http://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/news/changes-starting-pro-tour-magic-origins-2015-06-29
TL:DR: At Pro Tour Origins, they're going to test out a new mulligan rule, where if you take a mulligan, you're allowed to Scry 1 before the game begins after you keep your hand. This is being TESTED at the PT and will NOT be used in regular tournaments until further announced.
Coverage video may now be used in aiding judge investigations at the Head Judge's discretion.
Players on camera will be asked to keep their board within a standard layout to keep it similar across matches (and this does include Lands in back)
Kinda OP IMO
If not playable 7, mull, scry 1... Jeeeeeez
That's a pretty good way to setup for Aggro decks
The idea is that it will cut some of the variance out, so that games aren't just non-games due to craptastic mulligans
If it's not broke.......
{Delver of Secrets} on the play likes. Sure, I like always flipping my Delver's on turn two.
Quote from: bravado883 on June 29, 2015, 12:48:50 PM
Doesn't set up Delver. You mull, look at top card, if you keep you draw 6. You still don't know the first card of your first draw step.
The Scry is done after you decide to keep a hand. You don't get to Scry during the mulligan process, but after it's done.
It will spice up pro tour so featured matches don't have a 1 sided game due to magic being magic.
Land check is huge
Keep 2 lander all day
Also
Lol @
Lands must be at the bottom
Quote from: ConanEdo on June 29, 2015, 01:49:35 PM
Quote from: MuggyWuggy on June 29, 2015, 01:46:28 PM
Land check is huge
Keep 2 lander all day
Also
Lol @
Lands must be at the bottom
Sure, but then you get people saying combo is going to be dumb or implying you intentionally mull to set up Delver flip...
They can imply all they want. It's legit to take a mulligan to better your game. Or even take one if you've got the perfect hand.
As for the enforcement of a certain setup, I think it's over the top. You can already enforce the rules that your opponent has to be able to verify your every action. If your opponent is confused by a different setup in such a way that it's affecting his play, he can have play stopped to verify.
(Though I think at pro level you shouldn't be affected at all)
Quote from: Taysby on June 29, 2015, 01:02:10 PM
Who was it that got a game loss from "drawing a card" when he shouldn't even though he didn't, it was just physically touching his hand but not in his "hand"?
Yeah, he's probably mad. Now they /can/ look at the video footage.
However, it was physically touching his hand, so as per game rules drawn. It didn't matter they could backtrack to which card it was.
And on the other hand, he'd have gotten a grv for playing two lands before.
Quote from: Kaylesh on June 29, 2015, 02:09:03 PM
As for the enforcement of a certain setup, I think it's over the top. You can already enforce the rules that your opponent has to be able to verify your every action. If your opponent is confused by a different setup in such a way that it's affecting his play, he can have play stopped to verify.
(Though I think at pro level you shouldn't be affected at all)
It's more for the viewers than anything else. Keeping everything in the same relative location helps viewers keep track of what is going on across matches. None of the pros will mind switching it up if asked.
Quote from: Remillo on June 29, 2015, 02:12:46 PM
Quote from: Kaylesh on June 29, 2015, 02:09:03 PM
As for the enforcement of a certain setup, I think it's over the top. You can already enforce the rules that your opponent has to be able to verify your every action. If your opponent is confused by a different setup in such a way that it's affecting his play, he can have play stopped to verify.
(Though I think at pro level you shouldn't be affected at all)
It's more for the viewers than anything else. Keeping everything in the same relative location helps viewers keep track of what is going on across matches. None of the pros will mind switching it up if asked.
There was one incident regarding layout in pt DTK right?
But I can understand it will be consistent for the viewers, though in all likelihood the people watching would not have too much of a problem with it.
Quote from: Taysby on June 29, 2015, 01:02:10 PM
Who was it that got a game loss from "drawing a card" when he shouldn't even though he didn't, it was just physically touching his hand but not in his "hand"?
Yeah, he's probably mad. Now they /can/ look at the video footage.
Patrick chapin
Lands in back! Yes. Otherwise this seems bad. Allowing judges to look at the video seems so unfair to everyone who is not playing on camera. The fact that a head judge at a star city games event can look at the tape, when the majority of players getting taped are scg pros, is totally ridiculous. I think the scry is fine, should make for more games where you actually get to play magic. I don't think too many people will force mulligans just to get a scry.
It's not a legitimate argument to say that reviewing videos for rulings is favoring pros. If you are in the feature match, good for you, and if something goes wrong, why the hell wouldn't you want to do whatever you can do to make sure the ruling is correct? It's not favoring pros, it's just saying "well if we have this available to us, why aren't we going to use it?"
