I've tried this method at one event and agree with the benefits of the system. I'm about a minute faster, get to eliminate the +3mins for player shuffling, and get to use a smaller area (a big benefit in small cardshops). This system also addresses complaints that I've heard from players due to needing to mulligan excessively after a deck check. I know that the issue is simply players not shuffling enough after a full deck sort, but hey, this system addresses / eliminates that problem. Win all around.

The difficulties with adopting this system I've encountered are (1) that players will, by habit, shuffle their own deck when we return their decks; and (2) making sure that players don't glance at the bottom of their decks. I've addressed the glancing issue by placing my hands over the decks when I swoop and explain the new method I'm using. I make sure that I am the one placing their decks into their deck boxes and, when returning post deck check, I make sure that I am the one removing the decks from the deck boxes and placing the decks on the table. To address players shuffling their own decks more (negating a large benefit of this method), I place the decks in front of their owners with my hands still over the decks, explain that a deck check has been performed and the cards are in the order that they were originally presented in, and tell them that they are now in the part of pregame procedure where they are shuffling their opponents decks, while sliding Player A's deck to Player B and vice versa.

There's definitely some additional talking that needs to happen to the players as we guide them through with this new procedure, but there are definitely some benefits. I'll continue to use this method at local events, but will probably revert to the base method when at GP's or Star City Games Opens to maintain consistency with the rest of the team.

I'm going to try this method at a PPTQ on Saturday. I think it will be a good idea at the judge's announcement that I'm doing this, so I can remind players not to reveal any part of their deck to either player, and also to not shuffle when they get their decks back.

I'll try this method soon on a PPTQ.

What about giving them 1 additional minute and instruct them to do a really quick shuffle to eliminate the “I/my opponent saw the bottom card of my deck” ?

Or even don't give them a minute but tell them we didn't modified the order, just do a simple and quick shuffle and present your deck to your opponent.

Edited Jerome Pagola (Nov. 9, 2015 12:48:36 PM)

Giving a players some time to reshuffle their deck mitigates time gained. One or two riffle shuffles are ok if they insist but I would try to just pass deck to oponents to shuffle (wait and see if they actualy do).

HJ announcement addition like “during deck checks we won't change order of cards in your library” should help too and does not take too much time.

What I do, is that when returning the decks, I take one deck, ask players
“Whose deck is this?” and then I put it in front of that player's opponent.
Once I did the same with the other deck, I tell the players that we did not
change the order of the cards and that the decks are now presented to
opponents for additional shuffling.

This mitigates the possibility of players looking at the bottom card,
because since they are shuffling opponents' decks, it would result into
L@EC. Also, since I explicitly ask about whose deck it is and then give it
to the other player, players don't start shuffling (and looking at) their
own decks thinking I just forgot whose deck is whose.

2015-11-10 12:59 GMT+01:00 Jarosław Pokrzywa <

How about we make one cut after doing the deck check? This would:

1. Take away any previous knowledge of a bottom card.

2. Take away any chance that the player stacked the top cards to his
advantage without us noticing during the deck check.

3. Take 0 time while providing the possible two above benefits.

2015-11-10 8:02 GMT-05:00 David Záleský <

Originally posted by Dominik Chlobowski:

How about we make one cut after doing the deck check? This would:

1. Take away any previous knowledge of a bottom card.

2. Take away any chance that the player stacked the top cards to his
advantage without us noticing during the deck check.

3. Take 0 time while providing the possible two above benefits.

2015-11-10 8:02 GMT-05:00 David Záleský <

I see no point here. Oponents must shuffle the deck after we give them back, cards on top and bottom will change. Also remember that simple cut by oponent is not shuffling.

Either maintain the order and educate the players about this new practice, or grant them the extra three minutes for a thorough shuffling - no hybrid or in-between solutions, please.

d:^D

I loved what I read about this new method, and decided to give this method a shot at my most recent SCG IQ.

