Eudemonia July Results! Lists! Pics!

[LotusHead]

Hey! 24 People made it out! 5 Rounds of swiss ended with, in order:

Eric Campusano (Bob Jace Control)
Adam Telleen (Bob Jace Control)
Heiner Litz (Bob Jace Control)
Stephen Menendian (Gush Apprentice)
Michael Lynch (Genesis Chamber.dec)
Brett Allen (Bob Jace Tezzeret Control)
Sam Sherman (Shop Aggro)
Rich Shay (Young Americans)

Quarterfinals:
Rich beat Eric
Adam beat Sam
Brett beat Heiner
Michael "wins" due to Stephen's match loss thing.

Semifinals:

Rich beat Michael
Brett beat Adam

Finals:
Rich beat Brett


1st! Rich Shay (The Atog Lord) - Young Americans
// Land
1 Island
2 Volcanic Island
1 Library of Alexandria
7 Blue Fetch
2 Tropical Island
2 Underground Sea

// Mana
1 Black Lotus
1 Mox Emerald
1 Mox Jet
1 Mox Ruby
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Sol Ring

// Creatures
3 Deathrite Shaman
2 Young Pyromancer
1 Trinket Mage
4 Dark Confidant
1 Snapcaster Mage

// Broken
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Brainstorm
1 Demonic Tutor
4 Force of Will
3 Jace, the Mind Sculptor
1 Time Walk
1 Vampiric Tutor
1 Yawgmoth's Will

// Other
3 Mental Misstep
3 Lightning Bolt
3 Gitaxian Probe
2 Ancient Grudge
2 Cabal Therapy
1 Grapeshot
1 Skullclamp

SB: 1 Flusterstorm
SB: 3 Nature's Claim
SB: 2 Nihil Spellbomb
SB: 1 Yixlid Jailer
SB: 1 Ancient Grudge
SB: 1 Lightning Bolt
SB: 1 Red Elemental Blast
SB: 2 Trygon Predator
SB: 2 Pyroblast
SB: 1 Tormod's Crypt

2nd Brett Allen (Hiryu) - Grixis Bob Jace Control

1 Black Lotus
1 Blightsteel Colossus
1 Mana Crypt
1 Mox Emerald
1 Mox Jet
1 Mox Pearl
1 Mox Ruby
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Sensei's Divining Top
1 Sol Ring
1 Time Vault
1 Voltaic Key
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Brainstorm
1 Flusterstorm
4 Force of WIll
1 Hurkyl's Recall
2 Jace, The Mind Sculptor
2 Mana Drain
2 Mental Misstep
1 Merchant Scroll
1 Mystical Tutor
3 Snapcaster Mage
1 Thirst for Knowledge
1 Time Walk
1 Tinker
4 Dark Confidant
1 Demonic Tutor
1 Thoughtseize
1 Vampiric Tutor
1 Yawgmoth's Will
2 Lightning Bolt
1 Viashino Heretic
2 Flooded Strand
2 Island
1 Library of Alexandria
4 Scalding Tarn
1 Tolarian Academy
3 Underground Sea
2 Volcanic Island

Sideboard
1 Mountain
1 Surgical Extraction
1 Yixlid Jailer
1 Gorilla Shaman
3 Ingot Chewer
1 Lightning Bolt
1 Pyroblast
2 Grafdagger's Cage
1 Nihil Spellbomb
2 Pithing Needle
1 Tormod's Crypt

3rd/4th Michael Lynch Genesis Chamber.dec

4 Mishra's Workshop
4 Ancient Tomb
2 Wasteland
1 Gaea's Cradle
1 Tolarian Academy
1 Strip Mine
4 Lodestone Golem
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Mox Emerald
1 Mox Ruby
1 Mox Jet
1 Mox Pearl
1 Sol Ring
4 Memnite
4 Phyrexian Revoker
2 Frogmite
2 Thorn of Amethyst
4 Genesis Chamber
1 Mox Opal
1 Memory Jar
4 Arcbound Ravager
4 Signal Pest
2 Steel Overseer
4 Tangle Wire
1 Mana Vault
1 Mana Crypt
4 Skullclamp

Sideboard

4 Grafdigger's Cage
3 Dismember
2 Witchband Orb
3 Porcelain Legionnaire
3 Tormod's Crypt

5th-8th Heiner Litz - Grixis Bob Jace Control

4 Force of Will
3 Jace the Mindsculptor
1 Brainstorm
4 Dark Confidant
2 Mental Misstep
3 Mana Drain
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Time Walk
1 Demonic Tutor
1 Mystical Tutor
1 Vampiric Tutor
1 Yawgmoth's Will
1 Hurkyl's Recall
1 Time Vault
1 Voltaic Key
1 Tinker
1 Blightsteel Colossus
1 Merchant Scroll
1 Ponder
1 Sensei's Divining Top
2 Tezzeret The Seeker
1 Thirst for Knowledge'
1 Gorilla Shaman
1 Mox Emerald
1 Mox Pearl
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Mox Ruby
1 Mox Jet
1 Mox Opal
1 SOl Ring
1 Mana Vault
2 Island
2 Underground Sea
3 Volcanic Island
1 Tolarian Academy
4 Scalding Tarn
1 Misty Rainforest
1 Flooded Strand
1 Black Lotus
1 Mana Crypt
1 Lotus Petal

Sideboard

4 Ingot Chewer
1 Pithing Needle
1 Mountain
1 Viashino Heretic
4 Leyline of the Void
2 Flusterstorm
1 Red Elemental Blast
1 Strip Mine

5th-8th Stephen Menendian - Gush Pyromancer

4 Gush
4 Preordain
3 Mental Misstep
3 Flusterstorm
4 Force of Will
3 Young Pyromancer
3 Regrowth
1 Tendrils of Agony
1 Merchant Scroll
1 Ponder
1 Brainstorm
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Time Walk
1 Imperial Seal
1 Demonic Tutor
1 Vampiric Tutor
1 Mystical Tutor
1 Fastbond
1 Yawgmoth's Will
2 Ancient Grudge
2 Jace, The Mind Sculptor

1 Mox Pearl
1 Mox Emerald
1 Mox Jet
1 Mox Ruby
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Black Lotus
2 Underground Sea
2 Volcanic Island
2 Tropical Island
1 Island
4 Scalding Tarn
1 Polluted Delta
1 Flooded Strand
1 Misty Rainforest

