One of the stores in my region told me about something they've started doing recently, and I kinda like it, but I'm not entirely sure about the rules around it.

They're an advanced level store, so they can schedule 2 FNMs every week. The way they've been using it, is a way to separate the new players from the more competitive players. They have their 2 FNMs, both in the same format, at the same time, for the same price, with the same prizes, but as players sign up they enter them into one event or the other based on what the store owner believes their skill level to be.

So far, this seems to be going over really quite well with the players, and in fact I'm not sure if most of them even recognize that they're running two events, since they start the rounds for both events at the same time.

But I'm curious, if one of the more experienced players said “Hey, I don't want to play in the FNM with all of these other good players, I want to play in the one with all the new players because I think I'll win more in that one and get better prizes!”, as the TO, are they allowed to refuse this players request?

I know that they're allowed to keep people out of their venue for any reason they choose, but if they're allowing this player in to play in one FNM, do they have to give this player the choice as to which one of the FNMs he/she is entering?

I'd like to hope that he can't restrict entry like that. But I'm unsure.

If it was a local store to me I'd be encouraging the TO to run the two
events with different prize payouts. The ‘bad’ player one with flat
prize pay out (maybe even completely flat, every player gets the same
prize) and the other with a very heavy weighting to the top players.

On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 9:56 AM, Michael White
<forum-3530@apps.magicjudges.org> wrote:
> One of the stores in my region told me about something they've started doing
> recently, and I kinda like it, but I'm not entirely sure about the rules
> around it.
>
> They're an advanced level store, so they can schedule 2 FNMs every week. The
> way they've been using it, is a way to separate the new players from the
> more competitive players. They have their 2 FNMs, both in the same format,
> at the same time, for the same price, with the same prizes, but as players
> sign up they enter them into one event or the other based on what the store
> owner believes their skill level to be.
>
> So far, this seems to be going over really quite well with the players, and
> in fact I'm not sure if most of them even recognize that they're running two
> events, since they start the rounds for both events at the same time.
>
> But I'm curious, if one of the more experienced players said “Hey, I don't
> want to play in the FNM with all of these other good players, I want to play
> in the one with all the new players because I think I'll win more in that
> one and get better prizes!”, as the TO, are they allowed to refuse this
> players request?
>
> I know that they're allowed to keep people out of their venue for any reason
> they choose, but if they're allowing this player in to play in one FNM, do
> they have to give this player the choice as to which one of the FNMs he/she
> is entering?
>
> ——————————————————————————–
> 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/forum/post/18131/
>
> Disable all notifications for this topic:
> http://apps.magicjudges.org/forum/no email/3530/
> Receive on-site notifications only for this topic:
> http://apps.magicjudges.org/forum/noemail/3530/
>
> You can change your email notification settings at
> http://apps.magicjudges.org/profiles/edit



–
Gareth Pye
Level 2 Judge, Melbourne, Australia
Australian MTG Forum: mtgau.com
gareth@cerberos.id.au - www.rockpaperdynamite.wordpress.com
“Dear God, I would like to file a bug report”

It's all about the expected value for the player. I was at a store
where they advertised that there would be a more competitive minded
FNM, the prize would reflect it and a more flat payout for a more
casual minded FNM. It was a complete failure. Only a few >8 would sign
up for the “harder” draft. All the “experienced” players signed up for
the easier one.

In short, most experienced magic players don't show up to the more
competitive events to play magic. They pay the entry fee and figure
out the path of least effort to obtain the most prize, IMO they play
math. If they could choose to play against people their own skill
level or those of lesser skill and get the same number of packs. It's
an easy choice.

If they are aware of which group they are playing in may cause
negative customer service. Its best to mix everyone up and do it
randomly.

We actually run FNMs like this in Hobart and the players really do prefer
it.

The experienced players don't like to beat people for the sake of it they
like to play and the less experienced players don't like to get beaten just
to get experience. We assign people pods by experience and we've never had
a complaint (and we've been doing this for a good 4 years). Prizes are the
same and people know which pod they belong in and will be moved accordingly
when they've built up their skills. Splitting pods also means that in the
draft portion the players can move at their own pace which in the beginning
was more my concern.

