Saito stalling at GP

[Kage]

Click (http://billymoreno2.wordpress.com/2010/08/03/more-on-saito-from-an-undisclosed-but-personally-vouched-for-eyewitness/)

Interesting read.

[Skeggi]

He did it in Madrid too. It's hard to make very specific rules against this sort of abuse, but it's clear something has to be done. Saito is capable in reducing a 50 minute round into approximately 20 minutes real play time. On one hand it's pretty impressive that he can do this to the second without watching a clock, but ofcourse it's a form of slow play which has to be dealt with.

[Mark Sun]

Heh, I was sitting next to the Landstill player for the match. Can't say anything in the account wasn't true; these were pretty much my exact feelings during gameplay.

[Atwa]

He did it in Madrid too. It's hard to make very specific rules against this sort of abuse, but it's clear something has to be done. Saito is capable in reducing a 50 minute round into approximately 20 minutes real play time. On one hand it's pretty impressive that he can do this to the second without watching a clock, but ofcourse it's a form of slow play which has to be dealt with.

Oh so true.

I was sitting next to him on round 4. Now I am not a good combo player (and I'll be the first to admid Saito will think about more plays and scenarios in his head then I will ever do before making a play), but having to think 2 minutes how to respond in cracking a LED (when the only relevand card in hand is an Infernal Tutor is bordering slow play.

Seeing I was having trouble enough fighting ANT and a skullcracking headache at the time (thank God for Spanish painkillers so strong they are banned in the NL and my girl for going out and buy them for me), I didn't say anything about it, but he wasn't my opponent and he even anoyed the hell out of me with him playing as slow as he could.

[Mantis]

To clarify on what Skeggi was saying, we had quite a few players from the Netherlands at the top tables in Madrid so some of them had to play Saito as well. He was playing storm, and began taking the maximum time for each decision from the start of the game as it shorter rounds would obviously favor a storm player. He actually managed to squeeze several draws that would have otherwise been losses from this tactic and as such might not even have ended up T8 if he used this approach.

[Bryant Cook]

I was actually watching this game. A large amount of spectators were, including two judges. I'm not saying this person is wrong, but I'm a sure one of the judges would've called him on it.

[Skeggi]

I was actually watching this game. A large amount of spectators were, including two judges. I'm not saying this person is wrong, but I'm a sure one of the judges would've called him on it.

"Would've" or "should've"?

In my experience alot of judges seem often impressed by high ranking pro players like Saito and cut him some slack on this sort of thing, or just don't dare say anything because they know the pro player in question as at least the same knowledge of the rules as they do.

This is just my personal experience though, please don't kill me cdr :wink:

[MMogg]

Hello MTGO-style chess timer . . . goodbye slow play.

[Michael Keller]

In my experience alot of judges seem often impressed by high ranking pro players like Saito and cut him some slack on this sort of thing, or just don't dare say anything because they know the pro player in question as at least the same knowledge of the rules as they do.

That's kind of sickening to hear, when you consider this sort of behavior could be construed as favoritism by the judging staff who should treat each individual player the same way regardless if they have a 1,200 or 2,100 rating. The guy obviously likes drawing games out when he is ahead of some sort. If a judge sees that a player is intentionally trying to draw the game out like he did, they could conceivably penalize him for "Slow Play" depending on whether he was acting within the confines of the rules and trying to make legitimate decisions in an adequate amount of time deemed appropriate by the staff (which is usually close to thirty seconds or so).

I'm quite certain they would have warned him first, anyways. Saito was smart enough (albeit ballsy) to stretch the rules as thin as he could without necessarily getting disqualified, so, what's done is done.

[majikal]

Hello MTGO-style chess timer . . . goodbye slow play.
That would be so goddamn annoying, punching the timer every time you pass priority.:mad:

[Mantis]

I'm quite certain they would have warned him first, anyways. Saito was smart enough (albeit ballsy) to stretch the rules as thin as he could without necessarily getting disqualified, so, what's done is done.
That is exactly the point, he always manages to stay in the boundaries of the rules. I am not sure to which extent the rules are quantified, but it is my understanding that they are, please call me out if I am wrong.

[Sharpened]

To be fair, the guy is mostly a very deliberate player, even when not trying to game the clock.

I was his opponent in Round 5 at Columbus, and actually had to debate (with myself) whether or not to call a judge. He took a rather long time sideboarding between games 2 and 3. And by rather long, I mean like it was 4-5 minutes. I was sitting there trying to debate with myself what to do, I could see the clock. It was funny, as I heard a judge give a player an official warning just 3-4 seats down for failing to present his deck within 3 minutes. And here I am, staring at Saito who just finished agonizingly reconsider his sideboard decisions moving a few cards in and out, then back in and out, and its clearly on 4 minutes since we scooped up from the previous game.

I decided not to do anything becuase I thought it wouldn't matter. We had over 20 minutes left in the round, and I anticipated that would be enough time (It was.) We were even, and I didn't see any advantage for him in what he was doing. He was genuinely trying to figure out the optimal sideboarding which I'm pretty sure he hadn't planned for (I was playing the same Junk deck that Brad Nelson played, with minor variations). He took quite a long time, longer then he should of, but there didn't appear to be anything malicious about it or any advantage gained.

In game 3 he actually sped up his play at one point and missed a Reejery trigger. Before his next turn, he noticed his missed mistake (it didn't matter towards the outcome of the game), slapped himself in the face, and then proceeded to slow down in order to play deliberately and technically correct. And he certainly did, for the 2-3 turns that remained in that game. So what appears to be slow play may be technically correct, deliberate play in order to play well, not to milk the clock for an advantage. Not saying he doesn't do that, but it's gotta be a tough judgement call to allow one without allowing the other. I had a friend get asked to hurry up by a judge in turns when he was figuring out how to get the kill with no threats on the board (the judge let him, he managed to land a tog on turn 3 and get the kill on turn 5 which involved using top to draw a cunning wish to fect beserk, and use the other beserk he had to get the win despite having had his graveyard crypted away in response to the tog resolving), and I feel its tough for judges to find a balance.

The other problem is that I was actually thinking of the forums when deciding whether or not to call a judge, and that sucks. I was conciously aware that I didn't want to be "that guy" who called a judge on a pro to try and get a win. Not that I would be calling a judge for any other reason than to ensure a fair game that I had a chance to win or lose on my own, but there are far too many messageboards with keyboard commentators labeling players as sleezesballs for calling judges on their opponents. It should never be wrong to call a judge and let the judges decided, but too many people don't share that view and there exists a social pressure against it, especially in grey area situations. That sucks and was a factor in my decision making process.

I dunno. Slow play is such a grey area situation. Definitely frustrating and definitely unclear.

[sdematt]

If I was playing against a guy who is known to deliberately slow play, or I could see he was stalling it out, my hand would be up in a second.

-Matt

[TnA_Will]

I would be curious to know why increasing the time limit for a format like Legacy where the decision trees can branch out so far and be crucial that a game warning/loss can and does happen occasionally for fast play because of being worried about the clock.

Playing devil's advocate maybe Saito just wants to ensure that missing the Reejery trigger NEVER happens to him again. It’s kind of sad that players have to make a choice to either be meticulous about game play or worry about time constraints...

I didn't get a chance to see the game the article was written about, but it wouldn't suprise me to see a player look at everything in gamestate multiple times to try and understand every avenue possible. It's possible and may be likely he was going to time but having a judge step in and give a warning etc... may fix this specific case, but increasing the play time for matches for formats such as legacy would no only fix slow play(because they couldn't waste that much time without being blatenly obvious!) as well as fixing deck strategies that try to stall and win the match 1-0-1. I just think it would be a better solution than having judges make a call that is based on personal opinion.

[rockout]

It's up to the kid in the story to call a judge and ask the judge to watch to make sure play resumes at a normal pace.

