Disqualification at PTDTK

[goblinsplayer]

Does anyone know more about what happened? Thoughts?
http://magic.wizards.com/en/events/coverage/ptdtk/player-disqualified-ptdtk

[cdr]

No idea, but lying to judges by itself is a DQ. Even if it turns out you did nothing wrong otherwise.

[Meekrab]

There was also this...

https://twitter.com/BasicMountain/status/586638561035755520

[Tylert]

Anyone knows why do they remove the player from the standings when they are DQ?
Yesterday I was wondering why i couldn't find Dezani anymore in the list...
Also, maybe that if they were doing a little bit more of advertising on the cheaters caught / disqualified people, then there would be a little less people trying to cheat?

[thecrav]

Anyone knows why do they remove the player from the standings when they are DQ?
Yesterday I was wondering why i couldn't find Dezani anymore in the list...
Also, maybe that if they were doing a little bit more of advertising on the cheaters caught / disqualified people, then there would be a little less people trying to cheat?

It's a double edged sword. Sure they might turn some people off of cheating by this kind of show of force, but they may also turn off people who were interested in getting into the game when they see that there's cheating.

[JACO]

Does anyone know more about what happened? Thoughts?
http://magic.wizards.com/en/events/coverage/ptdtk/player-disqualified-ptdtkDezani, who was 2-5 at the time, misrepresented the game state. During the investigation it became clear to the judges that his story had changed, at which point it was ruled he was lying to the judges, which as CDR noted is immediate grounds for dismissal from a tournament, even if you've done nothing else wrong.


There was also this...

https://twitter.com/BasicMountain/status/586638561035755520This was Stephen Speck, who presented a 53 card deck to his opponent to shuffle. His opponent immediately called a judge, who after investigating, found a very good starting 7 card hand next to the sideboard. Apparently Speck had been palming the perfect opening 7 card hand, waiting for the game to begin. This was the same guy who recently had 5+ Turn 1 kills with Amulet Bloom at Grand Prix Vancouver, as Tom Martell noted on Twitter (https://twitter.com/tommartell/status/586632351578529794).


Anyone knows why do they remove the player from the standings when they are DQ?
Yesterday I was wondering why i couldn't find Dezani anymore in the list...
Also, maybe that if they were doing a little bit more of advertising on the cheaters caught / disqualified people, then there would be a little less people trying to cheat?Players are removed from the standings because they have been dropped from the tournament after a disqualification (and are no longer eligible for prize). I agree that WotC and tournament organizers should do more to highlight the people that have been disqualified for cheating, rather than sweeping it under the rug, which current announcements kind of look like. No one wants to play against cheaters and people manipulating the rules at any level, and highlighting them and shaming them in the community can go a long way to raise player awareness.

[lordofthepit]

This was Stephen Speck, who presented a 53 card deck to his opponent to shuffle. His opponent immediately called a judge, who after investigating, found a very good starting 7 card hand next to the sideboard. Apparently Speck had been palming the perfect opening 7 card hand, waiting for the game to begin. This was the same guy who recently had 5+ Turn 1 kills with Amulet Bloom at Grand Prix Vancouver, as Tom Martell noted on Twitter (https://twitter.com/tommartell/status/586632351578529794)

It should be noted that his deck has less than 0.1% chance of getting Simian Spirit Guide, Amulet of Vigor, U/G Karoo Land, Summer Bloom, Hive Mind, and Summoner's Pact in an 8-card hand (e.g. turn 1 on the draw) in any given game. There are no other combinations of cards that facilitate a turn 1 kill other than the 1-of Slaughter Pact if the opponent plays a turn 1 creature, although playing a Turn 1 Primeval Titan instead of Hive Mind into Pact is often sufficient to win the game. Obviously, he just ran extremely hot, amirite?

[Kathal]

It should be noted that his deck has less than 0.1% chance of getting Simian Spirit Guide, Amulet of Vigor, U/G Karoo Land, Summer Bloom, Hive Mind, and Summoner's Pact in an 8-card hand (e.g. turn 1 on the draw) in any given game. There are no other combinations of cards that facilitate a turn 1 kill other than the 1-of Slaughter Pact if the opponent plays a turn 1 creature, although playing a Turn 1 Primeval Titan instead of Hive Mind into Pact is often sufficient to win the game. Obviously, he just ran extremely hot, amirite?