Magic players are more often than not honest and want other people to have
a good time, so in my experience, they want to play with people at their
own level.

Cheers,
Morgan





On 27 March 2013 10:24, Nick Rutkowski <forum-3530@apps.magicjudges.org>wrote:

This store is one that is trying to encourage all the players to come out, and what they're trying to avoid, is a repeat of an experience that one player had, who hasn't returned.

He came to 3 FNMs in a row and lost every round, every time, got discouraged and stopped coming out. Nobody did anything mean to him or broke any rules or anything like that, but he just kept losing and didn't like that he just kept losing.

As far as I know, nobody has asked specifically to be put into one event or another, yet, I'm just anticipating that at some point, someone probably will, and I'd like to be able to let the TO know what he can and can't do if that does happen.

EDIT: This blurb from the MTR seems to indicate that they can do this if they choose to:

Anyone prohibited by local laws, the rules of the Tournament Organizer, or the venue’s management.

So, if the the tournament organizer makes a rule that say a particular player can't play in a particular one of two events, I suppose they can. Interesting.

Edited Michael White (March 26, 2013 07:38:49 PM)

While we don't run separate events, when I do the draft pods for our draft FNM (usually between 3-5 pods) I try to roughly sort by skill, while also honouring requests (I'd like to play with my girlfriend, brother, friend, etc.).

This was easier when there were real ratings, now I basically do it by eye and familiarity with their past results. I also talk to new players and find out if they're actually new or if they're random MODO ringers that have decided to come out of the woodwork.

In my experience, and I've had a fair bit of feedback on it, nearly everyone likes this, even though it costs the good players some prize equity. More competitive matches get played, more people learn more things, and there's some prestige in ‘moving up’ the pods–people are usually happy to get moved up over time as they learn, even though their competition gets harder.

Several of my players have had to move away, and report that drafting elsewhere is much less fun because they either get stomped by better players, or have to stop on new players, neither of which is very enjoyable nor educational.

On the other hand: not telling the players that there's two events going on is probably a Bad Thing.

Originally posted by Devin Smith:

While we don't run separate events, when I do the draft pods for our draft FNM (usually between 3-5 pods) I try to roughly sort by skill, while also honouring requests (I'd like to play with my girlfriend, brother, friend, etc.).

Please don't do this. MTR section 7.6. says “For Booster Draft and Team Rochester Draft tournaments, players assemble into random drafting circles (called pods) of roughly equal size at the direction of the Head Judge. ” That means you're supposed to make the pods randomly.

You're not allowed to sort players by ranking or perceived skill, or let players choose who is in their pod.

If you want to keep the new players away from the “sharks”, you can have two separate events with different prize structures (one that is more flat and newbie-friendly, the other more top-heavy for the good players) and starting times. Players can then choose which one they prefer. You should not make that choice for them, and they don't get to choose their pods or pairings within the event.

Johanna, in theory, I'd agree with you. I occasionally “seed” pods based on ability - usually when there are a few new players who have all turned up together.

However, practically, it's a different matter. As a TO, I don't know in advance how many pods I'm going to get, and if there are 2 pods, whether there are an unusual number of new players. If I decide that the conditions are right for seeding, I have to sanction a second tournament, drop half the players from the first tournament, and enter them for the second tournament. Often, we're only just done before the pub shuts, so this is added faffing time that I just don't need. In addition, I don't always have an internet connection at the pub in order to sanction the second tournament.

I've never had any complaints about it, and I think players appreciate it when I do do it. Considering what a low-level tournament it is, I think this is one of those “look the other way” times. People have turned up and paid quite a lot of money to draft Magic, and I'd rather maximise the enjoyment people get out of the event - and maximise the chances that they'll turn up again, rather than get discouraged.

You're not allowed to seed pods based on ability (or family relationship etc). This is not a matter of opinion. Policy does not allow it.

If you typically get enough players for 1 or 2 pods, then it probably doesn't make sense to run two events. Just run one, and let WER make the pods randomly. Encourage a friendly atmosphere where the new players will have a good time even if they occasionally lose to more experienced people.