Sideboard

2 Thoughtseize
4 Leyline of the Void
2 Yixlid Jailor
1 Mountain
3 Nature's Claim
3 Ingot Chewer

5th-8th Eric Campusano Bob Jace Control

4 Dark Confidant
2 Snapcaster Mage
1 Blightsteel Colossus
1 Black Lotus
1 Mana Crypt
1 Mox Jet
1 Mox Pearl
1 Mox Ruby
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Mox Emerald
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Brainstorm
2 Lightning Bolt
3 Mental Misstep
1 Mystical Tutor
1 Sol Ring
3 Spell Snare
1 Vampiric Tutor
1 Voltaic Key
1 Demonic Tutor
1 Hurkyl's Recall
3 Mana Drain
1 Time Vault
1 Time Walk
1 Tinker
1 Yawgmoth's Will
3 Jace, The Mind Sculpter
4 Force of Will
2 Island
1 Library of Alexandria
4 Misty Rainforest
4 Polluted Delta
3 Underground Sea
2 Volcanic Island

Sideboard

1 Mountain
1 Darkblast
2 Flusterstorm
2 Red Elemental Blast
1 Perish
4 Leyline of the Void
4 Ingot Chewer

5th-8th Sam Sherman - Slash Panther Shop Aggro

1 Tolarian Academy
2 Rishadan Port
4 Mishra's Workshop
1 Mana Crypt
1 Mox PEarl
1 Mox Jet
1 Mox Emerald
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Mox Ruby
1 Black Lotus
4 Lodestone Golem
3 Null Rod
4 Wasteland
4 Slash Panther
4 Tangle Wire
3 Phyrexian Revoker
4 Chalice of the Void
4 Thorn of Amethyst
3 Sphere of Resistance
2 City of Traitors
1 Trinisphere
1 Sol Ring
1 Strip Mine
4 Phyrexian Metamorph
4 Ancient TOmb

Sideboard

2 Duplicant
3 Crucible of Worlds
3 Wurmcoil Engine
3 Relic of Progenitus
4 Grafdigger's Cage

5th-8th Adam Telleen - Bob Jace Control

1 Black Lotus
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Mox Jet
1 Mox Ruby
1 Mox Emerald
1 Mox Pearl
1 Sol Ring
1 Nihil Spellbomb
1 Sensei's Divining Top
1 Voltaic Key
1 Time Vault
1 Brainstorm
1 Demonic Tutor
1 Vampiric Tutor
1 Yawgmoth's Will
1 Engineered Explosives
1 Mystical Tutor
1 Mana Crypt
2 Jace, The Mind Sculptor
4 Force of Will
3 Mana Drain
2 Mental Misstep
1 Flusterstorm
1 Spell Snare
1 Pyroclasm
1 Hurkyl's Recall
3 Dark Confidant
1 Snapcaster Mage
2 Lightning Bolt
1 Ancient Grudge
1 Library of ALexandria
1 Strip Mine
1 Tolarian Academy
4 Scalding Tarn
2 Misty Rainforest
3 Underground Sea
2 Volcanic Island
1 Tropical Island
1 Island
1 Mountain
1 Goblin Welder
1 Deathrite Shaman

Sideboard

1 Echoing Truth
1 Sower of Temptation
1 Flusterstorm
1 Nature's Claim
1 Spell Snare
1 Illness in the Ranks
2 Ingot Chewer
1 Vandalblast
1 Viashino Heretic
1 Yixlid Jailer
1 Grafdigger's Cage
1 Pithing Needle


Decklists and pics soon, just putting it up for people to chime in.

Brett vs Adam


Standstill vs Stephen


George vs Heiner I lent George (almost total stranger) about 2/3 of this deck. Thanks for not walking off with it!


Michael (top 4 12 year old) vs Charles and Mike vs Eric


Kobolds! Got there G1, maybe even G2. Dunno.


Tuan not happy with Danny's first turn Jace. Twice.


Rich Shay waiting for his opponent, 30 minutes late due to traffic from 90 miles away, and 50 miles away. I wait for my opponent who is travelling in same car, so I get to take all these round 1 picks!


Kobolds going crazy!


Jason Vintaged up his Legacy Dark Depths deck. His black fetches don't fetch basic Islands.


Stephen prefers dice elemental tokens instead of nice, photogenic Elemental tokens


Michael said that while this was his first Vintage Tournament, he's been researching it and testing for over a year. It seems it paid off enough!


Sam Sherman gives shop decks a chance.  


Blaine vs ? Shop mirror with a bunch of permanents that do stuff.


Sam follows up his opponent's Tinker for BSC play with well, playing two of his own BSC's! Like a boss!


Campusano uses the technology of having infinite turns to gain incremental advantage over Mike Lewis.


Me vs Tuan. He had Jace and stuff, I had nothing. But he drew all crap, so eventually something stuck!  Our games were kinda epic and swingy. More in my mini report later.


VS Campusano. My hand had moxen and stuff, but I had to try for the Discard Titan/Trike plan.  He had a bolt and Chewer in hand.


That card in the middle is Null Brooch.


Rich vs Adam


Galen vs Brett


Twin Pyromancers were a bit much to deal with when Blaine topdecks land after land.


Blurry Duress pic vs Oath. My hand was Mox, Mox, Chalice, Shop, Metamorph, Crucible, Golem.  He solved the puzzle and took Chalice of the Void. This was the 2nd pick. I stood up to take this pic to get the light not to reflect off the cards. As it took the picture, I noticed that Tuon's hand was technically visible briefly. I didn't know what the cards were, as I snapped it, then sat down, but I won't take aerial pics of my games from now on.


Ryan Reynolds has dudes out while opponent has Standstill out, whoot!''


I believe this is a game 1 or g2 vs Rich Shay where I played my Sphere of Resistance, even though Chalice of the Void for 2 is on the field. I made a dramatic announcement of it, placed it on the stack, and asked him if he wanted to counter my Sphere of Resistance that will make all his spells cost one more.  He looked at his hand a bunch, and thought about it, giving me time to cross my fingers and take this pic.  He said he was not going to counter it. I sighed, and put it in the graveyard cuz of my Chalice.  I don't know if he realized Chalice was set at 2 and would counter my Sphere anyways. (He's an extremely experienced Vintage player, but you never know.  We've all played stuff into Chalice of the Void.  When inevitable discussion of the "outside assistance" talk happens, keep this in mind that I deliberately played my spell, not hoping it would resolve, but hoping he would waste a spell in hand to deal with it.


