Keeping Vintage Tournaments Fair and Thriving- Tournament Organizers’ Solidarity

[Anusien]

I am a little confused Anusien, do you organize tournaments?  If not, I'm not sure what your concern is.  TO's have the ability to do everything in UTOG even without participating in it.  The implementation of UTOG does not change anything for anyone.  The only thing that changes anything is when a TO subscribes to the policies.  If you have an issue with a TO in your area using these policies, it would be best to take it up with that TO. 

My issue is that I play Vintage.  Everything in this document, since it is intended to be a standard, is of relevance to every Vintage player.  What's more, I'm a Level 1 DCI Judge, and I want to understand the rationale for these policies in the case that I judge a UTOG tournament.  Why am I continually being discouraged from posting in this thread?

[RaleighNCTourneys]

Because the UTOG isn't meant to be questioned... it's meant to be followed.

In my opinion, it's not neccessary, and I have no plans to use it. I hope it works out well for the region which it was designed for.

[ELD]

I agree with the basic Pro Points style rating system hammered out by MyriadGames and others, but I'm not clear on why are we keeping track of these ratings in the first place.

What purpose will ratings serve?

Will they reset at the end of the quarter/year/season?

Are we going to set up some sort of Vintage Players Club modeled after the Pro Players Club awarding byes and/or free entry into events for high level players at events that subscribe to the UTOG?

We will keep track of the rating for the fun of it.  Players like to know how their success stacks up.  The DCI's Vintage rating served no purpose until the creation of Legacy.  It was simply a benefit for the players to track their wins.  There is currently no plan to allow for extra buys/free entry fees.  As it is, players can earn TMD Open byes for winning smaller events. 

I am in favor of a year long race with points to the Top 8 based on finish and number of swiss rounds.

My issue is that I play Vintage.  Everything in this document, since it is intended to be a standard, is of relevance to every Vintage player.  What's more, I'm a Level 1 DCI Judge, and I want to understand the rationale for these policies in the case that I judge a UTOG tournament.  Why am I continually being discouraged from posting in this thread?

I don't believe anyone is discouraging you from posting, but instead to make productive posts.  UTOG is for TO's to get on the same page.  Players should take their concerns up with their TO's.  They can best discuss any concerns that you have.  If no TO in your area is following these guidelines, then they do not affect you at all.  The discussion takes place between members of UTOG.  Our interest is running successful tournaments.  This involves taking feedback from our players and keeping them happy.  I have done my best to explain how UTOG TO's have worked together on the one issue of suspensions.  There seems to be no other issues from TO's in regards to UTOG policies.  If you are judging a UTOG event, our goal is for you to be able to judge it just like it was a DCI event.  If you have any specific questions about how to judge in a UTOG event, that would be productive.  Was the answer about the proxies clear to you? 

Because the UTOG isn't meant to be questioned... it's meant to be followed.

In my opinion, it's not neccessary, and I have no plans to use it. I hope it works out well for the region which it was designed for.

UTOG is simply a group of TO's.  One does not question the whole group, but works with their local TO to address concerns.  TO's can take a look at the policies and see if it matches their goals.  Most successful TO's are basically following UTOG now.  For me, the only change is the improvement of Proxy standards, and the elimination of the confusion bad proxies can cause.  I hope that you find the guidelines helpful, as they do resolve all the issues that can stem from proxies use. 

[Anusien]

Can we get a list of TOs that are running events under UTOG?

[Myriad Games]

Proxies that are unclear would be handled through a simple penalty of a Caution for Game Play Error — Incorrect Representation. Most of these issues can be handled through checking the proxies before the event begins and making any modifications as necessary. This is frequently done at SCG and TMD Open events. There is no major penalty for having improper proxies; the player is simply required to correct or replace the proxies before continuing play.

