You can request to have a judge shuffle if you have a good reason for it - not all judges might consider that a good reason. Once is probably ok, round after round and you're going to get shut down.
“It's possible. But it involves... {checks archives} Nature's Revolt, Opalescence, two Unstable Shapeshifters (one of which started as a Doppelganger), a Tide, an animated land, a creature with Fading, a Silver Wyvern, some way to get a creature into play in response to stuff, some way to get a land into play in response to stuff (a different land from the animated land), and one heck of a Rube Goldberg timing diagram.”
-David DeLaney
On a related note; one of my recent opponents, upon shuffling my deck, noticed a torn sleeve (which I hadn't, or I obviously wouldn't have left it there). He tossed it facedown on the table for me to replace, then began to flick through my deck facedown to check for more torn sleeves. He did keep the deck facedown, so it's not like he was searching my library, but I still felt like he was overstepping his bounds. Does it really fall to players to check their opponents' sleeves like that, or should he have called a judge? (For that matter, should I have called a judge when he took it upon himself to do this? It seemed like a dick move to me.)Originally Posted by cdr
This seems like a nice one to me, since he gives you the opportunity to fix it without something happening. Consider he calls a judge, he find 3 torn ones and all of them are the same card, even if it is unintentional this might be considered marking.
Checking the back of your opponent's sleeves while shuffling doesn't seem unreasonable to me. Or either of you could have called a judge and had the judge check.
“It's possible. But it involves... {checks archives} Nature's Revolt, Opalescence, two Unstable Shapeshifters (one of which started as a Doppelganger), a Tide, an animated land, a creature with Fading, a Silver Wyvern, some way to get a creature into play in response to stuff, some way to get a land into play in response to stuff (a different land from the animated land), and one heck of a Rube Goldberg timing diagram.”
-David DeLaney
Gotcha, thanks for clarifying.
Wouldnt it just make more sense to make riffle shuffling your opponents deck against the rules? Seems like it would solve a lot of problems, fears, and concerns people have.
Yes, then everyone would bring their decks pre-shuffled from home.
"Want all, lose all."
There's plenty of non-riffle ways to shuffle safely.
I know, but riffle shuffling is not unsafe.
There is no reason at all to ban riffle shuffling. We should ban Goyf, Top and Island before taking action against the way people shuffle.
Just keep it decent, just like you do with your own cards and everything should be okay.
"Want all, lose all."
Actually once upon a time when I was like 12 I used to periodically mana-weave my decks, and only block-shuffle them. Block shuffling only breaks adjacency relations once per "shuffle" (where here a shuffle is picking up a block from the bottom and dropping it on top), so a reasonable shuffling consisting of around 10 individual shuffles leaves most of your mana-weaving relatively intact. If you, for example, only block shuffle your deck twice-ish after mana weaving, and present it to your opponent who then only performs another 8-ish individual shuffles, then you're mana weaving is still intact and as such gives you a significant advantage over your opponent.
On the other hand, it's important to note that riffle shuffling will do very little to affect the "x positions from top/bottom" property of cards (especially when x is a very low number). In other words, riffle shuffling n times will on average keep the top card within the top n/2 cards (for small n), so it's important to follow a riffle shuffle with a block shuffle, or vice versa.
Pile shuffling however usually produces sufficient randomization by itself, but it's slow and has a fixed time commitment.
Anyway, I'm usually more worried about them damaging my sleeves with riffle shuffles than my cards...
If you arrange your deck so that every third card is a land, and then pile shuffle, when you stack the piles on top of each other you will preserve the general pattern of every third card being a land. Pile shuffling is not really shuffling, it's actually stacking your deck. It's a good way to count the cards in your deck (or your opponent's) to make sure that you have the right number, but besides that, it does NOT provide sufficient randomization by itself.
Usually I begin with a semi-random deck (cards I've seen in the previous game are usually mixed together and placed on top of the remaining library), pile "shuffle" it to count, and then riffle the piles together to randomize, and finish with a mixture of riffles and slide shuffles.
If you don't want to riffle, a combination of "block" shuffling and slide shuffling should provide sufficient randomization.
If people start doing this, I'll start pile shuffling in three piles.
# The Bizarro Super Powers Team
In all seriousness, if your opponent does not sufficiently randomize his deck, call a judge. If you try to take advantage of an opponent's insufficiently randomized deck, you will be DQed.If people start doing this, I'll start pile shuffling in three piles.
“It's possible. But it involves... {checks archives} Nature's Revolt, Opalescence, two Unstable Shapeshifters (one of which started as a Doppelganger), a Tide, an animated land, a creature with Fading, a Silver Wyvern, some way to get a creature into play in response to stuff, some way to get a land into play in response to stuff (a different land from the animated land), and one heck of a Rube Goldberg timing diagram.”
-David DeLaney
Haha, I loled. That'd be epic :DIf people start doing this, I'll start pile shuffling in three piles.
Now, this is an exemple of shuffling abuse
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LIJQ95-adQ
You can thank leyjay for this find
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move. - Douglas Adams
Eh? Seems fine.
Only thing sketchy that I saw was he could easily glimpse the bottom card of the deck shuffling like that.
Look at it again.
Not only can he see the bottom card but while shuffling he moves that card to the top and the top is never shuffled, then repeats the process insuring that the top is stacked with cards he got to see from bottom.
I just don't see any reason an opponent would need to riffle shuffle your deck. it randomizes your deck just as well as side shuffling does. Also how can a judge determine you tried to take advantage of an opponents insufficiently shuffled deck? Is it really a players job to make sure their opponent is properly shuffling?
There's no reason they wouldn't need to riffle shuffle your deck. Riffle shuffling is legal, they can do it if they like.
Some people only know how to riffile (even an easy shuffle like side shuffling takes some practice). Riffle shuffling has different characteristics than side shuffling - doing both may well give you a better randomized deck.
If you three pile after your opponent mana weaves and doesn't shuffle enough afterward, that's Manipulation of Game Materials on your part - DQ. If your opponent somehow screws up his mana weave and you think it's in your favor so you don't call a judge, that's Fraud - DQ.Also how can a judge determine you tried to take advantage of an opponents insufficiently shuffled deck? Is it really a players job to make sure their opponent is properly shuffling?
It is your responsibility to watch whether your opponent shuffles sufficiently.
Also, remember that mana weaving is (unfortunately) legal so long as you shuffle sufficiently afterward.
“It's possible. But it involves... {checks archives} Nature's Revolt, Opalescence, two Unstable Shapeshifters (one of which started as a Doppelganger), a Tide, an animated land, a creature with Fading, a Silver Wyvern, some way to get a creature into play in response to stuff, some way to get a land into play in response to stuff (a different land from the animated land), and one heck of a Rube Goldberg timing diagram.”
-David DeLaney
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Reply With Quote