Rich Bolted my Golem, Bolted my Golem, and Bolted my Welder very early on.


Standings after Swiss

Top 8

Brett vs Heiner


Stephen vs Michael. Michael was mortified to learn that Stephen was given actual matchloss for comments during Rich Shay's and my game last round (round 5 in the win and in match. Top 6 drew in).  Stephen graciously is still willing to play (he came here to play, and write reports), so Michael fought his best. Tendrils were involved at some point. I'm sure Stephen will elaborate on this match.


Rich Shay vs Eric Campusano


Eric debating skipping turn to untap Time Vault to make Rich do more Bob draws.


Adam does it...Maindeck! Shop hate, that is. 64 card main, 11 SideBoard.


Brett has a bunch of blue cards in hand, and a few face down.


I lent Sam about 15 nice proxies to replace his shitty proxies. Some slipped through the cracks, I guess. He gave me a pack of Ravnica for my troubles (Steam Vent! Whoot!)


Rich trying to fight through all the permanents.  Danny and Blaine watch the match closely, and often pull back to talk about missed triggers and such. I'm sure they will chime in.


Adam getting owned by Mox Monkey again.


Rich trying to keep his mind in the game, but really thinking about his car getting a parking ticket or something.


Fun Fact: Michael sided in and played Witchbane Orb as defense against Bolts and Deathrite Shamans.  After the match, both players are alerted to the fact that Death Rite Shaman doesn't target players. Each opponent loses 2 life, EDH style! Doh!


I verified with Rich: All of his games are long and grindy!


The Mox Monkeys come out at night. Cuz top 4 ended shortly before 9pm,  about 2 hours later than usual (rounds just went long)


Notice the bright red card amongst the face down cards? That's a red Elemental token.

Brett and Rich play the finals, but I leave with lists and BC and Aahz. Hope we find out who won! (I heard top 8 split, but played for glory)

Decklists later (or tomorrow).

[oshkoshhaitsyosh]

Oh shit looks like pyromancer is the real deal??!! Can't wait to see Stephens list with pyromancer too. Congrats to Rich and rest of t8

[heiner]

Thanks Lotushead for the coverage, the tournament was great.

The match loss for Steven was a little disturbing though. I agree that it should be enforced that no spectator interaction takes place but a quick warning would have been fine. Instead, the tournanment was interrupted for everyone by half an hour and it RFGed the casual friendly atmosphere.

[LotusHead]

The last of the lists are up. Let me know if any lists are missing anything. Adam's list should be like 63/13.

The match loss for Steven was a little disturbing though. I agree that it should be enforced that no spectator interaction takes place but a quick warning would have been fine. Instead, the tournanment was interrupted for everyone by half an hour and it RFGed the casual friendly atmosphere.

Now that I've had a night to sleep on it, here are my thought's on the situation:

When something happens, and judges get involved, I will always accept the judge's decision, whatever it is.  If it was a super high REL competition, then there would be an appeals process if I felt strongly enough about something.  They decided that Stephen "gave outside assistance", and thus a match loss (unfortunately, not in swiss, but in Top 8).

As Rich Shay and I were playing in the "in and win" round (the only match that matter still happening) a lot of people were watching the match with interest.

This was game 3, and I was pretty sure I was losing. Rich Shay played his Black Lotus while I had Chalice for 0 out.  I thought about the possible impact that a Black Lotus would have on the game (ie, almost zero, he was winning and I needed some awesome topdecks to somehow get back in the game).  Well, the Stephen pointing at the Chalice thing, the response from (I believe) Sam Sherman, (although Rich Shay MAY have said something first), all of this happened pretty quickly.  Since things were afoot, a Judge was called over (the correct play), and people expanded on what happened. I pretty much remained silent during this time. People had their input and the Judge was ready to put the Black Lotus back on the stack (basically, nothing happened after he cast Black Lotus).

So that was the fix: Put Black Lotus on the Stack, pass priority to me. I pointed to Chalice at 0, and that was that (I indicated that Chalice of the Void is something I don't ever give takebacks on, even in testing with new players.) More discussion occured (Rich Shay inquiring what the rules are for spectators, etc. When Judges realized what the REAL controversy was, they pulled aside all their availiable judges, conferenced and made their decision. Matchloss for Stephen for "giving outside assistance"

I state here publicly, that I don't believe for a minute that Stephen was trying to assist me (or infact gave me any assistance). I don't believe Stephen was trying to aid anyone. I believe what he did was very similar to pointing out that a card that is put in the graveyard (with Leyline of the Void out) should be in Exile, not Graveyard.   Apparently the fact that Chalice of the Void's ability is a triggered ability is what sets this situation apart (DCI has revised these issues several times in the recent past. Jackie Lee got a DQ - Cheating Fraud for doing the opposite of what Stephen did (apparently keeping life totals the same was the difference there).

I stand by the judges decision (I think it was too harsh for what I assume is REL: FNM level, but I am glad we have impartial judges to be there for us to settle disputes, etc), but I don't think anyone thinks Stephen was trying to help (give outside assistance to) anyone.  As I said in the previos Leyling/GY example, people have pointed out to people playing the game if they saw a card hit the grave while Leyline was in play, and it has never been a big deal before.  Judges have let us play our games in the past and only interject when they see something or are called to settle something. The vintage players (and onlookers) usually maintain the friendly game environment.  None of us are used to such harsh penalties.

I don't believe for a minute that Rich Shay hoped his Black Lotus would resolve due to me missing my own trigger (In fact I think he forgot about it, as it was irrelevant until this point). I don't think that there is any chance at all that the Black Lotus would be able to resolve unless the game progressed with both of us missing it to where it's impossible to back it up.  Chalice is an activated trigger, but definately not a "May" trigger.  I don't believe for a minute that I would have let my own Sphere of Resistance resolve, even though I played into my own Chalice for 2, hoping Rich forgets that it will be countered anyways.  