Quote from: DimirOverlord1300 on June 30, 2015, 01:10:12 PM
It's not a legitimate argument to say that reviewing videos for rulings is favoring pros. If you are in the feature match, good for you, and if something goes wrong, why the hell wouldn't you want to do whatever you can do to make sure the ruling is correct? It's not favoring pros, it's just saying "well if we have this available to us, why aren't we going to use it?"
It is a legitimate argument. If you have a significantly higher likelihood to be in the feature match, then you have a benefit that I don't (instant replay). Even if there was some way that we could make it so everyone had an equal chance of being in the feature match that still wouldn't make it fair (although it would be less unfair). The only way for it to be fair is if every competitive game is on video and can be held to the same standard. And this obviously cannot happen.
Edit: and to assume that getting to the feature match means you earned your spot there and "good for you" is just misinformed. Star city games doesn't randomly choose people to be in the feature match. It chooses specific people based on viewers and other factors. It's not just the 1 seed versus the 2 seed in their feature matches.
IMO it's nothing to get frustrated or complain about. What's the problem here? Rules are going to be enforced better in some games? Is that really something to complain about? It doesn't make sense to me to point out that it's unfair for un-recorded games. Sure, technically it isn't fair, but as far as I'm concerned the less cheating, unsportsmanlike conduct, ect there is the better.
Perspective, pro sports. There are instant replays reviewed by a team of refs every time a call gets sketchy. My sister has made it to Provincials soccer multiple without that luxury. There have been hand balls, thinly veiled punches to the face, tripping, and enough bad calls that the crowd threatened to riot. After multiple bad calls, a player got hit in the face with a ball, went down (obviously hurt) and the ref called a /hand ball/ on the girl who didn't even bring her hands up to /protect her face/. Now imagine if there were cameras so they could challenge the call. But there aren't, the simple fact is the resources aren't there. If every game was recorded would it be okay to view replays? My point is it's a step forward, they can't just record everyone. Players that get recorded shouldn't bitch about it because they should have nothing to hide. (Which is the same point I make about cops.)
At the end of the day I agree that it's not really fair to un recorded players. But at the end of the day there simply isn't enough resources to do so 99% of the time so I can't really complain.
So ppl are upset by having feature matches judged properly seems odd lol I mean sure the pros are usually in them but if their opponent screws up the replay is there for them too.
Being opposed to video review is being opposed to determining a fair winner ... Patrick Chapin won that game the whole mtg community knows it but he got a game loss that is not fair to him at all. With this new rule the correct player would've won that match.
As for the fact that you have to be in a feature match to benefit from it. So? It's not like those players will abuse that benefit. They only benefit if they accidentally screw up like Chapin if they cheat or miss a trigger then they're still screwed.
The article did say that the extra usage of video footage was available at Pro Tours and worlds. It doesnt mention GPs or SCG opens events.
Quote from: Noblellama on June 30, 2015, 06:13:12 PM
I think the "outrage" for video is that all the players everywhere else who have played a game and their opponent did something "questionable" and by the time the judge came over there was no way to prove what had just happened.
I guess but the thing is that it's not like your opponent gains an edge and it's not like the pros in the feature matches gain an advantage being there :P
Quote from: Noblellama on June 30, 2015, 06:13:12 PM
I think the "outrage" for video is that all the players everywhere else who have played a game and their opponent did something "questionable" and by the time the judge came over there was no way to prove what had just happened.
As I already stated that's completely irrational.
Quote from: Mr_Fahrenheit on June 30, 2015, 05:54:00 PM
The article did say that the extra usage of video footage was available at Pro Tours and worlds. It doesnt mention GPs or SCG opens events.
Only because they want to test it at the higher level. If they like it I can guarantee it'll apply to all filmed matches.
Quote from: particle on June 30, 2015, 09:23:02 PM
Quote from: Mr_Fahrenheit on June 30, 2015, 05:54:00 PM
The article did say that the extra usage of video footage was available at Pro Tours and worlds. It doesnt mention GPs or SCG opens events.
Only because they want to test it at the higher level. If they like it I can guarantee it'll apply to all filmed matches.
Which is great! Why should the wrong person win bc of a minor accident like Chapin? That's not fair.
Quote from: Mattao19 on July 01, 2015, 12:52:02 AM
Quote from: particle on June 30, 2015, 09:23:02 PM
Quote from: Mr_Fahrenheit on June 30, 2015, 05:54:00 PM
The article did say that the extra usage of video footage was available at Pro Tours and worlds. It doesnt mention GPs or SCG opens events.
Only because they want to test it at the higher level. If they like it I can guarantee it'll apply to all filmed matches.