[Pastorofmuppets]

He got away with it
It means you could get away with it.
Just sayin'.

[ummon]

He got away with it
It means you could get away with it.
Just sayin'.

No I can't. I'm not Saito, and people would call a judge on me, and the judge would be stricter.

[Eddy Wally]

He got away with it
It means you could get away with it.
Just sayin'.

Tournaments at places that have a reputation of deliberate slow play attract fewer participants, and will see their local Legacy activity die off. Just sayin'.

[JeroenC]

I would be curious to know why increasing the time limit for a format like Legacy where the decision trees can branch out so far and be crucial that a game warning/loss can and does happen occasionally for fast play because of being worried about the clock.

Because outside of some drawn-out games, usually involving Landstill or CBTop, only games involving slow play ever realistically reach the clock limit. Tournaments are long and tiring enough as it is and also, T2 is a way slower format than Legacy and would much sooner require a bigger time limit- at least from my limited experience with T2.

No I can't. I'm not Saito, and people would call a judge on me, and the judge would be stricter.

BS. People may be afraid to call judges on pro's (but they should), but judges have no hidden alliance with pro players. They're not going to favor them.

[Broham]

Hey you know what? This a 2 player interactive game. It is not 2 guys playing solitaire, in silence, across from one another. If the kid didn't like what Saito was doing he should have told him something. In most cases like this there is no reason to call a judge, if you verbally tell somebody that they are doing something lame they will most likely stop. If they don't and the problem is serious then sure call a judge.

I don't know what this whole "playing in silence" thing is all about, if I am your opponent and you are being a douche I am going to tell you. Hell, I might even be polite about it, but I am going to let you know that you are being a little silly...

If that kid got cheated, he cheated himself.

[Bardo]

It's an awkward situation, since on the one hand you don't want to be seen as a rules-lawyering d-bag; on the other, you want to get on with things; on your third hand, you definitely don't want your opponent to gain an undeserved advantage by intentionally fucking with the clock.

This was going through my head when I called a judge for my opponent's slow-play in R3 of SCG Seattle. I had previously told him twice that if he didn't speed up, I was calling a judge. He was playing TES and clearly overwhelmed by the decision tree and said something like "this is really complex." I told him to play a easier deck -- you don't get a pass because you have to make a ton of decisions.

That was the round I countered an Ad Nauseum with Spellstutter Sprite (which I'll admit has no bearing on this discussion, but was really cool anyway).

[Eddy Wally]

It's an awkward situation, since on the one hand you don't want to be seen as a rules-lawyering d-bag; on the other, you want to get on with things; on your third hand, you definitely don't want your opponent to gain an undeserved advantage by intentionally fucking with the clock.

This was going through my head when I called a judge for my opponent's slow-play in R3 of SCG Seattle. I had previously told him twice that if he didn't speed up, I was calling a judge. He was playing TES and clearly overwhelmed by the decision tree and said something like "this is really complex." I told him to play a easier deck -- you don't get a pass because you have to make a ton of decisions.

That was the round I countered an Ad Nauseum with Spellstutter Sprite (which I'll admit has no bearing on this discussion, but was really cool anyway).


This may be slightly off topic, but was the opponent a newbie to the format, or just a veteran used to playing a less complex deck?

He's one of Frogboy's MtG friends, so I'm guessing he's a decent player in other formats, but new to Legacy. - Bardo

[ummon]

This may be slightly off topic, but was the opponent a newbie to the format, or just a veteran used to playing a less complex deck?

He's one of Frogboy's MtG friends, so I'm guessing he's a decent player, but was new to Legacy. - Bardo

Ahh in that case I would have gone easy on him. :D But then again I'm probably too nice to people...

[Eddy Wally]

I usually go easy on people who are new to the format (new blood is always good), but if he was playing so slow that the game won't end in time, I can see where your frustration came from.

In my 14 years of magic I've only been confronted with stalling once, and that was on a prerelease. Neither I nor my opponent were playing for the win in the last round, but one of us could win a single booster (12th place or something, I forget, this was Oddissey). I had calculated that I could have taken the booster with a draw, and that the opponent needed the win. He had arrived at exactly the opposite conclusion. It goes 1-1, and the third round could go either way. He starts to play slower and slower, but given the circumstances I saw no need to call the judge, because I know him somewhat and I didn't want him to get disqualified for shooting himself in the foot. The game goes to time and ends in a draw, and I tell him he really needed the win to take that small prize. Bastard gets angry with me. In hindsight, I should have called the judge.

[Michael Keller]

I usually go easy on people who are new to the format (new blood is always good), but if he was playing so slow that the game won't end in time, I can see where your frustration came from.

In my 14 years of magic I've only been confronted with stalling once, and that was on a prerelease. Neither I nor my opponent were playing for the win in the last round, but one of us could win a single booster (12th place or something, I forget, this was Oddissey). I had calculated that I could have taken the booster with a draw, and that the opponent needed the win. He had arrived at exactly the opposite conclusion. It goes 1-1, and the third round could go either way. He starts to play slower and slower, but given the circumstances I saw no need to call the judge, because I know him somewhat and I didn't want him to get disqualified for shooting himself in the foot. The game goes to time and ends in a draw, and I tell him he really needed the win to take that small prize. Bastard gets angry with me. In hindsight, I should have called the judge.

I never go easy on my opponents, no matter how new they are in large events. I used to get my ass monkey-stomped years ago trying to get very good at this game, and I paid a lot of money and spent a lot of time doing it. It's only fair the pain gets dished out two-fold; it's the only way to learn in pressure-filled scenarios in a legitimate tournament situation.

[Anusien]

It's an awkward situation, since on the one hand you don't want to be seen as a rules-lawyering d-bag; on the other, you want to get on with things; on your third hand, you definitely don't want your opponent to gain an undeserved advantage by intentionally fucking with the clock.
You lose fifteen million points for not saying "on the gripping hand".

There are two parts to the story here,
A) Call a judge. No, seriously, even if you're playing Saito. Even if your opponent is Barry Allen, he might be taking too much time to make a decision. And yes, not presenting your deck after three minutes of sideboarding is Slow Play. If you don't call a judge, you don't really have an excuse.
B) Not saying anybody is wrong, but I've watched matches while watching the clock. Players have no idea how much time goes by. This is not to say that anybody's story is wrong, just that the clock does weird things when you're bored or involved in a tough decision or amped up on adrenalin because you're battling a future Hall of Famer.

[aTn]

You lose fifteen million points for not saying "on the gripping hand".

There are two parts to the story here,
A) Call a judge. No, seriously, even if you're playing Saito. Even if your opponent is Barry Allen, he might be taking too much time to make a decision. And yes, not presenting your deck after three minutes of sideboarding is Slow Play. If you don't call a judge, you don't really have an excuse.
B) Not saying anybody is wrong, but I've watched matches while watching the clock. Players have no idea how much time goes by. This is not to say that anybody's story is wrong, just that the clock does weird things when you're bored or involved in a tough decision or amped up on adrenalin because you're battling a future Hall of Famer.

Agreed about time seeming to slow down when your opponent is idle, but in the case of Saito, he was clearly trying to maximize the time he took for each turn/play.

Looking at Saito reading Jace TMS twice, touching his Wasteland on about 4 occasions as if he was considering to activate it and so on made me feel sorry for his opponent. That being said, he should have woken up the judge who was next to Saito.

All this to say that in my opinion, slow play should be defined both by a time limit and by the perceived intent of a player. In that case, it wouldn't have taken Matlock to convince the judge that Saito was intentionnally trying to use time to change the match's outcome.

[Pastorofmuppets]

I never go easy on my opponents, no matter how new they are in large events. I used to get my ass monkey-stomped years ago trying to get very good at this game, and I paid a lot of money and spent a lot of time doing it. It's only fair the pain gets dished out two-fold; it's the only way to learn in pressure-filled scenarios in a legitimate tournament situation.

