Today I want to talk about something that has been nagging at the back of my mind for some time. It something that takes place at a lot of PTQs, GPs, and probably even on the Pro Tour itself. Something you’ve probably taken part in and didn’t even realize it. In any event I think it will do us all some good to talk about it so here goes.
As you may or may not know I played Heartbeat over this extended season and did pretty poorly, going something like 4-8 in 3 events. I would guess that out of all of the matches I played I won game 1 about 60% of the time. Normally by meeting some request of my opponent, “Show a Brain Freeze in you board/hand and I’ll scoop” for example, and of course I do so we can move on to the next game. This is where I run into what’s so troubling.
Is refusing to meet this request cheating or more importantly what if I took the maximum time allotted me to win? Strictly speaking from the time I untap on the combo turn until the time I actually win can take a lot of time, depending on how the cards come down, and in between there is a lot of shuffling, searching, and decision making. A lot of players have good answers in their sideboard for combo decks, and sometimes the nature of playing a combo deck lets you steal games you are not otherwise entitled to. By eating up as much of the clock as I can game 1 I put myself in better position to earn points on my round.
I’m not talking about stalling; I’m talking about playing at a reasonable pace until the game state has me as the victor or until my opponent concedes. Doing things like shuffling before each Mind’s Desire flip and making your opponent cut each time, all of which are perfectly legal, but the whole thing still feels like cheating to me.
To help put things in perspective a little more let me give you a real life example. In Chicago, round one I find myself paired against Gerry Thompson, not exactly a scrub if you know what I mean, but to make matters worse Gerry was playing the Rock, by far one of Heartbeat’s worst match-ups. I make a few misplays here and there but still manage to set myself up to win. On the last turn I pause and ask Gerry for a library count and a few seconds to work out some math. At this point he says if you show me a Brain Freeze in the board I’ll scoop. Knowing that you are unlikely to win this round if it goes game 3 would you just show him the Freeze and go to game 2?
The first thing I wanted to do was look at the issue from the other side. Let’s say it is game two and I’m down a game. Once I go off a lot of people would not only make me play it out, but make me shuffle on every Desire flip to eat up the clock, which I don’t get upset about and they have the right to ask. I’ve even had a judge called on me for not shuffling. If it is not cheating for them to ask me to play it out, and no one puts a special stigma on them for asking me. Shouldn’t it be ok for me to do the reverse and play the game out?
My next step was to look up what a judge considers cheating. So I booted up the DCI Floor Rules and this is what I found.
Cheating
Cheating will not be tolerated. The Head Judge reviews all cheating allegations, and if he or she determines that a player has cheated, he or she will issue the appropriate penalty based on the DCI Penalty Guidelines. All disqualifications are subject to DCI review and further penalties may be assessed.
Cheating includes, but is not limited to, the following intentional activities:
§ Receiving or giving outside assistance
§ Looking at opponents’ card faces while shuffling or cutting their decks
§ Collusion to alter the results of a game or match (see section 25)
§ Misrepresenting cards or rules
§ Using marked cards/sleeves (see section 44)
§ Drawing extra cards
§ Illegally manipulating which cards are drawn from a player’s deck or his or her opponent’s deck
§ Stalling the length of a turn to take advantage of a time limit
§ Misrepresenting public information (point totals, statistics of cards in play, number of cards in a deck, and so on).
§ Giving false or misleading information to a Judge or tournament official
Now I said before that I wasn’t doing any actual stalling. Meaning I was making all my decisions in a reasonable amount of time, but once my opponent asks me to show him a card or cards and he’ll scoop aren’t I doing just that and isn’t the reverse also true? Where do you draw the line?
Let’s take this outside the realm of Heartbeat and myself for a bit. A while back I remember a lot of teachings decks that would 6-0-2 a lot of swiss rounds that would only have 6-0-6 game records and 2 IDs. After seeing this some Madison area players constructed a deck with the goal of playing only one game each round in the swiss. They did this by using Gaea’s Blessing to drag out games that he could clearly win long enough to make sure the aggro decks couldn’t come back. Lucas Duchow took 3rd place at PTQ with the deck. Now just in case he reads this I’m not calling Lucas a cheater, but that doesn’t change the fact that what this deck did could be considered cheating.
At this point I decided that maybe getting a few more voices into the fray might be the best thing to do. So I asked some pros what they thought about the matter and I found that I’m not the only one who has problem picking a side.
Mike Turian had this to say about it, “A good rule of thumb is that if you think it might be cheating don't do it. I don't think it is cheating for you to piece together the combo in the situation you described, I do think that it would be both foolish and unsporting. A reputation takes years to build and moments to destroy.”
Brian Kowal took a completely different approach to the issue, “That’s not cheating. I never show my opponent the card when they say show me and I’ll scoop. They don't actually have to scoop to you if you show it to them. The only time to show them would be the rare time where you aren't so sure the card in question actually wins you the game but they think it will. Making a game play out is never cheating. Stalling while playing it out is cheating. It’s not your fault if the game goes long as you are going off. They have the option to concede at any time.”
