I recently discussed an interesting scenario with a few players from my Area - to which none of us could come up with any usefull solution if it ever occured.

I'll start by explaining the Situation and then the Deck in question:
Say you are running some sort of Competetive Legacyevent - e.g. a GP. You are in Top8 (so without a time limit for the round), Quarterfinals.
The opponents play a Shared Fate mirror - the Decks play next to no Wincondition on their own, besides one Form of the Dragon and a Claws of Gix (which saccrifices the Shared Fate when both libraries are empty before their oppoents Drawstep, thereby killing them), and 4 Academy Rector.

Game 1, both players got rid of each others Form of the Dragons (through Discard or whatever), and at some point in time, both Players have a Shared Fate in play and no Academy Rectors left in their decks - so the game will never finish (as none of them will sac their Shared Fate first, for obvious reasons, or because one or both lost their Claws of Gix somehow). So the Game will end in a draw.

For Sideboarding in the Mirror, both players will take out Form of the Dragon (so their Opponent cannot draw it under Shared Fate). Now both Players have Decks that can theoretically win (they both have 4 1/2-Creatures in their Deck), but in reality, both Decks will never, ever win - they each have 4 1/2s to block their Opponents 1/2s as well as Night of souls Betrayal, Moat, some Spotremoval and so on and so forth.


How do you resolve this Situation?
We do not have a Loop, and we can't really force players to sac their Shared Fates when they Libraries are empty (the players would sac the Claws to themselves before doing so even if we tried to). Their decks don't feature Enchantment-removal, and winning through Decking while beeing able to keep the opponent from resolving Shared Fate OR saccing an Academy Rector is just as unlikely as winning through 1/2-Beatdown.
So the game will probably never (or at least not within a reasonable timeframe, as you have a tournament to finsih) have a victor.

How likely is it that a Shared Fate mirror match will happen in the untimed portion of a REL-C event? Pretty unlikely.

In any case, if a game should ever reach a state in which neither player can win the game, I would remind the players that they have the right to intentionally draw the game.

Now do they, in a top 8, single elimination?
Since drawing single games doesn't really lead anywhere, as the ongoing match will probably result in 0-0-x, with x>20 before any of the zeroes change.

How do you seat the Semifinals then?


Oh, and it's not even that unlikely. I know of three Legacyplayers in my immediate vincinity that actually play the Deck, and in a GPT with ~16ish players, Legacy format, this situation could actually happen to me ;).

Originally posted by Philip Körte:

Now do they, in a top 8, single elimination?
Since drawing single games doesn't really lead anywhere, as the ongoing match will probably result in 0-0-x, with x>20 before any of the zeroes change.

How do you seat the Semifinals then?

Of course they can draw the game to move along the match. With any luck, one of them will end up winning a couple of games. Clearly they're capable of winning games or else they would have never made the top 8 cut.

^The point is it is impossible or infinitesimally unlikely for one of them to win the game against the mirror post-sideboard. They can sit there for years playing the match before the cards would be arranged in such a way one of them would lose. Of course they're capable of winning games against non-mirror to make the top 8 cut. I'm not sure this needed re-iterating.

I'm not sure how the match up works, but is it possible for them to do damage at some point in time? In this case you could play the game in some kind of Sudden Death. First player to lose life loses or player with the least life at end of round loses.

Edited Dominik Chłobowski (Dec. 16, 2012 12:24:11 AM)

If the situation were to compromise the integrity of the tournament, I would look at invoking the “sudden death” rule in MTR 2.5. I would inform the players of the rule before hand though, since I have never seen it used in my many years of playing/judging.

Carsten Haese <forum-2253@apps.magicjudges.org> wrote:

^Ah, I searched MTR for “sudden death” and didn't find it. Perhaps I should've looked at the headings more closely to realise it was in the EOG procedures. =P

It's used in things like Grinders for GPs since they don't want to have them take forever. I believe it or some kind of similar procedure is used for SCG event top 8s and stuff when the venue closing time is a concern.

Edited Dominik Chłobowski (Dec. 16, 2012 12:31:48 AM)

They most likely wont deal any damage ever, though the players might loose life due to fetchlands or gain some due to StP on Rector. Imposing sudden death sounds like a decent solution….though it really isn't much better than a cointoss in the matchup.
Thanks Trenten, don't know why I didn't think of that myself.

@Carsten - look at Shared Fate - the whole deck is based on the Idea to disrupt the enemy and/or imposte some sort of lock (Humility + Night of souls Betrayal), cast Shared Fate and then win with whatever the opponents deck gives us, or drawing the libraries, then saccing Shared fate in the opponents Upkeep.

Sudden death, but only if it becomes necessary because of things like venue closing. But, yeah, sudden death.

-Eric
—– Original Message —–
From: Philip Körte
To: eshukan@verizon.net
Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2012 4:52 PM
Subject: Shared Fate - the Absolute draw? (Rules Discussion)


I recently discussed an interesting scenario with a few players from my Area - to which none of us could come up with any usefull solution if it ever occured.

