Hello.

I just was looking at an article on CFB where a player recommends to people that they take a photograph of the standings to help them figure out what results they need to top 8, based on other finished matches during the last round. From my understanding of policy, looking at such a photograph during a match would be considered Outside Assistance. Is this correct?

When I HJ a competitive event, I explicitly warn players not to take pictures of the standings, and I ask the floor judges to stop players who are doing so. I have not seen discussions here about whether we should actually stop players from taking pictures of the standings.

What do you think?

Players can't look at such notes during a game, but are allowed to consult
those notes outside of games and matches.
Honestly, there's nothing we can do to stop players from taking pictures of
the standings unless we're going to start giving penalties to dozens of
players per event. The world has changed, and it's more fair to let
everyone just snap a picture than to forbid it and allow only the sneakiest
access to the information.
I would absolutely stop the practice if I could, but it's not really
possible, so we might as well just let the players get on with the event
and get back to playing Magic.
Remember, there's policy in place if players actually start colluding here.

Nothing in tournament policy prohibits a player from photographing or otherwise taking notes on the standings. It is also not something that needs to be discouraged – in fact, it's usually quicker at getting players to their seats if they are just walking up and taking a picture, rather than standing around in the crowd and trying to analyze everything at the board.

Once they're seated for their match, same rules as any other pre-existing notes they bring with them to the table; can't refer to them during a game, but can refer to them between games.

We have established on other threads that OA relates specifically to assistance playing a game of Magic. It does not apply to tournament math. (And policy is not written naively. If it were meant to cover tournament math, it would.)

In my opinion, this means any review of standings falls squarely under Slow Play, rather than OA, because the information on the standings board cannot meaningfully inform your in-game decisions. If players aren't starting a match, give a Caution or Warning and ask them to put the phone away and reach a decision. If players have started their match but are spending too long talking about an ID and reviewing standings as part of that discussion, give a Caution or Warning and ask them to put the phone away and continue play.

(You should investigate what notes the player is reviewing on his phone, but usually it's pretty obvious that it isn't tactical advice because the players will have the phone dead center on the table and both be looking at it.)

Looking at a photo of the standings while playing a game would fall under reviewing “notes made before the official beginning of the current match” and that is classed as outside assistance.

Originally posted by Gareth Tanner:

Looking at a photo of the standings while playing a game would fall under reviewing “notes made before the official beginning of the current match” and that is classed as outside assistance.

While MIPG 3.2 does say “notes made outside the current match can only be referenced between games”, the rest of the definition of MIPG 3.2 makes it clear that this is in the context of play advice or information that could be used to make play decisions. This is even more clear in the philosophy section of the document…

Tournaments test the skill of a player, not his or her ability to follow external advice or directions. Any strategy advice, play advice, or construction advice from an external source is considered outside assistance.

…making a decision of whether to draw or concede, in context of a match or game, should not be a strategic decision. Further, we even state in MTR 5.2 that players can make use of information about decisions to drop or concede, provided it isn't in collusion with other matches. They can't leave their seats, but nothing prohibits them from taking photos and using them while at their seats.

I see no infraction here.

But section 2.12 of the MTR states:

Players may use electronic devices to do the following:

• Keep track of life totals or other game-relevant information
  Take and review notes (as outlined in section 2.11)
  Generate a random number when the game calls for one
  Briefly answer personal call not related to the game (with permission of the opponent
  

So while I agree that it might not be Outside Assistance I still stand by players shouldn't look at a photo that was taken of the standings during a match

Originally posted by Gareth Tanner:

So while I agree that it might not be Outside Assistance I still stand by players shouldn't look at a photo that was taken of the standings during a match

While I concede that the MTR is not explicit on this point, I think MTR 2.12 is meant to be clear on what we generally accept players to use electronic devices to do. In that respect, while the list is not comprehensive, it is also not meant to be restrictive in the sense that leaving something of the list is prohibit. Especially as most policies in the MTR are generally meant to prohibit certain behaviors, rather than permit certain behaviors.

If we agree that the photo classes as notes, but due to having no strategic value don't class as outside assistance, do they then not also fall under “take and review notes”?

I didn't agree that photographs classify as notes. And I see where you want to go with this, and I don't agree with where you are going. For example, if a player wants to have a photograph of his significant other on his phone and visible during the match because it brings him good luck, who am I to care? If it's a photograph of the U.S. Declaration of Independence, again, who am I to care? Should I prohibit the player from looking at either of those things during the match?

In short, I don't see a photograph of the standings as anything at all. I concede I could be mistaken, but I don't see a problem with allowing the player to take the photo or to look at the photo at any point in time. It's not significantly different than allowing the player to simply ask “How did match X do?”, and we're okay with that.

Now, if the player is going to sit down and run through the entire math… Now we get into Slow Play. But, if he just wants to double check and see where he was at in the standings? I'm really not seeing the issue.

In which case I shall agree to disagree and leave it at that for now

Halfway through game 2, my buddy says “hey, Scott, what did you want from Smashburger?”, so I access their on-line menu, tell my buddy what I want, then show the menu to my opponent and say “want them to pick up something for you, too?” - clearly, that's not OA. Even if I access a text note I made 2 hours ago, to remind myself what I want to order - that's notes made prior to this match, but still not OA.

In the case of standings, it's not as clear, since the content is related to the tournament, and decisions based on those standings might affect the outcome of the current game and/or match. But it's still not a match for the philosophy that Brian quoted, above.

So, which is it? The Definition is not very forgiving, is it? (Notes made outside the current match may only be referenced between games…) Yet, the Philosophy explains the primary concerns that justify OA's rather harsh penalty.

We also have concerns about referencing any kind of notes, during a game. As Josh mentioned, looking at notes does not advance the game; he's right that Slow Play might apply. But it's impractical to expect judges to verify that the notes being referenced are NOT a violation of the Philosophy. It's much easier to just say “don't do it!”

That doesn't mean you should start shipping Match Losses to any player who fails to follow the Definition explicitly (probably because they only understood the Philosophy). After all, “The Head Judge is the final arbiter on what cards and notes are acceptable for a tournament.”

If a player is not seeking OA - per the Philosophy - and you haven't already done so, educate them. If they're ignoring that Education, or if the notes do contain advice of some sort, then Match Loss is appropriate. And, if you know they already knew better … well, we have a very special section of the IPG for that, don't we?

While I respect your right to disagree, I think you're focusing on the wrong question. You are asking whether photographs classify as notes or not. I would ask a much more fundamental question: What is a note?

IMO, if we answer the question of “What is a note?” that would be more relevant to assessing whether a photograph could ever classify as a note to begin with. Or if we have to evaluate the context and the information. (I concede there could be photographs that classify as notes, just that a “note” is going to be pretty specific in its nature. Information on standings is not “notes” IMO.)

Edit: This was posted in relation to Gareth's comments. Not to Scott. I want to make clear that I don't disagree with Scott. ;)

Edited Brian Schenck (June 13, 2013 09:46:32 AM)

Personally everything form of writing can be classed as notes, while some may not make sense to all or be relevant to the game that does not make them any less notes.

Why are you worrying about the broad English definition of the word
“notes?” “Notes” in policy roughly means “recorded information that will
help you play a game of Magic: the Gathering.”

Words have special uses in lots of technical disciplines that, if
interpreted in the broader English sense rather than the field-relevant
sense, would be vague or confusing. Magic rules and policy are no
different. We mean something very specific when we say “hand” or “generally
detrimental” or “card you own from outside the game.” We are also allowed
to understand something more specific than the usual meaning of “notes.”

Edited Joshua Feingold (June 13, 2013 12:35:41 PM)