Welcome, judges, to this week's installment of the Knowledge Pool! Our scenario this week is inspired by Sal Cortez and is of Silver level, so L2+ judges should wait until after their local FNMs to add their opinions.

Here are your blog post and scenario:

Alfonso is playing in a sealed GPT. He sits down for game 1 of his match, grabs a pile of roughly 40 sleeved cards out of his deck box, shuffles, and presents to his opponent. Upon drawing his opening hand, he immediately calls a judge and explains that this is his sideboard. He has several other packages sleeved for quick sideboarding, and he just grabbed the wrong pile from his deck box.

What do you do?

Here we go. Depending on how he has is cards organized there may or may not be an error.
If the cards in his deck box are only those from the sealed event and not extras outside the game. IE he only sleeved and put his side board in there, I don't see an error. No advantage has been gained since the match hasn't been started and he immediately called for a judge. (After double checking to make sure he indeed grabbed his sideboard - but that is under cheating because he is attempting to gain an advantage possibly because his hand is bad and thus not typically apart of these scenarios.) In this case I would caution to be more careful, tell him to get the right deck, and give a time extension equal to the time already used. NAP isn't up for consideration for anything because how could he know. I may be in error here as he DID present the wrong deck which is typically what we look for in deck checks, there for may fall under deck/decklist error and thus be the typical game loss. Sleeving your side board is a typical thing to do in constructed events so I see no issue with having the sideboard sleeved.

If the sleeved cards contain cards from outside the tournament, say a standard deck he also has (maybe its a toolkit box so it can hold multiple decks) we run into the issue of deck/decklist error where he has extra cards in his deckbox and thus technically his sideboard which I believe is typically a game loss.

EDIT: after reading others I see Caution is the wrong declaration and it is DDE downgraded to a warning at the head judges discretion. Right idea wrong conclusion before, I believe.

Edited Jonathan Burgess (June 19, 2015 01:10:21 PM)

Had a scenario similar to this at a PPTQ this past weekend, though in a constructed event.

At first blush, this is a Deck/Decklist Problem, though a specifically downgradable offense:

If a player, before taking any game actions, discovers a deck problem and calls a judge at that point, the Head Judge may downgrade the penalty, fix the deck, and allow the player to redraw the hand with one fewer card. The player may continue to take further mulligans if he or she desires.

My next step is to retrieve the player's deck list and quickly confirm the errant card(s) is/are from the sideboard and not outside the pool. Assuming this is the case, I give a warning, instruct the player to correct the deck and force a mulligan.

Importantly, if this player were on the draw and did not notice the error until his/her turn, the downgrade path is not available, as game actions have been taken.

And if the cards are not from the pool, then we are having a different discussion as to why these additional cards are sleeved and in the deckbox.

This is a TE-DDP, as Michael said, since the player call a judge before any game action are take, we can downgrade the penalty from GL to a Warning.

In a Competitive REL, Limited tournaments must use a decklist, so as fix, a deck check should be sufficient. Remember the player to pay attention before every new match.

Is good to remember that, on Regular Limited tournaments, this wouldn't be a problem, because the players can change the content of their decks with their side at any time between matchs, since their deck have at least 40 cards.

DDP, grab the decklist to confirm the proper list, fix the deck, consider (and probably) downgrade to a warning, and warn the player to be more careful in the future.

All that being said, the following line confuses me.

He has several other packages sleeved for quick sideboarding, and he just grabbed the wrong pile from his deck box.

I have a feeling this question isn't as simple as it seems, but this is my answer for now.

Is there a difference to: forgetting to “Re-Sideboard” after a previous match?

In Barcelona (Team Sealed) this happened to one of my teammates. Since he was the control player his matches took long. We were 5-1-0 and in Round 7 he realized on his starting hand that he forgot to “reboard” his deck. He called a judge immediately. Result -> Game Loss. We had no deck check. Well basically we lost “a game” and somewhat day 2 because he was “too honest” and called a judge.

Before:

First I'd check his decklist just to verify its his sideboard. Once that's done, he'll be awarded a Deck/Decklist problem and will get a game loss. By presenting his deck to his opponent he has claimed his deck is legal, which is not the case. Likewise I believe the sideboard is also meant to be presented, but it's not that relevant to this.

