I don't understand why this was a jerk move. All the guy did was make sure that he and his opponent played the game in accordance with the rules. I've hung out on this rules forum long enough to know that there is a specific order in which events occur during an action. I've played enough games to know that that menu of events isn't always followed exactly, but that does not change the rules.

Imagine if a football game were on and the opposing team ran out on the field, took the football, ran a touchdown, called a huddle and then lined up on scrimmage line. Or, the opposing team just threw an interception but wanted a "do over". In fact, sometimes referees allow do overs for certain infractions and we get all upset.

But now George is all evil and selfish for insisting Alan follow the rules. Why isn't anyone upset with Alan for declaring Outwit before he was legally entitled to? He is the one who was bending the rules - not George.

Why is it a jerk move to play by the rules as they are exactly spelled out? Are you suppose to give your opponent his turn back every single time you see what he is up to and realize it is a bad move?

At that kind of level you shouldn't expect a redo or a mulligan. I'm sure that there were plenty of casual games that weekend to please all gaming styles.

I'm tired of the beating that George is taking over seeing what was coming, and making sure that he could capitalize on the mistake. He is a true champion in my books.

(Both of the following quotes are simply examples. Many people have said the same things. I'm not singling these guys out.)
I would tend to disagree. It certainly was a move that an aggressive player would make, but I don't see how expecting your opponent to play by the rules is a jerk move.

A player is there to play his own game. He isn't there to play his game and then also play his opponent's game for him.

Ahh...that's it, though, isn't it? Maybe that's exactly what George did do.

I'm going to go ahead and play devil's advocate here.

I certainly cannot say what George would have done, BUT I somewhat suspect that he WAS giving his opponent the opportunity to take it back. As in, "Hey, I'm not going to come right out and tell you that you're about to commit a strategic flaw, but I'm going to give you one last chance by tossing out the Regis Philben 'Is that your final answer?'" In other words, I suspect that he would have allowed the take back had Alan requested it BEFORE placing the token.

I'm not saying that is definitely what was going through his head, but I think that there's a good possibility.

I feel bad for Alan. Something like that is a real shot in the pills, but it happens.

did George do a little dance? did he rub it in his opponents face? did he offer the suggestion to his opponent to move in and outwit knowing it would be against the game rules? would he do this against a first time player?

I am guessing George played it cool, when the move was made and outwit declared he asked for a ruling, opponent stuck he countered and the rest is history. as for if he would do this to a new player, hopefully we all encourage the community to grow and would use it as a way to teach a new player the rules(maybe even take the move back).

Good story. But, that's a rare occurrence.

But you know, you are right. I was making a generalization that certainly cannot be 100% true. And people do admit infractions. In volleyball for example, people will admit that they touched the ball on the way out, or that they touched the net... but in high level play? I don't know, that's up to the ref to see.

Same thing in basketball, people push others to get position all the time. If the ref sees it then the foul is called and accepted. You don't see people pushing someone and then admitting "oh, I fouled him"

Some refs will warn players to get out of the key before calling them for a 3-second violation and I thought that was cool. But again, that's a rare occurrence.

And, in chess, I've never seen anyone say, "uh, I'm gonna take your Queen if you move there, are you sure?" People just shut up and make others pay if they blunder.

I'm sure that somewhere out there are exceptions... just like this golfer. But in general, in high level competition, you can't expect people to babysit their opponents. And in George's case, the guy didn't even break any rules. And for chrissake's if you forget about first round immunity in a championship match then you deserve what you get.

And to attack the judge on how they handled is simply unfair. A judge has to be neutral. If the judge would have told Alan that he won't be able to outwit due to first round immunity then isn't that considered helping him out? That wouldn't be fair to George and in fact the judge would be in violation then.

So yes, I shouldn't issue blanket generalizations... my bad... more accurate would have been to preface with "in general..."

Terman8er, may I ask what sport you played professionally?

I admire your idealism.

But I think love for the game is on another level. In this case, realistically speaking, the stakes are pretty high... not just the entrance fee but the title of Champ, and you get to design your own piece, and the women who will admire you later on, and many other benefits... Therefore, you must be pretty strict about rules.

Basically, George used whatever was at his disposal and without doing anything illegal to secure an advantage. Ain't nothin' wrong with that.

