GP Disqualification at 13-1-2

[Bryant Cook]

So... you made play errors, so he's a dick?

Assuming that these hearsay half-remembered accusations are true even for a moment, what effect does that have on anything? Wescoe mysteriously knew that somewhere, somehow this guy had been a jerk to someone who goes by the handle getsickanddie and has " We break your rib cage, and ask you what the fuck's crackin" on their sig, and thus he was absolutely justified in being a ginormous prick to try and steal a legitimate loss?,

I have nothing against Drew, he's always been somewhat nice to me. But I've watched Drew play plenty of times and he's not the fastest of players until time is running short. It doesn't help that he's always playing Countertop decks, which are very time consuming. When Drew goes to time in the round, which happens often, he asks his opponents to conceed which is fucking ridiculous and arrogant in my book.

"I was going to win, just scoop to me"
[No]
"Judge! It's turn five and my opponent picked up their cards! I win right?"
'No, it's a draw'
"But he picked up his cards, I didn't want to draw"
'Well then deal lethal damage'
"I can't, but he picked up his cards"
'It's a draw'

After this Drew kept on running his mouth to a Syracuse local who verbally threatened Drew into shutting up. Then Drew ran to Eli in tears wanting a DQ, match win, and the local to be thrown out or he'd call the cops.

At the GP, he asked Alix to scoop to him. Although, Alix handled it much more professionally than the Syracuse local, it ended in a draw.

At Eli's Lotus event last year I was just walking around scouting, I pass him, stop to see what he's playing, "Bryant, leave before I call the judge".

I'm not agreeing with what Wescoe did, so don't try to turn my words around. What he did was douche-y. I'm just clarifying what happens with Drew. I bet if he played faster and played faster decks, events like these listed above wouldn't happen.

[goobafish]

I'm not the only one that's seen him act like a prick, I'm just the only one that will say it. Did he deserve to be DQ'd? Probably not. Are there a number of people taking some measure of pleasure in it? Yes.

He was a real asshole to his opponent he played the round before the DQ, I have never seen a guy litteraly cry for a judge while waving his arms frantically in front of his opponents board. But just because he wasn't a nice guy doesn't mean he deserves a DQ. I hope that this experience teaches him some tournament etiquette.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

I've never had a problem with Levin or seen him be discourteous, but it seems to be agreed that if he was it's still entirely irrelevant.

I actually came up with the best comparison: People that think that the rules should be applied in this way to screw over someone for betting on themselves (even if it hadn't been a prop bet), are basically exactly the same as people that think children should be arrested and prosecuted for child pornography for taking nude pictures of themselves.

It's not justice or the intent of the law, nor wisdom. It's just an asinine, lazy and cruel unwillingness to apply five seconds of common sense. The English language will always be imprecise, and it's usually impossible to close one loophole without creating the potential for others. Without the application of reasonableness and intent, there will never be a way to have a just society. This may be small potatoes in the long run, but the attitude underlying it is what's so dangerous and, to me, appalling.

[BenBleiweiss]

IBA raised an interesting question in another thread: "Why is it illegal to gamble on yourself to do well?" How would this in any way compromise the integrity of the game? Every time you pay a tournament entry fee, you're essentially gambling on yourself to do well. If you make top-whatever, you win money. Otherwise you lose the investment.

Theoretical Situation

DL: Hey Craig, I win $500 from a friend if I win this match, because I bet on myself to win! If you concede, I'll split the money.
CW: I make $200 more at most if I win this round and finish 9-16. I make $250 if I concede and split the money from this bet outside the tournament. I concede!

Results: Integrity of the tournament compromised by a player betting on themselves.

Real Life Application: Pete Rose claimed that he only bet on his own team, and gambling vouchers proved this - but it was also shown that when his two worst pitchers were pitching, he would not bet on his own team. This gave him motivation to play his team differently (put in different relievers/overwork certain guys) in order to maximize his own chance of winning - at the times at which he DID bet on his own team.

[Sims]

Theoretical Situation

DL: Hey Craig, I win $500 from a friend if I win this match, because I bet on myself to win! If you concede, I'll split the money.
CW: I concede!

Results: Integrity of the tournament compromised by a player betting on themselves.

- Ben

I may be opening a bad can of worms with this comment, but this doesn't really make sense Ben. In this case it's not only betting on yourself (which alone really doesn't effect the integrity of the tournament) but is also collusion. If i bet on myself to top 8, and didn't say a word, i just plowed into the Top8 and collected an extra 500 bucks then it doesn't really effect anything, unless i step over the line into another illegal act at a tournament and offer to split it with someone for the win.

Your situation you can replace "I bet my friend 500 dollars" with "I have a 30-rack and i'll split it with you if you let me win," or "I have an extra foil japanese Jace, TMS and i'll give it to you if you give me the win."

If we took the situation at face value, It's not the self-bet that's ruining the integrity of the tournament, but the collusion taking place. The bet means nothing to Wescoe if the collusion doesn't exist.