I don't take it easy on people who first-pick things like Liliana's Caress in draft.
I want to win. Just because they're not as experienced (there is no way to say this without sounding like an egomaniac, is there?) or as good as I am doesn't mean I should feel bad. I'd feel like crap if I lost out on top 8 because I was giving a new player a break.
Slightly more on topic, the guy could've called a judge, but he didn't. Is there a penalty for calling a judge and the judge saying that the opponent is doing nothing wrong?

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

I'm never going to understand this, "You didn't do everything possible not to be cheated= You deserved to have your shit stolen" mentality.

[Pastorofmuppets]

I'm never going to understand this, "You didn't do everything possible not to be cheated= You deserved to have your shit stolen" mentality.

If you can't look after yourself, who IS going to look after you?

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

If you can't look after yourself, who IS going to look after you?

Um, society. This is why we don't live in caves and shit in the woods. If a burglar shows up to your house and begins beating you with a socket wrench, the cops don't shrug and tell you to take care of your own problems. If a hurricane blows through town and knocks over your house, the EMTs don't spout Ayn Rand isntead of saving your ass.

If I see someone cheating you, I'm going to get a judge. Because I'm not a douchebag.

Maybe some people need a little lesson (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HaVXfHZv50Y).

[Anusien]

Agreed about time seeming to slow down when your opponent is idle, but in the case of Saito, he was clearly trying to maximize the time he took for each turn/play.

Looking at Saito reading Jace TMS twice, touching his Wasteland on about 4 occasions as if he was considering to activate it and so on made me feel sorry for his opponent. That being said, he should have woken up the judge who was next to Saito.

All this to say that in my opinion, slow play should be defined both by a time limit and by the perceived intent of a player. In that case, it wouldn't have taken Matlock to convince the judge that Saito was intentionnally trying to use time to change the match's outcome.
I wasn't there. I've never watched Saito play. I have no idea if Saito was playing slowly intentionally or unintentionally. But most people in this thread don't seem to watch much Magic for things beyond strategic content. If you watch a match being played and look past the strategy, you'll see this sort of behavior is completely common. Most people don't sit there staring at the board like a statue when they play. They manipulate game objects.

@IBA: Obviously, just because you don't call a judge doesn't license your opponent to cheat you. But I've had dozens of players come up to me and say, "I think my opponent stalled me out of a match." And the answer is a polite version of, "You should have told me this 20 minutes ago, when it was still going on."

[ummon]

Um, society. This is why we don't live in caves and shit in the woods. If a burglar shows up to your house and begins beating you with a socket wrench, the cops don't shrug and tell you to take care of your own problems. If a hurricane blows through town and knocks over your house, the EMTs don't spout Ayn Rand isntead of saving your ass.

If I see someone cheating you, I'm going to get a judge. Because I'm not a douchebag.

Maybe some people need a little lesson (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HaVXfHZv50Y).

Well with the direction in which we are heading I wouldn't be surprised if the EMTs started spouting Ayn Rand...

[Pastorofmuppets]

Um, society. This is why we don't live in caves and shit in the woods. If a burglar shows up to your house and begins beating you with a socket wrench, the cops don't shrug and tell you to take care of your own problems. If a hurricane blows through town and knocks over your house, the EMTs don't spout Ayn Rand isntead of saving your ass.

If I see someone cheating you, I'm going to get a judge. Because I'm not a douchebag.

Maybe some people need a little lesson (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HaVXfHZv50Y).

you're taking this off the deep end a little bit, IBA. Obviously, there are more players than judges. If someone beats you with a socket wrench in your own house (despite being a weapon of questionable effect), calling out for help might help a little bit.
If Saito takes 10 minutes to wipe his ass with your playset of foil Mindsculptors, please note that it will take about a minute or two to call a judge over. They've got other people to keep track of, too. You're not the only person on the planet, and therefore they can't be making sure that you aren't getting Saito'd into next week for the entire 50 minutes of a match. I can say with about 95% certainty that the judge won't tear your head off and suck out your brain juices. In fact, I'm pretty sure that they will assist you in a timely manner. Even if they'd only give your opponent a warning, it should hopefully make them think twice about giving you another chance to call over a judge.

tl;dr: I enjoy Ayn Rand. But you're off the deep end a little bit. Maybe the people around you are all douchebags. Unless you're in a vegetative state, you can say, "hey, judge," you should be fully capable of getting a judge to call you over, instead of expecting someone else to do it for you, or for a judge to be psychic. That's just being lazy.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

you're taking this off the deep end a little bit, IBA. Obviously, there are more players than judges. If someone beats you with a socket wrench in your own house (despite being a weapon of questionable effect), calling out for help might help a little bit. If Saito takes 10 minutes to wipe his ass with your playset of foil Mindsculptors, please note that it will take about a minute or two to call a judge over. They've got other people to keep track of, too. You're not the only person on the planet, and therefore they can't be making sure that you aren't getting Saito'd into next week for the entire 50 minutes of a match. I can say with about 95% certainty that the judge won't tear your head off and suck out your brain juices. In fact, I'm pretty sure that they will assist you in a timely manner. Even if they'd only give your opponent a warning, it should hopefully make them think twice about giving you another chance to call over a judge.

tl;dr: I enjoy Ayn Rand. But you're off the deep end a little bit. Maybe the people around you are all douchebags. Unless you're in a vegetative state, you can say, "hey, judge," and therefore should be fully capable of getting a judge over, instead of expecting someone else to do it for you, or for a judge to be psychic. That's just being lazy.

1) Ayn Rand is a talentless hack and a failure as a human being.

2) A decent sized socket wrench will completely fuck up your day.

3) Yet again, whether or not someone did everything possible to avoid something unfortunate being done to them doesn't mean that they should be blamed for the malicious acts of another. In this case it seems a judge was already at the table, a situation in which no inexperienced player is going to tell the judge anything because they assume the judge is doing their job. But if the judge isn't, and other more inexperienced players are watching it is their duty to correct the situation.

[Pastorofmuppets]

Yet again, whether or not someone did everything possible to avoid something unfortunate being done to them doesn't mean that they should be blamed for the malicious acts of another. In this case it seems a judge was already at the table, a situation in which no inexperienced player is going to tell the judge anything because they assume the judge is doing their job. But if the judge isn't, and other more inexperienced players are watching it is their duty to correct the situation.

Once again, going back to trusting yourself. Just saying to the judge, "hey buddy, is it just me or is this guy moving kind of slow?"
It's not your fault that you got Saito'd in the first place. It is your fault that you let yourself get Saito'd when all you had to do was ask the judge what his thoughts were. Most players don't want to interrupt a match when it's drawing that much of a crowd. Everyone has that same, "I might be wrong" complex inherently.
So, the judge is slightly at fault for being a little lenient to Saito
Saito is smart for being able to get away with it
His opponent was dumb enough to let Saito get away with it, and maybe he could've squeezed out a win had he had the sand to say something, instead of just assuming that everything was peachy.
What don't you understand?
Also, I accept that Rand's writing doesn't appeal to everyone.

[Skeggi]

If you can't look after yourself, who IS going to look after you?

You're one of those American militia gun-nuts aren't you? :tongue:

[Pastorofmuppets]

You're one of those American militia gun-nuts aren't you? :tongue:

No. I'm one of those responsible Americans (they do exist!) Also, I live in New Jersey. We pretty much can't have guns unless we prove we can shove them into our small intestine first.
Although guns are fun. Very fun.

[DownSyndromeKarl]

how did Saito's stalling get us on the topic of guns? is someone going to make him play faster at gun-point?
Just picture someone calling:
"JUDGE! Dredd"

[Sims]

how did Saito's stalling get us on the topic of guns? is someone going to make him play faster at gun-point?
Just picture someone calling:
"JUDGE! Dredd"


Because it seems to be a commonly held opinion in Europe that everyone who wants to protect and look after themselves is a Militia Gun-Nut despite there being ways of doing so that have nothing to do with firearms.