Which is great! Why should the wrong person win bc of a minor accident like Chapin? That's not fair.
As I understand it, the rules as written still apply. As it stands, Chapin failed to reveal.
Yeah, we could see in the video what card it was, but that shouldn't change the fact a grv was made.
If the replay is used to correct such grv's, IMHO it starts getting in a grey area, because grv's would be penalized less in the feature matches.
So you want the true winner to lose? How is that fair? It was obvious to everybody that Chapin placed the card on top of his hand him failing to reveal but the without moving his hand at all he flips the top card. He does this clearly without moving any cards so how is it fair to him that we give him a game loss?
Quote from: Noblellama on July 01, 2015, 10:56:12 AM
Matteo, my thought on this would be is not everyone is as honest as he was about it, think about how many people are gifted with sleight of hand when it comes to cards? (the Humphries shuffle anyone?)
The camera would (hopefully) assist in moments like this...
Ya aren't we both arguing the same thing? I like the video review. Sure {Sleight of Hand} ppl will try it but they will get caught if they do and now there's video replay to call them on in during the game
But this is not fair to all the people not on camera. They don't get the benefit of going back and fixing it.
In the case of cheating, intent was already proven by camera feeds.
Yes, the winner should win, but it's a slippery slope if you start allowing sloppiness, it creates space for the true cheaters.
I don't doubt for a second Chapin's errors were genuine errors. Could he have won the game? Yeah, unless he made another error in judging his attack for example. Don't recall if there was a scenario in which his opponent could have won tbh, but it's beside the point.
Rules are there for a reason.
It's not fair to the non feature matches? What's different? They play the same game as they always do. It's not preventing them from any strategic advantage or disadvantage.
It doesn't promote sloppiness I'm sure they will set rules for it that prevent sloppiness being "rewarded"
Quote from: Mattao19 on July 01, 2015, 12:17:24 PM
It's not fair to the non feature matches? What's different? They play the same game as they always do. It's not preventing them from any strategic advantage or disadvantage.
It doesn't promote sloppiness I'm sure they will set rules for it that prevent sloppiness being "rewarded"
It's not providing everyone with the same opportunity. It's not "disadvantagous" to me per se. While I want the rules to be enforced correctly at all times, what I want more, is an even playing field where everyone gets dealt the same hand (figuratively). If at any point it becomes possible where all competive matches can be reviewed, I'm all for it. But until then...
Quote from: particle on July 01, 2015, 12:53:40 PM
Quote from: Mattao19 on July 01, 2015, 12:17:24 PM
It's not fair to the non feature matches? What's different? They play the same game as they always do. It's not preventing them from any strategic advantage or disadvantage.
It doesn't promote sloppiness I'm sure they will set rules for it that prevent sloppiness being "rewarded"
It's not providing everyone with the same opportunity. It's not "disadvantagous" to me per se. While I want the rules to be enforced correctly at all times, what I want more, is an even playing field where everyone gets dealt the same hand (figuratively). If at any point it becomes possible where all competive matches can be reviewed, I'm all for it. But until then...
I've already explained why this doesn't make sense to me and I'm not particularly interested in repeating myself.
Quote from: LinkCelestrial on July 01, 2015, 01:10:53 PM
Quote from: particle on July 01, 2015, 12:53:40 PM
Quote from: Mattao19 on July 01, 2015, 12:17:24 PM
It's not fair to the non feature matches? What's different? They play the same game as they always do. It's not preventing them from any strategic advantage or disadvantage.
It doesn't promote sloppiness I'm sure they will set rules for it that prevent sloppiness being "rewarded"
It's not providing everyone with the same opportunity. It's not "disadvantagous" to me per se. While I want the rules to be enforced correctly at all times, what I want more, is an even playing field where everyone gets dealt the same hand (figuratively). If at any point it becomes possible where all competive matches can be reviewed, I'm all for it. But until then...
I've already explained why this doesn't make sense to me and I'm not particularly interested in repeating myself.
There are basically two schools of thought when it comes to this:
1) We have the ability and technology, so why not use it. It's pretty straight forward. Someone humble on camera? We can go back and look at it to figure out what happened.
2) Judges on the floor can't rewind time, so judges at the camera shouldn't be either. It's an issue of every. single. person. at the tournament having the same treatment when a judge is called. Let's say something happens on camera and whatever the judge's initial call was is overturned by reviewing the tape. Then, the exact same thing happens at a normal table, but because of a lack of video review, the initial ruling is kept, even though for the featured match, the tape was used to overturn it. This is the 'interest of fairness'. While the players that end up on camera are far less likely to mess up in a way that would require review, having that extra layer of certainty can be unfair to normal players who have to rely on honesty from their opponents and the judge's discretion for their rulings.