I agree with Heiner that a warning for commenting on a match was more appropriate. The friendly atmosphere was lost (and we are VERY friendly, and were friendly with each other. The matchloss verdict put a damper on things).  I hope the judges read this thread, and consider what is said by the player base.  LSV took a game loss while winning with ELVES!, but that's at a higher REL.

24 players in the house! Follow my progress on twitter!

Man, outside assistance is so good I heard. Who needs optional triggers anymore?

Does anyone think that Chalice of the Void triggers are in any way optional?
Does anyone think that Stephen's actions were "giving outside assistance to LotusHead"?

For people commenting on this topic (and I feel here is the best place for it, but MODS feel free to move this whole discussion to somewhere more appropriate if necessary.), please be respectful of Stephen, Rich and myself on this topic.

[Smmenen]

Thanks Jeff.

I definitely was NOT trying to help any particular player.

If you had played your Lotus into your own Chalice I would have made the exact same remark.   Your Leyline example is exactly on point, although the judge would probably say that was a game rule replacement effect, not an optional trigger.  I either did not know or did not remember that Chalice was an optional trigger.   I've played with and against that card for years, and apparently they changed the rules recently.  It's harder for older players like myself who do not compete in sanctioned events or play in tournaments very much to keep abreast of these changes, let alone internalize them.  

I was totally shocked by the severity of the punishment as well.  It may have been considered outside assistance by the letter of the law, but it certainly was not the kind of behavior described in the examples of the IPG under that infraction, which are helping players with a line of play or giving notes.  

I was, and am, remain fairly distraught about it.  And then, I logged onto Facebook and saw a bunch of vitriolic comments from folks and was even more shocked.  Rich posted what happened, and Stu summers called me a "piece of sh*t" and Cedric Philips, the editor for SCG, called me the "scummiest there ever was."   I thought that was pretty low.  


Thanks for posting the decklists Jeff.  I was too upset to stay for the top 8, as I'm sure folks can understand.  Glad they gave you the decklists.  Also, great pics.  

[Lunar]

I find Cedric Phillips calling somebody else scummy extremely ironic.

[The Atog Lord]

I honestly believe that Steve was not intending to give either of us an advantage in the matchup. I don't think there was any malice involved.

The new trigger rules are tricky, especially because Wizards has changed them several times in the recent past.

Under the current trigger rules, you are required to remember your own triggers, but you are allowed to let your opponent forget his triggers. So, if I have a Chalice on the table, and I cast Black Lotus, then I am obligated to have my own Chalice counter my Lotus. However, if my opponent has Chalice out, it's perfectly legal for me to toss my Lotus out and hope my opponent forgets his Chalice. (Granted, in this instance, I wasn't doing anything nearly so clever. I just forgot about Chalice and played the Lotus).

[wiley]

Changes to Missed Trigger

I'm sure that most of you have heard about the changes to the missed trigger policies. If not this next sentence should give you everything you need to know as a player about the changes.

"Don't miss your triggers!"

So "Judge?" you ask "What if I do miss my or my opponents' triggers?" My answer: it depends…

At all Rules Enforcement Levels: Just like before you are responsible for your own triggers. Intentionally skipping a mandatory trigger will get you kicked out of a tournament faster than you can say "cumulative upkeep." Regardless if you miss your own trigger raise your hand and call a judge.

At Friday Night Magic or any other tournament run at Regular REL: Everything you previously learned about triggered abilities still holds true. You are still required to point out any mandatory triggers at Regular REL. Regular REL events are considered a place to learn how the game works. Not pointing out your opponent's triggers goes against the spirit of FNM and other such events.

So what if this is a PTQ or higher-level event?

At Competitive REL or higher: You are not expected to point out your opponents' triggers mandatory or not. Magic is a game of skill. Judges and you as a player should not be required to make sure players play the game well. This policy change makes remembering your triggers into a skill test. I welcome it.

What if you want something to trigger? Let's say your opponent forgot to discard a card to their trigger; what do you do? You simply point out that they missed a trigger and call a judge. After you explain the situation to the judge the judge will let you know if the trigger will go on the stack or not. This is where all the technical stuff about lapsing and non-lapsing abilities comes in but players really don't need to worry about that. Basically if your opponent misses a mandatory trigger and you want it to resolve call a judge right away.

One more thing: since remembering triggers is now a skill test this means that judges other players and spectators are not allowed to point out missed triggers. This is going to take a little getting used to and I'm sure for the first few weeks there are going to be some awkward judge calls involving outside assistance.

http://www.starcitygames.com/php/news/print.php?Article=23913

4.2. Tournament Error — Outside Assistance
Definition
A player, spectator, or other tournament participant does any of the following:
• Seeks advice from others once he or she has sat for his or her match.
• Gives advice to players who have sat for their match.
• During a game, references notes made before the official beginning of the current match, including Oracle
text that has not been provided by a judge.

These criteria also apply to any deck construction portions of a limited tournament using decklists. Additionally, no
notes of any kind may be made during a draft.  Notes made during a match may be referenced during that match or between matches. Notes made outside the current match may only be referenced between games.
19
Examples
A. During a game, a player references play notes that were created before the tournament.
B. A spectator points out the correct play to the player, who had not solicited the information.
Philosophy
Tournaments test the skill of a player, not their ability to follow external advice or directions. Any strategy advice, play advice, or construction advice from an external source is considered assistance.

Penalty

Regular - Warning

Competitive - Match

Professional - Match

Spectators who commit this infraction may be asked to leave the venue if they are not enrolled in the tournament.

http://www.wizards.com/dci/downloads/MTG_IPG_1Jul09_EN.pdf

I can understand the judges decision to call it outside assistance, and I suppose they already downgraded the penalty from a match loss to a game loss, but I still feel that is harsh for pointing out a (in no way optional) missed trigger.  I feel like he should have been given a warning and told that next time he should seek a judge.  Again, I understand the judges' decisions, but I have a hard time agreeing with it given the state of the game.

As for people attacking Stephen on facebook/elsewhere, that is very poor form.  I hope that their reactions are based mostly on an absence  of information, but regardless I have to condemn their actions.  I won't devolve to childish retorts, but I will say those people should apologize for their serious overreactions in the same public manner they chose to present them in the first place.

