Ethics question

[oneofchaos]

Lets pretend time is running short in the round.  I am playing Control.  My opponent is playing a TPS variant.  He proceeds to say, show me a counter and I scoop.  I reveal some counter, and he proceeds to do something like cabal therapy away the named card and win.  Does the verbal agreement he stated mean anything in terms of a judge and/or penalties? 

[M.Solymossy]

Id punch my opponent in the dick if he cheated me like that.    No lie.  We're all here to have fun, but we're also paying a somewhat substantial amount of money to enter the tournament.  I'm pretty sure this person would be banned from every vintage event, just like Nate Peace did. (I think that was his name, right)?

[Clariax]

Lets pretend time is running short in the round.  I am playing Control.  My opponent is playing a TPS variant.  He proceeds to say, show me a counter and I scoop.  I reveal some counter, and he proceeds to do something like cabal therapy away the named card and win.  Does the verbal agreement he stated mean anything in terms of a judge and/or penalties? 

There is nothing illegal about this at all.  Whether or not it is ethical is an entirely separate matter.  But statements about intent to do something in the future are in no way binding.

Id punch my opponent in the dick if he cheated me like that.    No lie.  We're all here to have fun, but we're also paying a somewhat substantial amount of money to enter the tournament.  I'm pretty sure this person would be banned from every vintage event, just like Nate Peace did. (I think that was his name, right)?

This, however, is very much illegal, would get you DQ'd and likely banned.

[M.Solymossy]

There is nothing illegal about this at all.  Whether or not it is ethical is an entirely separate matter.  But statements about intent to do something in the future are in no way binding.

I'd like to point you to this, sir... 

6.3.   Cheating — Hidden Information Violation
Definition
A player, spectator or other tournament participant intentionally and illegally seeks or reveals information in an attempt to gain advantage. A player has not committed an infraction if the information was revealed to them by his or her opponent accidentally, nor is he or she required to advise an opponent who may be doing so, as long as he or she does not go to excessive lengths to take advantage of this. Note that, in general, players are allowed to reveal information that is hidden to their opponents unless is it explicitly banned by the rules of the game or format.
Examples
A.   A player in a booster draft intentionally reveals a card she drafted to another player during the draft.
B.   A player in a booster draft intentionally peeks at the cards from which his neighbor is selecting.
C.   A player intentionally looks at the faces of an opponent’s cards while shuffling an opponent’s deck.
Penalty
All Levels
Disqualification

[Anusien]

The player did not illegally seek information. It is completely acceptable to lie about future actions. If you show me a card, as long as I'm not representing that some game effect makes you do it (like saying I'm playing Cabal Therapy when I'm not), that's your mistake.

[M.Solymossy]

The player did not illegally seek information. It is completely acceptable to lie about future actions. If you show me a card, as long as I'm not representing that some game effect makes you do it (like saying I'm playing Cabal Therapy when I'm not), that's your mistake.

seeks or reveals information

You and I must have different definitions of the word "Seek"

[Killane]

The player did not illegally seek information. It is completely acceptable to lie about future actions. If you show me a card, as long as I'm not representing that some game effect makes you do it (like saying I'm playing Cabal Therapy when I'm not), that's your mistake.

seeks or reveals information

You and I must have different definitions of the word "Seek"

Seeking in this context appears to refer to requesting information that the rules state you can't have, such as what someone wlese at your table has picked out of the draft pack you just passed them, or seeking hidden information such as the contents of another player's hand via peeking at it. Nothing in the rules says I can't show you what is in my hand, and nothing in the rules says you are not allod to ask me what is there. Further, nothing in rules states that I am not allowed to lie to you about what actions I am going to take in the future. Therefore, by the rules, that move is legal.

Pull it in the local shop here though and everyone (myself included) would react the same way as you I think. Vintage is not DCI sanctionned and doesn't lead to the PT. It's a community event, and pulling crap like that hurts the community.

But if I was in the Top 8 at a GP or PT, it's a different story. You're not there to make friends, you;re there to make money, earn pro points, and generally improve your financial standing. It's cuthroat, but it's business and it's legal. Would I do it? I don't think so, but if $40,000 were on line line can I say for sure I wouldn;t pull whatever legal mind games I could to win it? I can't speak intelligently about that without experiencing the situation. Mind games are part of professional magic - playing at that level I think you need learn to deal with it.

But not in Vintage.

