There have been a couple threads in the last few months (A Casual tournament and a Serious problem suspicion; Potential Bribery at FNM's) about serious problems with match outcomes at Regular REL events, but there hasn't been much discussion on the TO's side. It's a subject I've discussed with a few local store owners, and I'm concerned that there's a significant gap between judges and TOs, especially with improperly determining the outcome of a match, and extra-especially when young players are involved.

From the judge's point of view, this is a straight-forward issue. Improperly determining the outcome of a match is a serious problem and earns a DQ. Dustin De Leuww summed it up in one of the posts above:

Originally posted by Dustin De Leeuw:

For other infractions, knowing that you do something wrong is a requirement for it to be a Serious Problem, we only DQ if the player is aware he or she did something Very Bad. However, for infractions such as Bribery, Wagering and Random Determination of a Winner, there is no such prerequisite. Please do not deviate from the rules, DQ players who engage in such actions, even if they didn't know it was illegal. It has severe legal consequences if we tolerate bribery situations like these…

From the TO's point of view, it's much trickier. No matter what kind of customer service treatment you can provide (whether it's a refund for the event, free stuff, demos/other games), it's hard to patch over that a stern-sounding representative of your store (or maybe even an employee!) just told a customer they were no longer welcome to participate in that event. For some of the owners I've talked to, this is not acceptable. One store owner summed it up neatly: “I will not be a Magic judge if it means I'm obligated to DQ kids from a tournament.”

It's especially hard to get TOs to understand this policy when the penalty seems so draconian compared to the other TCGs.

Is there any way we can provide some breathing room for TOs?

For example, the rules for Fraud and Cheating specify that a play must be aware that they're breaking a rule for the penalty to apply. Could that apply for improperly determining match outcomes as well?

Edited Daniel Stockton (July 22, 2015 04:01:44 PM)

I once thought as you did too Daniel, however I changed my mind when another point was brought up. When someone rolls dice to determine the outcome of a match, could that not also be considered a form of gambling? Once I thought of it that way I no longer had a problem with the penalty of DQ for IDW, even if the players were new and didn't know it was not acceptable.

However that doesn't mean we can't be proactive in preventing it. If you have a group with many kids or you know there are new players, explain ahead of time about the rules of how a match can conclude and what is not acceptable. By doing that it can help keep those players in the tournaments and the tournament organizers happy.

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 10:29 AM, Cris Plyler
<forum-19929-672f@apps.magicjudges.org> wrote:
> you know there are new players


Remember that *new players* means new to magic, other games have
different rules so players coming from those environments can have
wrong ideas about what is acceptable. Heck even new to your store can
matter, their old store may have been running things wrong.

–
Gareth Pye - blog.cerberos.id.au
Level 2 MTG Judge, Melbourne, Australia
“Dear God, I would like to file a bug report”

I understand both sides and I have seen many matches end in draws and both players hold it against the other
“I can't believe he took so long to win.”
“He can't win with his deck, he is basically winning purely through concessions.”
Thus the resentment towards draws.

On the other side you came to battle and battle you should. I and as a judge/player the idea of not battling to decide is unappealing to me.

Also the rules saying don't do it because of corruption is very relevant it can just be hard for me to rationalize a DQ in reg rel when we want to be teaching.

Tossing a coin tot decide who wins €3 worth of product is gambling
according to most legal systems. The TO does not have a licence to
facilitate gambling. If we allow x% of matches to be decided on by chance,
we are a criminal organization. The amount of trouble magic in the EU could
get into is no joke. Nobody wants tot DQ a little kid, and it's a good idea
to mention this every time in your introduction. It's a bad idea to allow
people to decide the outcome of a game nu chance.
On Jul 23, 2015 12:59 AM, “Daniel Stockton” <

Originally posted by Evertjan van Veelen:

Tossing a coin tot decide who wins €3 worth of product is gambling
according to most legal systems. The TO does not have a licence to
facilitate gambling. If we allow x% of matches to be decided on by chance,
we are a criminal organization. The amount of trouble magic in the EU could
get into is no joke. Nobody wants tot DQ a little kid, and it's a good idea
to mention this every time in your introduction. It's a bad idea to allow
people to decide the outcome of a game nu chance.
On Jul 23, 2015 12:59 AM, “Daniel Stockton” <

Most pubs/bars in the UK are licensed to allow small stakes gambling and a lot of events take place in pub function rooms so this line of argument is not always useful.

For me, the key conversation I would have with TOs facing these difficulties is to ask them how they think the IDAW rules protect the majority of his customers? It might be bad for the one or two people a year that are DQd but the hundreds of people that have a much better play experience because the rules are being enforced will usually make up for that over time.

Like Evertjan said, prevention is the best remedy: make sure you clearly announce that Bribery/IDaW is not allowed, and this should do a great deal in preventing DQs.

And in case you do have to DQ someone, well, if anyone is capable of providing excellent customer service while doing so, it should be the store owner. When DQ'ing a kid, you should take time and sit down to explain what it means, and mostly they will accept and understand.

