oh ok, nevermind me then >_>
.......................................................

1st of all... DO NOT PUT WORDS INTO MY MOUTH. I never said that Mandatory effects were optional. Tell me where I said that.

Secondly...
No competent judge would rule to resolve a Sangan effect from 8-10 turns ago. I've never heard of anything like this going on at any tournament but mandatory effects are forgotten all of the time. When judges get involved usually the ruling they issue is just to continue the duel as normal. I also somehow don't see a judge issuing a game loss penalty to both players when one player realizes a mistake when they are about to lose the duel.

I'm not telling you anthing other than Mandatory Effects WILL be resolved. This is not only a Player Management issue, but the way the game is played.

BOTH players are responsible for the upkeep of the game. Sangan didnt get to the Graveyard without your knowledge as the opponent or the Controller. If it did, then that is a sign that YOU as the opponent or controller, ARENT paying attention to the game, and thus a Game or Match Loss CAN be issued depending on the Severity of the damaged Game State. Not telling your opponent to resolve an effect you know needs to be resolved is not an advantage you should be looking for.

If you want to talk about competence, no competent player would allow his opponent, nor himself, to forget to resolve such a game altering effect when it occurs. Sangan isnt a new card. It's been around since Metal Raiders and is in greater than 90% of Decks. Forgetting to resolve Sangan's effect is like Dueling with a 39 Card Deck.

For you to say that a Mandatory Effect cannot be resolved when it is discovered to have been missed, is to say that a Mandatory Effect is not Mandatory, and when things aren't Mandatory, they must be "optional". That's why players dont rely on other players to make Ruling Calls. They consult a Judge, and HE decides the severity of the game state and whether it has degraded to the point of being irrepairable.

Each game is different. A game can be tied 6 to 8 turns in, or it can be hanging on a thread after turn 2. To make a ridiculous call saying a 2 turn game is beyond repair is irresponsible. To say a 8 turn game where the score is tied is equally irresponsible. To place the same standard to all instances is not being a effective Player Manager.

If you dont know who you are addressing, it's best to not assume that you are imparting knowledge which is greater or less than that person's capacity. I passed my Level 3 Judge Certification just like everyone else who has. Up until now, there has been no need to rub that fact in anyones face, as I have been quite content to be a regular member of this forum. When you take and pass your Level 3 Certification, then I guess you to will be one of those "High Level Judges" who make bad calls.

Until then, you're just someone else making them.

I don't care if you're a level 100 judge, an effect is not resolved if both players forget about it 5 turns later. And once again, you're putting words in my mouth. Where did I state that I was involved in this situation? I'm asking a question based on a common occurance. Look buddy, I don't care who you are, but you need to stop putting words in my mouth.

I never said that Sangan was not mandatory. Would you like to point out where I said that? I'm talking about a case where both players mutually forget about the card effect.

The game state is beyond repair after 1 turn has passed. The common instance where a Sangan is forgotten is when it is sacrificed for another monster. The circumstance would be:
Player A sacrifices Sangan
Player A summons Mobius the Frost Monarch
Player B puts both his magic/traps in the graveyard.
Player A continues his turn forgetting to retrieve a monster for Sangan.
On Player B's turn he summons Diamond Dude and resolves the effect.
Player A calls over a judge because he forgot about Sangan.
At this point a game is unrepairable. After 1 turn, the game is unrepairable.

You're right. A judge would decide what would happen. I never said he/she wouldn't but all I am saying is no competent judge would allow the player to resolve Sangan at this point. A penalty would be issued and both players would be issued a game loss or the most common ruling among judges for a situation like this would just be to continue the duel with a warning.

Oh and if you don't know who you are addressing, it's best to assume that you are imparting knowledge which is greater or less than that person's capacity.

Again, obviously you must not be aware of Player Management Policy. A mandatory effect must be resolved.

This has nothing to do with "competence". You attempt to repair the game. The game is not beyond repair after "1 turn". If the game cannot be repaired, a Game Loss is issued, not a Warning. I don't know where you got that from, but obviously you got it from the same place that causes you not to care about Judge Rulings, which shows a lack of respect for Rules and set Policy.

This isnt worth it for me to argue as I know what has to happen.

Machine_Yoshi I don't think any of these people had negative intent toward you from the beginning so please calm down. I know different judges may have different rulings, but I do believe game losses are usually given in this case. Once in a similar situation where I snatch stole a Ryu Kokki (this was stupid since his other monster was DMoC and this would have turned out all the same if I had taken DMoC, except for the damage part) and suicided it into DMoC we should have removed both monsters from play, but instead we just removed DMoC. Later he played Premature targetting the Kokki when we realized it should have been removed from play. Although this game state would have been really, really easy to fix the judges gave us a warning and just told us to start the game over...........

Okay so let me get this straight... You're saying...

Player A and Player B forget about Sangan
Player B makes his next move and plays all his cards. Player B's move depends on Player A having 2 cards in their hand instead of the 3 with the Sangan.
You'd rule that Player A could resolve the effect after seeing Player B's move? Remind me to stay the hell away from the tournaments you judge.

The game is beyond repair at this point. You might want to consider playing the game and learning a thing or two about how little things affect a duel.

And to say that I have a lack of respect for judges and their rulings is incorrect. I have a great deal of respect for judges, but I have NEVER seen one make a ruling that allows a player to go back in time and resolve an effect. I've read the judge list, I read regional threads, and not ONCE has a situation where the judge has ordered a resolution of an effect 1 turn after a forgotten mandatory effect occured. In this case, a game loss would be issued.