Looking at the tournament results ... I guess if you are building a deck right now you really need to have game against bob + jace.  That is actually a somewhat depressing top 8 to me, but the double shot of pyromancer decks, both of which are different than the one I'm currently brewing, serve to cheer me up some.

Also, I love the amount of pictures.  Getting camera feature matches is great and all, but being able to see so many people slinging old school cardboard and having fun is great too!

EDIT:

Under the current trigger rules, you are required to remember your own triggers, but you are allowed to let your opponent forget his triggers. So, if I have a Chalice on the table, and I cast Black Lotus, then I am obligated to have my own Chalice counter my Lotus. However, if my opponent has Chalice out, it's perfectly legal for me to toss my Lotus out and hope my opponent forgets his Chalice. (Granted, in this instance, I wasn't doing anything nearly so clever. I just forgot about Chalice and played the Lotus).

The big problem with this is that it promotes exactly that kind of play.  Heck there was even a legacy pro on scg that wrote in his article that he tries to play things that would get countered by his own cotv and would resolve them if the opponent forgets about it.  Seeing as it is impossible to know what a person thinks they can get away with this through at least one judge call, which is total bs and completely against the spirit of the game...

edited for better formatting

[heiner]

I state here publicly, that I don't believe for a minute that Stephen was trying to assist me (or infact gave me any assistance).

I believe assistance is meant neutral here. I doesn't matter whether somebody benefits and whether the ouside assistance was intentional or not, it basically says: Don't say anything if you are a spectator. So its irrelevant whether Stephan was trying to help or not.

Does anyone think that Chalice of the Void triggers are in any way optional?
Does anyone think that Stephen's actions were "giving outside assistance to LotusHead"?

As I learned yesterday this is not correct. Effectively CotV triggers are now OPTIONAL and not mandatory. So if I play mox into your chalice and you say resolves, it resolves. If you find out a second later that the CotV should have triggered it does not matter at all anymore. It s another story again with "mandatory" triggers that are controlled by you and which are to your own disadvantage. So if I play a mox into my own chalice, I am responsible for anouncing triggers. If I "forget" and my opponent does not remind me of the CotV trigger does my mox then resolve?

[Smmenen]

I suppose they already downgraded the penalty from a match loss to a game loss,

No, the judge gave me a match loss. 

but I still feel that is harsh for pointing out a (in no way optional) missed trigger.  I feel like he should have been given a warning and told that next time he should seek a judge.  Again, I understand the judges' decisions, but I have a hard time agreeing with it given the state of the game.

I was -- and remained - stunned.

Thanks for sharing that link.

Two questions: 1) there is any other infraction category for classifying that kind of action other than outside assistance? and 2) is there no discretion for discerning differences in penalties based on severity of the infraction?  I mean, what I did is very different than, for example, telling somewhat how to build a Doomsday pile during a match, yet comes under the same infraction...

[Demagoguery]

I find it shocking that anyone would say such negative things online about such a prominent member of the Vintage community. I've always viewed our community to be much more respectful than any other community, and I hope that those users apologize in some fashion for their statements.

More so, I find it strange how online play and real life play can deviate in such ways. Online we have the program enforcing these triggers, much as Stephen did in this case, but in real life they are in a sense optional? As a whole this seems like a very harsh penalty for a very minor infraction.

[The Atog Lord]

In terms of the effect on a game, there isn't a difference between reminding someone of a trigger and helping him make Doomsday piles. In both cases, it is outside interference than might affect the match outcome. I would have been much less happy if the reminder actually did cost me the win and in. Further, the judge had already admonished Steve for providing outside assistance in the match. Steve had answered a question from LotusHead during sideboarding that probably should not have been answered.

[birds of paradise]

Fantastic picture reports as always. Maybe next step is video coverage ?

[Smmenen]

In terms of the effect on a game, there isn't a difference between reminding someone of a trigger and helping him make Doomsday piles. In both cases, it is outside interference than might affect the match outcome. I would have been much less happy if the reminder actually did cost me the win and in. Further, the judge had already admonished Steve for providing outside assistance in the match. Steve had answered a question from LotusHead during sideboarding that probably should not have been answered.

Just fyi, Jeff asked the crowd if you can sacrifice a Gemstone Mine to itself by removing counters, and replay it without passing priority -- and I did not answer that question.  I was talking with him, but didn't actually give an answer.  The judge stopped the conversation before anyone even tried to answer - but I wasn't intending to answer it during the match. 

[wiley]

Emphasis mine

1.3
Tournament Roles
The following roles are defined for tournament purposes:
• Tournament Organizer
• Head Judge
• Floor Judge
• Scorekeeper
• Player
• Spectator

The first four roles above are considered tournament officials. The Head Judge and floor judges are collectively considered judges. A single individual may act in any combination of tournament official roles. Individuals who are not judges at a tournament are acting as spectators in any match they are not playing in. Members of the press are also considered spectators.


1.11
Spectators
Any person physically present at a tournament and not in any other category above is a spectator.  Spectators are responsible for remaining silent and passive during matches and other official tournament sections in which players are also required to be silent. If spectators believe they have observed a rules or policy violation, they are encouraged to alert a judge as soon as possible. At Regular or Competitive REL, spectators are permitted to ask the players to pause the match while they alert a judge. At Professional REL, spectators must not interfere with the match directly.

Players may request that a spectator not observe their matches. Such requests must be made through a judge.
Tournament officials may also instruct a spectator not observe a match or matches.

http://www.wizards.com/ContentResources/Wizards/WPN/Main/Documents/Magic_The_Gathering_Tournament_Rules_PDF2.pdf

It does clearly fall under outside assistance, unfortunately.

[Samoht]

24 players in the house! Follow my progress on twitter!

Man, outside assistance is so good I heard. Who needs optional triggers anymore?

Does anyone think that Chalice of the Void triggers are in any way optional?
Does anyone think that Stephen's actions were "giving outside assistance to LotusHead"?

For people commenting on this topic (and I feel here is the best place for it, but MODS feel free to move this whole discussion to somewhere more appropriate if necessary.), please be respectful of Stephen, Rich and myself on this topic.

