Question: Can the Twin player ask the judge for his deck list and show it to his opponent?

The MTR says: “Players have the right to request to see their decklist between matches. Such a request will be honoured if logistically possible.” So they don't get them during the round, and to be honest, it would take a judge off the floor potentially at a time when they're busiest (end of round) so it's unlikely to be feasible anyway.

Originally posted by Mark Mc Govern:

he MTR says: “Players have the right to request to see their decklist between matches. Such a request will be honoured if logistically possible.” So they don't get them during the round, and to be honest, it would take a judge off the floor potentially at a time when they're busiest (end of round) so it's unlikely to be feasible anyway.

Right, forgot about the “between matches” part. Thanks Mark!

In fairness, I didn't know about that qualifier either until I looked it up just now. One of the side benefits of interacting on these forums is you end up learning yourself half the time :p

Originally posted by Mark Mc Govern:

One of the side benefits of interacting on these forums is you end up learning yourself half the time

Happens to me often enough, I consider it more than just a side benefit! :)

Originally posted by Eli Meyer:

There are similar cases where we can give advice on how players can get what they want within the framework of policy–for instance, I would answer “Judge, we both mulliganed twice, can we agree to go to seven cards?” with “you can declare the current game a draw at any time and start the next game with the same player on the play and new seven card hands,” rather than the technically correct answer of “no, you can't.”

Wait is this legal? I mean I quite like the spirit of the conclusion (both players getting to play magic rather than live off the top of their decks), but it seems so loop-holey.

But further to the point, are we as judges allowed to suggest such a resolution to a problem? Or does that count as coaching?

Originally posted by Edward Bell:

Eli Meyer
There are similar cases where we can give advice on how players can get what they want within the framework of policy–for instance, I would answer “Judge, we both mulliganed twice, can we agree to go to seven cards?” with “you can declare the current game a draw at any time and start the next game with the same player on the play and new seven card hands,” rather than the technically correct answer of “no, you can't.”

Wait is this legal? I mean I quite like the spirit of the conclusion (both players getting to play magic rather than live off the top of their decks), but it seems so loop-holey.

But further to the point, are we as judges allowed to suggest such a resolution to a problem? Or does that count as coaching?

This is legal, because MTR 2.4 tells us ‘If a game or match is not completed, players may concede or mutually agree to a draw in that game or match.’ and since we play ‘First to reach 2 points’ instead of ‘Best of 3’ this does no big change to the result.

As for the question whether this is coaching, I find it equally coaching to say ‘You can declare any game a draw as long as it is not completed’ as it would be to say ‘You might only show your opponent any informations you’re able to see yourself'. Both is giving them the rules knowledge they need to solve their problem.

Edited Markus Dietrich (Feb. 13, 2015 04:50:34 AM)

Originally posted by Markus Dietrich:

As for the question whether this is coaching, I find it equally coaching to say ‘You can declare any game a draw as long as it is not completed’ as it would be to say ‘You might only show your opponent any informations you’re able to see yourself'. Both is giving them the rules knowledge they need to solve their problem.

As I mentioned, though, this isn't about rules knowledge or game knowledge; it's tournament knowledge. I don't feel like I've coached anyone when I suggested they end the game in a draw, and I don't feel like I would be coaching the players in the original post if I told them about cracking a fetchland–but I'm open to being corrected if I'm misunderstanding policy!

Eli, during a match, it's best if judges stick to answering rules questions. Between matches, you can provide additional information. If you simply tell the player they can't reveal their library unless something allows them to look at it, you've provided a rules answer. It's up to them to realize that a fetch land would let them look…

d:^D

Thank you for the clarification, Scott!