Also, I want to highlight what Norman just said: the IDAW rules protect the majority of his customers. It might be bad for the one or two people a year that are DQd but the hundreds of people that have a much better play experience because the rules are being enforced will usually make up for that over time.

A point that wasnt mentioned is this: Just because you DQ a player doesn't mean he's no longer welcome in this store in future events. A DQ means that exactly this event is over, because certain rules were broken, not less, often not more.

I'm reminded of something Scott Marshall said here: http://apps.magicjudges.org/forum/topic/11208/

I need to be very clear about something: the TO does not determine whether or not to DQ anyone.

The Head Judge determines when to remove a player from the tournament.
The TO determines when to remove a player from the venue.
Those two are often linked, but not always.

Example: the TO discovers a player selling cards, against the clearly stated policies. The TO may choose to escort that player out of the building. This is not an infraction, but when that player fails to show up for the next round, he'll receive Tardiness and be dropped by the SK. (If you learn of the removal ahead of time, you can drop that player before pairings, and save a bit of disruption.)

Example: you overhear a young player offer to flip a coin to determine a winner, and you have to DQ them. The TO talks to that player, tells them they feel bad because that player didn't know that rule, and offers them a free entry to a draft that's about to start. The player wasn't a threat, they just failed to learn a rule that we require every player to know. Good customer service by the TO.

Example: you investigate and determine that a player drew a few extra cards during a game, when his opponent was distracted, and then lied to you. You inform him that you will DQ him, and he goes ballistic, screaming expletives in your face. The TO and security staff restrain the player, and escort him out of the building.

But again, let me stress: a TO must not, can not, overrule a Head Judge who has determined that a DQ is the appropriate penalty.

Norman, I think you've highlighted the problem; I'm not sure if store owners would agree that the IDAW rules protect their players (or their business, since that what this boils down to). There's some regionalism involved here – I live in the US in New York and work in Connecticut – so my issue might not apply everywhere, but here are a couple observations I've picked up playing and working in New England in the last few years.

– There is a very high number of stores (many of them very small) offering a very high number of weekly events. Competition for participants in Regular REL events is intense.

– Issuing a DQ is likely to lose a customer. As Philip points out, a simple DQ is a big difference from being banned from a store, but with so many opportunities to play, I suspect most players choose a different store after getting DQ'd.

– The cost of losing a single customer is high. A regular FNM player can easily be worth several hundred dollars in revenue over the course of a few months, and losing one can be really painful for a small business. And that's only a direct cost; if the player takes their friends, if they leave a negative review online, if they provide negative word-of-mouth advertising, etc., the costs can be much, much higher.

Ideally this cost would be spread out over several hundred players over the course of the year, but some of the smaller stores don't see that many unique customers in a year and they don't have a way to recoup that cost. I recognize that in the long run there are positive outcomes for the broader community, however, I also recognize that enforcing the official policy has a measurable impact on TOs bottom line.

This is the main reason I don't understand this policy very well… I can't think of another example where the official policy and the local business owner's interests are so divergent.

Edited Daniel Stockton (July 24, 2015 01:01:43 AM)

Originally posted by Daniel Stockton:

I'm not sure if store owners would agree that the IDAW rules protect their players

Then let's educate them, help them build a holistic view of the events. And, while we're at it, let's make sure they know that this isn't a localized concern that doesn't have to apply in certain pubs, but a globally enforced policy dictated by the company that makes their events possible.

Originally posted by Daniel Stockton:

I suspect most players choose a different store after getting DQ'd

Then I would argue that the DQ was handled incorrectly, esp. for IDAW. Such penalties are meant to be educational, but the severity of the offense, and its effect on the overall integrity of the event, justify the end of their participation in THAT EVENT (only). Unless they're a habitual violator of that rule, they should be welcome at that store, welcomed by the Judges, and welcomed by their fellow competitors.

I try to remember to encourage players learning that rule to make sure ALL their friends hear about it, too - help spread the word.

If a player is DQd for a malicious, intentional act of Cheating, then the store isn't losing a valued customer, the valued customers are gaining respect and trust for the Judges and TO, by removing a serious problem. Please don't let “but he's a good customer” influence a DQ decision, when it's merited. He'll either be a smarter good customer, or his negative influence on future events may be prevented.

d:^D

Do we have a “So your player just got DQ'd” FAQ document for TO's, the way we have a “so you just got DQ'd” doc for players?

None that I am aware of. But it could be a great doc if someone wants to work it :)

-Eric Shukan
—– Original Message —–
From: Eli Meyer
To: eshukan@verizon.net
Sent: Monday, August 03, 2015 6:14 PM
Subject: Re: Improperly Determining Match Outcomes and Serious Problems for TOs (Regular REL)


Do we have a “So your player just got DQ'd” FAQ document for TO's, the way we have a “so you just got DQ'd” doc for players?

—————————
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/131709/

Disable all notifications for this topic: http://apps.magicjudges.org/forum/noemail/19929/
Receive on-site notifications only for this topic: http://apps.magicjudges.org/forum/noemail/19929/?onsite=yes

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

I'll see what I can make happen :-)

There's some discussion here that I think would be valuable to our new Player Experience Sphere. Going to send a few Judges this way to have a look. :)