[rleader]

Someone asking you to play faster isn't unreasonable,

It can be, especially if they start to request non standard (but still legal if agreed upon) shortcuts.

For example, year and years ago, I won game 1 vs. turbofog with my even more shitty deck though sheer luck. This took 35 minutes.

Game 2, he requests that I discard (multiple howling mines in play) while he draws. He basically badgered me (I was a first time guest in a store on a different coast) into playing in a way that would maximize his chances of completing game two and I went along with it, even though the margins were bad for me. For example, I couldn't inspect what he was drawing since I was busy emptying my own hand, etc.

He won game 2 for the draw during extra turns.

People who play slow decks slowly turn into ape demons if you take game one from them (especially when their decks are supposed to win pre-sideboard).

[The Pharmacist]

I've never played vs him and i never want to. I really think the kids a DICK and I'm happy it happened to him! He walks around tournaments thinking he's better then everyone and every time I see him I want to slap the shit out of him. Drew you got what was coming to you.

[freakish777]

Theoretical Situation

DL: Hey Craig, I win $500 from a friend if I win this match, because I bet on myself to win! If you concede, I'll split the money.
CW: I make $200 more at most if I win this round and finish 9-16. I make $250 if I concede and split the money from this bet outside the tournament. I concede!

Results: Integrity of the tournament compromised by a player betting on themselves.

Real Life Application: Pete Rose claimed that he only bet on his own team, and gambling vouchers proved this - but it was also shown that when his two worst pitchers were pitching, he would not bet on his own team. This gave him motivation to play his team differently (put in different relievers/overwork certain guys) in order to maximize his own chance of winning - at the times at which he DID bet on his own team.

That's clearly collusion, and a totally separate issue.

As far as the Pete Rose scenario goes, let's assume that Bookies took bets on Magic tournaments (I'm pretty sure there's websites out there that will do this for you). A level 8 Pro decides to have "a friend" bet that he'll make day 2. He makes Day 2, and picks up some money because of the bet. Cool. The integrity of the tournament isn't impacted. Said Pro decides to not bet on himself for the next tournament. The integrity of the tournament... isn't impacted. It's not like Saito/LSV/PVDR/Kenji/Cedric/etc can "play his deck differently" to maximize later potential winnings.

Furthermore, Baseball teams have schedules they must follow. Magic players can go to every GP they want to. Or they can decide to stay home. It's not like Alix Hatfield's Tarmogoyfs and Wild Nactl's are more exhausted than his Knight of the Reliquaries or Krosan Grips.

Your theoretical situation isn't applicable to Magic the Gathering (as far as the Pete Rose situation) or what happened at GP Columbus (there was no collusion on Levin's part).


In short, drop Wescoe from your authors,
Signed, The Magic the Gathering Community (no, we're not going to take lame excuses or theoretical situations with no applicability to what actually happened)

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

I've never played vs him and i never want to. I really think the kids a DICK and I'm happy it happened to him! He walks around tournaments thinking he's better then everyone and every time I see him I want to slap the shit out of him. Drew you got what was coming to you.

If you're happy about this, I'm just going to lump you into the 1/2 of New York players who are total dicks*.


*The other half is people who almost never go to Legacy tournaments any more.

Theoretical Situation

DL: Hey Craig, I win $500 from a friend if I win this match, because I bet on myself to win! If you concede, I'll split the money.
CW: I make $200 more at most if I win this round and finish 9-16. I make $250 if I concede and split the money from this bet outside the tournament. I concede!

Results: Integrity of the tournament compromised by a player betting on themselves.

Real Life Application: Pete Rose claimed that he only bet on his own team, and gambling vouchers proved this - but it was also shown that when his two worst pitchers were pitching, he would not bet on his own team. This gave him motivation to play his team differently (put in different relievers/overwork certain guys) in order to maximize his own chance of winning - at the times at which he DID bet on his own team.

Problem: Your theoretical situation isn't about betting on yourself, it's about betting on yourself + BRIBING an opponent. It doesn't matter the source of the money; if you offer your opponent $250 to concede, that's illegal whether or not any gambling took place.

So this is the "Drugs should be illegal because you might get high and go murder someone" argument. There's already a rule in place to deal with the actually problematic part of your argument.

And the latter example has no parallel at all to the game.

In short, drop Wescoe from your authors,
Signed, The Magic the Gathering Community (no, we're not going to take lame excuses or theoretical situations with no applicability to what actually happened)

[Zlatzman]

There is actually one scenario where betting on yourself is detrimental to the game:

Player A makes a bet with Player B, with Player B owing Player A "something" if Player A gets top8.

Before the last round Player A is really close to making top 8, so is Player C. It turns out that Player B is playing against Player C. Player B decides to concede the match / play horribly. This ensures Player C gets into top8, Player A does not, and Player B saved his money.


The above situation is of course highly theoretical, and I can't imagine it being relevant at all.

[Aggro_zombies]

There is actually one scenario where betting on yourself is detrimental to the game:

Player A makes a bet with Player B, with Player B owing Player A "something" if Player A gets top8.

