Hi,

I've had two separate occasions where a player realises about a problem with his deck after I told them I came to deck-check.

1) Before game 1 in a modern competetive event.
- I'm slightly too early in saying “i come to deck check” as one player is still in his final shuffle.
- This player places the deck for me face down on the table.
- I ask for sideboard as well.
- Player looks at his sideboard before giving it to me and realises he “failed to de-sideboard”

2) Before game 2 in a SOI sealed PPTQ
- I tell the players I come to deck check.
- One player while handing over his deckbox, sees a checklist card instead of the actual card in his deckbox.

For both these occasions I went with the option to downgrade as they sort of called a Judge upon themselves.
But after discussion at both events, i'm not sure if this is the right way to go.

The first scenario I think that your issue here is, he presented his deck to his opponent?

If he did it, it's a DP/DLP when you make the deck check.
If not, he has the option to solve this problem before the deck check, this because there's no an illegal situation yet and he hasn't presented his deck.

Consider the potential on win an advantage here.

Now the penalty.

First this

Originally posted by IPG 3.5 Tournament Error — Deck/Decklist Problem:

If a player, before taking any game actions, discovers incorrect cards in their deck and calls attention to it at that point, the Head Judge may issue a Warning, fix the deck, and, if the player has drawn their opening hand, instruct the player to mulligan. The player may continue to take further mulligans if desired.

In the first case I'll consider in issue the downgrade to warning due that he call us the atention on this before make any action or gaining advantage.
In the second case, there's no penalty for this yet.

The second scenario I'll consider only a marked card (the card is perfectly different from the rest of the deck) and I'll correct the deck with the checklist and issue the penalty of marked cards without thinking in abuse from the player.
I no consider abuse because if both player shuffle without seeing their decks, they didn't have the chance to notice the DFC in the deck.

So, it's only a problem of replacing a card and make the deck completely random again.

Greets.

For the first one, I don't think I would downgrade. While they haven't presented the deck to their opponent, they have presented it to you, and it's only when they get the sideboard that they see the error. Had you not interceded, they would have played game 1 with an illegal deck.

For (2), I don't know if it's (a) the actual DFC is in a sleeve in the deck; or (b) it's a 39 card deck. If (a), and the sleeves aren't marked, and it's only the one copy of that particular card, then no foul so no need to downgrade anything. If (b), then 39 cards is 39 so game loss.

That's my particular view anyway.

Originally posted by Cristóbal Vigar Guerrero:

The first scenario I think that your issue here is, he presented his deck to his opponent?If he did it, it's a DP/DLP when you make the deck check.

Is placing a deck on the table for me to pick up the same as presenting the deck to the opponent?


In both cases my doubt is about the fact that you can get out of a gameloss worthy situation by “discovering” a problem just by thumbing through your sideboard.

Originally posted by Mark Mc Govern:

For the first one, I don't think I would downgrade. While they haven't presented the deck to their opponent, they have presented it to you, and it's only when they get the sideboard that they see the error. Had you not interceded, they would have played game 1 with an illegal deck.

For (2), I don't know if it's (a) the actual DFC is in a sleeve in the deck; or (b) it's a 39 card deck. If (a), and the sleeves aren't marked, and it's only the one copy of that particular card, then no foul so no need to downgrade anything. If (b), then 39 cards is 39 so game loss.

That's my particular view anyway.

After reading again the situation and your answer, I think the same (I miss read the part when the player caught his error after looking his sideboard), and also the fact on playing a game with an illegal deck if you're not deck checking them supports the sanction.

The second scenario is, as I understand, the player is playing with checklist's because he hasn't sleeves or his sleeves are not enough opaques.

If this is the situation I'll keep applying the penalty for marked cards only, because the deck is still legal, right?

Greets.

Let's break down our situations.

In situation 1), one of two things might have happened. Either the player is lying to you and is intentionally playing with the “wrong” cards in his deck. If you believe this to be the case, you DQ him. If he is truly forgetful and had not de-sideboarded since the last game, he should not be penalized so harshly.
In IPG 3.5. Deck/Decklist Problem, the second Downgrade says as follows:
“If a player, before taking any game actions, discovers incorrect cards in their deck and calls attention to it at that point, the Head Judge may issue a Warning, fix the deck, etc.”

I would definitely have a chat with that player to make sure that this is not them “getting caught” and making up a story about not de-sideboarding. Either way I would not Game Loss them.

In situation 2), if I understood you correctly, the player had a check-list card in their deck box but was missing the corresponding card? Where was that card found?

Originally posted by John Eriksson:

In situation 2), if I understood you correctly, the player had a check-list card in their deck box but was missing the corresponding card? Where was that card found?

The actual card was found in the deck.

Cristóbal Vigar Guerrero
The second scenario is, as I understand, the player is playing with checklist's because he hasn't sleeves or his sleeves are not enough opaques.

Yes, his sleeves were not opaque enough.

Originally posted by Alex de Bruijne:

For both these occasions I went with the option to downgrade as they sort of called a Judge upon themselves.

In the first scenario, I don't think that this applies - if the player is still shuffling and hasn't presented his or her deck, no infraction has occured, because D/DLP only applies to list errors and problems with a presented deck:

IPG 3.5
The contents of the presented deck and sideboard do not match the decklist registered.

(emphasis added)

If you swoop in too early and the player hasn't presented, you should probably just go get a different table, unless you need to perform a targeted check on the player's opponent. If you perform a check when one player has presented, but the other hasn't, you're setting up a potential situation where you're issuing a Game Loss to one player, and telling the other to be more careful when both have problems with their decks.

And if you say “Well, we'll call that presented”, you're assuming that the player wasn't going to realize the error and correct if before presenting… I've seen some players finish shuffling, look over their sideboard, then slide their deck forward once they've confirmed that they reset it.

In the second scenario, I don't completely understand what you mean about a checklist card instead of the actual card.

However, if this would be a D/DLP, I don't believe that the downgrade applies either. Once you've swooped in, it's too late for the player to make you aware of an issue and consider it “calling a judge's attention to it” - at that point, they knew that you'd discover it on your own. This downgrade is there to encourage players to be honest when they probably wouldn't get caught - there are a lot of sideboard cards that could reasonably be played in the main deck without an opponent noticing, or just held in-hand until the game ends. It shouldn't be used just because a player realized that they're going to fail a check that's imminent.

Edited John Brian McCarthy (May 9, 2016 09:03:15 AM)

I tend to agree that the player in the first situation hasn't presented yet, so he's allowed to discover and correct his error - but I am going to investigate that one; I want him to convince me that he wasn't aware he was about to present a pre-sideboarded deck.

In the second situation, I'm not seeing where there's anything wrong here - just swap the cards back where they should be, carry on, no harm no foul? Convince me that's wrong?

d:^D

For case 1, I would like to check:
1 What's those cards which should be in sideboard rather than main deck
2 What deck is his current opponent playing, are these cards able to make advantage for him
3 what deck is his previous opponent playing, are these cards reasonable to be sided in
(All for the possiblilty if he is intended)

Thanks for all the feedback!

To round it up:
1) investigate player for pre-boarding, next time wait for both players to present.
2) no infraction, just fix it

You're welcome Alex!