[Clariax]

Pull it in the local shop here though and everyone (myself included) would react the same way as you I think. Vintage is not DCI sanctionned and doesn't lead to the PT. It's a community event, and pulling crap like that hurts the community.

There are DCI sanctioned Vintage tournaments.  And in my experience unsanctioned vintage tournaments that allow for proxies tend to follow all of the DCI rules except the rules concerning proxies.  Whether the play is ethical really is not the issue here (in spite of the thread title).  Would doing this make you any friends?  No.  But as per the rules of the game and the DCI tournament rules (which is what we are discussing here, we cannot answer questions about tournaments being run under some other rules) it is completely legal.

[thecapn]

If its not seeking information, then where is the line drawn for concession?

Can I be like "I don't think I can win, well played sir" reveal my hand, shake my opponent's hand, then after my opponent scoops his cards up be like "How nice of you to scoop, I said I concede I was just complimenting you, I wanted you to actually play it out."

It seems to me that his statement was a state based concession of sorts. (Maybe triggered is a better metaphor?)

[Delha]

If its not seeking information, then where is the line drawn for concession?

Can I be like "I don't think I can win, well played sir" reveal my hand, shake my opponent's hand, then after my opponent scoops his cards up be like "How nice of you to scoop, I said I concede I was just complimenting you, I wanted you to actually play it out."

I am absolutely convinced that you would be held to a concession. Declaration of action is binding, and offering a handshake is very widely accepted as exactly that.

[Killane]

If its not seeking information, then where is the line drawn for concession?

Can I be like "I don't think I can win, well played sir" reveal my hand, shake my opponent's hand, then after my opponent scoops his cards up be like "How nice of you to scoop, I said I concede I was just complimenting you, I wanted you to actually play it out."

It seems to me that his statement was a state based concession of sorts. (Maybe triggered is a better metaphor?)

But the statement wasn't- i concede if you have X in your hand, it was, if you show me "x" I'll conceede - the statement was not taking the action, it was about an action in the future- not the same thing at all

[thecapn]

If its not seeking information, then where is the line drawn for concession?

Can I be like "I don't think I can win, well played sir" reveal my hand, shake my opponent's hand, then after my opponent scoops his cards up be like "How nice of you to scoop, I said I concede I was just complimenting you, I wanted you to actually play it out."

I am absolutely convinced that you would be held to a concession. Declaration of action is binding, and offering a handshake is very widely accepted as exactly that.

Ok what if I say, "doesn't look like I can win, well played" and lay my hand on the table? If I'm facing an easily excited opponent who scoops his cards up is that a free win then?

Where is the line between concession and mind trick? Is it it simply rephrasing?

"If you scoop your cards up and shuffle them then I'll give you the win?"

[Clariax]

The issue here is the difference between conceding and saying that you will concede at some point in the future (perhaps conditional on something else).  Telling your opponent, "You win," or "well played" and offering a handshake while putting your cards down on the table is clearly conceding.  Scooping up your cards, conceding.  Saying something like "Let's go on to game 3," conceding.  In each of these cases, you are conceding the game/match right now.

The situation initially asked about is a statement about doing something in the future.  "If you show me a Counterspell, I'll concede" is not binding.  It's no different than "If you attack with that Serra Avatar, I'll block with my Jackal Pup," or "If you play a spell, I'll counter it."

There's a big difference between taking an action and expressing intent to take some action in the future.

[Delha]

Ok what if I say, "doesn't look like I can win, well played" and lay my hand on the table? If I'm facing an easily excited opponent who scoops his cards up is that a free win then?

Where is the line between concession and mind trick? Is it it simply rephrasing?

"If you scoop your cards up and shuffle them then I'll give you the win?"

If this was back when I ran events, and you pulled some crap like this, I'd ban you in a heartbeat. If I was a judge and had to make the call, I'd give your opponent the win also. In short, if you heavily imply that you are conceding, then I would hold you to that.

Look everyone, here are the simplest answers: If you're looking for cheap wins, learn to play better instead. For every game you take this way, you would have won twenty if you'd just improved your skill (with the added bonus of not getting jumped in the parking lot). If you're afraid of being tricked this way, then just don't accept promises of future action, and get a solid answer to "So you're conceding, right?" before you pick your cards up.

[ELD]

This brings up a difficult situation.  I'll provide a real life example that happened with me recently.