[Skeggi]

Because it seems to be a commonly held opinion in Europe that everyone who wants to protect and look after themselves is a Militia Gun-Nut despite there being ways of doing so that have nothing to do with firearms.

That's not true. I made that remark because he (unintentionally) quoted the militia gun-nut interviewed in Bowling for Columbine. I was hoping someone would reckognize it...

[kiblast]

Because it seems to be a commonly held opinion in Europe that everyone who wants to protect and look after themselves is a Militia Gun-Nut despite there being ways of doing so that have nothing to do with firearms.

but we europeans seem to forget that kiddies in Italy or in France, or in East europe would need a knife with themselves hundreds times more often than in usa..just to make police rendez-vous a bit more fair....just sayin.
ok, i stop it.

btw, Pros in Mtg are like major football teams in europe....they can stretch rulings till one second before the breaking point, and who judges simply close his eyes if nobody tell him that maybe something is wrong....c'mon, 5 minutes to side 3 cards? who are you? Deep Blue challenging Kasparov?

[Loxodon Baileyarch]

Speaking of Judge Dredd. They're remaking it with Karl Urban as Dredd. Doesn't seem too bad for an action movie, considering that's all the roles he has done.

[Jim Higginbottom]

Um, society. This is why we don't live in caves and shit in the woods. If a burglar shows up to your house and begins beating you with a socket wrench, the cops don't shrug and tell you to take care of your own problems. If a hurricane blows through town and knocks over your house, the EMTs don't spout Ayn Rand isntead of saving your ass.

If I see someone cheating you, I'm going to get a judge. Because I'm not a douchebag.

Maybe some people need a little lesson (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HaVXfHZv50Y).

Not that this is the forum for it but you have a very misconstrued idea of what objectivism is. "Do not confuse altruism with kindness, good will or respect for the rights of others. These are not primaries, but consequences, which, in fact, altruism makes impossible. The irreducible primary of altruism, the basic absolute, is self-sacrifice--which means; self-immolation, self-abnegation, self-denial, self-destruction--which means: the self as a standard of evil, the selfless as a standard of the good."

[DarthVicious]

I never go easy on my opponents, no matter how new they are in large events. I used to get my ass monkey-stomped years ago trying to get very good at this game, and I paid a lot of money and spent a lot of time doing it. It's only fair the pain gets dished out two-fold; it's the only way to learn in pressure-filled scenarios in a legitimate tournament situation.

Quoted for truth. Trial by fire is the best way to learn anything.

Also, I would've told Saito to slap himself and get a move on. Then called a judge if he kept it up.

[citanul]

You have to call a judge in any situation that you think is wrong.
I've called a judge twice now on the game next to me. Resolving mulligans at the start of a game and I notice they are holding 8 cards and keeping their hand? Yeah, I'll call a judge and that happened twice to me now so I'm pretty sure there are more people doing this.
I've had a vigilance creature in GP Paris in 2009 and tapped it for attack several times as I didn't know yet. I lost the game due to that and next game I read it has vigilance. I laughed at it and told my opponent, he said he knew and a few minutes later I called myself a victor and he learned that it's cheating.

Basicly the rules are that you can take a set amount of time for any decision, no matter the complexity. Being in a really complex situation shouldn't change the time you take for making a decision. I guess it also works the other way around? But just call a judge and ask if he watches. Your opponent will spead up his game anyway due to the presence of the judge.

Also, it's not because a judge is standing at your table that he's actually watching your game. He could be asked to check for slowplay on the table next to you and to not notify the slowplayer stand a bit aside.

[pippo84]

but we europeans seem to forget that kiddies in Italy or in France, or in East europe would need a knife with themselves hundreds times more often than in usa..just to make police rendez-vous a bit more fair....just sayin.
ok, i stop it.

btw, Pros in Mtg are like major football teams in europe....they can stretch rulings till one second before the breaking point, and who judges simply close his eyes if nobody tell him that maybe something is wrong....c'mon, 5 minutes to side 3 cards? who are you? Deep Blue challenging Kasparov?

MOGGI!!!!!! :eek:

Anyways, he should have called the Judge. If he tought that the opponent was stalling he should have done it. Who cares if you're playing against a pro or you arent? Rules should be the same for everyone... :eyebrow:

I really hate playing against slow players, a friend of mine is really slow at playing and I hate it.. In a tournament call a judge.

[Forbiddian]

The judge should have been called.


I wonder why the people, who were apparently there and are now tweeting about how much of a cheater Saito is, did nothing.

[Eddy Wally]

The judge should have been called.


I wonder why the people, who were apparently there and are now tweeting about how much of a cheater Saito is, did nothing.

Part of it is some of them being starstruck, part is just people who didn't see a damn thing and are now talking in hindsight. Hindsight is always perfect.

[Hopo]

The judge should have been called.


I wonder why the people, who were apparently there and are now tweeting about how much of a cheater Saito is, did nothing.

Because they are retards and/or do not have the needed understanding of the tournament rules. It's a very fundamental thing in tournament Magic to call a judge if in doubt. Nowadays you can even do that as an outsider. Simply put, there is no good reason not to do that.

[Sharpened]

Because they are retards and/or do not have the needed understanding of the tournament rules. It's a very fundamental thing in tournament Magic to call a judge if in doubt. Nowadays you can even do that as an outsider. Simply put, there is no good reason not to do that.

Yeah, becuase there aren't threads on the internet where a multitude of people bash players for calling a judge. Craig Wescoe hasn't been publically raked over the coals for calling a Judge for what he heard Drew Levin say. Matt Nass hasn't had a bunch of people insulting him or anything for calling a judge when his opponent had 4 foil hell's thunders as the only foils in their deck. There's definitly blowback from calling a judge. There shouldn't be, but there is.

[Sims]

That's not true. I made that remark because he (unintentionally) quoted the militia gun-nut interviewed in Bowling for Columbine. I was hoping someone would reckognize it...

Never seen it, or any of his movies actually. I do apologize for the misunderstanding, but i have noticed on many forums and public outlets much of Europe seems to have a very interesting view on American firearm laws. I have been called a Cowboy many times just because I own firearms... and I don't even carry.

But again, I apologize for not picking up on the reference.

[citanul]

Why would anyone pick up on that reference? No one watched that movie for good reasons.

[ummon]

Why would anyone pick up on that reference? No one watched that movie for good reasons.

Are you trying to start a flamewar or something? Everyone I know in nor-cal has watched Bowling for Columbine.

Anyways, I think the problem here is that Saito is one of the pros that Bill Starkington likes so much. Thus, he plays as a pro by bending or breaking the rules as far as he can. That is the difference between a pro and a good but not pro magic player.

[Pastorofmuppets]

Yeah, becuase there aren't threads on the internet where a multitude of people bash players for calling a judge. Craig Wescoe hasn't been publically raked over the coals for calling a Judge for what he heard Drew Levin say. Matt Nass hasn't had a bunch of people insulting him or anything for calling a judge when his opponent had 4 foil hell's thunders as the only foils in their deck. There's definitly blowback from calling a judge. There shouldn't be, but there is.

Those were really dick technicalities. There was no evidence that Levin actually bet on the match, and most of the time players aren't called on having one foil card in their deck (If that were the case, pimped decks with duals would be a whole lot less common)

[Michael Keller]

Anyways, I think the problem here is that Saito is one of the pros that Bill Starkington likes so much. Thus, he plays as a pro by bending or breaking the rules as far as he can. That is the difference between a pro and a good but not pro magic player.