From here I'd let him bring out his actual deck, and would just remind him to make sure he makes it clear what is his sideboard and what is his deck.

After:

Ends up a warning is sufficient here since no game actions have happened. My bad :).

Edited Kai Clark (June 19, 2015 04:30:54 AM)

Originally posted by Michael Anderson:

Importantly, if this player were on the draw and did not notice the error until his/her turn, the downgrade path is not available, as game actions have been taken.

At what point is a player considered to have taken a game action? With the downgrade path, whose actions are we looking at?

If a player, on the draw, looks at his hand, sees his early game plans are fine, but the late game card he barely glanced at is actually a sideboard card, and he realises before he makes a game action, are we giving a game loss?

Originally posted by Dylan Rippe:

All that being said, the following line confuses me.

I think, it's just red herring there to confuse judges ;)
As a infraction we have there TE/DDP - player presented deck that don't match his decklist but: he called on himself about that, and there wasn't any game actions taken, so we could downgrade (and I think we should). Restore deck to proper state, our unlucky player draws new opening hand with one card less and can take additional mulligan decisions. We issue him Warning and that's all there :)

Before reading other responses:

Alfonso has shuffled, presented, and drawn an opening hand from a deck that does not match his registered decklist - and thus has committed Tournament Error - Deck/Decklist Problem. However, he noticed this error before taking any game actions, and called a judge, so we have an opportunity to fix this error before it causes any real damage.

Alfonso will receive a Warning (downgraded from the usual Game Loss), we'll fix his deck by having him pull the correct pile from his deckbox, and he'll shuffle and draw an initial hand of 6 cards. Mulligan decisions may continue from there. Issue a time extension if necessary. Thank him for his honesty and quick calling of a judge.

After reading other responses:

A few judges were tripped up by the line:

He has several other packages sleeved for quick sideboarding, and he just grabbed the wrong pile from his deck box.

In a limited event, you can sideboard any number of cards from your pool. In some cases, it can be advantageous to ‘sideboard’ into an entirely different deck, built from other colors your pool supports. This is mostly likely to happen in sealed, where a player has roughly 84 nonland cards in their pool, but only needs ~23 for a deck. It sounds like that's what was described in this scenario.

One thing that may be worth noting is that, by IPG, only HJ is allowed to do such downgrade.

Originally posted by Denis Leber:

Result -> Game Loss. We had no deck check. Well basically we lost “a game” and somewhat day 2 because he was “too honest” and called a judge.

Denis, I am not sure it belongs here, but did your team mate appeal?

Fundamentally what has happened here is that Alfonso has presented a set of cards that do not match the 40 cards registered as his main deck. That means we are looking at a Deck/Decklist Problem. Ordinarily, errors with a deck result in a Game Loss. However, we have a particular condition under which this is not the case:

Originally posted by IPG 3.4 - Additional Remedy:

If a player, before taking any game actions, discovers a deck problem and calls a judge at that point, the Head Judge may downgrade the penalty, fix the deck, and allow the player to redraw the hand with one fewer card. The player may continue to take further mulligans if he or she desires.

Typically this error is the result of failing to replace a small number sideboard cards from the prior match with their correct main deck slots. However, the IPG does not limit our ability to apply this fix based on the scale of the error. In this case, Alfonso has presented approximately 35 mismatched cards, which made it extremely easy to detect and report the error. Because he has done so, the Additional Remedy should be invoked. A Warning will be issued, and Alfonso will have the opportunity to correct his deck back to the proper game 1 configuration. After he has done so and presented the deck to his opponent, he will draw a hand of six cards and may mulligan from there.

Some discussion has revolved around how best to have Alfonso restore his deck to match his list. The answer is to simply ask him to do so. After he has, browse quickly through the deck, looking at the colors he is playing and any cards you feel are notable, either for being especially good in some matchups or rarity or any other criterion than strikes your fancy. Once the players have begun play, quickly check the player's list to ensure that the colors and cards you mentally noted match up. Do not perform a full deck check or other intensive deck verification procedures. Alfonso has called a judge on himself after noticing an error, and your priority should be to get him playing Magic with the minimum required extension.

Thanks to everyone who participated, and we'll be back soon with a new scenario!