In a recent Monday Night Vintage, a player who had been attending frequently was down badly against me in game 1.  Vault Key active, with 2x Remora out, he believed he had outs if I did not have 2x counters.  His plan was to have me run out of both remoras, then go for Nature's Claim with Misdirection back up.  He asked me to show him two counters, and said he would scoop if I did.  I explained to him that even if I showed him the counters, he would not be required to scoop, so I simply don't do that in tournament play.  For example, if I showed him two Spell Pierce, and he could play around them, then he would be in his rights to recognize his mistake and continue with the game. 

He went on to insist that he would in fact scoop if shown the counters, and asked that I trust him.  I told him that I do have two counters in hand, to trust me and scoop.  He didn't like that idea at all.  I tried to explain that his unwillingness to trust me, and him asking me to trust him makes for an awkward situation, and another reason why I don't deal with this kind of proposal.  Keep in mind this is all in under a couple minutes, as I am trying to keep the game going. 

Eventually, frustrated he scooped.  He was visibly upset, and verbally attacked me.  I explained to him that I would not be penalizing him for his unsportsmanlike behavior, but it was unacceptable to resort to name-calling or insults with other players.  I don't believe he recognized the potential for abuse in his tactics.  I believe, in his mind, he really felt I was turning down a free win to be a jerk.   

This brings up the fine line between protecting yourself in a tournament setting, and building the community.  There was a very high chance that he would have scooped if I showed him the counters.  Of course, being up Game 1, there's no tactical reason for me to rush to Game 2.  From a tactical perspective, I played the situation to the best of my ability.  The problem comes in with the real world results.  We have not seen the player since.  Now, I don't know if this is the reason we have not seen him since.  All I can reasonably assume is he did not enjoy the experience, and it will be a factor, however big or small, in his decision to make the time to attend a MNV. 

I'm posting this to show the trade off.  A player really shouldn't ask to see cards from their opponents hand, and it is generally only less experienced tournament players who will do so.  That demographic is unlikely to intentionally look for an advantage.  They are likely to get angry when players refuse a free win, something they don't understand.

The next time I'm in that situation, I might respond with "If you scoop, I'll show you my hand." 

With that response, I'm giving my opponent a small advantage in the information war, but hopefully it would have a better impact on the social element of the game. 

[tezzajw]

ELD, you and your play group are probably better off without him.

I have never been able to understand why people get upset playing cards?  Sore losers are the worst kind.

I would have told him to keep on playing the game, I'm not showing him anything.

[ELD]

Not to derail this thread, but I disagree that we are better off without him.  Everyone goes through growing pains when it comes to the realities of competitive play.  Sometimes people feel upset or angry when things in a tournament strike them as unfair or "cheap."  Vintage players are particularly susceptible to these unpleasant reality checks.  A player might play for years with their playgroup, and even venture into the occasional Mox event without encountering a situation like this.  Contrast this with the PTQ player, who must deal with people actually trying to rules lawyer constantly. 

We have a great community, which is very laid back.  This comes at a cost though.  There are times where a player might be able to leverage this casual approach to their benefit.  There are times where a casual approach gets hammered down by the rules of a tournament setting.  Taking back plays, for instance, can be a very dicey thing.  Playing the wrong land and picking it up might not get a reaction in some tournaments, and in others it might create a whole lot of noise.  Losing a tournament because you listen to your opponent telling you that you can't play the other land from your hand instead can be a very unpleasant experience. 

I would not turn away players from MNV lightly.  I've only had to speak to one player in all the years I've run it to tell him he's not welcome unless he changes his behavior.  This player is certainly welcome at our events.  This player certainly was good for the group, as is anyone who makes the effort to show up every Monday. 

[playkenny]

"If you scoop, I'll show you my hand."

Is this legal? As in bribary or something to that effect?

[Delha]

"If you scoop, I'll show you my hand."

Is this legal? As in bribary or something to that effect?

It is perfectly legal.

It is simply a reversed phrasing of the exact same deal offered by the opponent. The dominant player gets a concession, and the losing player gets to see that you did indeed have backup for your win.

[Tha Gunslinga]

But you're offering something in exchange for a concession.  Yes, it's nothing physical, it's just knowledge, but it's still offering something in exchange for a concession.

The decision to drop, concede, or agree to an intentional draw cannot be made in exchange for or influenced by the offer of any reward or incentive. Making such an offer is prohibited. Unless the player receiving such an offer calls for a judge immediately, both players will be penalized in the same manner.

Looks like a double-DQ to me.

[Clariax]

There is a fine line between telling your opponent that if he happens to concede, you'll do something and offering your opponent something in exchange for a concession.  This is the former in my opinion and I do not see any bribery or any reason to DQ anyone in this situation.