That still doesn't justify his actions. No matter how much you think you can bend the rules, if a judge sees that what you're doing is undermining the floor rules that have been set in place or attempting to bend the rules and take advantage of their "leeway" by allowing specific actions to breach a certain extent, then yes: A judge can issue a warning for those kinds of actions if they see fit.

It doesn't matter what skill of play you bring to the table; everyone follows the rules and adheres to the Head Judge's standards (as well as D.C.I. standards; effectively one in the same).

[Sims]

Those were really dick technicalities. There was no evidence that Levin actually bet on the match, and most of the time players aren't called on having one foil card in their deck (If that were the case, pimped decks with duals would be a whole lot less common)

To be fair, I don't really see the win that Ness got as a dick technicality. There were 4 foils in the kids deck, the kid drew all 4 of them in 1 game, they were all the same card. Knowing the way foils warp and bend, it stands to reason they were distinguishable from the rest of the deck, otherwise the judge wouldn't have deemed them to be marked cards. I would have made this same judge call.

[ummon]

That still doesn't justify his actions. No matter how much you think you can bend the rules, if a judge sees that what you're doing is undermining the floor rules that have been set in place or attempting to bend the rules and take advantage of their "leeway" by allowing specific actions to breach a certain extent, then yes: A judge can issue a warning for those kinds of actions if they see fit.

It doesn't matter what skill of play you bring to the table; everyone follows the rules and adheres to the Head Judge's standards (as well as D.C.I. standards; effectively one in the same).

I guess I didn't state myself properly. I'm complaining that pros are no better than good non-pros, except that they cheat (sort of).

[Jander78]

To be fair, I don't really see the win that Ness got as a dick technicality. There were 4 foils in the kids deck, the kid drew all 4 of them in 1 game, they were all the same card. Knowing the way foils warp and bend, it stands to reason they were distinguishable from the rest of the deck, otherwise the judge wouldn't have deemed them to be marked cards. I would have made this same judge call.
At Pro-Tour level events, foil cards can at times be considered marked cards since they can bend and be obvious (especially if it's the top card of your library). The judges can, and have, enforced rules to make people swap them out with the regular versions of the card (or given infractions). From what I've heard from most Pros, you either play a deck that has no foils or is all foils.

[Pastorofmuppets]

At Pro-Tour level events, foil cards can at times be considered marked cards since they can bend and be obvious (especially if it's the top card of your library). The judges can, and have, enforced rules to make people swap them out with the regular versions of the card (or given infractions). From what I've heard from most Pros, you either play a deck that has no foils or is all foils.

Is it possible to ask for proxies if you show that you only own foil versions of the card?
Also, who remembers the Vendilion Clique Caper with Martin Juza? I mean, some rulings are plain dumb. How is it cheating if your opponent flashes their hand to you? If anything, they're revealing information that they shouldn't be (which is like a warning or something).

[cdr]

At Pro-Tour level events, foil cards can at times be considered marked cards since they can bend and be obvious (especially if it's the top card of your library). The judges can, and have, enforced rules to make people swap them out with the regular versions of the card (or given infractions). From what I've heard from most Pros, you either play a deck that has no foils or is all foils.

No, it's not that "foils can at times be considered marked cards". If you have a marked card, foil or not, you're going to have to replace it. Foils have more ways they can become marked, but any card can be marked.

"No foils or all foils" is very conservative, but could be understandable if you're very risk averse. Foils are not automatically marked.


Is it possible to ask for proxies if you show that you only own foil versions of the card?

No. You are responsible for replacing marked cards you own, foil or not, unless it started as mint sealed product and became marked in the course of play.

[Sims]

Chuck, just a curiosity question that may actually be better suited to a different forum, but what are the standards/practices a judge goes through to deem if a card is marked?

For example, in the siutation Ness called the judge in, what would you have done (or what is required of a judge to do) to determine if those 4 hell's thunders were marked? This I am genuinely curious about, as I've had plenty of games where I could consistently cut to a certain card in my opponents deck but as most of the tournaments locally are pretty casual and no official judge, just the TO who spends most judge calls on the DCI hotline, i'd like to know what the actual process is incase this comes up again.

It was super prevalent during Lor-Ala standard where there were a few players who played everything non-foil except for their 4 promo Demigod's in Blightning.

[Anusien]

Also, "All foils" is not guaranteed to be unmarked. Some foils warp differently, especially PR/Launch Party/MPR foils (the kind that don't come in packs).

[cdr]

Chuck, just a curiosity question that may actually be better suited to a different forum, but what are the standards/practices a judge goes through to deem if a card is marked?

For example, in the siutation Ness called the judge in, what would you have done (or what is required of a judge to do) to determine if those 4 hell's thunders were marked? This I am genuinely curious about, as I've had plenty of games where I could consistently cut to a certain card in my opponents deck but as most of the tournaments locally are pretty casual and no official judge, just the TO who spends most judge calls on the DCI hotline, i'd like to know what the actual process is incase this comes up again.

It was super prevalent during Lor-Ala standard where there were a few players who played everything non-foil except for their 4 promo Demigod's in Blightning.

I'm not going to go into too many details, but basically:
a) looking at whether the card is bent differently than the deck, which can make it easier to cut to or even distinguishable when looking at the deck
b) looking at whether the top and/or sides of the sleeve are marked in a way that makes it distinguishable from the rest of the deck

It's worth remembering that pretty much every sleeve/card is marked in at least some small way, so experienced judges will generally be lenient with markings so long as they can't be easily used for advantage.

If cards are marked in a way that could be easily used for advantage or looks intentional, the player will be investigated for intent and at the very least receive a game loss upgrade.

If you think your opponent's cards are marked in a way that could be used for advantage, definitely call a judge. Even in a casual event, people really shouldn't be using significantly marked cards.

[Svenanole]

i hace some foils that are kind of bent, is there a good way to bend them back?

[jrsthethird]

Riffle-shuffle your deck until they all have the same bend.

Buy KMC Perfect Fit sleeves and double-sleeve your deck.

[dahcmai]

I found just putting then in a box tightly fitted with other cards works just fine. They straighten out after a while of being forced into being straight. There's always the trick of putting them in a book too. Humidity is what makes them bend, just keep them away from humid places once you have them unbent.

[aTn]

If you watch a match being played and look past the strategy, you'll see this sort of behavior is completely common. Most people don't sit there staring at the board like a statue when they play. They manipulate game objects.

HAhaha ! I don't think anyone is debating that... you were joking... right ?


I wasn't there. I've never watched Saito play. I have no idea if Saito was playing slowly intentionally or unintentionally.

I was there. I have watched Saito play a number of matches.

I hardly doubt he wasn't aware of Jace TMS' text, thus requiring him to read it once for about 30 secs and then taking another 10 sec peek to verify.

I think, like many players watching the match, that Saito was aware that there were good chances he would lose this game (and the match).

I hardly doubt that he'd need to ponder wasting one of his opponent's lands at least on 4 occasions given the board and gamestate hadn't changed much.

I don't think Saito usually takes that much time to signal his end of turn and makes that many ''wait (...) *no play*" interruptions - especially given the board and gamestate didn't change much.

Anyhow, this is all perception on my part, I am aware of that (and am simply stating it here).

[Koby]

Foils are definitly suspect for shady biz. I remember back when Masques came out it was very common to "knock" on the top of your deck to see if it is bounced back up with a warp. Some players strategically played only foil lands to predict their next draw.

Unless you play 100% foils, there's always something shady going on.

[heroicraptor]

Unless you play 100% foils, there's always something shady going on.

Even then, there are multiple kinds of foiling techniques, so 100% foils kinda doesn't mean anything.

[HAVE HEART]

No. You are responsible for replacing marked cards you own, foil or not, unless it started as mint sealed product and became marked in the course of play.

Also, if you are playing in a Limited event and one of the cards has a "darkened" back to it. I had this happen to me with an Ajani Goldmane

[Amon Amarth]

I call bullshit on Saito not knowing what Jace TMS does. How does that not set off any red flags?