It has also been suggested that proxies of certain well-known cards with full art be allowed. This would be similar to playing with existing textless cards like Pyroclasm and Psionic Blast. This could be allowed within the existing proxy guidelines by refining the requirements as Harlequin has suggested. The key underlying principle of any proxy guidelines should be for clarity and recognizability. There should be no major confusion provided that these guidelines are followed, and it would certainly allow for artistic expression much as existing textless cards provide an additional bit of flair. The cards should be limited to well known staples (such as Moxen, Black Lotus, Ancestral Recall, Time Walk, Mishra's Workshop, Bazaar of Baghdad, etc.) with examples of such textless treatments given here:

Any tournament organizers who are following the DCI guidelines and applying the supplementary Universal Tournament Organizer Guidelines to their unsanctioned events are already participating in UTOG. UTOG should only apply to events with 8 or more players that are unsanctioned (sanctioned events can be handled without the UTOG supplement). Certainly these guidelines should not be necessary for kitchen table play or more casual local events. Use is at the discretion of the hosting tournament organizer. It is better to have a system in place to deal with unpleasant occurrences within unsanctioned events than to ignore a potential issue of such magnitude. So far, we have not seen any alternative suggestions for dealing with players that take actions which would lead to a DCI suspension if they occurred at sanctioned events. No one is discouraging questions or constructive criticisms. I have specifically addressed all questions that have been posed thus far. There is a significant difference between suggesting improvements and simply discounting concepts without providing any alternative solutions.

I concur that ratings would simply be for fun and prestige. 

If there are any further questions that have not been specifically answered, please PM me so that I can elucidate personally.

[iamfishman]

My events already are and will continue to be run using the UTOG. 

One of the big areas of contention is the completely understandable fear that players can be unfairly banned.  Eric rightly pointed out that a player being banned is an incredibly rare case, however, it is still understandable that people like Anusien want to know what would happen in that very unlikely but possible situation.

Please know that the UTOG is all about TO's working together.  Accordingly, in the event that a player's integrity is called into a question, I can assure you that the following will take place as part of a fair due process:
All UTOG TOs will review comments from judges knowledgable of the situation, player witnesses, and a statement by the person in question.  DIscussion and a majority vote among those TOs would be needed before any kind of action took place.  A majority vote would also determine the appropriate way to handle the situation(although looking through the list of currently suspended DCI players to gain insight into the typical action taken for various behavior would be key).  This process ensures that a single TO with a vendetta against a player can't simply ban him for all UTOG events. 

This is the way the process must be, since it demonstrates the main strength of UTOG: TOs working together to maintain the integrity of their events.  I wouldn't advocate UTOG if it wasn't for some kind of collaboration about such a major decision.

Overall, and I feel this is what people are misunderstanding: UTOG has already been in place and is not the radical change people believe it will be.  Technically, my events could have been called UTOG events for the last two years!  Have I had a problem that I am not aware of?  Additionally, there is nothing at all that says any TO, judge, or player has to be involved.  UTOG is completely optional.  Organizers who have always run events that they have played in, for example, will be affected in no way.  They will run the same events they have always run.

In short, most tournament announcements have the following lines of text in one form or another.
Proxies must be legible and convey all relevant game info.
A qualified judge will be on site to answer all rules questions.
Results will be posted shortly after the event.
And the inevetible question will always be asked, "is player X allowed at the event?"

UTOG encompasses all of the above.  UTOG is like a magic keyword.  It simply says the above listed things in four letters.  That's it.

[Myriad Games]

That is exactly the purpose of UTOG, to provide a simple key phrase indicating addenda to the DCI tournament guidelines. Many tournament organizers have been following these guidelines without having a simple term to summarize them. This will allow players to know exactly what to expect at an event. Each tournament that elects to use UTOG can simply make a mention on if it in their announcement with a link to the guidelines.

Based on proxy discussion so far, here's an updated proposed proxy section, adding the option to use textless cards.

"Proxies
The use of proxy cards should diminish neither the clarity nor the integrity of the game.

Proxies should be made on basic lands or on cards that share as many characteristics as possible with the proxy card. 
Card characteristics that are printed the same as the proxied cards may be left intact.

All proxies must have the following text neatly printed, using a extra fine point Sharpie. Ball point pens may not be used:
- The full name of the card (no abbreviations or nicknames)
- Correct casting cost of the card including all colored mana symbols
- All relevant/game effecting text*

*Textless cards or full-art cards may be used provided that such cards follow the layout of existing textless cards (e.g. Pyroclasm). Textless treatments should be limited to well known staples such as Moxen, Black Lotus, Ancestral Recall, Time Walk, Mishra's Workshop, and Bazaar of Baghdad.