As a judge, myself, I don't think it will change too much, as featured players aren't nearly as prone to penalty-worthy mistakes. The number of times that a video will actually be used in investigation will still be quite low. However, it will satiate those who watch and catch something, as long as someone brings it to a judge's attention.
Quote from: Mattao19 on July 01, 2015, 10:34:04 AM
So you want the true winner to lose? How is that fair? It was obvious to everybody that Chapin placed the card on top of his hand him failing to reveal but the without moving his hand at all he flips the top card. He does this clearly without moving any cards so how is it fair to him that we give him a game loss?
If we were to go down this path, then why bother having the rules? They are there for a reason, everyone knows them and by playing in the event they are agreeing to be bound by those rules. Chapin violated the rules resulting in a game loss. Therefore his opponent was the 'true' winner. End of story. Whatever could or would have happened after that point is irrelevant.
I agree with all of that, but it has to be taken in context. At FNM, sure, the REL is less and maybe some leniency might be appropriate in those circumstances. But in a pro tour? That is the pinnacle. If the rules arent going to be enforced there, then where will they be?
Also, like you said, subjectivity can become an issue. This is why the rule needs to be in black and white. Otherwise you end up with different rulings for different people in the same situation. Do you want the game to be like that? I know I dont. The line has to be drawn somewhere and I think having it like it is is the best place to draw that line, in my (humble) opinion.
Except the rules are being enforced if somebody misses a trigger they missed it it's just for minor accidents like not revealing and putting it on top of your hand (like Chapin) now had Chapin shuffled his hand there's no doubt he gets a game loss even with the new video review
I really dont see what the fuss is about. Whether he shuffles his hand or not, he still did what is defined in the rules as drawing an extra card. Whether you agree with the severity or validity or not doesnt change the fact that he violated a rule that he knew existed, at the highest level of competition. While it is unfortunate, it could not and should not have been enforced any different.
Lets assume he gets off with just a warning. Now the next time someone gets caught potentially doing sleight of hand shenanigans and get a game loss, they have a legitimate gripe. Chapin got off. What they did looks exactly the same. How are those rules fair? Your intentions are irrelevant, as subjectivity and ambiguity have no place in competition.
Thing is is that EVERYBODY saw him reveal the card to the table spotter then PLACE the card on top of his hand then immediately started shuffling his library leaving no room for any shenanigans. (Chapin is just the most recent example that's why I keep referring to it)
Thats the thing people dont seem to get. That is completely irrelevant. I dont understad this mindset that everyone seems to have that 'rules are enforceable, except if I think they are inconvenient'
You can disagree with the validity of the rule as much as you want. As long as they are applied correctly then there really isnt anything to complain about. In Chapin's case, he was a victim of the rule itself, not the way the judges made the ruling.
Did he deserve the game loss? Probably not. Were the rules applied correctly? Absolutely
Quote from: Mr_Fahrenheit on July 01, 2015, 11:45:04 PM
Thats the thing people dont seem to get. That is completely irrelevant. I dont understad this mindset that everyone seems to have that 'rules are enforceable, except if I think they are inconvenient'
You can disagree with the validity of the rule as much as you want. As long as they are applied correctly then there really isnt anything to complain about. In Chapin's case, he was a victim of the rule itself, not the way the judges made the ruling.
Did he deserve the game loss? Probably not. Were the rules applied correctly? Absolutely
Ahh now.I see your point but the thing is that a player fighting in a ProTour should not be given a game loss bc he placed a card on top of his hand and revealed it 5 seconds later that is a minor accident that can easily be reviewed via camera so we have the technology so let's use it.
In baseball tie goes to the runner and if the ump accidentally blinks and doesn't catch it should we just allow that runner to be safe or should we use the technology that we have to figure out if he was or not? (I'm tired and couldn't come up with a perfect example but still moral is that technology is there for us to use)
I agree but until the rules are written to properly incorporate it and the same technology is available to everyone then it will never be perfectly 'fair'. Saying we should use it is all well and good, but until the actual problem is addressed i.e. the actual rules that govern the use of it there will always be people who try and tae advantage of it.
Quote from: Mr_Fahrenheit on July 02, 2015, 12:05:46 AM
I agree but until the rules are written to properly incorporate it and the same technology is available to everyone then it will never be perfectly 'fair'. Saying we should use it is all well and good, but until the actual problem is addressed i.e. the actual rules that govern the use of it there will always be people who try and tae advantage of it.
I guess but I'm sure WotC will have proper rules set up.
When is the PT?