Before the last round Player A is really close to making top 8, so is Player C. It turns out that Player B is playing against Player C. Player B decides to concede the match / play horribly. This ensures Player C gets into top8, Player A does not, and Player B saved his money.


The above situation is of course highly theoretical, and I can't imagine it being relevant at all.

This can happen even in the absence of a bet. For example, players B and C could simply not like player A. When they get paired in the final round of Swiss, they decide player C's deck has a better matchup against player A, so player B loses intentionally/concedes so that player C makes top 8 and hopefully knocks out player A.

If the players actually play the game out, it's difficult to prove in either case that something was done to make sure certain players make top 8 (or not), especially if they keep their mouths shut about what they were doing.

Betting on yourself is extremely unlikely to compromise tourament integrity. However, the DCI prohibits it anyway because they don't want to be associated in any way with gambling, so they take quite a hard line towards it (at least, this is what I've been told by several level 2-3 Arizona judges).

[The Pharmacist]

If you're happy about this, I'm just going to lump you into the 1/2 of New York players who are total dicks*.

Ok so I guess I'm a dick, but that's how I feel about him.

[Tammit67]

If you're happy about this, I'm just going to lump you into the 1/2 of New York players who are total dicks*.

Ok so I guess I'm a dick, but that's how I feel about him.

Ditto. That whole fiasco of fishing for concessions or matchwins did not sit right with anyone there at the tournament (Vestal). The other guy shouldn't have called him a faerie, but he has anger issues. Not entirely happy with the way it was handled at the GP, in an event that stresses the rules Levin so vehemently fishes for elsewhere. Team Left field is a bunch of good guys, they got it right.

@JRS (Stempo)- Take your time. Of course he is going to rush you. Just chill out and play your game. You are entitled to your time if it is not unreasonable. But calling him out on you playing poorly because he was trying to get you to hurry is pretty weak.

[MMogg]

@JRS (Stempo)- Take your time. Of course he is going to rush you. Just chill out and play your game. You are entitled to your time if it is not unreasonable. But calling him out on you playing poorly because he was trying to get you to hurry is pretty weak.

Yeah, he probably should mention play errors, but I think he was just expressing his frustration. Anyway, I think the most important part of what jrsthethird said has been untouched/ignored and that is (emphasized part):

I take some blame for this but it just was not fun to play with him.

I've been in this situation (I know I'm an overly sensitive person in general, take things personally and one bad incident can ruin my day if not week), so when I read this statement, I knew what he meant completely on both cognitive and emotive levels. It's not just being rushed, it's that dealing with an asshole while you're trying to have fun and enjoy your hobby is a fun succubus. Fun is an important aspect of the game, of course, and being rushed and/or playing against a fisherman is probably as universally unfun as anything else.

[TheMightyQuinn]

If Levin is really as much of a toolbag as some people are making him out to be, some good may actually come from this clusterfuck of a situation: maybe he has learned a lesson and will be a more pleasant competitor at future tournaments after feeling what it is like to be on the receiving end of the jerkwad stick.

[umbowta]

Three years ago Craig Wescoe beat me in a tournament with Jinxed Friggin Choker. I still made top 8, only to end up losing to Paul Nicolo, but that's beside the point. I never got to the point of liking the guy or not but, truth be told, I could tell he was a rules follower to a fault. I think it's totally possible that Craig was just following the rules. Hoping for a favorable outcome is second nature at that point.

[Pulp_Fiction]

It seems like a few people are complaining about losses that were their own fault. If you opponent rushes you .... WHY ARE YOU COMPROMISING YOU PLAY FOR THE SAKE OF SPEED? There are actually quite a few people at my local card shop who ask people to speed it up and rarely are there any arguments. Lots of games just play themselves. BUT, when faced with a tough decision why are u not taking ur time? Thats just ignorance on your part, it isn't the other guys' fault.

I have lost a lot of respect for Levin since someone said he only plays CB bullshit so he is now classified as a tool, but regardless of this, I am still on his side, and this is very rare since I basically hate everyone who plays CB bullshit and Landstill (for time reasons and my level of boredom I am able to achieve in the matches).

And that example .... wtf, when you enter a tournament you are already betting on yourself to win, otherwise why would you pay to play? I can't believe this is even an issue, betting on yourself, who the hell cares?? It effects nothing in the tournament.

[Whit3 Ghost]

Real Life Application: Pete Rose claimed that he only bet on his own team, and gambling vouchers proved this - but it was also shown that when his two worst pitchers were pitching, he would not bet on his own team. This gave him motivation to play his team differently (put in different relievers/overwork certain guys) in order to maximize his own chance of winning - at the times at which he DID bet on his own team.

Two things, there's proof that Rose bet on the game besides a statement chock full of hyperbole, and there's no way to manipulate Magic in the same way that Rose did.

[lordofthepit]

So technically, did the dude lose his bet?

[Rood]

That's the best non counting placing I have ever heard of for sure.

Though I would never cry for a judge if he made that remark after beating me in a match.