There is also another possibility to kill on turn 1 with Amulet Bloom:

It needs, 2 Amulet, SSG, UG Land, Titan/Summoner's Pact, Bloom. Exile SSG, cast Amulet, tap/bounce land, cast Bloom, tap/bounce land, cast second Amulet, get 6 mana for Titan, cast him, get Boros Land and Slayer's Stronghold, give him +4/+0, haste and vigilance, bounce the Stronghold, attack, trigger, get Vasuva + double strike land, target Boros land, give Titan double strike and kill the opp with 20 damage.

And yeah, both lines are extreme rare, since both hands need 6 out of 7/8 cards. Getting 1 at an GP is standard (someone did once the math, but normally you win once on a 15 Round tournament on turn 1) but not 5+.

Overall I'm pretty thrilled of the amount of cheating happened there. It is pretty sad :[

Greetings,
Kathal

[lordofthepit]

There is also another possibility to kill on turn 1 with Amulet Bloom:

It needs, 2 Amulet, SSG, UG Land, Titan/Summoner's Pact, Bloom. Exile SSG, cast Amulet, tap/bounce land, cast Bloom, tap/bounce land, cast second Amulet, get 6 mana for Titan, cast him, get Boros Land and Slayer's Stronghold, give him +4/+0, haste and vigilance, bounce the Stronghold, attack, trigger, get Vasuva + double strike land, target Boros land, give Titan double strike and kill the opp with 20 damage.

And yeah, both lines are extreme rare, since both hands need 6 out of 7/8 cards. Getting 1 at an GP is standard (someone did once the math, but normally you win once on a 15 Round tournament on turn 1) but not 5+.

Overall I'm pretty thrilled of the amount of cheating happened there. It is pretty sad :[

Greetings,
Kathal

Thanks. I'll calculate or simulate the odds at some point. I expect the probability of getting even one turn 1 win in 45 games (e.g. the number of games played in Swiss if every match went to three games) to be significantly lower than 50%.

[ESG]

This was Stephen Speck, who presented a 53 card deck to his opponent to shuffle. His opponent immediately called a judge, who after investigating, found a very good starting 7 card hand next to the sideboard. Apparently Speck had been palming the perfect opening 7 card hand, waiting for the game to begin. This was the same guy who recently had 5+ Turn 1 kills with Amulet Bloom at Grand Prix Vancouver, as Tom Martell noted on Twitter (https://twitter.com/tommartell/status/586632351578529794).

Also in that Twitter exchange, Mike Costello says Speck is a judge at Costello's LGS. Are bans longer for judges, or does that not change anything?

Edit: LOL at Doug Lambert's post: @tommartell when asked in his T8 Vancouver profile why he chose the deck, he replied "I don’t like playing fair Magic."

[Meekrab]

This was Stephen Speck, who presented a 53 card deck to his opponent to shuffle. His opponent immediately called a judge, who after investigating, found a very good starting 7 card hand next to the sideboard. Apparently Speck had been palming the perfect opening 7 card hand, waiting for the game to begin. This was the same guy who recently had 5+ Turn 1 kills with Amulet Bloom at Grand Prix Vancouver, as Tom Martell noted on Twitter (https://twitter.com/tommartell/status/586632351578529794).
Someone in the twitter commentary noted that the obvious next level of this strategy is to present 60 and leave an 8 card sideboard.

[Lemnear]

Someone in the twitter commentary noted that the obvious next level of this strategy is to present 60 and leave an 8 card sideboard.

So am I allowed to count my opponents SB at any time to estimate, if he slipped a certain card into his starting grip if only 14 are present? I mean, for me as a storm player, stuff like adding a single Ad Nauseam to my starting grip via slight of hands and presenting a 60 card deck post-board should be hard to detect especially with the new SB rules.