You have the option of forgetting your triggers without penalty with the rules change. Do I think that change is silly and encourages people breaking the spirit of the game for personal advantage? Sure. Do I abide by it regardless? Yes. I also think that losing damage on the stack is silly, but if I tried to use a Mogg Fanatic with damage on the stack it would be a problem, wouldn't it? As a tournament entrant you are required to know the rules of the game you are playing. As someone who assumes such a position of knowledge/wisdom from on high in his writings and orations, I think it's fair that he is held to the standard that the average player in the community is, no?

Stephen certainly gave outside assistance as termed by the rule. I actually do believe it was in earnest just to try to maintain the correct game state. Let's not forget that in M10 it became the responsibility of onlookers to do such. The problem is that he took direct action as opposed to acquiring a Judge after stopping the match. By inserting himself in a role of authority that he did not have a right to take, he assumed the repercussions for being wrong. I think the penalty administered was a bit harsh, but it was the letter of the law. I acknowledge the community generally is a bit more lenient than that, but that doesn't mean the judge has to be. Additionally, a previous occurrence of outside assistance makes the penalty more understandable.

[Smmenen]

Additionally, a previous occurrence of outside assistance makes the penalty more understandable.

But that did not actually happen, btw, as I already explained.  Jeff was asking a rules question that I never actually answered.  

It's also frustrating to go out of my way to try to actually set up events like this in the first place, to arrange with the owner of Eudemonia to schedule an event (bear in mind Eudo stopped holding Vintage two years ago), publicize it, and promote it -- including reaching out to folks like Rich several times with links, etc -- and then go onto Facebook and get hella degraded and cussed out. 

[TheProfessor]

Sweet looking list Stephen!  Makes me want to sleeve up some Gush's again! 

[hiryu]

So if I play a mox into my own chalice, I am responsible for anouncing triggers. If I "forget" and my opponent does not remind me of the CotV trigger does my mox then resolve?

No, if it's your own Chalice then you are required to remember the trigger.  If you forget, and you or your opponent notices, then you call a judge and find out what happens.  There's a policy for resolving it, but the key thing here is if they determine it was intentional, it will be considered cheating.

[Demagoguery]

In terms of the effect on a game, there isn't a difference between reminding someone of a trigger and helping him make Doomsday piles. In both cases, it is outside interference than might affect the match outcome. I would have been much less happy if the reminder actually did cost me the win and in.

I find this to be a very strange comment, as realistically the fact that its a mandatory trigger means that in an ideal game state there wouldn't be a situation in which it could be missed and thus result in you gaining some benefit. As I mentioned before, on MTGO you simply don't even have that as the program itself will force the trigger to happen, but the program will never tell you how to make a Doomsday pile.

I understand that the rules allow for people to miss mandatory triggers, but it simply seems against the spirit of the game to be upset that you won or lost because a trigger like that was pointed out. Players are allowed to put markers on top of their deck as a reminder that they have to pay upkeep costs, but there's no real way to put a marker on the game that states "Remember your Chalice at X".


Though even if Stephen asked you to pause the game so he can call a judge over, wouldn't that still alert both players to the fact that something may have been missed and as such still influence the probability that the Chalice is noticed after the spell was declared?

[LotusHead]

Fantastic picture reports as always. Maybe next step is video coverage ?

I likely would have taken a video of the finals, but had to leave with my ride.

[Varal]

Every tournaments are supposed to have a REL with the Regular one being pretty lenient with mistakes and cheating is pretty much the only thing that is penalized, Competitive REL is way more strict about rules and some rule traps exist where a player can lose games or matches upon mistakes made with no intent to cheat.

The REL should be communicated to the players but proxy tournaments are in a weird situation since the tournaments aren't sanctioned, rules violations and cheaters are not reported to the DCI, there is no one to review the judge calls and some sections of the rules are changed. You can't get disqualified for playing fake cards or at least not in the same way as a sanctioned tournament.

Since the rules aren't all enforced and most Vintage tournaments are friendly the Regular REL seems like a good choice but a tournament with hundreds of dollar in prize seems more fit for a Competitive REL. I feel like Stephen was a victim of the confusing Missed Trigger Policy. A lot of people don't understand the policy which is understandable with all the changes there was recently and how differently the policy affects the different RELs.

It's sad that someone is insulted for making a mistake when he wanted to be helpful. What is even sadder is that it is coming from "friends".

[Cruel Ultimatum]

Since the rules aren't all enforced and most Vintage tournaments are friendly the Regular REL seems like a good choice but a tournament with hundreds of dollar in prize seems more fit for a Competitive REL. I feel like Stephen was a victim of the confusing Missed Trigger Policy. A lot of people don't understand the policy which is understandable with all the changes there was recently and how differently the policy affects the different RELs.

Basically any event that requires deck lists is run at competitive REL.

[Metman]

Steve, it's a bummer that things went down like they did. I understand the ruling made by the judges and think, unfortunately, they did what they had to do. To me, it sounds like you were the victim of being at the wrong place at the wrong time.

In terms of people posting publicly made comments, you have to shrug it off. I know that some of these people are colleagues, maybe friends. Again, and unfortunately, many people feel pressured into reacting to situations for reasons other than what is in the best interest of being a decent person. If people are quick to make comments like "Steve is _______" when they don't know the what happened or even bothered to ask you what happened, in the grand scheme of things, their opinions don't matter and the people that pass judgment based on the comments of those people don't matter. The Vintage community owes a lot of gratitude to you for the work you have done to promote the game and format we love. I have been following TheManaDrain for, what 13ish years, I've seen it all. You keep doing what you are doing. There are only a handful of people that have a grasp on the format that have a voice like you do. Don't let this learning experience be something that leaves you "stunned" for too long.

[LotusHead]

Apparently I forgot to actually put Adam's Top 4 list up there. Fixed. (This puts Heiner in 5th-8th. Sorry bro!)

[The Atog Lord]

In terms of the effect on a game, there isn't a difference between reminding someone of a trigger and helping him make Doomsday piles. In both cases, it is outside interference than might affect the match outcome. I would have been much less happy if the reminder actually did cost me the win and in.

Words.

Well, this is easily the worst argument I've read on TMD in quite some time. Let's go through it point-by-point.

the fact that its a mandatory trigger

It's not mandatory that I point out the trigger --  my opponent's Chalice of the Void trigger is entirely option if he doesn't mention it.

in an ideal game state there wouldn't be a situation in which it could be missed and thus result in you gaining some benefit.

