Exactly.
Another thing to consider, another devil's advocate moment...
you say you are getting extra scrutiny because of your past accomplishments/fame in the game. have you ever thought you may be getting extra leniency? If this were joe schmoe, you may have gotten a prize penalty instead of a 2nd warning for the same thing in a single tournament. You may have received a lot more penalties if you were a nobody, but because of your past accomplishments, and because people know you're a nice fellow you may be getting let off the hook more than you think. Just something to consider- it may be the exact opposite of what you think, Ross. You may be getting preferential treatment because of who you are. If you were a less known/liked person, you may have received harsher (fairer?) penalties.
Also, what is up with that watch being sideways!?
--
Another thing to note...
If your opponent is playing slowly, in order to try to maximize how many actions you can do in the short amount of time you have, you may end up playing faster than you otherwise would have, in an attempt to get a fair amount of action in the shortened time frame. If you are playing slowly, it's not just that your opponents may get less overall turns, but the turns they do get are played faster (probably sloppier) because you force them into a situation where they have to play faster to get a reasonable amount of game actions in. To compensate for an opponent's slowness, a player will often play faster to compensate. This is another way and reason why slowplay is not fair, and why your play may not be fair to your opponents, Ross.
Just going from the video against Joel Moskow, I see a few things-
1. Watch is sideways. This leads me to believe you are constantly monitoring the amount of time left. It is a digital watch, and I bet you know the exact time the round will end as well. Why is this important? It is important nowadays, because having the round end on your opponent's turn means you get 2 extra turns, and your opponent only 1 extra turn.
2. You are turn 1. Look at the above point. A backwards, digital watch and turn 1 indicate that you may have played in a manner to have yourself be turn 1. At the very least, it leaves doubt in my mind.
3. Here is how the minute and a half before time is called plays out:
7:40- ross draws card
7:43- plays skyarrow
*stares at hand doing nothing*
8:10- looks through discard
8:20 puts discard down
8:23- attaches energy
8:33- completes ultra ball discard, searches deck
9:03 attacks
9:23- time is called
You stared at your hand for almost half a minute, before merely deciding to look through your discard. Your attack was about a perfect 20 seconds before time was called. Enough to get a flip and a fliptini flip, and have your opponent draw a card to make them turn 0.
Is it coincidence? Probably. But that sideways watch, and the fact that it went to time just makes me wonder. Did you use that digital watch to see there was a minute and 40 seconds until the round was over, and then take a perfectly timed turn?
Maybe.
This is one of the reasons I want to do away with all kinds of watches, especially digital kinds. I've never in my life see someone wear a watch the way you are. It is literally sideways. This is not how a normal person wears a watch. A person would wear this watch if they wanted to look at their watch and make it seem like they were viewing their hand.
Just things I've observed while watching the match. I'm surprised no one else is alarmed at the sideways watch...
Seriously, though, how many times did your matches go to time? How many did you win on time? How many times was your opponent turn 0? Interesting things to ponder.
Ryan Vergel, I am absolutely fed up with your scandalmongering against me. Your posts are turning into basically personal attacks, which is not allowed on Pokegym btw (Rule #2). It is one thing to call into question my pace of play which you can observe, but is a BIG step further to try to peek into my mind and assert my thoughts and intentions. How would you feel if someone was on the internet, writing in front of thousands that 'you know, I think Ryan Vergel is a cheating player, he looks like he thinks that way.' That sounds fair right?
I wear a watch to know how much time is left when that is important. Some ON THE BOARD strategies are different when you know time is low vs not. That's just a fact. I do not stall people to win, except legal ways. (i.e. paralyze) I've seen players 'stretch' card playing to stall and I don't even do that. (i.e. random receiver very slowly, do multiple searches while shuffling in between) When I have nothing to play, I don't sit there for a minute. The clock in my head goes off after a few seconds BECAUSE THERE'S NOTHING TO DO. If anything, I probably become more aware I need to play fast if I'm in a position that could be construed as stalling on purpose. As many have pointed out, my slow plays in the round 8 game shown were all at the beginning, not at the end.