When complete, each proxy card should be indistinguishable in weight, contour, and flexibility from the rest of the cards in a deck.

Any player using a proxy card that does not follow these guidelines must update or replace the proxy."

[Dxfiler]

I told myself I'd never post in here because there's just too much I strongly disagree with, but I'll be brief.

From Ray:

This is the way the process must be, since it demonstrates the main strength of UTOG: TOs working together to maintain the integrity of their events.

This implies that the integrity of your event may be in question if you're not following these guidelines.  That is flat out unfair to TO's who follow DCI guidelines and have been for years.

Just starting from the name: Universal Tournament Organizer Guidelines.  That name alone implies that these are guidelines all TO's can follow to make their tournament better even though the DCI guidelines are already out there.  I don't understand why a TO should forced to be followed these guidelines over the ones officially set for the game that have been in place for over a decade.

Really the only reason to go with these guidelines (and I've read over all of them) over DCI ones is if you wanted to not allow someone from your event who isn't on the DCI's suspended list.  Right now that happens to be only one indvidual.  The proxy guidelines are common sense and even though the DCI doesn't have those I would think that if they did it would be very similar to the ones shown here.

The 'investigative process' for banning someone under UTOG guidelines is incredibly vague and I'm not surprised.  The UTOG doesn't have the resources that the DCI does so you're basically leaving it up to a couple TO's rather than an entire employed investigative body whose sole purpose is to find out whether someone should be rightly banned or not. 

I appreciate the purpose behind the UTOG, but the driving forces behind it are on a very slippery slope.  You've created this set of guidelines that pretty much mimic the DCI's, but you're forcing TO's to get behind it or somehow their integrity may be questioned.  I noticed on another site that fully backs the UTOG that UTOG endorsed events are checkmarked while 'normally' run DCI events are not.  I don't even know where to begin on that one. 

Basically I look at the UTOG as trying to fix something that isn't broken.  You're trying to streamline tournaments into a very rigid system when there's already an official system in place.

Yes, vintage is unsanctioned and DCI rules are built on sanctioned tournaments... but it's not like you enter a jungle when you're in an unsanctioned event.  They have historically run fine under DCI rules using reporter with real judges and basically if you're a TO who follows the DCI guidleines when running you're unsanctioned event, you're going to have a successful event.

The standards and practices of the UTOG are not unviersally agreed upon and when you try to impose those beliefs on the community then you get on a very slippery slope. 

It's one thing to have a couple tournament organizer's share beliefs and act on them in their own tournaments privately.   It's an entirely different and extremely dangerous thing to form a council that tries to impose those views on all TO's across the board when there already are perfectly acceptable guidelines in place.

This is me trying to be brief :p

I'll end this by saying I truly appreciate what Ray, Dan and others are trying to do, but I can't support it.  The UTOG guidelines do not improve on the DCI guidelines in my eyes.  They are basically the DCI guidelines with some personal stances tacked on.

The UTOG guidelines in my opinion do not improve the community, it simply fractures it more.

- Dave Feinstein

[Godder]

UTOG is conceived of as a trade association of sorts that aims to guarantee minimum standards for tournaments. Membership/compliance is thoroughly voluntary, so it's not as if anyone is trying to impose anything. Having minimum standards posted for all to see also has the bonus of providing some helpful guidelines for inexperienced TOs on how to run a tournament.

[iamfishman]

I told myself I'd never post in here because there's just too much I strongly disagree with, but I'll be brief.

Welcome to the party. 

From Ray:

This is the way the process must be, since it demonstrates the main strength of UTOG: TOs working together to maintain the integrity of their events.

This implies that the integrity of your event may be in question if you're not following these guidelines.  That is flat out unfair to TO's who follow DCI guidelines and have been for years.

No.  This is a error in reasoning.  It has been a while since I took a logic class so I don't remember the name of this error but it follows the form:
A implies B therfore not A implies not B.  In this case A is a TO using UTOG and B is the event being run with a high level of integrity.
Your statement(with the hypothesis and conlusion switched for clarity, while not changing the meaning of your though) is "if you're not following these guidelines then that implies the integrity of your event may be in question."

This would be akin to saying, "NASA employees are smart."
And someone responding with, "you probabbly aren't smart if you don't work for NASA"

It is simply illogical and furthermore unfounded.  An event not under UTOG can most certainly be run with a great level of integrity.

Just starting from the name: Universal Tournament Organizer Guidelines.  That name alone implies that these are guidelines all TO's can follow to make their tournament better even though the DCI guidelines are already out there. 

This is going to sound sarcastic(and trust me...this thread is already way to heavy for that), but I assure you it is not...
Which of the four words in the name means "better"?  I don't understand how you made this assumption.

I don't understand why a TO should forced to be followed these guidelines over the ones officially set for the game that have been in place for over a decade.

Let me reitterate what has been said in the thread already. This is not something being put IN PLACE OF the DCI guidelines.  It is simply an add-on addressing issues that, because of certain aspects of Vintage like proxies, aren't addressed by the DCI.

You've created this set of guidelines that pretty much mimic the DCI's, but you're forcing TO's to get behind it or somehow their integrity may be questioned. 

Again, there are two claims in this statement that are false.  First, no one is being forced to do anything.  Second, the integrity of a TO would not be questioned if they don't use this system.  As a perfect example, if you ever chose to hold an event again, I would go, whether you advertised your event as UTOG or not.  Your last event was run very professionally.

The standards and practices of the UTOG are not unviersally agreed upon and when you try to impose those beliefs on the community then you get on a very slippery slope.

I know that you consider me to be an upstanding person.  I assure you that I see UTOG only as a positive thing.  I also cannot imagine it heading down a slippery slope if any major decisions are a result of collaboration and majority agreement.  If I thought there was even a reasonable chance of the UTOG system being abusable I would not have signed on.

It's one thing to have a couple tournament organizer's share beliefs and act on them in their own tournaments privately.   It's an entirely different and extremely dangerous thing to form a council that tries to impose those views on all TO's across the board when there already are perfectly acceptable guidelines in place.

UTOG is the first, not the second.  Well...it is the first if you remove the word "privately".  I don't want to be private about what people can expect when they come to my events.

I'll end this by saying I truly appreciate what Ray, Dan and others are trying to do, but I can't support it.

And I appreciate you taking the time to think about what we are trying to do from our perspective.  If you choose not to come to my events because of the affiliation with UTOG, you will be missed(Who will dance a jig?).  Ultimately, my only hope is that in time I might convince you that your fears were unfounded.

[xrizzo]

Could you guys edit the first post in this thread to contain all the latest information related to UTOG so people can reference the latest all the time without having to read through discussion about potential changes?

[Dxfiler]

UTOG is conceived of as a trade association of sorts that aims to guarantee minimum standards for tournaments.

Again, the DCI has been around over a decade longer than the UTOG and those official standards have held up to the test of time quite well.  The majority of DCI guidelines can be easily and readily applied to non-sanctioned tournaments.  You're saying that the UTOG "guarantees" minimum standards for tournaments but the problem with that is that DCI guidelines have already guaranteed that for years.

First, no one is being forced to do anything.  Second, the integrity of a TO would not be questioned if they don't use this system.  As a perfect example, if you ever chose to hold an event again, I would go, whether you advertised your event as UTOG or not.  Your last event was run very professionally.

I appreciate the complement, but effectively I and other TO's who may not agree with everything UTOG are still forced to comply if we want a successful tourney even if we disagree with parts of it.  This is my main contention with UTOG.  If I ran another event and felt that for example after 2 years someone was free to play in my event but UTOG says they are banned for 3, I have to realistically not let that person in or else I'm going to lose people.  It doesn't matter that the person isn't on the DCI suspended players list... if he's on UTOG suspended players list then TO's must comply even if they disagree or they will lose people. 