[Godder]

I don't think the contents of the opponent's hand could be seen as a reward or incentive to concede in terms of Bribery - that's reading too much into the literal meaning of the words, rather than the spirit behind the rule.

[Diakonov]

Particularly because the "reward" in this case is still enclosed within the match.  The only reason you would want to see their hand would be to give yourself an advantage against them in the following game.  With bribery the idea is normally to motivate the person to not want to win the match in some form.  I suppose you could argue that the reward goes beyond the match by giving information to that player's friends, but that's getting a bit silly.

[Cyberpunker]

There is a fine line between telling your opponent that if he happens to concede, you'll do something and offering your opponent something in exchange for a concession.  This is the former in my opinion and I do not see any bribery or any reason to DQ anyone in this situation.

Is there no rule that covers the former type of deception?

[Tha Gunslinga]

Sounds like unsporting conduct to me.

[playkenny]

There is a fine line between telling your opponent that if he happens to concede, you'll do something and offering your opponent something in exchange for a concession.  This is the former in my opinion and I do not see any bribery or any reason to DQ anyone in this situation.

I'm getting very confused with what wording = DQ and what wording = OK

So if I said "I offer you the current information of my hand in exchange for your concession" does that warrent a DQ?

I think what i'm (and probabily lots of people here) trying to find out is what the acceptable short cuts are without getting DQ for it (or screwed by your "unethical" opponent). For example, many times someone gets a Timevault combo on you, and we say "show me your win con and I will scoop" (or "I will offer my concession in exchance for the information of your tinkerbot" ). So they just go and look through their deck for inkwell(or whatever) and I scoop. I recently found we cannot short cut to this! So basically, I could have gone and "mised" a win by saying "judge, my opponent looked through his deck illegally etc."

Is it illegal because of my wording? or the action? etc

[Clariax]

The wording is not what's relevant at all.  it's the content of what's being said, and done.  Regardless of how you word it, offering to scoop if they show you a Counterspell or such, or offering to show your hand or part of your deck if your opponent concedes is not going to be bribery.

Your opponent telling you they will scoop if you show them your win condition, however, does NOT entitle you to pick up your deck and dig out your win condition.  The game is still going on. As we've already established, that your opponent says they're going to concede doesn't change anything. 

[Cyberpunker]

The wording is not what's relevant at all.  it's the content of what's being said, and done.  Regardless of how you word it, offering to scoop if they show you a Counterspell or such, or offering to show your hand or part of your deck if your opponent concedes is not going to be bribery.

Your opponent telling you they will scoop if you show them your win condition, however, does NOT entitle you to pick up your deck and dig out your win condition.  The game is still going on. As we've already established, that your opponent says they're going to concede doesn't change anything. 

So there is no rule whatsoever that covers this sort of situation?

[Godder]

There are things you have to be truthful about, but the contents of a hidden zone is not one of them. The hand and the library are hidden zones, so if you want to lie about the contents of them to other players (but not to judges) to gain some sort of advantage, go right ahead.

Before anyone gets upset that I'm condoning the sort of behaviour that started this thread, I'm not, but bear in mind that it's legal, if highly unpleasant.

[Delha]

...For example, many times someone gets a Timevault combo on you, and we say "show me your win con and I will scoop" (or "I will offer my concession in exchance for the information of your tinkerbot" ). So they just go and look through their deck for inkwell(or whatever) and I scoop. I recently found we cannot short cut to this! So basically, I could have gone and "mised" a win by saying "judge, my opponent looked through his deck illegally etc."

Is it illegal because of my wording? or the action? etc

Your opponent telling you they will scoop if you show them your win condition, however, does NOT entitle you to pick up your deck and dig out your win condition.  The game is still going on. As we've already established, that your opponent says they're going to concede doesn't change anything.

@ playkenny: The only way to legally get the result you are discussing is to put the concession first, as ELD mentioned. Promise to show them your wincon after they concede. It will probably help if you point out that you're willing to hold up your end first, but doing so is an illegal action. Once they scoop, the game is over, and you are be free to show them your entire deck, sideboard, whatever.

If you are on the opposite side of the table, and they have Key/Vault active, there is no way to guarantee that they are not simply lying about having DSC still in their deck. If you scoop and then they refuse to hold up their end of the bargain, you're just out of luck. To repeat what everyone's been saying for a while now: It's immoral, but not illegal.