This scenario came up at a local PPTQ that I attended as a player, and I was interested to see how you guys would handle it.

You are the head judge of a large limited PPTQ. Albert and Norbert have just finished their match, when Norbert says “I think you are the player that registered my pool!” Albert disagrees, and backs it up with “I'll bet you $1 that I didn't register your pool.” Norbert agrees to the bet, and goes over to the judge station and asks to check his Decklist. After confirming that Albert did indeed register Norbert's pool, Albert hands over $1. At this point, a floor judge informs you about what took place. How do you proceed?

Here's the relevant section on Wagering from the IPG:

Wagering occurs when a player or spectator at a tournament places a bet on the outcome of a tournament, match or any portion of a tournament or match. The wager does not need to be monetary, nor is it relevant if a player is not betting on his or her own match

Edited Tristan Killeen (March 31, 2015 07:15:21 AM)

I feel like “who registered this pool” would fall under “any portion of a tournament” in the IPG description of Wagering, so yes I think this is squarely under USC - Bribery and Wagering.

Additionally, I have been told (and someone correct me if this isn't true) that beyond the obvious tournament integrity concerns with Wagering, it's also forbidden to ensure that Magic tournaments don't run afoul of laws about gambling. If people are being allowed to have “side-bets” on things it could open up a huge can of worms that we want to stay well clear of.

There has been strong emphasis in the past, that anything that would tie Magic to gambling should be harshly dealt with. This is to set a precedent that Magic is in no way, shape, or form connected to gambling. I have searched the net for examples of this but have come up empty. Perhaps someone else's Google-fu is better than mine. I believe that removal of the players from that event is the only option we as judges have in that situation. An explanation of exactly why the behavior damages the integrity of not just that event, but possibly all other Magic events, may go a long way to getting those players to understand why that infraction is so serious.

I think that some of this explanation is lacking from the “Philosophy” portion of the Wagering section of the IPG. A few more words there would drive the point home a little bit better and could help judges understand the scope of what we are trying to enforce.

Edited Addison Miller (March 31, 2015 07:49:06 AM)

Rather than get hung up on whether or not this wager is “any portion of a tournament”, let's just consider the underlying philosophy: We (that's us judges, the TOs, the players, and Wizards of the Coast) absolutely can NOT allow wagering to be a part of our tournament environment, in any fashion.

So, let's tell those two players about the rule they've just broken, and the rather unfortunate but necessary consequences. They'll be upset, and they'll want to downplay the significance of their bet - but that's where you can point to the “any portion of a tournament” phrase, and explain that the mere appearance of wagering in connection with competitive Magic could bring the whole world crashing down around them - and you know they don't want to ruin it for everyone, right?

d:^D

Here's a similar scenario that came up at a regular REL draft event at my store:
Player A finishes drafting, then sits down with spectator B to build his deck. While building, the two get into an argument about what happened in a Hearthstone video they had previously watched. They bet $1 on who was right, then watched the video on youtube and settled the bet. Would this still count as wagering?

It doesn't fall within what the IPG says, but I would definitely ask them to avoid doing that in the venue in the future, and explain why.

Sidegrade question:

If you overhear their original suggestion before they go through the checking and payment, what would be the best reaction?

I'm personally a tad used to regular where rather than let people say things I would have to DQ them for, I try to use what-ifs to show them what would happen if they did say what they totally weren't going to say. At comp obviously the IPG does rule, but is this a situation where you might try to essentially help them not get DQed by cutting them off?

Edited Gregory Titov (April 15, 2015 10:07:05 PM)

Originally posted by Gregory Titov:

I'm personally a tad used to regular where rather than DQ people I know have no clue about those sort of rules, I use what-ifs to show them what would happen if they did say what I totally didn't hear them say.

Note that even at Regular REL, bribery/wagering is a case where ignorance of the rule is not a defense, and the player must be DQed.
From the JAR:

"Any player engaging in the following must be removed from your event…

• …gambling on any part of a tournament"

Edited James Winward-Stuart (April 15, 2015 08:11:15 PM)