Originally posted by Mitja Bosnic:

What if the player actually had a Combust in hand? Or what if they had a French Go for the Throat? Or a Japanese Counterbalance that they mistook for a Judge promo Force of Will? Or a Maze of Ith and they just have no idea about how the game works?

There's one huge difference, which is that in those cases the player is using the judge to help them understand the game, which is what judges are for.
In the original question, the player is using the judge to mindgame a tactical advantage. This is not what judges are for.

It's wasting judge time. If it only happens once or twice, then that doesn't create an actual staffing issue, but it clearly isn't scalable, so we can't allow players to see it as an OK thing to do in case it catches on.

For that matter, even just one call like this is slowing down floor judge response to actual calls and reducing the number of judges watching games. It's lowering the quality of our overall customer service, for zero local gain (as helping with bluffs is not part of the service we are providing).

Honestly, I think this is not so good as a trick.
More often than not, the opponent of the calling player will see a confused judge, a player answering himself, and will get the picture. It is not going to scale, because it doesn't work.

Further, when a player calls me and then says “nevermind, I figured it out by myself”, I usually answer “well, since I'm already here, what is the question anyway?”. The player would have to continue holding the bluff, and will become less and less convincing.

But where do you draw the line, what if the player has a creature in hand and does this, would you talk to them if it turned out not to be their turn or they couldn't cast it?

What Mitja said: this is not a real concern, we don't get that many judge calls, let alone “fake” ones like these. If it ain't broke, don't fix it…
I don't want to have to judge the quality of a question.

Originally posted by Gareth Tanner:

But where do you draw the line, what if the player has a creature in hand and does this, would you talk to them if it turned out not to be their turn or they couldn't cast it?

My answer would be: Sir, this creature does not have flash, so you are not allowed to ask this question right now. Moreover, this creature costs 4 mana, and currently you only have 3 lands in play. Hence, per the IPG section 12.38a, I will issue you a penalty for Improperly Asking Questions. Did you already receive this type of Warning before during this event? Please play on ans ask questions more carefully to avoid similar penalties in the future.

When something is not a real concern with a specific group of players at a specific tournament scene, please don't generalize this to that something not being a real concern at all.

At many of the tournaments I judge (mostly the ones where the local regular community has a hand at competitive by joining a GPT or a PPTQ), I get several judge calls at the same time. Unlike some, we do not have the luxury to have more than 1 judge at a 30 player event, so when I'm doing a deckcheck, and get a judgecall, and then get another judgecall while handling the first, and it turns out to be because of a bluff, I, and the other players waiting for me, will not be amused. Yes, this would be a real concern, and yes, it does happen more than once in a blue moon.

I'm not saying this is stalling, I'm not saying there should be an IPG fix for this, but I am saying this is wasting my time.

“If at any time today, you have questions about this tournament, or about the game of Magic, don't hesitate to call me, or call Judge, and I will be there to assist you” does not include “If at any time you would like to use me as a tool to get a strategic advantage over your opponent, don't hesitate to call me”

Edited Jona Bemindt (June 16, 2015 12:07:23 PM)

Jona, only for clarity:

you' re telling
“several judge calls at the same time are a thing”
or you're telling
“several judge calls at the same time, one of those being a bluff call, are a thing”?

The first, certainly. Never had a bluff call, I'm just stating (as was asked in the original question) what I would do if I did get one. It's on the same line as the talks I have with players about joke-calls (which I do get from time to time, mostly from, regretfully, drunk players).

I'd ask the player to come with me for half a minute, far from the table,
where the opponent cannot hear us, and then nicely explain to him to don't
do that again; he's calling for a judge not because he has a problem or
concern to be solved, nor even to ask a question, so he's just wasting our
time to try to get a game advantage, lengthening the tournament, and that's
something not desirable, and in the future could lead to a Slow play
infraction.

I'd never consider an UC, and of course not an OA, but I feel that I should
kindly explain the player that it's an unwanted behaviour.

2015-06-16 14:44 GMT+02:00 Jona Bemindt <

Dustin - I meant if they did the same as in the original post but with a non land, “judge, if I… No wait I get it, never mind thanks” while holding a creature or any spell they can't cast.

A question for people, how would you identify this as a “bluff call” and not a real call? How do you separate this from the call of a player thinking of their outs remembering a card that makes the land relevant, wanting to check the interaction and then remembering how it works and not wanting to ask more to avoid giving away information?

Originally posted by James Winward-Stuart:

Mitja Bosnic
What if the player actually had a Combust in hand? Or what if they had a French Go for the Throat? Or a Japanese Counterbalance that they mistook for a Judge promo Force of Will? Or a Maze of Ith and they just have no idea about how the game works?

There's one huge difference, which is that in those cases the player is using the judge to help them understand the game, which is what judges are for.
In the original question, the player is using the judge to mindgame a tactical advantage. This is not what judges are for.

I meant that the player has this card in hand, but calls us and then realizes “Oh wait, nevermind” halfway through asking the question.

I feel like this is a case of common sense, something we tend to have a fair amount of in the judge community :).

I would personally never penalize or tell a player off for calling me unless it is absolutely clear that it is a bluff call or joke call (like the ones Jona mentioned). So I wouldn't really draw a line, I'd have a chat with the player at an appropriate time and ask what the purpose of the call was before explaining that it was inappropriate. Seems to me like a good way to avoid telling a player off for a genuine call.

I would also agree that for the most part, I would tell the players to not do it. I would tell them in a nice and educational way that this can be a problem at some events (even if it isn't at this particular one) and to keep this in mind :).

Edited Eskil Myrenberg (June 16, 2015 05:24:07 PM)

If I was judging a 15 player tournament and I hadn't had a judge call in an hour and I was bored out of my mind, I'd probably find it funny. If I was judging a 40 player tournament where the judge calls were coming a mile a minute, I'd give the player a stern caution and a UC - Minor if it happened again. I would expect the player to have a sense of his shrroundings, and I feel that this sort of thing is a UC - Minor or not based on those surroundings.

I guess I'm in the minority here, but I don't really see a problem here.

In this scenario, I would probably respond with “great, did you have any other questions I could answer? If not, enjoy your game!”. And I wouldn't have anything I wanted to talk with him about afterwards (unless maybe to ask if the bluff had worked!).

I think customer service is a big part of judging, and it seems like pulling a player aside and potentially penalizing him for something that, #1, is not strictly against the rules, and #2, he almost certainly meant no harm by, is definitely not a feel-good moment for that player.

And if the tourney is extremely busy and I have a lot of judge calls, that makes me even less likely to think it would be a good use of my time to spend several minutes explaining to this player why he shouldn't involve me in his bluff.

I would have no problem with the player getting away with this bluff. I also wouldn't feel guilty about ruining the bluff by straight-up answering the question. It's a risky bluff. If you try to pull it, you have to be prepared to have it backfire.

But there are two reasons why I would still be inclined to have a chat with the player to discourage this kind of behaviour.

First, there is a big grey area between “I got away with it once” and “I am entitled to it”, but some people have a tendency to jump from one to the other far too quickly. I wouldn't want this player or other players to get the idea that they are entitled to using judges as sock puppets in their strategic mind games, and more importantly, that judges are required to cooperate with those mind games.

Second, by allowing the bluff to slide I might give the impression to some players that I am playing favourites and helping the bluffing player. And I really, really don't want that particular idea to get a foothold anywhere.

This, to me, is a “you gotta be there”.

I could see myself giving any of (1) no further action (2) stern talking-to (3) stern-talking-to after the game (4) TE Slow Play (5) USC Minor (6) USC Stalling, depending completely on the situation.