You, Hair10, would have been more forgiving? That's ok too. And, if you would have lost but actually considered the fact that you were there and played as the true reward, well that's like being a Buddhist because that's clix Nirvana right there.

I can see it now:

Kryptonian Physiology Superman does not take damage unless adjacent to a Kryptonite object or takes damage from the Mystics team ability.

Reverse the Earth's Rotation Superman can use Probability Control. He can use Probability ten times during his turn, and ten times during his opponent's turn.

The big question is-

What would you want your opponent to do if you were in their shoes?

Would you want them to allow you to take it back? Or would you prefer they allowed you to make a stupid mistake?

I'm sure a few people would rather learn from their own mistakes, but the overwhelming majority of people would prefer it if their opponent is easy on them. Makes for a much happier game.

i just got through the first page of this thread and is seems to be full of opinions... i mean onions... so i wont bother with the rest...

this is my fyi: for noobs, let them rethink their plans, afterall you want them to play... dont you?

for the "experienced" player we have a rule... EVERYONE GETS ONE UNDO...
but you cannot undo anything that requires a roll of the dice or after the die is cast...

play to win... TEWELL... you knew what you were doing and you knew what the rules were or at least you thought you did so if you wanna cry about it why dont you take this shiny quarter and call someone who gives a... poop... or what ever it is cause playing for fun and playing to win are two different things pee wee...

imo and such...

FWIW....

Had George allowed Alan to take back the move, I don't believe any judge would have stopped him. I agree with Harpua that by asking Alan to place the token, George was essentially asking Alan "Are you really sure that's what you want to do?"

As for what any of us would do, it's really hard for us to say. The number of people who have been playing in the Worlds Finals is exceedingly few.

For the original topic, my personal style of play is "if no dice have been rolled, go ahead and reset." But I agree with others on this thread that that is a courtesy and not DA RULEZ.

It's early in the morning here. It took me a second to see the humor in this statement.

I agree.

I played da foosball! (to quote the Waterboy) Semi-Pro in California and Germany and one year of NFL Europe.

Idealism implies something unobtainable. It's not. It's how I prefer to play.
Would I want the win? Of course. But I'd want the win only if I knew A) both players played to their full potential and B) I didn't win by being a dink (not saying George did, I have no idea as I wasn't there).

I can see both sides of this argument. The Worlds is the highest level of Clix there is and nobody that plays in the tournament plays to lose. I believe in having fun first and foremost when playing this game. That's not to say that I am not competitive to an extent when I play and I do often beat myself up when I make a dumb move or forget to do something. As a personal rule I don't take back moves after I have placed a token on my figure even when my opponent tells me to take the move back when I realize that I have made a mistake. It helps me to remember not to do it again. I will allow my opponent to do it though. On the flip side, I have never had a problem at my venue with my players and take backs. I have seen every one of my players allow take backs on multiple occasions regardless of whether or not it would end up hurting them or what the prize for that week was. I see a lot of people saying that they would have let Alan take back the move if they were in George's position and that may be true of most, but I have to wonder had they been in the same position with everything on the line would they? I honestly think that I would have allowed the take back because I would have felt like a dick for winning that way. However, I can't say 100% for sure because I wasn't in that position and I don't think that anyone else can unless they are where George was. I played in the Worlds once a few years ago and was bumped out on the second day by a guy who cheated. I chose not to play in Worlds again after that and just did battle royales. After that experience and after reading this thread, if I ever choose to play in a big tournament like that again I will be cutthroat because those are the kinds of people that I will be facing off against.

lol, I had to do a double-take there... "you get paid to spin little wooden men?" Football. That's cool.

I played basketball in city leagues for a number of years. Now, it's volleyball. But, I just stopped because I'm tired of jumping up and down and hitting the ball into the net... plus it was interfering with my clix schedule.

I play that way too most of the time.

A few weeks ago, I was playing against a beginner and I was reminded him of his Leadership roll a few times because he forgot to do it. Last weekend, I asked my opponent, "do you want to move your Bucky so you can PC that attack?" He did but it didn't matter. He still rolled high enough. And, just last night, I asked my opponent, "didn't you want to ICWO your defense up?" And, he did and it was all good.

Of course those things are considered helping your opponent and honestly, if it was World's or against really good opponents, I wouldn't do it.

But yeah, to play is the true reward. And especially when you play against a nice bunch of people, you can't help but offer a little help.