I'll probably say no, sure, but you should always ask for the take back, no matter what.
  16. pokemaster1970

    pokemaster1970 New Member


    I think P!P really needs to clarify the rules on Actions a bit more, especially for these big-time events coming up. If head judges are having such opposing interpretations of these "guidlines", then a more defined clarification needs to be established.
    Last edited: Mar 8, 2011
  17. vaporeon

    vaporeon Moderator

    The way I see it. As long as the player did not take an action after, then its fair to do that. Players like me do it to see how I want to plan my turn. Now, if he played a trainer THEN wanted to replay the energy, then its a problem but if he played the energy, then thought about it for a while then took it back, he should be allowed to as long as no other action was taken.

    Him playing the energy and taking it back does not make the game play any differently. It's just a fan rule and if you want to call a judge, fine but its not a real rule.
  18. Scubadude

    Scubadude New Member

    The whole point of this does PIP want games to be decided because of misplays or because the players were better players and had better decks. If your opponent makes a error and realizes it a second after without effecting game state but then loses next turn cause his opponent wouldn't let him fix the error. Thats what rule sharking is seriously look at other games its the same thing.
  19. yoyofsho16

    yoyofsho16 New Member

    No, it's not.
    Rule sharking is constantly watching the rules to catch the opponent on a technical error that really caused no harm. For example, an opponent who times how long his opponent's moves take to call a judge for going a couple seconds over the 15. Another example: calling a judge for not putting 20 dmg on Bronzong G instead of just reminding them.

    It is within the rules that a player has a choice to accept an opponent's take-back if the action was immediately before. If you feel the opponent should be more vigilant, then fine, don't let them. It is a gift to be able to take back a move AT ALL. See it not as rules lawyering when they aren't allowed, but rules loosening when they are.
  20. NoPoke

    NoPoke New Member

    I don't know if there are such opposing interpretations ( I remain unwilling to throw the HJ under the bus ;) ).

    I have THINK-SAY-DO as a recommendation/guideline too: It is easy to understand. If I wanted to make it more like a rule then it would change to Consider-Communicate-Complete which is nothing like as obvious but allows for non-verbal communication of action. That energy card that I just attached: I don't have to announce it as the attachment and release is clear communication of what I'm doing; or is it? Maybe there is a power I could be using or an attack. In pokemon without the SAY then it is often not 100% clear what is going on: the DO can be misinterpreted. In the case where a player is frequently changing their mind and not SAYing anything in order to stay in the THINK phase then it is very likely that they will exceed the guideline thinking time for each game action, and a SLOW PLAY infraction will occur. I don't require players to actually say anything, if your action can be reasonably interpreted as a common part of play then that counts too. Can be tough when it isn't quite what you had in mind.

    By way of third hand example: a player attaches a grass energy in silence and then later in the turn tries to attach a psychic energy. The judge gets called and the player claims that the grass attachment was due to a power and the psychic was the per-tun energy. The judge did not accept that interpretation as the initial attachment was in silence and just what does the player expect their opponent to think the grass energy play was. The psychic was returned to the player's hand. It was a real example (I may have the detail wrong the important part was that the psychic could not be attached by the power that ended up being unused for the turn)

    Don't advise your daughter to keep quiet. When the gamestate does become confused, silence during her play leaves her at the mercy of what the judge thinks is a resonable interpretation of her actions.

    Chess has it easy as all moves in chess have exactly the same structure: a piece is selected and moved. It is possible to carry out a chess game in silence without any communication of intention, not so for pokemon tcg.
    Last edited: Mar 9, 2011

Share This Page