Devin said his store often gets 3-5 pods worth of players for FNM. In his case, it might make sense to run two events, the second one starting (for example) 30 minutes after the first one. FNM has to be sanctioned weeks ahead anyway, and you can sanction two events even if you're not sure you're going to run them both. If you don't run both, you can use the leftover foils as extra prizes next month (unless the policy on this changed very recently).

Note on running a second event on the fly:

The players may not even need to be aware that you're running a second
tournament. If your practice has been to run two pods separately, the
players will probably see the same thing. Perhaps you announce the
pairings differently, which honestly players may appreciate as it's easier
for them to know when THEIR pairings are up, rather than having to wade
through players in the other “pod.”

As for the delays, you can put much of that delay on the back end. True,
you do need to drop everyone in the 1st event who you want in the 2nd and
reenter them, but the re-entry should be very quick if you use your local
player database. As for sanctioning, if it's an FNM it has to be
sanctioned in advance as Johanna said, and if it's not you can sanction it
later if you run into internet problems. You can run the whole event
unsanctioned and keep the results slips, then just sanction the event and
re-enter it later. It takes some more total time for you, but your players
won't see most of that delay.

Aside: I would use this post to suggest to any who are listening and have
the power to change things that, if it doesn't already have it, WER could
really use an option to drop multiple players at once. We had an issue
last week where we accidentally added our entire local player database to a
tournament (803 players in all), so we had to create a new event and
re-enter everyone since I couldn't figure out how to mass drop players. If
there is already a way to do this, I'd like to hear it.

-Justin Miyashiro
L1 Fort Collins CO

Originally posted by Justin Miyashiro:

I would use this post to suggest to any who are listening and have
the power to change things that, if it doesn't already have it, WER could
really use an option to drop multiple players at once.

That is an excellent suggestion. Unfortunately, the individuals who have the power to change this do not have access to this forum since they are not judges. You can however, post here and it will get to the right people.

Jess

Following up on what Johanna said, why do we have this policy in place?

The idea is that by mixing players of all levels we help new players to become better players. For if we have unskilled players playing almost exclusively other less skilled players, then we prevent them from learning from more seasoned players. This, however, works best if the more experienced players understand that it is in their own best interest if they educate newer players. This is where judges can to do a terrific job, ie., helping to build community by advising seasoned players to become mentors for less experienced players.

Please don't do this. While there may be good intentions here, this policy is in place for several reasons.

First of all, while you may think you're improving things for the weakest player in the store, what do you think you're doing to the 7th/8th best players who know that every week they're going to get stuck in the shark pod and have to get lucky to win anything.

Secondly, there are a lot of bad things that can go down if pods aren't randomized. Stick the TO's friend with 7 bad players? Why not! Set it up so that friends are feeding each other? Sure! You say that this would never happen in your store, but a) perception is everything, and the perception here isn't pretty (the good players at my local store question the TO when the pods happen to come up this way) and b) your store is setting an example for other stores, who may see ‘hey, I don’t have to do it randomly' and don't have quite such good intentions.

I feel an underlying issue here is consistency versus a tailored approach.

Many shops have a regular tight-knit playerbase and FNM emphasizes fun over professionalism to a certain extent, so I believe there is merit to a tailored approach if it enhances the experiences of the local playerbase.
I understand with higher levels of play like PTQ you want to have consistent rules. But when it comes to in-store FNM, how bad is it really if it's inconsistent?


As for the 7th/8th player, if you aggressively promote people who do well and demote people who do bad, you won't have people who keep finishing high or low week after week. It also facilitates that newer players can start to learn from better players at the moment they're ready for it.

Edited Toby Hazes (April 16, 2013 05:24:44 PM)

As a judge, I do not want to be ‘promoting’ or ‘demoting’ people to specific pods. I would be putting myself in a non-neutral position by doing so. If people want to play only with specific people, they are welcome to run their own unsanctioned draft.
As a player I would not be happy if the judge's opinion of me, or how lucky I was drafting that bomb rare last week, determines who I play against and what chances I have of winning certain prizes.