As you can see Mike and Brian have two very different opinions on the matter, but I think the best response I got came from Zac Hill and Adrian Sullivan. After posing what I felt was going to be a pretty simple question the two had a lot to say about the issue and even debated back a forth a bit. I’ve copied their thoughts down below for everyone.
--
Zac: I don't think players are ever obligated to concede. Intentionally taking any game actions for the sole purpose of spending time, though, is cheating. It's a slippery slope but I'd definitely leave it up to the judge. I know, for example, that when playing Turboland I can't just cycle through my deck infinitely for forty five minutes and then kill my opponent because it's game 1.
Adrian: Wow. I completely disagree with that, Zac.
I recall MANY games where just such play has been done. I don't even think of that as shady.
Two that spring to mind immediately: Jim Hustad playing URw control at GP Phoenix a million years ago. He had complete control of the game, a million land out, a COP: Red, stabilized versus a player playing some kind of Red-based beatdown deck (I forget which). He didn't take a long time with any decision. He played at a reasonable pace. When the judge called time, he cast Urza's Rage with kicker, and then untapped and cast Urza's Rage with kicker.
The other is John Shuler, playing Rec/Sur at the US Open vs. White Weenie. He could pretty much just Recur his opponent into oblivion if he wanted, but he didn't. Instead, he only used Avalanche Rider enough to keep his opponent at 3 mana. He "forgot" to Recur a few times. He gained a few life off of Spike Feeder here and there. He Weaved a few times (and "forgot" to do so a few times). He just kept his opponent hoping that he could win. His opponent finally realized that he couldn't win the game when there were only a few minutes left. FINALLY, the opponent conceded, but couldn't finish game two in time.
I don't see anything different between these two things and a Turbo-land player playing solitaire like that. They DON'T have to take the kill.
Eating time via taking too long making decisions IS wrong. That's why there are rules against slow play. But nothing forces a player to MAKE the kill. If it isn't to a player's advantage, it's not required of them, and similarly, the (losing) opponent who refuses to concede is also not required to concede. It might very well be worth their time, though, and failure to concede at the right time has cost many people a match.
If someone is wasting the clock improperly (taking too long to resolve decisions), this can be a question of sportsmanship, and there are historical examples of when people are given even HARSH penalties because of their failure to play a sporting game.
An example of this is the player who mulligans 7 times, taking their fully allotted time mulliganing each time, eating up a million minutes, and thus, taking the match. This has happened, AND it has also been ruled as drastically unsporting (resulting in appropriate penalties).
Zac: See, I don't really see the point of the shuffling/playing distinction. Sure, in practice, your opponent can concede if you're just infinitely cycling your deck, but what if you don't have a win condition left? What if it's game two and he *knows* you don't have a win condition left, but you keep playing cards because you won game 1? Clearly concession is no recourse, but the rules of Magic shouldn't provide players an outlet to victory (the clock) when winning a game given enough time would clearly be impossible.
Me: I think Zac's example is more of what I was going for when I asked the question originally. But I don't know if it really changes what anyone has said up to this point. I personally think that most of the time I would pack it in because I'm lazy, but if winning meant the difference between a top 8 and going home I'd probably try to run out the clock. I still don't know if it's cheating though.
Adrian: It's definitely NOT cheating.
The reason that the shuffling situation was ruled as poor sportsmanship is that it is using procedure to run out the clock.
Zach's example of continuing to play without a win condition left is an excellent example. Just because you can't win doesn't mean you have LOST. The other person still has to succeed in getting the victory.
Part of the decisions that one makes when SELECTING a deck is keeping in mind its costs and benefits. Zoo CAN win in very few minutes/turns. Tog can do the same. Scepter-Chant generally can not.
So, in the specific example you gave, where you have no win conditions left, but have won the first game, and your opponent knows it, you still haven't LOST. You aren't obliged to concede simply because your opponent is the only one left that CAN win. They still have to do it. At this point, the decision of when to concede is a strategic one, certainly not an issue of cheating.
If you are to start stalling via certain repetitive behaviors (repeatedly activating a Top), slow play or sportsmanship may be an issue. But that is all...
Zac: ""So, in the specific example you gave, where you have no win conditions left, but have won the first game, and your opponent knows it, you still haven't LOST. You aren't obliged to concede simply because your opponent is the only one left that CAN win. They still have to do it. At this point, the decision of when to concede is a strategic one, certainly not an issue of cheating""
That is actually a great point. I hadn't thought of it that way before.
I don't really differentiate much between slow play, sportsmanship, and cheating, though, I don't think.
--
As you can see there is no easy answer. What I can tell you is that the DCI will not call you for cheating so long as you keep playing at a reasonable pace, but like Mike said, “A reputation takes years to build and moments to destroy.” As of now I’m still not sure which side of the fence I’m standing on, but I think I’m inclined to side with Adrian on this one. Managing the clock is part of the game and learning how to manage it well is something we should all do.
Let me know what you guys think. I’m curious to find out where the magic community as a whole stands on this issue. As always any feedback is greatly appreciated. Until next time.
Bob
Tags: Magic
