shuffling

[shroomy2dope]

sorry this question may seem novice but my play group is secluded and my non-local tournament experiance is non-existant.

is there a required method or standard of shuffle?

i usually do what is reffered to as a gamblers shuffle. taking the deck in one hand and shuffling packets of cards from back to front with my other hand. i never bridge my cards my power is real and that scares me, specially with stiffer cases.

i also do, what in 5-color, we reffered to as a mana shuffle. going through your library between games and placing a mana source/land every so many spaces. in a tournament scene is that frowned upon?

how about rearanging, "packets", of cards when you sideboard. i know some players do this, is it wrong. let's assume i board in all 15 every mach to conceal my true boarding. it's logical to assume i'm going to seperate the multiples i just boarded in,so i'm already seperating in essence.
i guess that maks my ultimate question this; what is the line? is it the amount of time you take?, or is it the ammount of rearanging you do?, and all of this on what standard of shuffle?

[scifiantihero]

Check out the DCI rules.  They explain it pretty well.  

'Sufficiently Random' is the key term.  What you are calling Gamblers' Shuffling seems to be not enough.  Just moving around piles of cards leaves way too much opportunity for key combos to stay together, which is not random.

Mana-weaving, or whatever people want to call it (land, card, card, land, card, card) is certainly not random, and will get the judge called over quite quickly.

Bridge shuffling is certainly a concern, but you can get the same effect from splitting the deck, loosening the piles up in your hands, and gently sliding them together.  Let's call it smash shuffling.  Rough sounding name, but don't worry; it keeps the moxes safe and the cards random.

And of course there is pile shuffling-- dealing the cards out into a number of face down piles in front of you to make sure things are as randomly un-clumped as possible.  This is not enough either, though, to be sufficiently random.

What I, and most people I see, do is a combination of Smash shuffling and pile shuffling.  Pick up the cards, shuffle 'em a little, pile shuffle once, smash shuffle, pile again, then smash a few times, cut it, and present it.  

As far as side-boarding goes . . . I forget what the current ruling is.  The last couple updates had the DCI going back and forth on that one in the form of saying the sideboard must be in different sleeves than the main deck.  I believe, though, that you can now sideboard in all fifteen then pull out whichever ones you want, again.

[CorwinB]

There is a pretty good Youtube video on how to shuffle cards with sleeves :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zjLp5wh5y90&feature=related

[Doomsday]

You can mana weave if you want, so long as you sufficiently randomize your deck afterward (so basically it accomplishes nothing).

[Anusien]

There are only two requirements for shuffling and sideboarding:
1) You shuffle sufficiently such that you have zero knowledge of the order of your deck.  It is assumed that you know the full order of your deck before you shuffle.  So shuffle the heck out of that thing.  I strongly recommend at least ten riffle or side shuffles.  You could do what you're talking about, ordering the deck land/spell/land/spell.  But you still have to shuffle a ton afterward.  I wouldn't recommend doing it at all.  It just takes up time.

2) You have to shuffle in some way that meshes the cards in the deck together.  You don't have to riffle, but you have to at least side shuffle or some other method.  Pile shuffling, cutting and similar methods are not enough.  You need to interleave the cards in your deck in some manner.

As to sideboarding, you must present a legal deck with the right number of cards.  You can put 15 sideboard cards in and pull 15 cards out.  You can swap one for one.  You can even exchange the cards in the sleeves.  There is no set way to do this.

[sorcutt]

Pile shuffling into 7 seperate piles works the best for card distribution (better than 6 piles).  Ray Robillard told me the crazy math percentages one time. Usually I'll pile shuffle for the opening hand.  Then if I mulligan I'll side shuffle.  If I mull to 5 or anything less I'll pile shuffle each time to ensure equal distribution.

As an Ichorid player I know the value of good shuffling.  If you're not shuffling correctly you're going to get mana flooded ro end up with a lack of mana.  The land cards that you scooped up from last game will most likely all be gouped together, fucking up your day.

[vroman]

I just do about 30 side shuffles at rate of 1/sec. I dont mul very often, so it must be working.

[Mantis]

I pile shuffle every mulligan and starter then side shuffle about 4~5 times. sorcutt made a good point, if you mulligan make sure you shuffle good, take your time to make sure your cards are equally distrubuted again to minimize the risk of having the same bad hand you did last time.

If you are not familair with the terms of shuffling, like riffle shuffling/pile shuffling etc., ask about that and Im sure someone will give you a satisfying answer.

[shroomy2dope]

i believe what i refer to as a gamblers shuffle, is what you refer to as a side shuffle, thus my question remains.   is it unethical to redistribute the card order and lands in your deck between matches/games then only side shuffle(which leaves cards in packets), and not bridge or pile shuffle?  is this considered sufficiently random?  when i see a player rearrange then side shuffle, am i playing at a disadvantage? because i assure you the cards stay in a closer order to the way you set them that way then the other two mentioned methods.


sorry, i probably should have posted this in the rules forum but i didn't consider it at the time.

