(cross-posted from The Source)I'm a judge, for those of you unfamiliar. I regularly work at Pro Tours, Nationals, Grand Prix, etc in addition to local tournaments.
The judge handled the situation excellently.
I activate both Factories and swing for the final 6, he thinks before cycling Decree of Justice, DRAWING HIS CARD, then tapping mana and saying he was going to make soldiers.
WHAT? So you want to see an extra cards and then just make soldiers until you think you have it figured out? No way, JUDGE!
...
Then he claims that since this was downgraded to REL 2, it was his obligation to determine the intent of the play. He asks the guy if remembers what card he drew, he says "No ... wait, I THINK it was this one". Judge says "I'm not allowed to reveal what he drew, but I believe it was his intent to make the soldier tokens". He doesn't even make him put the damn card back before creating 12 tokens, Quadruple blocking each Factory and putting 2 guys in front of the soldiers. What a lame ass call.
... For example, during the tournament an opponent of mine brainstormed during my main phase, and forgot to put 2 cards back. I cast a spell, then went to end of turn step and noticed that he had too many cards in hand. My understanding is that this is potentially game loss worthy, especially if I had waited til his draw step. But I'm sorry, a Mox Jet isn't worth my being a bastard. I'd like to give my opponent the benefit of the doubt, point his mistake, and continue on with the match, especially since in this particular instance, his mistake had not caused him to have any unfair advantage.
Neither of these attitudes is good.
You call a judge when something goes wrong because the judge is the only person that can decide the best solution to the situation and issue appropriate penalties if necessary.
You do not get to decide how much advantage something has given someone, and you do not get to decide penalties for your opponents.
Under current philosophy, both players are held responsible for the gamestate. Something happens that shouldn't, it's
both of your faults.
"Missing" your opponent making a mistake (like drawing two cards) so you can call a judge later is more likely to earn you a DQ than any penalty for your opponent. You think judges aren't wise to that?
Also, badmouthing judges on forums generally makes people lose all respect for whatever it is you're complaining about. There is a difference between a call not in your favor and a bad call.
If you have a problem with a ruling, you discuss it privately with the judge later.
Honestly, if you expect people to not want to win, you should be playing a different game. If you're playing for a large amount of prizes you have to be expected to play by the rules, and my guess would be that anyone who says that they're turned off by competetive play either A) is not happy with their relative skill or B) didn't want to play competetively in the first place.
You win by playing Magic. You do not win by attempting to get your opponent a loss from a rules infraction.
Some seem to confuse "playing competiviely" with "being a complete and utter asshat".
For the record, I completely agree with you. Having not been there in person, I can only speculate in the abstract, but I'd much rather lose honorably than win cheaply.
Yes, winning on technicality is part of the design of the game, but it's dirty and unseemly.
In the end, as fun as the game is, it's just a fucking card game. And the value of a power card in no way compensates for a the loss of self respect and decency -- even if it is a Black Lotus [which it wasn't].
No one should "win cheaply" or "lose honorably" in a tournament, at least in the way you're implying. You shouldn't try to get a win out of a problem, and you shouldn't ignore a problem because it might involve penalties.
"Winning on technicality" is not part of the game.
Sweet report, Spynal. You get my respect for your effort. And as for Derek: I won't be arrogant and say nothing in his "speech" was true, but he can't (nor can you) deny this simple fact: you're playing in a fucking tournament. Expect competitiveness, of all kinds.
He's expecting to have fun. This is not an unreasonable expectation.
Competitiveness and fun are not mutually exclusive, despite what many of you seem to be assuming.
The unsporting sort of competitiveness should not be welcome at tournaments.
Particularly at a GPT, which is a bridge between casual tournament play (REL 1) and PTQ-level play (REL 3). In fact, REL 2 is nearly identical to REL 1. There is a strong emphasis on education rather than penalization.
This does not mean you don't call a judge, because you won't learn anything if you don't call a judge. Judges are there to facillitate play, not to hand out penalties.
Show Posts
...and it's going to be Fuccillo HUGE!? 
