In the final round of swiss, the top few tables all ID into Top 8. The now top two tables decide to play it out. One table finishes games 1 and 2 and are resolving mulligans for game 3 when one of the players sees that the next table has finished their match (a player had won, no draw). With this new information, he presents an option to his opponent: “lets just ID and let tiebrakers decide who gets in.” His opponent agrees to draw and they submit their result slip as 1-1-1. Since they draw, both players are in Top 8.

The judges present had a very polarized discussion on whether or not they used “outside” information to determine the outcome of their match. Other players in the tournament also expressed concerned about how that match was finalized. After a brief investigation, I ruled that nothing was wrong and we finalized Top 8. However, how they decided to draw did make me uncomfortable as I didn't want to encourage that type of behavior. What would you have done? How can we discourage determining match outcomes like this in the future? (random seating in the last round?)

How is (or is not) MTR 5.2 relevant here?

“Players may not reach an agreement in conjunction with other matches. Players can make use of information regarding match or game scores of other tables. However, players are not allowed to leave their seats during their match or go to great lengths to obtain this information.”

From: Ronald Thompson
Sent: Monday, May 20, 2013 3:04 PM
To: Heckt, Andy
Subject: Outside Assistance? (Competitive REL)

In the final round of swiss, the top few tables all ID into Top 8. The now top two tables decide to play it out. One table finishes games 1 and 2 and are resolving mulligans for game 3 when one of the players sees that the next table has finished their match (a player had won, no draw). With this new information, he presents an option to his opponent: “lets just ID and let tiebrakers decide who gets in.” His opponent agrees to draw and they submit their result slip as 1-1-1. Since they draw, both players are in Top 8.

The judges present had a very polarized discussion on whether or not they used “outside” information to determine the outcome of their match. Other players in the tournament also expressed concerned about how that match was finalized. After a brief investigation, I ruled that nothing was wrong and we finalized Top 8. However, how they decided to draw did make me uncomfortable as I didn't want to encourage that type of beh avior. What would you have done? How can we discourage determining match outcomes like this in the future? (random seating in the last round?)

——————————————————————————–
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/22990/

Disable all notifications for this topic: http://apps.magicjudges.org/forum/noemail/4257/
Receive on-site notifications only for this topic: http://apps.magicjudges.org/forum/noemail/4257/

You can change your email notification settings at http://apps.magicjudges.org/profiles/edit<http://apps.magicjudg%20es.org/profiles/edit>

From MTR 5.2:

Players may not reach an agreement in conjunction with other matches. Players can make use of information regarding match or game scores of other tables. However, players are not allowed to leave their seats during their match or go to great lengths to obtain this information.

It's pretty difficult to discourage this behavior, since it's not illegal and isn't much different from the other 6 players drawing into the top 8. Random seating is an option, but unless you have a large room and the relevant matches end up far away from each other, this may not really do much for you.

The best chance of changing the behavior (in the long term) is if the other players view it negatively and express that sentiment, but even in that case, it only matters if the players who made it into the top 8 care what those other players think about them… :P

The new Top 8 play-draw rules are very popular because they help avoid
this type of thing. IMNSHO, they should be made the default.

There is no reason to ‘discourage this behavior’. The players who can draw into the top 8 have earned that ability by their (better than others) prior performance in other rounds.

It is no different that a sports team replacing some of their best players with other players once they feel secure in winning the game, or have secured a playoff position.

The fact these players are not acting as competitive as you might desire them to is not a judging matter. They are not be _un_sporting. There is a difference between low competitive behavior and unsporting behavior.

I want to discourage this behavior because it is ripe for abuse that is difficult to catch. Would your position change if the two players intentionally played slower (but not too slow!) or one of the players purposefully lost a game to have to play a third game? Its possible, in these types of scenarios, that the two players know that their ability to ID into Top 8 is dependent on a different match and want to see that outcome before making their decision.

Its sometimes impossible to read a player's true intentions. Because of the room for misinterpretation (both on the judge's part and other players) I would like to try to avoid these types of situations.

I don't have issue with the scenarios in you outline and neither does policy.

Andy

________________________________________
From: Ronald Thompson
Sent: Monday, May 20, 2013 4:43 PM
To: Heckt, Andy
Subject: Re: Outside Assistance? (Competitive REL)

I want to discourage this behavior because it is ripe for abuse that is difficult to catch. Would your position change if the two players intentionally played slower (but not too slow!) or one of the players purposefully lost a game to have to play a third game? Its possible, in these types of scenarios, that the two players know that their ability to ID into Top 8 is dependent on a different match and want to see that outcome before making their decision.

Its sometimes impossible to read a player's true intentions. Because of the room for misinterpretation (both on the judge's part and other players) I would like to try to avoid these types of situations.

——————————————————————————–
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/22999/

Disable all notifications for this topic: http://apps.magicjudges.org/forum/noemail/4257/
Receive on-site notifications only for this topic: http://apps.magicjudges.org/forum/noemail/4257/

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