[Mantis]

The only thing I have ever see a player do was pick up his sideboard cards and stick them rather equally distributed in the deck, he then obviously did shuffle. I was not playing that guy but if he were to do that against me, I would have definately called the judge over and ask him to check if his sideboard cards were sufficiently randomized.

[Gandalf_The_White_1]

i believe what i refer to as a gamblers shuffle, is what you refer to as a side shuffle, thus my question remains.   is it unethical to redistribute the card order and lands in your deck between matches/games then only side shuffle(which leaves cards in packets), and not bridge or pile shuffle?

You can do anything you want to your deck as long as you shuffle it properly afterward.  As Anusien previously stated, players are assumed to know the initial arrangement of their decks anyways.  The catch is that to actually "sufficiently randomize" the deck, you have to shuffle well enough that you cannot know the position of any card in your deck based on its starting position.  Therefore, if you shuffle properly after mana-weaving or pile-shuffling (a good number of side shuffles), by virtue of the definition of 'shuffle properly' you have just undone whatever you did in the first place.

because i assure you the cards stay in a closer order to the way you set them that way then the other two mentioned methods.

So, assuming proper shuffling, this assertion is false.

In conclusion: you either
A) Mana weave your deck and then don't shuffle enough to randomize it, in which case you are cheating and stacking your deck.
or
B) Mana weave your deck and then sufficiently randomize it, in which case you just wasted your time mana-weaving.

This is why I think mana-weaving is stupid.  I know people who swear by it, and it's fine as long as they shuffle properly afterward, but they are just fooling themselves when they think that it actually does anything.

Pile-shuffling is in fact similarly useless, because it doesn't randomize the deck since each card is re-distributed based on a regular pattern--i.e. if you know the starting order of your deck, you can still know where each card is after pile-shuffling.  The only real reason to pile shuffle is that it lets you count your deck before presenting to make sure that it is legal (which is actually a good thing).

EDIT:
Also, if by "bridge shuffle" you mean riffle shuffle, a side-shuffle is essentially equivalent to this in the way that it randomizes the deck--both shuffles interweave the two parts of the deck with one another, as in the video which was linked.  As such, side shuffling does not leave cards in packets (if you do it enough times).

[vroman]

You can alphabetize your deck if you want, so long as you shuffle after.

[scifiantihero]

because i assure you the cards stay in a closer order to the way you set them that way then the other two mentioned methods.

So, assuming proper shuffling, this assertion is false.

However, the poster was asking about this being done by his opponent, and he IS a little new to the concept (no offense intended!).  So while it's perfectly fine to explain how sufficiently randomizing a deck will always make it sufficiently random . . . well he can probably figure that out.

So, another issue is that not all players ARE going to be honest and fair about it, and not all opponents--even if they are trying to be perfectly fair-- have been smart enough to come to TMD and ask about it, and may be slightly uninformed about what's expected of them by the DCI.  Players WILL either intentionally or unintentionally present you with an insufficiently randomized deck. 

So, if you see someone doing something that MIGHT be a little sketchy, based on the great advice everyone here is providing, feel free to give their deck a few shuffles.

And on another note, not doing anything remotely sketchy yourself is a good way to lessen the chance that lotus gets bent by being shuffled a few extra times by the opponent!

[shroomy2dope]

thanks you were all helpfull

[kenoc]

No one really answered the question, so I'll try.  They just said it needs to be "sufficiently" shuffled.

What shuffling means to me, and I think to the DCI, is the same as in poker.  Which is that any two cards could be in any position after shuffling.  So if you weave your deck (let's say alphabetize) there is an equal chance the top card is a lotus as it is a time vault, and that the next card is a inkwell leviathan.  etc.

For 52 cards, that means 7 riffle shuffles and 1 cut.  Google "random shuffle cards".  There's a bunch of articles on it.
For what you call a gambler's shuffle, if I recall correctly, mean to get a true shuffle, you need something like 11,000 gambler's shuffles.  Not easy to do with DCI time limits.
BTW, pile shuffle does not equal riffle shuffle.  Pile shuffles are not random - unless you pile shuffle into random size piles and clump your cards (which sort of defeats the purpose).  Also, in my opinion, pile shuffling damages cards more than what someone else called a "smash" shuffle.  So the only logical reason to pile shuffle is to 1) stall 2) not randomize your cards but make it look like you are.

For 60 card decks, you'd probably have to riffle shuffle 9-10 times and do a cut.  And that is regardless how many pile "shuffles" or gambler's "shuffles" you do - because these do basically nothing.

BTW - i wonder where the term "gambler's" shuffle comes from.  Probably some poker cheat.