[Michael Keller]

I call bullshit on Saito not knowing what Jace TMS does. How does that not set off any red flags?

It's not so much he didn't know what Jace, the Mind Sculptor does; he read the card an inexplicable amount of times over the course of two or three turns and milked the clock for every second that he could.

Either way, with the heat that has been brought down upon him (winning the event or not), he will be the subject of close scrutiny and close watch from judges who are aware of his play-style. If for nothing else: To maintain the integrity of the game.

[blueneverfails]

Personally I would feel like Sato is a jerk for slow playing but in the end, saito just exposed an in experienced player, that is all. That is the difference in a person who will never make day 2 and a person who always makes day 2. Now before I get bashed for everyone thinking that I am endorsing slow play, What I mean is that if you feel that your opponent is slow playing, you need to have the balls to raise your hand and say something or atleast mention to a judge to watch for it. As a person who played all 17 rounds without a bye, there is a complete difference in day 1 and day 2, but the one thing that was the same is the amount of judges called, which if both days were the same, 128 people should have alot less need for a judge because of the sheer decrease in players and the play skill should be higher, but this was not the case, I did not have a single judge called on me day 1, but day 2, I had a judge called on me every single match.(none of them went against me I will add), Also day 2 is alot more ruthless, I had 2 different matches where a player called a judge on me cheating because I blind flipped on a counterbalance. didn't get that at all on day 1.

Very simple example that follows this kind of same thing(although I didnt do the whole search graveyard thing), my player was playing lands and I had won game 1, (this being game 2) and I have a pithing needle naming mishra's factory, With about 1 minute left in the round, he gets mindslaver lock with enough mana to do it every turn, and says should we go to game 3, and say to him no, you havnt killed me yet, he calls a judge over and asks the judge if he could make me concede because he had the combo in place, and the judge told him no, and he could not find a way to kill needle and I won 1-0, so because of that, does it make me a douchebag, because I was playing for the clock to run out? I don't think so.

[Michael Keller]

Very simple example that follows this kind of same thing(although I didnt do the whole search graveyard thing), my player was playing lands and I had won game 1, (this being game 2) and I have a pithing needle naming mishra's factory, With about 1 minute left in the round, he gets mindslaver lock with enough mana to do it every turn, and says should we go to game 3, and say to him no, you havnt killed me yet, he calls a judge over and asks the judge if he could make me concede because he had the combo in place, and the judge told him no, and he could not find a way to kill needle and I won 1-0, so because of that, does it make me a douchebag, because I was playing for the clock to run out? I don't think so.

Right, but your opponent at least called a judge over to inquire whether or not a concession was acceptable (which obviously was deemed not). Saito was using the "Broken Record" technique; he would perform the same unnecessary actions each turn to ensure the clock would continue to run in his favor. He forced his opponent to either call a judge or accept his agenda of milking the clock for all it was worth until the match ended.

Your opponent was smart enough to try and subconsciously "milk" a concession out of you with overwhelming circumstances surrounding the board, which was smart in itself. You identified the situation and handled it accordingly.

Saito's opponent, however, did not.

[troopatroop]

Saito is better than all of us at playing Magic. He was giving himself the best chance to win, eeking out every incremental advantage he could think of, and he won the GP. We'll never know if he was slowplaying, because noone called a judge. End of story.

[ns2973]

Saito is better than all of us at playing Magic. He was giving himself the best chance to win, eeking out every incremental advantage he could think of, and he won the GP. We'll never know if he was slowplaying, because noone called a judge. End of story.

You're wrong. We all know saito slow played. He used the rules to his advantage and bullied his opponent with his reputation to get that win.

Not that i begrudge him doing it, i'd do the same.

[johanessen]

It's not Saito's fault. It's judges fault. Congrats Saiton on wining the GP

[ns2973]

It's not Saito's fault. It's judges fault. Congrats Saiton on wining the GP

Wait what? So if I deliberately don't follow the standard rules of magic, it's the judges fault that nothing happens? So if i stack my deck, and don't get caught it's the judges fault and i have no blame?

He has the fault for deliberately "bending" rules at the very least, he knew exactly what he was doing and got the cheap win, why can't he just be cheap and move on? It's the GP, use whatever advantage you can muster, but don't defend the guy.

Again, i would have done the same thing, and would have known i was being a complete dick in doing it, but at that level of play, i'm taking ANY advantage i can to advance as far as i can, i wouldn't justify my actions however.

[troopatroop]

Wait what? So if I deliberately don't follow the standard rules of magic, it's the judges fault that nothing happens? So if i stack my deck, and don't get caught it's the judges fault and i have no blame?

Basically. That never stopped you from cheating against me, and playing Goblin Welders through Chalice at 1. You're only adamant about this because you know all about it. It's always your opponents fault for not catching you and saying something.

[cdr]

I just wish people would remember the difference between slow play and stalling.

Slow play is unintentional. 90% of magic players are guilty of slow play. What Saito is being accused of is stalling, deliberate cheating.

[Amon Amarth]

It's not so much he didn't know what Jace, the Mind Sculptor does; he read the card an inexplicable amount of times over the course of two or three turns and milked the clock for every second that he could.

Either way, with the heat that has been brought down upon him (winning the event or not), he will be the subject of close scrutiny and close watch from judges who are aware of his play-style. If for nothing else: To maintain the integrity of the game.

I was obviously implying that he DOES know what Jace TMS does, he runs a card shop and plays Standard all the time. It's ridiculous to suggest that he doesn't know what it does. I can't imagine how anyone could think that was not stalling.

[menace13]

I was obviously implying that he DOES know what Jace TMS does, he runs a card shop and plays Standard all the time. It's ridiculous to suggest that he doesn't know what it does. I can't imagine how anyone could think that was not stalling.

I agree with the stalling thing. I mean, Jace2 is the figure head in STD and the pros play STD heavily, so it is not like he did not know what Jace2 does, becasue if he hadn't known then he hasn't played STD and If he hasn't played STD then I'm completely wrong and smoke 2 packs of dik a day. Either way, wether someone plays STD or not-though more reason if they do play- I have a hard time believing that a player ranked as high as Saitou is, wouldn't know what the best card printed in a while does. Another issue was Saitou took 2 minutes to act while a Tsabo's Decree smackdown was on stack naming Merf, where he had 2 Merfs in hand and no way to get the spell off the stack.

[Parax]

It's not Saito's fault. It's judges fault. Congrats Saiton on wining the GP

I wouldn't say it was Saitos fault, or the judges, i think it was the opponents fault for not calling a judge over. I think next tournament he plays in he'll have to step up the speed cause most people are aware of his play style now. Will be interesting to see how he does.

[BWM]

At PT Amsterdam, he had a personal judge watching him for pretty much the entire saturday...

[Solaran_X]

It's a sad day. Apparently, Saito made it into the Hall of Fame.

[dschalter]

It's a sad day. Apparently, Saito made it into the Hall of Fame.

I hate to break it to you, but- he's been in for a week and it isn't exactly as though the other members of the HoF have unblemished records.

[Solaran_X]

I hate to break it to you, but- he's been in for a week and it isn't exactly as though the other members of the HoF have unblemished records.
Well it's nice to see that blatant cheaters can get into the Magic HoL. Granted, when Magic finally dies I doubt anyone will remember the Magic HoL, but that's not a reason to treat it like the way it's being treated and letting people in just because they're "pros", regardless of whether or not they cheat.

[The Wolf]

I would guess that 90-100% of the people in the hall of fame have done something during their professional career that people on these boards would call cheating.

I’m not excusing his behavior, but the standards were set for this HoF a long time ago. He disserves his spot.

[ns2973]

I would guess that 90-100% of the people in the hall of fame have done something during their professional career that people on these boards would call cheating.

