Shefet Monitor

I wanted to wait until the knowledge pool was finished before I brought up an interesting scenario that happened at the last PPTQ I judged. I was the head judge at this PPTQ and I get a judge call, I go over and the player drew a card and then searched his library off of a Shefet Cycle.

This one has a twist though, in an earlier match this player called a judge and the floor judge made the ruling that the draw happens before the search and in that match there was no appeal. But in the later match the opponent knew the correct sequence.

So I'm curious how others may handle a situation like this since the player was only doing what the floor judge initially ruled?

Cris Plyler

Edited Cris Plyler (May 23, 2017 07:21:37 AM)

1. Check with the FJ that he indeed gave this ruling.
2. Back to the match, explain the correct sequence.
3. If they are indeed following Judge instructions, I would not give out a penalty
4. Explain to players that they are required to follow the proper sequence from here on out. Would leave the game state as it is.
5. Great learning moment for the FJ, regarding this section of the rules.

1 - Check with FJ in private if he/she indeed gave this ruling
2 - Assuming FJ did indeed give the incorrect ruling, go back to table with FJ and get FJ to explain his/her error
3 - Sit down with FJ to educate on his/her concept of the stack

Originally posted by Chuanjie Seow:

Assuming FJ did indeed give the incorrect ruling, go back to table with FJ and get FJ to explain his/her error

I don't think this is necessary. In all likelihood the FL is already going to be very distraught at their error, I don't see a need to have them explain that error in person to the players. (Obviously they should be allowed to do so if they want.)

Exactly what Isaac says - ask your teammate: “Do you want to communicate this yourself to the player?”. You are the “owner” of the second judge call after all. And you are the HJ doing a kind of a “post-appeal”.

Originally posted by Chuanjie Seow:

1 - Check with FJ in private if he/she indeed gave this ruling
2 - Assuming FJ did indeed give the incorrect ruling, go back to table with FJ and get FJ to explain his/her error
3 - Sit down with FJ to educate on his/her concept of the stack

I'm on this side, and I would by any means involve FJ in delivering the correct ruling - unless he or she is so upset that he couldn't be able to.

FJ should learn to acknowledge his or her error, without feeling guilty for that - everyone commits mistakes, it's not the end of the world.

Also, I don't like the idea of players receiving a ruling from Judge A, and a different ruling from Judge B. I find appropriate Judge A delivering both the wrong ruling and the correct one.

Once I was at a GP, I delivered a ruling, and when I went away, I heard the player asking again the same question to another judge nearby. It felt awkward. I don't want to encourage this.

Originally posted by Francesco Scialpi:

Once I was at a GP, I delivered a ruling, and when I went away, I heard the player asking again the same question to another judge nearby. It felt awkward. I don't want to encourage this.

I would take this opportunity to teach the players that if they don't agree with or understand a judges ruling they have the option to appeal .