So as the last event of pre release weekend here in Whitehorse we do 2hg.
Prize structure is 2 packs per team per win.
In round 2 one match goes to extra turns a father playing with his 6 year old son against to very new players (we issued them dci numbers during deck construction).
As they hit the fifth turn with it apparent that the game is going to be a draw. I am standing there waiting to get final results to pair the next round. The father begins to say it is silly that we draw which means no one gets packs for this match why don't we concede and you give. At this point I interrupted before he could finish his sentence explaining why it would be a bad idea to finish his sentence and explained the rules but didn't issue a DQ because the sentence didn't get finished. I think I did the right thing but jumping in but not issuing the DQ thoughts?

Edit the 5 extra turns instead of 3 was due to slow play earlier in match.

Edited Robert Langmaid (April 4, 2016 12:14:31 AM)

Firstly, I hope you use 3 extra turns for 2HG and not 5.

Second, I would propose a small change in your prize structure to not just
have 2 packs per team per win, but also to split those between the 2 teams
if the match were to end in a draw.

As for you stepping in, I believe you gave good customer service here and I
hope you explained some more about bribery.

-R.

2016-04-04 8:37 GMT+02:00 Robert Langmaid <

First of all, don't let it get to turn 5, the match is over after 3 additional turns (as per MTR 2.5). I agree on stepping in before something really bad happens like you did in regular REL events and even more so in prereleases which should all be about having fun. In competitive events that's another story.

Additionally I would potentially talk to the TO about changing the price structure to avoid talks like that in the future…

Edited Christian Genz (April 3, 2016 11:49:59 PM)

One good way of avoiding these things is to do a quick reminder of things not to do at magic events. Since most DQs for bribery/wagering/IDAW are done out of ignorance, if you can teach people what isn't allowed they're less likely to wade into minefields.

The 5 extra turns was due to slow play earlier in match.

Originally posted by Robert Langmaid:

The 5 extra turns was due to slow play earlier in match.

Robert it sounds like you're using the IPG's fix for Slow Play. Is there a reason you chose to do this?

I am not sure on the change in prize structure the current structure gives an even number of packs so teams can easily split packs. If we were to split the prize packs for a draw it could cause other problems. As there are some players who just show up at the event and find a random partner.

Originally posted by Robert Langmaid:

The 5 extra turns was due to slow play earlier in match.

We don't use the MIPG/add 2 additional turns for slow-play at regular REL.

Originally posted by Jeff S Higgins:

Robert Langmaid
The 5 extra turns was due to slow play earlier in match.

Robert it sounds like you're using the IPG's fix for Slow Play. Is there a reason you chose to do this?

The father and son team was basically the father trying to play both decks and not very quickly. Borrowing the imp fix seemed th fairest to the other team and the best way to deal with general unwanted behavior from the JREL.

General Unwanted Behaviors

. Players taking unreasonable amounts of time sideboarding or making play decisions.

As a judge, the priority is to educate players who exhibit these behaviors. It can be useful to reinforce this education with more stern penalties such as a Game Loss should the unwanted behaviour continue.


Applying the ipg fix seemed seemed a good incremental step.

I agree that adding turns was a fine solution, even under the JAR - but I have to chuckle about everyone focusing on that, and not the interesting (and, in my opinion, much more important) question!

Yes, you absolutely did the right thing, by stepping in before they could earn a DQ. In an ideal world, you make an announcement about what not to do, and players actually hear it, listen to it, and remember it. I've never visited this ideal world, so instead we need to be vigilant at matches where this can happen.

I think I'm plagiarizing Lems (L5 Judge Jason Lemahieu), but the message is spot-on: when you see a match that isn't likely to finish, step in and give a quick education on what they can and cannot do.

d:^D

Originally posted by Scott Marshall:

I think I'm plagiarizing Lems (L5 Judge Jason Lemahieu), but the message is spot-on: when you see a match that isn't likely to finish, step in and give a quick education on what they can and cannot do.

d:^D

I probably should have explained again during extra turn the no bribery rule I did think they would and should have finished match on turn five the attacking team had leathel on field if they had played the combat tricks in hand correctly. But they didn't and then the comment that I had to inturrept happened.

Good judge: does what was done here.

Great judge: convinces the TO to change his prize structure to have a
draw being worth half a win.

On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 3:09 AM, Robert Langmaid
<forum-26010-d995@apps.magicjudges.org> wrote:
> Scott Marshall
> I think I'm plagiarizing Lems (L5 Judge Jason Lemahieu), but the message is
> spot-on: when you see a match that isn't likely to finish, step in and give
> a quick education on what they can and cannot do.
>
> d:^D
>
>
> I probably should have explained again during extra turn the no bribery rule
> I did think they would and should have finished match on turn five the
> attacking team had leathel on field if they had played the combat tricks in
> hand correctly. But they didn't and then the comment that I had to inturrept
> happened.
>
>
> ——————————————————————————–
> If you want to respond to this thread, simply reply to this email. Or view
> and respond to this message on the web at
> http://apps.magicjudges.org/forum/post/167813/
>
> Disable all notifications for this topic:
> http://apps.magicjudges.org/forum/noemail/26010/
> Receive on-site notifications only for this topic:
> http://apps.magicjudges.org/forum/noemail/26010/?onsite=yes
>
> You can change your email notification settings at
> http://apps.magicjudges.org/notifications/settings/



–
Gareth Pye - blog.cerberos.id.au
Level 2 MTG Judge, Melbourne, Australia

Having heard in the past that cutting people off to stop them from going into DQ territory, it's nice to hear people on the other side of the fence there. :)

Originally posted by Gareth Pye:

Good judge: does what was done here.

Great judge: convinces the TO to change his prize structure to have a
draw being worth half a win.

(Ahead of time, sorry to digress from the original topic)

A local TO actually found a cool way to do this, they now use ‘balanced prizing’ for some prereleases. Basically, every time a player wins a match, they get a pack, every prerelease with this prizing is capped at 4 rounds to allow for this to perfectly math out to 2 packs per player being given out.

Additionally, the store has little promotional coupons they give out at some events that you can redeem for stuff (1 for a pull from a random rare box, 2 for a pack, 9 for a free prerelease.) So in the event of a draw, they give each player a store coupon, literally half a pack. Same goes for 2HG, just doubled for each match.

On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 3:30 PM, Gregory Titov
<forum-26010-d995@apps.magicjudges.org> wrote:
> Additionally, the store has little promotional coupons they give out at some
> events that you can redeem for stuff (1 for a pull from a random rare box, 2
> for a pack, 9 for a free prerelease.) So in the event of a draw, they give
> each player a store coupon, literally half a pack. Same goes for 2HG, just
> doubled for each match.


I think this is much of the reason that most of the stores in these
parts ensure that it's 2 packs per win, half packs suck. But do what
it takes to make things work out.

–
Gareth Pye - blog.cerberos.id.au
Level 2 MTG Judge, Melbourne, Australia