Thanks for the info, I have removed the sanctioning number from view on the events. I have no idea why that would be confidential though :)

I imagine it goes something like:
Player gets SN, reports the event with their own copy of WER, with that player as the winner.
Or some other, similar shenanigans (appealing the result afterwards, for example)

I am pretty sure that sanctioning numbers are printed on match slips and maybe even pairings by either WER or DCIR? Maybe I'm imagining it, but I could have sworn that they're printed on one of the first few lines of the slip.

SN number is available to everyone interested at planeswalkerpoints.com so I don't think it's a thing you should keep hidden. Unless a lot of people forgot about that ;)

Edited Bartłomiej Wieszok (Sept. 6, 2014 05:44:11 AM)

But those are for past events - if someone tried to sanction an event under one of those numbers, I don't believe WER would allow you. (plus, that'd look somewhat suspicious if it happened in quantity)

and I guess when your TO-Login to upload the tournament does not match the TO registering the tournament it will be even more suspicius (if it even works at all in the first place)…

Niklas, thanks for all your hard work! MTGpairings.com looks great and I'm going to propose using this at our WMCQ next weekend. How equipped is it to handle an event of 100-140 players? Are there any (stability) issues I should be aware of?

The next question is a more general one (also at other tools): Have you considered open sourcing this kind of tooling? I think there are a lot of tech savvy judges and I think we could benefit from each other's knowledge. It would also allow others to host the tool themselves, getting around potential performance issues when multiple large events are run simultaneously.

No problem :)

There are no major stability issues that I am aware about. There are two minor ones:
1. There is a random crash that can occur in the uploading utility that I have not been able to track down. It tends to happen when the application has been running for a long time. It tends to occur every 5th event or so, so you likely won't see it. In case it does crash, simply restart the application and tick the checkbox for the event again.

2. The full event pages, (full standings and pairings) can be a bit slow to load for large events. The front page, which is the most used, where you find your personal pairings is still fast though.

I have considered open source, though I haven't made any decision yet :)

Also, I just made an update to fix the worst performance issue regarding the Event page for large events. The standings are still a bit slow (~6 seconds for the final standings for a 180 person tournament) since they are currently being calculated on load and not stored. I have that on my to-do list though.

Sadly Wizards has not authorized us to use mtgpairings.com for our WMCQ.

We’ve looked at this with our legal department and they have several concerns regarding your use of personal data in relation to this website. Specific concerns include the lack of Terms and Conditions, so we’re not going to authorize your use of this website.

I've asked the TO to ask them for examples of acceptable T&C. I think this initiative has huge potential and it would be unfortunate to get stuck on legalese. I'll let you know when we hear back from them.

I hope this is something that can be resolved, as this functionality is fantastic and desirable. I would go so far as to call Niklas's project Exemplary. :)

Unfortunately the coding of such a site isn't as big an issue as wading
through the legal waters.

It is doubly unfortunate as the judge community has a vast wealth of
programmers compared to relatively few lawyers.