Now I do not hold it against you if you personally don't want to come because I let someone into my tourney who you may feel should not be allowed.  I don't think it's a stretch to say that you skipped one of my tourneys for that very reason and that's totally fine.  The problem is when you make this suspended player list that is supposed to be the non-sanctioned version of the DCI's suspended player list... but there's a huge difference in that your list doesn't have anywhere near the level of investigation that the DCI's does.   Yet we as players and TO's are expected to follow it.  If you don't follow it, your attendance will shrink.  This is again where you get on a slippery slope of imposing your beliefs on others and effecting their bottom line.  You may not intentionally be doing it, but if you take a hard-line on someone and they end up on the UTOG suspended player's list, other TO's better follow suit or else they're going to take an attendance hit since that's the stance that you take and people look to you.

If I'm random casual player and I see 3 events following UTOG and one following the DCI, I think I'm going to gravitate toward going to the UTOG events because its system is seeing more use in a particular region.  Now you can say that random casual player is going to go to any tourney that is run right, whether its UTOG or not... but the problem with that is when you have 3 TO's standing together promoting UTOG and some other guy who may run just as good a tourney but not running UTOG, it affects public perception.  Perception does translate into bottom line.

If you choose not to come to my events because of the affiliation with UTOG, you will be missed(Who will dance a jig?).  Ultimately, my only hope is that in time I might convince you that your fears were unfounded.

I never said I was going to stop going to UTOG events.  If a tourney is good then I'm still going to go to it.  It just bothers me when people try to fix something that isn't broke.  DCI guidelines basically cover everything that UTOG does.  The only main differences again are proxies and if you want to suspend someone who isn't covered on the DCI's list.  Proxies are straightforward and UTOG's don't differ any from SCG's or other major vintage events that have run for years.  So at some point one does have to ask the question of why UTOG is needed at all.

There's a huge difference between a couple TO's deciding not to allow someone in contrasted with those same TO's making very elaborate guidelines that basically mimic official ones already set in place but contain that same personal stance, this time in the form of 'universal guidelines.'  There isn't anything universal about that. 

Again, personal views need to be separated from actual guidelines.  Your view that a player should be suspended for X amount of time is still a personal view.  You may think player X should be suspended for 3 years, and so may others, but by no means is that 'universal' nor should it be promoted that way.

I hope you can understand my concerns.  I think I made them as clear as I possibly can and even though we disagree on some central things we both agree that in the end its the players that matter.  I just don't think UTOG  guidlines enhance a player's experience and instead opens doors to hurt those experiences because of personal views that may end up in those guidelines.

You are going to run a good tourney whether it's UTOG or not.  That's why the UTOG really doesn't need to exist.  If the TO is good, the player's ultimately don't and won't care whether you followed these guidelines as long as it's a quality tournament.  Quality tournaments are already ensured following the DCI guidelines, so why should new and aspiring TO's wonder which one they should follow?  It's a choice they shouldn't have to make.

- Dave Feinstein

[Myriad Games]

The latest version of UTOG will be available here. The proxy section should be updated shortly. The latest version of the Tournament Organizer Primer is available here. This will provide an easy summary of the changes based on the suggestions made here. The UTOG are an optional supplement to the DCI guidelines, not a replacement for them. In fact, use of the UTOG means that the tournament is already following all the DCI guidelines, as that's part of the definition, clearly stated in the first paragraph of the guidelines.

Thus far, questions about UTOG have been focused on a lack of clarity about precisely how they will be implemented. Most respondents agree that the principle of extending the DCI guidelines to areas unique to unsanctioned events will improve the overall tournament environment. While discussing UTOG at ELD's event yesterday, the following suggestions were made.

That a list be made for which cards would be allowed at textless proxies, to ensure that players know that they can use their textless proxies at any UTOG event, simply by referring to a unified list.

That the process for reporting disqualifications and potential suspension investigations be explained in more detail than that already available in the DCI disqualification guidelines.

That a dedicated forum be established for the discussion and implementation of UTOG, to allow for consolidated, tiered discussion and record-keeping.

Some of the major strengths of UTOG that have been repeatedly cited are that they are already being followed by many seasoned TOs with great success, that the principles at the foundation are solid, and that through proper implementation, these guidelines will improve unsanctioned events overall. They should be particularly useful for new TOs who do not yet have an established reputation. By using the UTOG, all organizers can simply and clearly communicate what to expect at their events.

We'd like to thank everyone who has contributed to the discussion thus far and to encourage constructive advice on how to improve any of the UTOG.