I’m not excusing his behavior, but the standards were set for this HoF a long time ago. He disserves his spot.

90-100% of people that are successful in ANY arena, not just magic.

[dschalter]

I would guess that 90-100% of the people in the hall of fame have done something during their professional career that people on these boards would call cheating.

I’m not excusing his behavior, but the standards were set for this HoF a long time ago. He disserves his spot.

When it comes to the stalling incident, yes. That kind of behavior is extremely common, both among pros (even those who talk about integrity) and PTQ level players. When it comes to what he did previously... no, that kind of behavior isn't common at all. I still think he should be in the HoF, as he was only 17 when he did the dumbness that got him a 1.5 year suspension and also because he hasn't gotten in real trouble since then (well, and he is the best deckbuilder of the last five years and one of the top 5 deckbuilders of the last decade).

[Michael Keller]

I was obviously implying that he DOES know what Jace TMS does, he runs a card shop and plays Standard all the time. It's ridiculous to suggest that he doesn't know what it does. I can't imagine how anyone could think that was not stalling.

I was referencing the fact that he did know what it does while being sarcastic about the whole thing. Be realistic.

It may be ridiculous to suggest that he doesn't know what it does, but he obviously needed to check the card several times for some reason. And whatever the reason is (or however absurd it may be), that doesn't excuse him for stalling the game to preserve the victory. That's exactly what he did, and he (technically) got away with it.

He (Saito) had no right doing what he did to undermine the integrity of the game. He knew exactly what he was doing and whether or not he got caught doesn't excuse him from abusing strict rules enforcement in such a high-profile event.

[Solaran_X]

So basically, (almost) everyone is saying is that we (as a collective community) are fine and accepting of a certain degree of cheating among our "professional" players because they all do it, and as such shouldn't bother holding them to the standards of professional players of other games?

That seems a little ridiculous. Maybe I'm just old fashioned (or just old), but I think the pro players should be held to a level of professionalism above that of your average amateur player.

[dschalter]

So basically, (almost) everyone is saying is that we (as a collective community) are fine and accepting of a certain degree of cheating among our "professional" players because they all do it, and as such shouldn't bother holding them to the standards of professional players of other games?

That seems a little ridiculous. Maybe I'm just old fashioned (or just old), but I think the pro players should be held to a level of professionalism above that of your average amateur player.

Well, the HoFs of professional sports (which are what the MTG HoF is modeled on), aren't exactly free of shitheads and cheaters. They are about stars and most stars will get in, unless they have cheated repeatedly and in a particularly egregious way (Rose, Mike Long, etc;).

[CorpT]

I'm not excusing his behavior, but the standards were set for this HoF a long time ago. He disserves his spot.

I'm guessing you meant "deserves" and not "disserves", but I think it is much apt as "disserves".

[Michael Keller]

So basically, everyone is saying is that we (as a collective community) are fine and accepting of a certain degree of cheating among our "professional" players because they all do it, and as such shouldn't bother holding them to the standards of professional players of other games?

That seems a little ridiculous. Maybe I'm just old fashioned (or just old), but I think the pro players should be held to a level of professionalism above that of your average amateur player.

Calling someone a "professional" Magic is analagous to calling someone a "professional" poker player; it's just absurd. Both are predicated largely on bankrolling your own investment and accepting a potential loss without necessarily earning anything.

You aren't guaranteed to earn anything.

[Solaran_X]

Calling someone a "professional" Magic is analagous to calling someone a "professional" poker player; it's just absurd. Both are predicated largely on bankrolling your own investment and accepting a potential loss without necessarily earning anything.

You aren't guaranteed to earn anything.
So you attack my calling of them "professional" players (don't we call them pro players? Pretty sure we do...), but you still don't respond to the main point of my post.

Judging by your previous post, you condone and accept cheating by the professional players because they all do it, and apparently you don't feel that they should be held to a higher level of professionalism than amateur players.

[ns2973]

I'm with hollywood, i'd argue that magic isn't a profession. Therefore we are all on the same playing field. This isn't like the NBA where there is a magic draft, since no border of professionalism exists, how can you advocate a higher standard? Unemployed people could be called "professionals"

[juventus]

Calling someone a "professional" Magic is analagous to calling someone a "professional" poker player; it's just absurd. Both are predicated largely on bankrolling your own investment and accepting a potential loss without necessarily earning anything.

You aren't guaranteed to earn anything.

Yea, calling people that regularly play on the Pro Tour "Pros" is definitely absurd. Also consider that if you are a high enough Pro Level you are guaranteed money for appearing at GPs and PTs.

[Solaran_X]

So if we're all on the same playing field, why are some players called "pro players" and the rest of us aren't?

If we're all on the same playing field, then why can't some kid who just bought a precon beat Saitou or Nassif in Standard?

Clearly we are not on the same playing field.

[CorpT]

I'm with hollywood, i'd argue that magic isn't a profession. Therefore we are all on the same playing field. This isn't like the NBA where there is a magic draft, since no border of professionalism exists, how can you advocate a higher standard? Unemployed people could be called "professionals"

So shouldn't everyone be held to the same (high) standard then?

[ns2973]

So if we're all on the same playing field, why are some players called "pro players" and the rest of us aren't?

If we're all on the same playing field, then why can't some kid who just bought a precon beat Saitou or Nassif in Standard?

Clearly we are not on the same playing field.

Define a pro level magic player for me. What do YOU think makes someone a pro?

We are all on the same playing field, guess what, if Saito draws for shit in the last round or the first, he's JUST as screwed as you and me. If some kid qualifies with a pre con? He has JUST as much opportunity to win as saito. It's like your job, you are all on the same level field, that doesn't mean your abilities are the same. Anyone can call anyone a pro, there really isn't any finite line in magic.

Most good magic players earn positive cash flow from playing. Are they pro's? I know guys that have played pro tour events, they have day jobs, can they be pro's?

[ns2973]

So shouldn't everyone be held to the same (high) standard then?

Yup, in my opinion at least, should all be the same standard. What you define as "high" may vary from the next.

Then again, i don't think athletes should be role models either in terms of anything but skill, i don't hold them to a higher standard than anyone else and they ARE actually pro's.

[Solaran_X]

Define a pro level magic player for me. What do YOU think makes someone a pro?
How about the players who play on the Pro Tour?
How about the players who do well at the Grand Prixs and such and get Pro Points?
How about the players with enough Pro Points to get paid simply to go to GPs and PTs in addition to airfare and lodging?


We are all on the same playing field, guess what, if Saito draws for shit in the last round or the first, he's JUST as screwed as you and me. If some kid qualifies with a pre con? He has JUST as much opportunity to win as saito. It's like your job, you are all on the same level field, that doesn't mean your abilities are the same. Anyone can call anyone a pro, there really isn't any finite line in magic.
There is an obvious finite line between Pro and amateur in Magic. Whether or not you're willing to see it or acknowledge is another issue.

The biggest line between pro and amateur is card stock. Some kid with a precon isn't going to have a chance in comparison to someone like Saitou who, as a dealer, has access to any card he needs to build any deck for any event in any format. And if he doesn't have the card on hand, he likely has the available money to quick purchase one or borrow one from a teammate.

Furthermore, a Pro's life basically revolves around Magic. A Pro isn't someone who plays for fun once or twice a week and goes to nearby GPs and PTQs. A Pro is someone who play tests for hours and hours each day, either in person or online with his teammates - using every possible deck in the format against every possible deck in the format to determine what deck is best for which metagame.

Being a Pro player takes a rather large investment of both time AND money - and not many people are willing to make that investment for any of a dozen possible reasons.