The absolute truth is, I often never look at my watch during the game, and I see it even less towards the end of the game. I usually forget about it, because I'm too busy thinking through all my moves. And probably 99% of the time I do look at my watch, it is on my opponent's turn. I'm too BUSY THINKING on my own turn.
I'm sure I've had as many, and very likely more games where time is called on my turn, the disadvantage in the +3 system. Since I am not looking at my watch on my turns, I have never manipulated the clock in this way (i.e. attack with 5 seconds to go or something). You're reading into that turn you mention is purely coincidental. 'Time ended not on Ross' turn. There was a 50% chance of that…but maybe there's something fishy!!!' Wow. =/ When you see me thinking, I AM THINKING. I didn't even 'need' time to win that game until Joel's turn 0 where he Hammered my Fire. It was only after that that I suddenly realized, wow I have zero ways to win, except timing things right on the +3, but time had been called so you can't put that on me.
You wanted to know how many of my games ended on time? I already said the facts. Round 8 was the only game where I obviously won because of time and time alone (it turned out). If Hammer=tails, or I don't misplay discarding the fire a turn earlier, or Joel doesn't misplay playing Catcher, the game isn't decided by time. But everything happened to fall right that I won on time. In a game where my opponent's and I's last 6 turns each were about the same pace.
This doesn't happen at all most tournaments. And when time decides a game, it usually is not in my favor, as I've mentioned.
My other games that ended on time, maybe 1 swiss game. I honestly don't remember. I had games in plus 3 but they finished then. If another game in swiss ended in time, it wasn't the type where I would lose otherwise, because that is unique and I'm sure I'd remember it. My top 32 game ended in game 3 with me winning 2-4 and in control. The rest finished in time. The data in this paragraph is likely 'faster' than many players this past weekend. And I was playing one of the slowest decks around right now because of Victini.The point I've tried to make in defense of this 'characterization' of me is that time has not affected nearly as many of my games as this one game and posts here would lead one to believe.
Of course, all I have are my words to say that the vast majority of my 13 years playing have not come down to time. Or that I'm not looking at my watch on my turns, especially late, or looking much at all, or planning meticulously to win on time. And your words broadcast to the same audience of thousands may unfortunately nullify those words, and that's why this isn't fair. You wonder aloud whether my fame is helping or hurting me with penalties? Well my fame is hurting me in a new way today. How about you have some integrity since you like to question it so much? I've done nothing wrong to deserve attacks on my character posted to the entire player base. You were right in your first post. I HAVE been a nice guy and that's important to me. As someone with fame in this community, I have people wanting to meet me at every tournament I go to. While they may know little about me other than I'm a successful player, it is not fair for you to 'give them' this new, untrue characterization of me. The Pokegym is not the New York Tabloids.
FWIW, I have NEVER seen a prize penalty given for slow play, and I've been playing as long as anyone. So yes, if it happened to me I would feel like I was being punished unusually harshly. And I would feel that way for anyone getting a slow play penalty unless it was much more egregious than my play. I don't know where people get this idea that 2 warnings no prize penalty is lenient. I asked the head judge specifically if warnings were something like '3 strikes' and get a prize penalty, and he said it was not that way, it was entirely up to the head judge. The best judging call I've ever seen was a time extension in top 4 of Worlds 2008 when there were 2 players playing slow. The time extension allowed the game to be decided on the board, and not up to something subjective like 'was that play slow? or too slow?'
Everyone else in this thread for the most part I think are on the right idea. I understand Psychup's points and it points saying '30-40 seconds' can be ok etc. shows me he knows there's a balance, which I think everyone agrees with. The fine details are not important enough to be argued. (Ok well, it IS too much to predict what you are going to Juniper and plan for every scenario….but anyways) The judges I've been involved with have done a good job and I would be disappointed to see a vastly different level of enforcement. Thought is good. Too much thought is bad. Rushing is bad. The line is gray. Not everyone plays at the same pace. The best case is when the game is won on the board without time being called. This won't always happen. It does happen a lot. We all do the best we can.
:smile::tongue::wink::biggrin: