Well, of course they can, but if you saw them do it once, why would you not stare at their hands without blinking the second time?

And if they do it again, it's clearly not a mistake, and a judge should be immediately alerted and informed of the full situation.

And generally, I only offer a reshuffle if it's a player I don't know or one that I have no reason to doubt. If something feels suspect, a judge is the first choice.

Shuffle for you, or watch the opponent shuffle, or whatever. But that's what judges are there for. What other option would you offer?

An official warning is the only way to track such behavior, thus if the opponent is not given a warning, as far as a judge is concerned you ARE the first to complain about it.

I can't recall a tournament I've attended where judges didn't hand out warnings where appropriate. Are these local YuGiOh judges, or large tournament ones?


Warnings are used to track infractions of the rules, and that is why if you see something that *might* be cheating, but *might* be a mistake, you should always have a judge come over to make an official record of it.

Well what do you want them to do? Give them a game loss? So instead of cheating by looking at the bottom of your deck and maybe getting an advantage, cheaters will instead tell judges that you looked at the bottom of their deck while shuffling and get game wins? The only way you can punish something like this is if you get multiple opponents complaining, then maybe something would be done.

Dalton, that's not what he's suggesting - what happens? The peeking player is given a warning. The judge shuffles both players decks. Proceed with normalcy.

And then, even if the "peeking player" decides to say that you did the same thing, and your deck is shuffled, what is going to be the outcome from the perspectiev of a competent head judge? In the most extreme case (this behavior happened and was noticed and corrected every match) your peeking player has "given" 8 warnings, and ALSO, has had 8 DIFFERENT players say that he is doing what he is doing.

The judges that I know are competent to figure this situation out appropriately.

Orwell,

For IGN_Rob, though, that's exactly what isn't happening. He said the judges he's experienced (in YuGiOh, at least) have not been issuing warnings.

And he did ask for an alternative to judges shuffling the deck in place of his opponent.

No, I want them to offer a consistent and clear methodology for judges to deal with this situation. I have experience playing in, judging, and organizing premier events, and I've yet to see a judge who's sure of what to do when a player calls him over to deal with this situation.

In my most recent experience playing in high level YGO events (note: these are, in large part, the same judges who work high-level Vs events, so this is not isolated to either game), I've requested that judges shuffle my deck when my opponent seemed shady. This situation is unique, IMO, in that it's difficult to give an official warning the first time it happens but should quickly escalate past that if another opponent in another round accuses the same player of the same thing. Therefore, I think UDE should mandate some type of unofficial warning system for the situation, which the entire judging staff for each premier event needs to be familiar with. If the warning isn't tracked the first time and a different judge is called the second time, there might not be a clear pattern and the appropriate penalties might not be assessed.

They do have one.

Why is it difficult to give a warning? If they look, the judge should give the warning. If they don't, you can appeal to the head judge. At a high level event, if the head judge refuses, the TO and UDE should be made aware.

However, if you are calling the judge before the opponent does anything wrong, well that cannot be warned.

That's exactly what should happen, yes.

Why unofficial? The official warning system does exactly what you describe. It is recorded in the official tournament logs, and all judges are aware of all warnings issued.

The problem is the judges you mention do not seem to be following the guidelines.

The problem is that one player says that the other looked at his deck while shuffling; the offending player insists he didn't. As a judge, are you going to absolutely issue a warning?

The exact circumstances would have to be taken into account, but in many cases I can think of, yes I would.

P-5 Warning

Warnings are an official way to track minor infractions. The warning penalty should always be followed by an explanation of the infraction, potential consequences for repeat offenses, and education of the player receiving the penalty. The purpose of the warning penalty is to alert tournament officials of potential problems. Warnings are tracked in the official UDE database. While receiving a warning is not significant by itself, accumulating an excessive number of warnings can result in potential investigation and suspension of the player.

that's not right...
i'm telling what kinda seems and what emerge from the scene somehow sometimes......
the ban of hans was just the biggest and most worst case.
this is not only about hans and roy...there are many other little sintomatic situations.

there are significatives differences between make a top8 and win a pc.

No offense, but until a non-american wins a PC, talking about how we would treat that situation is a bit silly, no? Do you really think Hans was DQ'ed to prevent him from winning the PC?

There has been 1 non-American player to win a major event on US soil and he's one of the most popular people involved w/ VS.

What happens if Hans really did cheat and he just happened to come from Europe?

You're assuming that he didn't cheat. While it's certainly possible, it's not definite. You can't get banned for being 'non-American,' I'd like to believe we aren't THAT xenophobic.

CuginoBaal- I find it funny how its always some European player that brings up Hans unfairness and starts bashing people making retarded comments. Its not like Americans bash European players, especially Hans. The only time Americans even TALK about it is when a moron like yourself starts provoking us.

I'm not stereotyping, I'm telling the truth. Judges and Players don't discriminate against European players. The head judge wasn't even American. Hans was suspended from playing because he made a mistake.

I think you are just fed up with the fact that European Sneak Previews don't get Shirts and Mats, and the European OP is awful. Doesn't mean you can blame Americans for it.

Tombster is correct. I have the utmost sympathy for the situation Europe is in, but it's old to see Europeans come in and cry Xenophobia against European players.

If that was the case, why even market the game in Europe.

And so when Kolb and Kockott lose in the top 8, it's because they got beaten (happens to 7/8 of top 8 players, you know), but when Hans gets beaten in one top 8 and DQed for cheating in the other when he's down a game, it's a massive American conspiracy to keep a European from winning the PC?

What the hell is going on in your head?

Yawns.

I have travelled all over the place with Vs, and haven't really been aware of a huge amount of xenophobia, or any other dramatic regional differences amongst players worthy of mention.

Cheats can easily come from anywhere, and everyone knows it. Nationality is largely irrelevant. For those whose native tongue isn't English, there will be a little less communication than their might be between English speakers, but in my experience miscommunication happens as often (if not more) amongst those of the same nationality who are simply sloppy players.

If you see someone pulling anything that appears shady, call a judge. They will have a look at the situation, hopefully stay and watch things for a bit, and may issue some penalty. It might just be a caution, it might be a warning or more. The only tricky thing comes with tracking warnings, and especially cautions at large tournaments, so that they are upgraded at the earliest opportunity appropriate. This is one of the things that a good head judge should be on top of.

If we're going to talk about cheating, can we keep it to more entertaining 'and then Roy did this' stories. They seem far more amusing than the frankly rather stale debate about Hans.

Tim