I'll start by explaining the Situation and then the Deck in question:
Say you are running some sort of Competetive Legacyevent - e.g. a GP. You are in Top8 (so without a time limit for the round), Quarterfinals.
The opponents play a Shared Fate mirror - the Decks play next to no Wincondition on their own, besides one Form of the Dragon and a Claws of Gix (which saccrifices the Shared Fate when both libraries are empty before their oppoents Drawstep, thereby killing them), and 4 Academy Rector.

Game 1, both players got rid of each others Form of the Dragons (through Discard or whatever), and at some point in time, both Players have a Shared Fate in play and no Academy Rectors left in their decks - so the game will never finish (as none of them will sac their Shared Fate first, for obvious reasons, or because one or both lost their Claws of Gix somehow). So the Game will end in a draw.

For Sideboarding in the Mirror, both players will take out Form of the Dragon (so their Opponent cannot draw it under Shared Fate). Now both Players have Decks that can theoretically win (they both have 4 1/2-Creatures in their Deck), but in reality, both Decks will never, ever win - they each have 4 1/2s to block their Opponents 1/2s as well as Night of souls Betrayal, Moat, some Spotremoval and so on and so forth.


How do you resolve this Situation?
We do not have a Loop, and we can't really force players to sac their Shared Fates when they Libraries are empty (the players would sac the Claws to themselves before doing so even if we tried to). Their decks don't feature Enchantment-removal, and winning through Decking while beeing able to keep the opponent from resolving Shared Fate OR saccing an Academy Rector is just as unlikely as winning through 1/2-Beatdown.
So the game will probably never (or at least not within a reasonable timeframe, as you have a tournament to finsih) have a victor.

—————————
If you want t o respond to this thread, simply reply to this e-email. Or view and respond to this message on the web at http://apps.magicjudges.org/notifications/129608/

Disable all notifications for this topic: http://apps.magicjudges.org/forum/noemail/2253/
Receive on-site notifications only for this topic: http://apps.magicjudges.org/forum/noemail/2253/

You can change your email notification settings at http://apps.magicjudges.org/profiles/edit

If I anticipate that this will be a problem (which in this case it seems that you do), I would announce ahead of time that the single elimination portion of the tournament will be timed, setting the limit at 90 minutes. This leaves plenty of time for most other decks to complete their games (for many decks 90 minutes may as well be untimed), but it automatically invokes sudden death in these rare cases where there is potential for indefinite stagnation.

Originally posted by Robert Hinrichsen:

I would announce ahead of time that the single elimination portion of the tournament will be timed, setting the limit at 90 minutes.

You can't do this at a PTQ or other event whose factsheet states differently.

Fact sheets are great, but real life is another matter. If your choice is a) not running the top8 because time is a factor due to unforseen circumstances and b) putting a reasonable time limit on the top8, I'll choose B.

In extreme circumstances, it is better to get a winner than to not finish the tourney. OF course, the few times this has happend here and there, I've seen other solutions, like going to a hotel lobby or a pub or a restaurant. But, if no other option is avalaible, a 90-munte time-limit would be fine in my book.

-Eric
—– Original Message —–
From: Sean Hunt
To: eshukan@verizon.net
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2012 12:31 AM
Subject: Re: Shared Fate - the Absolute draw? (Rules Discussion)


Robert Hinrichsen
I would announce ahead of time that the single elimination portion of the tournament will be timed, setting the limit at 90 minutes.
You can't do this at a PTQ or other event whose factsheet states differently.

—————————
If you want to respond to this thread, simply reply to this e-email. Or view and respond to this message on the web at http://apps.magicjudges.org/notifications/129608/

Disable all notifications for this topic: http://apps.magicjudges.org/forum/noemail/2253/
Receive on-site notifications only for this topic: http://apps.ma gicjudges.org/forum/noemail/2253/

You can change your email notification settings at http://apps.magicjudges.org/profiles/edit

Originally posted by Eric Shukan:

Fact sheets are great, but real life is another matter. If your choice is a) not running the top8 because time is a factor due to unforseen circumstances and b) putting a reasonable time limit on the top8, I'll choose B.

In extreme circumstances, it is better to get a winner than to not finish the tourney. OF course, the few times this has happend here and there, I've seen other solutions, like going to a hotel lobby or a pub or a restaurant. But, if no other option is avalaible, a 90-munte time-limit would be fine in my book.

Sorry—yes, this is true. I was referring to putting a time limit on the final because you're worried that you might see a Shared Fate mirror in the final and that you'll need a time limit to make the match end. If outside circumstances dictate a time limit, that's one thing; if you just don't want the final to take forever, that's your problem.

I think that the situation described fits within the bounds of “significant and exceptional”—it is significant because the match needs to end at some point, and it is exceptional because it seems unlikely to do so in any time limit. If this is the case, I would carefully evaluate the situation and attempt to give the best ruling in the situation. I don't want to speculate on what that would be, because there are too many variables that would depend on the exact circumstances of the tournament.