Judges, welcome to another exciting episode of The Knowledge Pool! This one is rated Silver.

You can see the blogpost here.

Nathan has just lost game 1 in the 4th round in a PTQ. While sideboarding for game 2, he yells, “Judge!” You walk over and ask, “How may I help?” Nathan explains, “It looks like I played a 54-card deck in game 1.” You ask for more details and he elaborates, “I had sideboarded for round 3. After the match, I took my sideboard cards out of my deck but forgot to put the original cards back in before playing game 1 of this round.”

What do you do? How do you determine if this is a USC-Cheating situation? If it’s not Cheating, what penalty, if any, do you apply? Would your answer be any different had he won game 1 instead of losing it?

This is a Tournament Error-Deck/Decklist Problem and prescribed remedy is a game loss. Downgrading isn't an option in this case because it was not discovered upon drawing an opening hand. In the case of a Deck/Decklist Problem, it's not required to get the head judge involved, however in this case, I would want to because it's not the standard “Deck/Decklist Problem” that usually arises as the result of a deck check.

To determine if this is possibly cheating, I would ask the player when they first became aware of the problem. Any answer other than “while I was sideboarding for this game” would push the penalty up to Cheating. In that case, I would tell the player that they need to call a judge over as soon as the error is discovered so that it may be properly fixed with minimal damage to the match and recommend a disqualification to the Head Judge.

Assuming it's not cheating, the penalty as mentioned above is a game loss. This does not change based on the fact that he lost game 1, which I feel is irrelevant information in this context.

David, I strongly disagree with that. This isn't a Deck/Decklist Problem.
We have no method of verifying the error in the list - regardless of what
the player says they did. What we have at the moment is a list with 64
cards in the maindeck in the middle of sideboarding. I would inform the
player to please be more careful in the future, and resume sideboarding. No
infraction.

I agree with your cheating investigation, however. The right answer is ‘I
just realized it while sideboarding’ and I would probably follow up with a
'Did any of the sideboard cards come up during game one?'' and ‘Which cards
were mistakenly in your main deck?’ Any indication that he saw the cards
earlier (or that they were cards that would have been extremely relevant in
the matchup) is going to get me very serious, very quickly, regarding
Cheating.

My answer here would be no different if he had won Game 1.

I agree with Andrew. I would also check who was his previous opponent and
ask him whether he seen those cards (and in which games). I would also
review that oponent's decklist in odrer to determine whether it makes sense
to sideboard those cards.


2013/4/11 Andrew Rula <forum-3765@apps.magicjudges.org>

I would ask the Question “How did you notice?”. I find this - after thinking a bit - better then “When did you notice”. I want to know when he did notice it, but try to avoid during such investigations to ask the direct question. I don't want to make players aware which piece of information I need to make my decision. Because if the are aware what I want to know the might realize why I want to know it and give the answer, they think, helps them most.

If the answer in this case is “I was sideboarding and realized my sideboard containend to many cards” I'm fine. I will not anything more like checking with his previous opponent. Reason: He called me himself, he could just have remaint silent and changed his deck for game two to 60 cards.

I give no penalty because the game has finished and I thank him for his honesty. I will suggest him to do one pileshuffle while shuffling just do count the cards (If he had done a six pile pileshuffle he might still have missed the error).

'Did any of the sideboard cards come up during game one?'' and ‘Which cards
were mistakenly in your main deck?’

In this scenario, he had no cards mistakenly in his maindeck - he had his normal maindeck minus the cards he sideboarded out during the previous round. So unless he was counting his deck or checking his sideboard, he wouldn't be able to notice this mistake

I think it's pretty clear that this is not a D/DL infraction, because the error was discovered after one game but before the deck was presented for his second.

I agree that an investigation for Cheating is in order here. In my experience, players have pretty consistent, perhaps even ritualistic pregame procedure, especially for game one when they are able to perform it before time officially starts and there are no worries about sideboarding. To me, the most important info and what I'm going to be asking about is how this player performs their pre-game procedure and why this error slipped through the cracks. Does the player normally check or present their sideboard before the game? If so, why didn't they this time? Do they pile shuffle? If so, do they use a particular pattern when shuffling and why did they not notice the count was off? It could also be useful to have them step through the game they just played, and see if they ever had an opportunity to search their deck, and if they can explain why they didn't notice the error when the deck was revealed to them.

If the mistake seems completely unintentional, I will remind the player to be careful in the future, provide a reasonable time extension to allow for proper sideboarding and rerandomization, and ask them to begin game 2. If the player gives any indication that they know of their error before calling me, I'll get the HJ and let hir finish the investigation.

Edited Darcy Alemany (April 11, 2013 12:14:15 AM)

The other question that's relevant here to our investigation is `why didn't the opponent notice?'. I'd check and see if opponent pile shuffled (or otherwise counted) player's deck at any point, and make sure that they're not up to something odd.

I think the emphasis on cheating is way too high here and the assertion that players have a pregame ritual is also not true. Most players that I have seen and played against simply shuffle and present, and most of them only check their sideboard to see if there are fifteen cards when they see me do the same.

This player also has too FEW cards in his deck. He even said all of the cards he boarded in for last round are in his deckbox. I'd just ask him how/when he realized, and I wouldn't investigate further. This guy is likely not cheating and if he isn't, then I'd thank him for being honest and instruct him to continue playing.

Asking the opponent if they noticed is likely not going to be fruitful and will simply be a waste of time. If the opponent noticed, he has no incentive to not bring it up immediately. If anything, he has every incentive to bring it up immediately.