Sorry, if I opened Pandora's Box.

PS: You are free to check my SB at GP Lille lol

[Hopo]

So am I allowed to count my opponents SB at any time to estimate, if he slipped a certain card into his starting grip if only 14 are present? I mean, for me as a storm player, stuff like adding a single Ad Nauseam to my starting grip via slight of hands and presenting a 60 card deck post-board should be hard to detect especially with the new SB rules.

Sorry, if I opened Pandora's Box.

PS: You are free to check my SB at GP Lille lol
Post siding, 14 cards is ok nowadays as long as your maindeck has at least 60 cards and all of the cards can be found in your decklist. It would require more than just counting SB after shuffling in order to catch something like that.

[Lemnear]

Post siding, 14 cards is ok nowadays as long as your maindeck has at least 60 cards and all of the cards can be found in your decklist. It would require more than just counting SB after shuffling in order to catch something like that.

That's what I was trying to hint at. Using the fact that a SB does not require to contain 15 cards would require a Decklist check to see if indeed a card is missing or is hidden which is nuts in decks which use certain crucial 1-offs like Vintage (Fastbond/Ancestral/Lotus/etc.) or the mentioned Storm Engine in a deck with naturally 40% mana. Palming a perfect 8 is stupid as an attempt to cheat, but sneaking a single card in your opener is dangerously easy to pull off

[Julian23]

Palming the perfect 7 is what a friend of mine *always* did with his Elves deck back when we started playing Magic in around 1999. It always lead to a turn 3 kill.

It's kind of ironic because at some point everybody just knew it; but instead of calling him out, literally nobody just played against him anymore and the guy soon left the game. To me it always felt as if he was suffering from this "I should win this because I am better than all of the other players; so I'm just making sure I get what I deserve anyways." #Disgusting

[Dice_Box]

There is a story kicking round with some of the really old Modern players locally that there was a guy that would run more than 4 copies of important cards in his deck. To get at him everyone had 4 copies of Surgical in the side. He would just concede in response to the casting of Surgical so he did not have to reveal his main. Seemed like a great answer to me.

[Julian23]

There is a story kicking round with some of the really old Modern players locally that there was a guy that would run more than 4 copies of important cards in his deck. To get at him everyone had 4 copies of Surgical in the side. He would just concede in response to the casting of Surgical so he did not have to reveal his main. Seemed like a great answer to me.

Is a "really old Modern player" an Oxymoron?

Anyways, I have to confess. Back in our casual games at school, I used to run 5 copies of Cho-Manno's Blessing in my deck for a couple of weeks :cry:

http://magiccards.info/scans/en/mm/12.jpg

[Sloshthedark]

So am I allowed to count my opponents SB at any time to estimate, if he slipped a certain card into his starting grip if only 14 are present? I mean, for me as a storm player, stuff like adding a single Ad Nauseam to my starting grip via slight of hands and presenting a 60 card deck post-board should be hard to detect especially with the new SB rules.

Sorry, if I opened Pandora's Box.

PS: You are free to check my SB at GP Lille lol

hmm thinking of it I might have a problem one day :really: ... I usualy play a 62 card 14 SB deck vs Miracles postSB

// playing 4+cards can hardly be prevented

[Lemnear]

hmm thinking of it I might have a problem one day :really: ... I usualy play a 62 card 14 SB deck vs Miracles postSB

// playing 4+cards can hardly be prevented

Interresting, as many play 61 cards with 15 in the side anyways. No one would be suspect a missing card if you present 60 cards MB and 15 in the side then anyways while you hide one card from your opponent in all the games. Under the lights of current events, I think we should forward that stuff to WotC and make them think about their rules concerning SBs once more

[Quasim0ff]

hmm thinking of it I might have a problem one day :really: ... I usualy play a 62 card 14 SB deck vs Miracles postSB

// playing 4+cards can hardly be prevented

Nope, that's perfectly fine.

They changed the rules, not too long ago, to prevent those of mix-ups.

As long as your maindeck is at least 60 cards, and sideboard is a maximum of 15 cards, you're in the clear :)!