Deck checks were performed at beginning of round and mid-round, by an experienced L2 judge, an L1 who was comfortable with beginning of round checks but not mid round checks, and an L0 who had never done a deck check of either kind. I was interested to see how someone new to mid round checks, and someone new to deck checks entirely, would perform.

Here's the data, from deck-and-deck list-in-hand time to “looks good” time:

Old method
Average time 5:02
Minimum time 3:39
Maximum time 6:03
Average time extension 9 minutes (time to and from tables added about a minute, plus the standard 3 minutes for shuffling)

New method
Average time 5:10
Minimum time 4:17
Maximum time 6:30
Average time extension 6 minutes (adding about a minute for travel to and from the tables)

Observations:

For our first time doing the new checks, the checks themselves weren't really any faster or slower (8 seconds difference on average is hardly significant). But, the savings in the extra 3 minutes were enormous, especially at end of round. Waiting 6 minutes past the buzzer rather than 9 minutes past the buzzer for time extensions may not seem tremendous, but it really is a third faster and it seemed to keep the momentum going between rounds.

The new method really Shined for mid round checks, though! Both of my floor judges struggled with keeping sideboards separately organized during mid round checks using the old method (it really takes practice!), but using the new method seemed very intuitive, even with a sideboarded deck, and both floor judges preferred it then. As an experienced deck checker, I felt the new method was a vast improvement for mid round checks, and I also immediately preferred it.

The new method requires much less space to perform, which is a plus in tight venues.

The new method really requires a bit of ambidexterity. One judge was very right hand dominant, and used his right hand to flip cards and to write. It slowed him down noticeably. Use both hands :)

It was not a big deal telling players “We've used a new deck check method that does not require reshuffling because it maintains the order of your deck. Just present your deck to your opponent as usual and play on!” Players liked not having to shuffle again!

Conclusion:
There were no downsides to using the new method, but there were many upsides. I will continue practicing the new method, and expect to become even faster with practice. Give it a try at your next event!

Edited John Trout (Nov. 11, 2015 04:07:23 AM)

Originally posted by Scott Marshall:

Either maintain the order and educate the players about this new practice, or grant them the extra three minutes for a thorough shuffling - no hybrid or in-between solutions, please.

Sorry, I read too much into the constant mentions of seeing bottom card and lack of consideration for opponent shuffling along this whole thread.

Tried the method again yesterday and was very pleased with the results. I had a L1 try it for the first time and he found it extremely simple, finishing his deck before I did mine. I had previously always done it with a red pen but I only had one at hand, so I made do with a black pen - not advisable, I lost quite a bit of time because of that.

As per recommendations, I gave each player's deck to their opponent and very clearly told them that the decks were fine and that the opponent could now shuffle the deck. It worked. :) I still ended up giving a 7-minute time extension, but I think this is still a decent improvement over regular deckchecking.

I was also very impressed with this method, as was my floor judge. Together, we managed to shave off 3-4 minutes off each deck check. (And he beat me each time, the swine!) I did feel the method was slightly slower when you encounter a problem, but most checks are problem free.

I tried it in many events and found two different types of decklists resulting in big differences in time needed for checking. If you have a printed decklist or at leat written in a nice handwriting it is indeed way faster than the traditional method. If on the other hand you have barely legible list it took me wy longer than the traditional way since with the new method you save a lot of time since you're not sorting but then again you lose some amount of time on searching the actual card on the decklist. If you need a lot of time to find every card the total check takes way longer.
So if we can educate players to all write legible or even better use printed decklists… ;-)

I must apologize you for long delay. I have tried to publish my article by Judge Apps but after two months of waiting I just got information that it will not be published (without any explanation). I am really sorry about that, I should have posted it earlier for you all.

Link to the article:
Deck Check

Feel free to publish it anywere you desire to educate or inspire other judges to try this technique.

Thank you for all comments in this topic. I hope you will enjoy it.