Edited Jeph Foster (April 11, 2013 09:07:46 AM)

Andrew: To be clear, the player had 54 cards, not 64. This is a penalty for game 1, not for game 2. By his own admission, Nathan presented an illegal deck and sideboard in game 1. If that's not a Deck Problem, I'm at a loss as to what it would be.

I don't agree with giving no penalty either, as Nathan played game 1 with a significant advantage. Whether or not he actually won that game is irrelevant. At the very least a warning would be in order, but I'd stick with my recommendation of a game loss. As a reminder, this is at a PTQ and not at FNM.

Originally posted by David Carroll:

If that's not a Deck Problem, I'm at a loss as to what it would be.

We don't generally retroactively issue penalties for infractions that occurred in games that have already been completed. One reason for this is that there is no longer any way to verify that something was actually wrong (even if both players agree on the events). In this case, at the time the judge is called, the players are between games and thus there is no presented deck that can be illegal.

I think you need to check 3 things:

First: Why is a player calling the judge upon himself during a time where he could easily fix the problem and go on with the game without anybody ever realizing something was apparently wrong in game 1. Is he doing this in the hopes that we as a judge in investigating this call we find a possible cheat with his opponent… I would definately ask him -why- he calls the judge right now at this point. I would ask him if he counted his cards before handing them over. I also would ask him if he never thought about it during the first game,…

Second: You need to check/ask/investigate if his opponent let this situation resolve with him knowing. If it becomes clear that the opponent knew of this and would say he thinks he has an advantage over 54-card deck (for any reason) than he is cheating. I would simply ask if he counted the cards during shuffling, if he didn't found the deck apparently thin (very objective I know, but I wanna know the reaction to this question).

Third: I finally would ask both players if they have seen the other player counting the cards during their respective shuffles.

Say that everything was done as an honest mistake, I would advice both players to be more careful. Count the decks every round and not issue any type of official warning.

A plethora of cheating motives can be used and depending on the answers players give I would keep the following options in the back of my head:

• The player calling the judge thought he was better of with this 54 cards (check out with his previous opponent from the earlier round if he indeed sideboarded and how much and how he desided, check the decks of both players, maybe it becomes obvious as one player removed some of his red cards vs anti-red deck)
  
• The other player could for the same reason think he is better of facing a 54 card deck (he plays mill himself, he has seen the sideboard error previous round and thinks it's better for his deck to play this 54,…)
  
• The player calling the judge might try to “sneak game-loss” his opponent. If this player knew his opponent counted his cards and he now finds out his opponent didn't mention that he was playing 54 there is a problem
  
• Same situation as above, the player calling the judge tries to “sneak game-loss” his opponent but it's also clear that he knew about him presenting an illegal deck (or any time during the first game)
  

Edit: I don't think my actions would be different if the player had won game 1

Edited Niki Lin (April 12, 2013 11:08:32 AM)

Excuse me for not being experienced, but I believe the ‘correct’ solution, at least as policy is concerned, assuming the player is not cheating, is not to apply a penalty. I don't believe giving him a game loss for Deck/Decklist problem is correct, because the game had finished and the second game had not started.

I do not think I would be extremely cautious of cheating in this case. Calling a judge over, on himself, in order to have his opponent receive a penalty, is a conclusion to which I wouldn't jump so soon. If I had, at a major tournament, done as the question implies, I would call a judge over on myself. I would expect all players to do so, when they make an illegal action; not just this one.

Lastly, people are implying that he may have seen sideboarded cards. Going off the original question, he took 6 of his sideboarded cards out of his deck after his third round, but didn't put 6 back in. His 54 card deck is 54 mainboard cards.

Edited Tim Hughes (April 12, 2013 09:03:21 AM)

Originally posted by Niki Lin:

Why is a player calling the judge upon himself during a time where he could easily fix the problem and go on with the game without anybody ever realizing something was apparently wrong in game 1. Is he doing this in the hopes that we as a judge in investigating this call we find a possible cheat with his opponent… I would definately ask him -why- he calls the judge right now at this point. I would ask him if he counted his cards before handing them over. I also would ask him if he never thought about it during the first game,…

I've found that most players are inherently honest. I do not see how asking him why he has called us now furthers our investigation at all.

I do understand your point, but I feel like we can get the same information without appearing accusatory.

No infraction, no penalty.
This is where I would say to the player
“Thank you for your honesty, but since that game is finished we will just go to game 2. Make sure that you straighten things out before this game and carry on. I highly recommend that you perform a pile shuffle to count your deck before every game.”

I agree that in 99% of the cases we are going to deal with an honest person Josh, but what I find strange is that a player that is in the perfect spot to clear all his traces is calling a judge to call upon something that (if a player knows the rules) is not really an infraction at the time he is calling the judge.

But one of the original questions of the scenario was: “How do you determine if this is a USC-Cheating situation.” (Hence the reason why I went into “questioning mode”)

I think it is also the main focus of this Scenario: how would we investigate this matter, as the rest is quite clear mostly (what would we do if it aint' cheating, is simply a matter of following the guidelines).

But I do think it's sound advice to thank the player for his honesty in this case, if he wouldn't be cheating that is!

Originally posted by Niki Lin:

what I find strange is that a player that is in the perfect spot to clear all his traces is calling a judge to call upon something that (if a player knows the rules) is not really an infraction at the time he is calling the judge.

I don't find this strange at all. We always tell players that whenever something goes wrong, thy should call a judge. In many cases in ends up that nothing is wrong at all. We don't want to dissuade players from calling a judge ever, and this player is just doing what judges always tell players to do.

Edited Vincent Roscioli (April 12, 2013 12:10:53 PM)