In an "ideal game state," my opponent already knows the proper Doomsday pile to make and someone telling him how to make those Doomsday piles also doesn't "result in you gaining some benefit."

on MTGO you simply don't even have that as the program itself will force the trigger to happen

If you'd like to play MODO, you can sit at home, eat your large bag of Doritos, and play all the MODO you want. Whatever happens on MODO is entirely irrelevant. And besides, it's not like you could even be playing Vintage Magic on MODO anyway, so I have no idea why you're even bringing this up.

the program will never tell you how to make a Doomsday pile

While this is true, if you're at home playing MODO, there's also nothing stopping you from opening up Microsoft Internet Explorer and using Google to find an article telling you how to make Doomsday piles.

I understand that the rules allow for people to miss mandatory triggers, but it simply seems against the spirit of the game to be upset that you won or lost because a trigger like that was pointed out

I understand that the rules allow for people to make bad Doomsday piles, but it seems against the spirit of the game (whatever the heck that is) to be upset that you won or lost because a pile like that was pointed out.

Players are allowed to put markers on top of their deck as a reminder that they have to pay upkeep costs, but there's no real way to put a marker on the game that states "Remember your Chalice at X".

Sure you can have a reminder like this. You can have an actual Chalice of the Void Magic card six inches in front of you, with X actual counters on it.

Though even if Stephen asked you to pause the game so he can call a judge over, wouldn't that still alert both players to the fact that something may have been missed and as such still influence the probability that the Chalice is noticed after the spell was declared?

I guess we'll never be able to know.

[Demagoguery]

Well, this is easily the worst argument I've read on TMD in quite some time. Let's go through it point-by-point.

I'll politely ask you to leave the casual insults out of this discussion, as it hardly warrants such things.

It's not mandatory that I point out the trigger --  my opponent's Chalice of the Void trigger is entirely option if he doesn't mention it.

That is a fair point, and you have the right to maintain your silence, but it is still in theory a mandatory trigger as nowhere on the card does it say "may". This rule exists to create a smaller burden on players to maintain both sides of the game, and is there to reduce the number of warnings issued.

In an "ideal game state," my opponent already knows the proper Doomsday pile to make and someone telling him how to make those Doomsday piles also doesn't "result in you gaining some benefit."

This is simply not true. An ideal game state refers to the functionality of cards as printed or stated in the errata. A Doomsday pile is a subjective matter and a player can have various justifications for making a pile differently than another player, based on different factors. A player does not have the right to miss their own Chalice triggers intentionally.

If you'd like to play MODO, you can sit at home, eat your large bag of Doritos, and play all the MODO you want. Whatever happens on MODO is entirely irrelevant. And besides, it's not like you could even be playing Vintage Magic on MODO anyway, so I have no idea why you're even bringing this up.

I will once again ask you to keep the petty comments to yourself. As for why MODO is relevant, well it has some of the strongest game state enforcement, there's no such thing as an illegal deck registration or failure to maintain game state, it's the best example of the ideal state of a magic game.

MODO does not help you make strategic decisions, such as Doomsday piles, but it does force you to maintain game state as in the mandatory triggers, and it does force you to have a legal deck.

More so, Wizards has made promises to bring Vintage to MODO.

While this is true, if you're at home playing MODO, there's also nothing stopping you from opening up Microsoft Internet Explorer and using Google to find an article telling you how to make Doomsday piles.

And this is cheating, it's harder to track on MODO but it is use of outside sources, and is not something MODO intentionally supports. If there's an in person MODO tournament, such as at a convention like PAX, the client will still force you to follow all mandatory triggers, but if a judge sees you using your phone or opening other programs for consultation you'll be disqualified.

Having to compare acts of cheating to none ideal game states is rather negative :/.

I understand that the rules allow for people to make bad Doomsday piles, but it seems against the spirit of the game (whatever the heck that is) to be upset that you won or lost because a pile like that was pointed out.

This is also incorrect, as I mentioned above, the Doomsday pile is a subjective matter that can be right or wrong based on hidden information, and thus a player making a pile should not have outside interference.

The spirit of the game is about triggers that are mandatory, but made less so due to physical inconvenience.

More so, the spirit of the game extends to functionality, rather than optimization. A player recently won a PTQ running 6 copies of Elvish Archdruid in their deck, a fact that wasn't caught until round 5, when the player was 5-0 and only then was he awarded a single game loss. Clearly we can agree that the ruling was against the spirit of the game, and as such we can agree the ruling made against Stephen was against the spirit of the game, but both rulings are clearly in the IPG. Should I be allowed to play with 3 Black Lotuses or Ancestral Recalls, for multiple rounds of a tournament with only a game loss as penalty as long as I can prove ignorance of the cards I placed in my deck versus what I registered?

I'd like to make it clearly that by no means am I stating you cheated, because you were in your right to remain silent about his trigger, but to be angry about Stephen pointing it out just seems a bit absurd to me.

Sure you can have a reminder like this. You can have an actual Chalice of the Void Magic card six inches in front of you, with X actual counters on it.

There's a vast difference between an obstruction to your ability to physically draw a card and another piece of cardboard in play. Maybe a phone app that pinged whenever a player stated a card name that had a CMC equal to a chalice with X counters in play?
[/quote]

[Smmenen]

the fact that its a mandatory trigger

It's not mandatory that I point out the trigger --  my opponent's Chalice of the Void trigger is entirely option if he doesn't mention it.

Yes, but a key point is that this did not used to be the case.  Apparently the rules changed on this in February.  For the vast majority of Chalice's existence,  both players were responsible for triggers that did not have the word "may" or other optional language.  I was not aware of the fact that these triggers were now considered 'optional.'  I thought they were to be treated just like other rules violations.  That doesn't excuse me for interrupting the game - I still should have gone to the judge -- but it does explained why I was so shocked by the ruling and the penalty.  This new missed trigger policy means that I was indeed helping another player out when that was not my intent.

The design intent of Chalice of the Void, and cards like Dark Confidant, was that players could not miss them when they were in play because they were designed under a different set of rules.  That's part of what was so confusing to me about this new philosophy in the rules. 

