As formats like Legacy and Modern get more popular, we need to remind players that they need to check their alters with the head judge before the event. Not doing so can cost valuable time during deck checks, as alters will always need to be cleared with the head judge when discovered during a deck check, adding at least a minute to the procedure. This came up several times last Sunday, when I was team lead for Deck Checks on the Legacy Premier IQ at the SCG Open Weekend in Syracuse, NY.

When I got home, I got an idea: We should have some form of altered card verification slip that the HJ can give to a player when their alters have been checked and cleared. It can list the date, player name, and the altered cards that were okayed.
The player could then leave this slip of paper inside their deck box so that if/when that player is deck checked, the deck check team would know that the alters were okay and not have to spend extra time verifying their legality.

I've thrown together a quick first draft here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1K6T41-tnX7KGH6uX2V0-qyip0fFBTG5EWs6OImdmIsQ/edit?usp=sharing
If you want to, please try it out at your next event and let me know how it worked.

This system likely wouldn’t be viable at the Grand Prix level, but at a moderate sized event (7 or 8 rounds), it could probably shave a few minutes off of the event overall.

What do you all think? Has anyone ever tried something like this before?

Your idea is interesting. But a line in the MTR is balancing it.

The Head Judge of the tournament is the final authority on acceptable cards for a tournament like altered cards.

In France, as the EDH format is well-develloped, we have this “problem” coming very often. It's very common for the head-judge to have around 20 altered cards to check at the beginning of the day. But each head-judge has his own limit or policy on the definition of “acceptable cards”.

In purpose to avoid the problem mentionned above (loosing time during deck checks), when I am the head judge of this type of format, I prefer preventing than curring by being very proactive and asking to all the players, before the seat-all, to come to check with me their altered cards. It's quite effective and I have the time to enjoy seeing a lot of beautiful alterations.

Sonia,
I know of that line, and this helps address it.
The whole point is that when the head judge OKs the alters in a deck, it
gets one of these slips so that the deck check team knows that the HJ has
authorized their use.
Even if you tell players that alters need to be approved by the head judge,
there's always going to be one or two people who don't check with you.

On Fri, Apr 10, 2015, 08:34 Sonia L'hopital <

Oh, that's interesting! (I thought it was to give an approval for severals events - sorry)

So, the head-judge put this little note in the box and the deck-check team knows that these cards have been approuved by the head-judge at the start of the event.
That's a good idea! I will try it at my next events in these specific formats (Legacy, EDH).

Thanks for the idea!
:)

Originally posted by Charlotte Sable:

This system likely wouldn’t be viable at the Grand Prix level, but at a moderate sized event (7 or 8 rounds), it could probably shave a few minutes off of the event overall.

Now I am wondering, why this idea can't be use at Grand Prix level?

Alternately, one could instruct the players to bring their decklists to the head judge when they are checking their alters and have it noted on the deck list itself.

I think this is a great idea. Playing devils advocate, could a player then change the card after the alter is approved to one that was not approved at another event that he really wants to play with? I think it's the way it is now so that the head judge gets a second look at the card to verify it's a card that he approved already. I can't think of a way to abuse a change like this to a point of cheating but it might be possible.

The idea is that the slip of paper is good for just this event, not every event.

Preston, do you really think a player will come with two altered cards just to get an advantage…?

And risk DQ and possible suspension for it?

From: Sonia L'hopital
Sent: Friday, April 10, 2015 9:04 AM
To: Heckt, Andy
Subject: Re: An idea for Altered Cards and Deck Checks (Tournament Operations)


Preston, do you really think a player will come with two altered cards just to get an advantage…?

——————————————————————————–
If you want to respond to this thread, simply reply to this email. Or view and respond to this message on the web at http://apps.magicjudges.org/forum/post/113064/

Disable all notifications for this topic: http://apps.magicjudges.org/forum/noemail/17461/
Receive on-site notifications only for this topic: http://apps.magicjudges.org/forum/noemail/17461/?onsite=yes

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

Do I think it's possible? yes. Do I think it'll happen often at all? no. Like I said I like the idea. I'm trying to punch holes in it. If I can't then awesome the idea is even better. I have seen people denied their alters in decks. I think some small number of them would consider abusing this as a way to play their alter that gets denied every so often. So the question becomes how large is that percentage and do we care about that percentage?

Edit: Adding to this, it may show that we are paying more attention to alters and deter people further from trying to abuse something like this.

Edited Preston May (April 10, 2015 01:41:35 PM)

It is possible that a judge who is more lenient on alters can approve them sign off on the slip. When that player goes to a different event the judge who is more strict will have a difficult time with this player because they have physical proof that a judge ok'd them for a different event rather than just a verbal admission.

Nick, I do not see the problem with that.
Whenever I ‘ok’ off alters, I explicitly tell the player that this is true for this event and this event only, and even if the same player plays at a different event which I Headjudge, I might not allow it for whatever reason.
I do not see how a piece of paper changes that.

If the player is upset that his card was not allowed at a tournament, even if it was allowed in the past, he will be upset wether he was told it is ok or if he got a slip that says it was ok for exactly that event.

We brush off many things when a player says that “some other judge said so” because we have no way of verifying if that is correct. With a slip of paper we now have proof. Which will influence our decisions to allow the alter. Having some physical proof will also make a player argue more and be more upset if we don't allow the alter(s).

Some judge who are not as confidant as others when it comes to confrontation will just bend to the player for the sake of “customer service”.


I think a better way to handle something like this is for the head judge to write down the name of the player with alters and communicate that to the DC lead. Then there is no worry of the dc team coming across an approved alter and taking up time to verify if the HJ approved it.

How about the Head Judge just discussing his or her guidelines for acceptable alters with the Deck Checks team, and delegating that responsibility to the Deck Checks Lead? Obviously, there's going to be some borderline cases where the DC Lead will want to confer with the HJ, but empowering the DC Lead saves a lot of time for the HJ. (And that, by the way, is a reason for not using the suggestion for GPs.)

d:^D