Speed and Magic

[Cownose]

I was playing at a local PTQ a few weeks ago and something I thought that something I experienced there might be worth a discussion on these forums: Should the time limit on rounds be evenly divided among the two participants? I.E. as Magic Online does it (for those who dont know, in a 50 minute match time online, each player is given 25 minutes of priority and if they go beyond that time, they are disqualified). Now to most of us, this seems to be a very stupid thought, and to be honest with you it seems that way to me as well, but allow me to explain what prompted this:

At an extended (I know it's not T1, but the same principal still applies) PTQ a few weeks ago I was playing a combo deck (Words of Wind Enchantress). Now for anyone who has played that deck it is quite hard to pilot effectively because there are several points on the turn you go off where one can kill themselves, either directly by decking yourself or indirectly by allowing your opponent to counter a key spell and manaburning you to death. During the course of the 7-round swiss, I had several players (4 to be exact) express dissatisfaction with the rate of my play, one having gone so far as to call a judge and try to convince him that I was stalling the game (which i can honestly say I was not). Now on the turn you go off with the deck, you will cast anywhere between 10 and 30 spells, draw your entire deck, generate infin. mana, and activate words of wind a bunch of times. As i did not want to acidently kill myself or to do something stupid as a result of rushing my play, i took as much time as was needed to ensure victory. Some of the games ended fairly shortly, as I drew exactly what i needed and ended the game in a hurry, but a few of the games in question had final turns lasting between 10 and 20 minutes. I had two opponants tell me that if I knew my deck well enough, that i would not have had to take so much time to go off (though this may have been true, I really dont think that i could have made it go any faster). I know this same issure comes up in alot of control matches in T1, and i was wondering what the majority of the population thought.  

So heres the Question:

Is it within a players right to take as long as they deem necessary to finish a match or is it the players responsibility to keep the game going at a "normal" pace? And, if it is the players responsibility, would adding a time limit to play time (as in chess) solve the problem?

[JSexton]

This is a very good question. It's a fairly subjective situation, though. Here is an excerpt from the Universal Tournament Rules:

Players must take their turns in a timely fashion regardless of the complexity of the play situation. Playing too slowly or stalling for time is not acceptable.

It's clear that slow play is not limited to simply delaying the inevitable. I think most judges will give some latititude if the situation is highly complex, but the rules _do_ state that complexity is not a mitigating factor in determining slow play.

Honestly, I think your opponents have a point. If you cannot reasonably expect to complete three games in 50 minutes (knowing that such a time limit is in place), then you should either learn to play the deck faster or select another deck. It sounds harsh, but time limits are a necessary restriction in the game, and you have to anticipate that.

As for a chess clock, or something similar, I just don't think it's practical in real-life Magic. You just can't hit a timer every time you pass priority. You can't really do it based on turns, either, since your opponent can spend more time making decisions on your turn then on your own. Draw-Go, for example.

[rvs]

unfortunately, the last point JSexton raises is very true.

Simply put, you might not be intentionally stalling, but that doesn't mean it's not slow play. There is a distinctive difference between slow play and stalling in my opinion. Slow Play is often untintentional, while Stalling is not. That's also the reason why Slow Play results in small penalties, and stalling is considered cheating. The best the judge could do, is watch you, and in case he also thinks you are playing too slowly, give you a warning, which can be upgraded to a gameloss if you keep that up. It's always a judgement call, and one that is perhaps the most difficult for judges to make, since there's a lot of other tables that also need your attention.

Unfortunately, it's probably inavoidable to have situations like these arise.

[leviat]

I would actually be more than happy to advocate a round clock when dealing with competitive tournaments. It seems very unfair than one player be allowed to monopolize the time involved. It would also encourage people not to play ungainly combo decks that they really have no business playing.

[Tristal]

If you mean chess-style clocks, the issue's already been discussed on the judge list and denied for several reasons.  Not that I'm an authority on it at all, but cost-effectiveness is definitely not worth it.

[rvs]

@leviat: so you hit the clock each time priority passes? It doesn't work, just test it out.

[leviat]

@leviat: so you hit the clock each time priority passes? It doesn't work, just test it out.

I've never tried it so I can't make an educated response, but when dealing in a high-stakes tournament I think it would be wonderful (if for no other reason than to make it clear when my opponent is passing priority).

Hehe, I know at least once a tourny (usually once a match) my opponent and I sit there staying at one another waiting for the other person to finish/start their turn.

I do see the problems of course though, seeing how monotonous it would get as you sit and pass priority at the end of each and every step/phase (especially in the control mirrors with all the, "land-go").

[Cownose]

I have another question about this then. The floor rules clearly state that the game must be played in a timely manner, however it is unclear if that applies only to playing slowly--i.e. taking 2 mins between each decision--and your deck just taking alot of time to win--i.e. casting and resolving 30+ spells can take alot of time in a turn even if the players is going as fast as threy can. I do not think that a Judge can penalize a player simply for playing a slow deck (keeper, anyone?). If i have a legitimate reason to continue my turn (such as casting more and more spells), then it is not my right as a player and competitor do do everything in my power to win on that turn, rather than saying "well, ive already cast 10 spells and taken 8 minutes this turn, I guess ill just stop going off and pass the turn for your sake".  

On nother note, JJ Storrs just wrote an article on brainburst about just this situation (allbeit that he actually advocates eating up the clock on purpose, which I am in no way doing). its actually kind of odd, because he uses this very same deck as an example in his article here

http://www.brainburst.com/db/article.asp?id=3747

...Maybe he reads themanadrain's forums    [/url]

[Jebus]

You will not be penalized for playing a slow deck, as long as you are playing in a timely manner.  Decks such as Enchantress can take a long time to go off once it  gets going, but this isn't the players fault (unless they actually are making decisions too slowly).

Taking 30 actions in your turn that are nescessary would not be slow play.  Taking 30 actions very slowly would.

Really, all that is important is how fast you are playing and how fast you are making descisions.