I've been playing with or against Chalice of the Void since it was printed (hell, I wrote an article about Chalice when it was spoiled). That's part of what is so frustrating about the penalty under the rules -- it goes against all of my ingrained experience of how Chalice has long worked.  And, unlike the major changes to the fundamental aspect of the rules like damage on the stack, as Samoht pointed out, this was not even a game rules change, but an IPG or floor rules change -- not something that someone like me, who doesn't play in regular tournaments would necessarily learn or discover.  I play in roughly 1-2 sanctioned tournaments a year.  Sometimes this game is not friendly to older players. 

Considering that I was not the only person confused (or surprised) by this new rule (Heiner, Jeff, Blaine etc did not know either -- see their posts in this thread or the conversations we had on site), I think it illustrates that this was a pretty confusing rules matter. 

I'm glad at least I can serve as a cautionary example for others to avoid the same penalty.     

[LotusHead]

Well, this is easily the worst argument I've read on TMD in quite some time. Let's go through it point-by-point.

I'll politely ask you to leave the casual insults out of this discussion, as it hardly warrants such things.

Rich said it was one of the worst arguments he's read on TMD in quite some time.  Then addressed them point by point.

There was no casual insult to you, but only to your arguments (Your arguments were fine, but obviously Rich had issues with them, not you personally. Then addressed your points).

Playing Magic online (even on MWS/Cockatrice) is NOT the same as playing Vintage with cardboard in a tourney.  The REL of the event and the penalty for what happened is the issue.  I watch drafts all the time online (I don't play MTGonline, or Modo I guess it's called), as I play FNM drafts a lot (only Standard casually).

Real people in a tourney have to deal with what's there. There is no helpful programming to let us know what's on the stack, and in contrast, there is no way to "forget" a Chalice trigger online. That's why Modo and Cardboard are in a ways like apples and oranges.

We all want some clarification, and having the Judges explain their standers/REL enforcement, and so forth will help us better enjoy this format IRL.

@Stephan: don't let a few FB comments let you down.  The matchloss, sure, get pissed over that, but not stupid non-moderated FB posts.  You know we love you.

In case you are interested, when I was a better player (ie, with a team I could playtest with endlessly) I first experienced Chalice of the Void shenanigans when I got to the finals of my first (ok) second proxy tourney, none other than the first Eudo Power 9 series.  In round 4, my opponent (playing white weenie) casually played an evil Isochron Scepter after a long board stall. I countered the shit out of it.  He laughed, and said, he was gonna just discard this 8th card at end of turn, but just played it into my Chalice of the Void set at 2. I mean, why not? I used this experience to try and get Rich to counter my Sphere (though Chalice would deal with it anyways). Epic games Rich!
http://www.themanadrain.com/index.php?topic=22217.0

[The Atog Lord]

Considering that I was not the only person confused (or surprised) by this new rule (Heiner, Jeff, Blaine etc did not know either -- see their posts in this thread or the conversations we had on site), I think it illustrates that this was a pretty confusing rules matter.  

Steve, I agree -- the constant rules changes are confusing. I really hope that things have stabilized with the trigger rules now.

Well, this is easily the worst argument I've read on TMD in quite some time. Let's go through it point-by-point.

I'll politely ask you to leave the casual insults out of this discussion, as it hardly warrants such things.

That is not an insult directed toward you. That is directed entirely at your argument. I have no interest in insulting you, but I am interested in picking your argument apart. The difference in subtle, but very important.

That is a fair point, and you have the right to maintain your silence, but it is still in theory a mandatory trigger as nowhere on the card does it say "may".

Sometimes the rules change, altering what a card does. The rules of the game have changed, making Chalice of the Void function differently than it did in the past. And now, if my opponent controls the Chalice of the Void and misses the trigger, the trigger becomes entirely optional for me. I get that you don't like this very much. I don't like foil very much. You saying that Chalice somehow "should" be mandatory for me is sort of like my saying that I can ignore any foil cards my opponent plays, because I don't like foils.

This is simply not true. An ideal game state refers to the functionality of cards as printed or stated in the errata.

I still honestly have no idea what an "ideal" game state is.

Magic cards have rules text, and they function within the game's rules. Without any rules, the text on Magic cards is entirely meaningless. What does "deal 3 damage to target creature" even mean, without a set of rules giving that phrase meaning?

As far as I can tell, your "ideal" game state is a game state that adheres to a set of rules that you've arbitrarily decided that you like more than the actual rules the game has. You could certainly host a tournament where people are asked to play by your "ideal" set of rules. I, however, showed up for a Magic tournament using the current Magic rules, proxies aside.

As for why MODO is relevant, well it has some of the strongest game state enforcement, there's no such thing as an illegal deck registration or failure to maintain game state, it's the best example of the ideal state of a magic game.

MODO is a different game than paper Magic. I realize that MODO is in some ways similar to paper Magic, but the game itself is different. MODO has a chess clock. MODO has automatic reminders of triggers. MODO has no reserve list. MODO requires that you use Microsoft Windows. MODO games miss out on being able to look at your opponent and read him. In other words, yes, MODO reminds you about triggers. Paper Magic does not. The fact that MODO does remind you about triggers is entirely meaningless in this discussion. We've established that you can ignore the opponent's Chalice if he misses the trigger, and all of the low-quality 1990's-inspired user interfaces in the word won't do anything to change that.

The spirit of the game is about triggers that are mandatory, but made less so due to physical inconvenience.

I'm not an animist. The game of Magic has no "spirit." Magic has a set of rules. We don't get to pick our favorite rules and ignore the rest. Instead, if we want to get together with people and play Magic, we're obligated to follow those rules. I just don't see this Spirit of the Game or Avatar of Magic or Gametime Incarnation that you're envisioning.

to be angry about Stephen pointing it out just seems a bit absurd to me.

I'm not angry at Steve. I've never given any impression that I was. Steve said it was an honest mistake and I believe him. Simple.

There's a vast difference between an obstruction to your ability to physically draw a card and another piece of cardboard in play. Maybe a phone app that pinged whenever a player stated a card name that had a CMC equal to a chalice with X counters in play?

I'm pretty sure that using your phone to help you play Magic better would be considered against the "Spirit of the Game" that you've invoked above. Or, maybe not. I'm not quite sure. But I know that I'd call a judge for outside assistance if this happened. Remembering your triggers is part of the game, just like making Doomsday piles is part of the game.