Most good magic players earn positive cash flow from playing. Are they pro's? I know guys that have played pro tour events, they have day jobs, can they be pro's?
Many of the true Pro players have jobs that involve Magic (such as a dealer), or are students and can take the time off from school to travel (on Wizard's dime if they got enough Pro Points) to exotic destinations for GPs and PTs and Worlds. But some guy who happened to play in a Pro Tour once or twice and works a normal 9-5 isn't going to be able to get the time off to regularly do GPs or PTs. And that's assuming you're referring to someone who actually played in the Pro Tour and not just a Grand Prix or Pro Tour Qualifier.

[Michael Keller]

So you attack my calling of them "professional" players (don't we call them pro players? Pretty sure we do...), but you still don't respond to the main point of my post.

Judging by your previous post, you condone and accept cheating by the professional players because they all do it, and apparently you don't feel that they should be held to a higher level of professionalism than amateur players.

I don't condone or accept cheating by anyone, so I have no idea what you're talking about. It's obvious you drew a conclusion from something so trivial that to purport it after I blatantly said that Saito stalled and should have been reprimanded for his conduct - is just plain preposterous. You've chastised my belief that players like Saito - just because they have a higher rating - deserve fair treatment under strict rules enforcement, when you yourself have no idea what I was talking about by the simple fact you disregarded the posts made long before I ever spoke to you directly on this matter - and in this thread.

You are classifying "amateur" players by their skill of play and not the fact they can simply pay to enter the same event - just like Saito did - and potentially end up with the same results. They may not be as good as Saito is, but judging by your retort you obviously support and condone Magic: the Gathering or poker as a game that can be classified as a profession, which I explicitly disagree with.

Just because you are good at something doesn't make you a professional at it. Just because you hold yourself to "professional" standards doesn't make you a professional at it. Who deems who a professional? Wizards? You can be an expert at what you do, but predicating your livelihood and income on a card game by paying to enter the same tournament as a "professional" level player would immediately declassify that person as being, as what you call it, a "pro". Magic and poker are (in my eyes) almost professional endeavors except for one glaring omission:

You don't necessarily earn anything when you play. You could pay to have fun and exhibit professional mannerisms and not do well, which is fine. But there are massive losses that could be accrued in this game - just like in poker - and that is what distinctly separates this game and other card games based on gambling your financial resources in an attempt to gain personal wealth.

Also, the Pro Tour is setup to invite players who have performed well over the course of their time playing by inviting them to play in a series of events designed to showcase the game as being the premiere collectible card game in the world, and instilling the belief in people who don't have the time or resources that they too can involve themselves by paying more to play in large events and encouraging them to do well. All it is is an invitational event rewarding people for doing well. That's not to take away from their intelligence in the matter, however; some of those people are very smart at what they do.

Wizards are the professionals here and they are the ones who take the time to reward people for paying money to play in their events and advertising the game throughout the Magic universe so people will spend more money on their product.

Do you see Pro Tours setup for Legacy? No. Why? Because the cards are expensive and advertising an older product that has no bearing on the future of the game won't elicit a positive response for inexperienced, younger players wanting to ask their moms and dads for the paycheck so they can buy those cards they heard were so good. In that respect, perhaps. But that is all but a smokescreen when claiming "individual professionalism" for a single player, when it is Wizards that are ultimately generating the revenue.

[ns2973]

Oh, ok. So you are a pro when you hit what, pro tour level 7 when they pay for all your airfare? (they don't pay for lodging) The highest possible payout in appearance fees is about 10k a season. (to the best of my knowledge, i could be wrong). I guess the 10k and free airfare just doesn't scream pro like say professional contracts etc.

The pro tour in magic is just a tournament that you have to qualify for, thats it bro. If you qualify, you can play.

[SlopeeJ]

Actually you get the 10k, airfare and all the magic groupies. That is worth something right? Pro players are a myth, like you said you just have to qualify.

[Bahamuth]

Hollywood is right about Magic and poker not being professions. The definition of a profession is using specific knowledge/skills to 'trade' services, that only you can do because of your profession, with others. Pro's don't exactly 'trade' their knowledge, they essentially use their knowledge to exploit others.

But I don't think that most people interpret the term Pro player as a player who made playing Magic his professions. My english might fail here, but the term 'professional' (or 'pro') seems to be a little wider than someone who has a profession. One could be considered a professional in all sorts of games/sports/whatevers, but still not make their money with it. It seems that professional is just an indication of someone's skill level in something.

[Nihil Credo]

In most MTG-related conversations, I see "pro" being conventionally used to mean "someone who doesn't need to PTQ".

If you wish to convey a very different meaning, I would recommend making it clear in your post.

[emidln]

High level pros get appearance fees and additional perks for attending GP and PT events. Some pros may even be sponsored by a shop or website and receive money or other considerations (ability to borrow thousands of dollars of cards, food, hotel room, etc) for promoting the shop/website by wearing t-shirts, writing articles, or mentioning the shop/website during interviews.

[citanul]

Oh, ok. So you are a pro when you hit what, pro tour level 7 when they pay for all your airfare? (they don't pay for lodging) The highest possible payout in appearance fees is about 10k a season. (to the best of my knowledge, i could be wrong). I guess the 10k and free airfare just doesn't scream pro like say professional contracts etc.


Benefits:


Level 7

Member is invited to his or her country's national championship
Member receives three byes at all Grand Prix tournaments
Member is invited to all Pro Tours and the World Championship
Member receives a $1750 appearance fee whenever he or she competes in a Pro Tour or the World Championship
Member receives expenses-paid air travel ticket to all Pro Tours and the World Championship during the current season*
Member receives a $250 appearance fee whenever he or she competes in a Grand Prix
Level 8

Member is invited to his or her country's national championship
Members receives three byes at all Grand Prix tournaments
Member is invited to all Pro Tours and the World Championship
Member receives a $2250 appearance fee whenever he or she competes in a Pro Tour or the World Championship
Member receives expenses-paid air travel ticket and hotel accommodations at all Pro Tours and the World Championship during the current season*
Member receives a $500 appearance fee whenever he or she competes in a Grand Prix


4 Pro tours a year and 18 grand Prix:
Level 7: 1750 x 4 + 250 x 18 = 11500 + Expenses paid for Pro Tours.
Level 8: 2250 x 4 + 500 x 18 = 18000 + Expenses paid for Pro Tours.

Those incomes aren't taxed here in Europe due to the difficulty to check it by the governments. Quite the income for playing a card game.

[pw709]

Although that math is a little off, because I'm sure it costs the Level 8s well over $500 to travel to any particular Grand Prix.

[JACO]

Does anybody know if Saito was disqualified without prize at GP Portland last weekend?

Check out the standings here:
http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/eventcoverage/gppor10/standfin

63 Nelson, Brad J [USA] $200 1
64 Saitou, Tomoharu [JPN]
65 Mead, Forrest W [USA]

Do you notice something interesting? Saito finished 64th with no money or pro point awarded. I was under the impression that 33rd-64th place all received $200 and 1 point, per documentation here:
http://www.wizards.com/Magic/TCG/Events.aspx?x=mtg/event/grandprix/portland10

So does anybody know if the standings are incorrect or if there was an incident?

[Artowis]

Does anybody know if Saito was disqualified without prize at GP Portland last weekend?

Check out the standings here:
http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/eventcoverage/gppor10/standfin

63 Nelson, Brad J [USA] $200 1
64 Saitou, Tomoharu [JPN]
65 Mead, Forrest W [USA]

Do you notice something interesting? Saito finished 64th with no money or pro point awarded. I was under the impression that 33rd-64th place all received $200 and 1 point, per documentation here:
http://www.wizards.com/Magic/TCG/Events.aspx?x=mtg/event/grandprix/portland10

So does anybody know if the standings are incorrect or if there was an incident?

looooooool.

Saito wasn't DQ'd, if he ever has a major incident at a Magic tournament there would be all sorts of stories immediately after the event took place. The only notable incident to take place at GP: Portland was how fucking horrific Day 1 was in terms of how the tournament was run.