If it isn't worth your time to argue why did you even bother replying? You've been putting words in my mouth this entire thread and I'm sick of it. I've read the policy documents, I've read the judge list, I've competed in higher level tournaments, and I've seen my fair share of strange rulings but I've never heard of any competent judge time warping back to resolve a Sangan effect in the middle of another player's turn.

And Andro... This is the internet. Some people get all riled up over things, others just sit calmly at their PC drinking Kool Aid. I would be the guy sipping Kool Aid.

Hmmm... alrighty, it just seems like you are angry I guess. Although it is tough to distinguish feelings in a forum.

You have not once paid attention to anything I have said, and FINALLY gave a scenario where the game is beyond repair instead of simply saying that the game is beyond repair just because a turn has passed.

Competence is what your whole claim was. I simply gave a overview based upon resolving a mandatory effect. Not once did I ever waiver from the fact that a Mandatory Effect must be attempted to be resolved UNLESS the game is beyond repair. You can only rewind the game so far, as well as take back moves.

Had you stopped trying to prove me wrong and actually read what I was saying, you would have been able to see what I was saying. But instead, you chose to do what most people do. Argue what you dont understand and defend a moot point.

I already stated SEVERAL times that if the game cannot be repaired, a Game Loss would be issued. You ATTEMPT to repair the game state. If it CANNOT be repaired, a GAME LOSS is the next remedy. Obviously, to keep playing a game where "fairness" is at question is going to create more contraversy, than just issuing the Loss, and the message is understood. PAY ATTENTION to your game!!

The main reason I stated that I chose not to continue "arguing" is because you keep glossing over my main point. Mandatory Effects must be resolved if possible. If not possible, then you move on to the next logical step.

You must progress through the steps of attempting to repair game before Penalizing either player. Not once did I say that "ALL GAMES MUST BE REPAIRED." And, not once did I put words in your mouth. I only stated that you cannot ignore that a Mandatory Effect was activated and must be remedied.

Your Remedies are:

Repair Game
Issue Game Loss


You cannot simply "ignore" that the player missed a mandatory event. That in itself causes the game to be that much more beyond repair, by allowing play to continue.

You didn't put words in my mouth eh?


Never said that mandatory wasn't mandatory. Never said that that I had a choice.

Had you stopped trying to prove me wrong, and stopped to actually read what I was saying, you would have been able to see what I was saying. Realistically, in this situation a judge isn't going to rule a player to get the monster for Sangan after the flow of the game has changed if both players forgot about it. What you have been saying is the game is repairable after 1 turn, which is usually incorrect.

You've stated this several times, but what you keep defining what is unrepairable incorrectly. It would be pretty contraversial if a player realized this 10 turns later right as they were about to lose and then a judge gave both players a game loss penalty now wouldn't it?
Okay... Wow. You just stated that you were done arguing yet you make yet another reply and continue to illustrate your points incorrectly. A mandatory effect cannot resolve at an incorrect time, such as 5 turns later.

I never stated that you said "ALL GAMES MUST BE REPAIRED" but you did state:

Which is incorrect I might add. The game usually is beyond repair after 1 turn.

It cannot be "ignored" because that would be cheating. This entire situation is based on players forgetting and remembering later on.

Why do you assume I am directing this at you? "You" are not who I am talking about. "You" is "A Player". I was never talking about you, which is why I fail to understand why I have to keep repeating that I wasnt trying to tell YOU anything.

I addressed your statement. Not you personally. Maybe I should have just said "A Player", so you would stop taking it personally.

And, I have debated this very point SEVERAL times from your side of the argument as well on another message board. But a game state will always have an attempt made to repair it before issuing a Game Loss, no matter what turn it is. You seem to be under the impression that all games are complex. They arent. Each game is a case by case basis. You know as well as I do that 3 or 4 turns can pass with neither player doing anything.

I really dont see how you can say that a mandatory effect can miss its timing, and get upset when I say that you are now saying that a mandatory effect is optional. And that's the point I continue to make. How else does a person say, by not carryng out a mandatory effect, it makes it "optional". You (A Player) have "chosen" not to do what you (A Player) must do.

You (A Player) cannot make that choice.

Now, I am done. I can see that you took this whole series of post as a personal attack against you, instead of a general statement, and proceeded to directly insinuate that I am incorrectly assesing the situation based upon your opinion of how you think things should be, not how it is.





Player Management Situations 2005-04-12 16:36:00 <Gary Haynes>


we had a couple of incidents that occurred during the Pomona SJC and i would like to present these to other judges so that they can think about how they would resolve the situation if it were to occur in their event that is higher than the store level.

remember that at the store level we're trying to teach and inform, so accessing severe penalties on the players is not a good way to conduct our responsibilities.


Scenario 1:

two players are at the end of their duel. a player flips over Ring of Destruction targetting a monster during a player's draw phase of which they just drew their card.

the turn player comments that there's really nothing and that it looks like he's lost.

another individual passes, looks at the turn player's hand, and sees a Book of Moon in it (the card that was just drawn) and comments, "heck, just Moon it", then continues to walk past.

the turn player looks down, sees the Moon, and states that they are going to chain the Moon to the Ring.

the opponent calls for the judge and asks for assistance.


******************
Scenario 2:

a player forgets to search for a Sangan during their last turn.

now, the opponent notes that they forgot to search, and calls the judge over.
the opponent has already begun their turn, drawn, and summoned a monster.

******************

these incidents come up all the time.

do you penalize the player for commenting in the Scenario 1 before they actually looked a their hand? should players not even get into witty banter since they may say something that gives the impression that they are going to do, or not do, something? do you seek out the opponent, who may not even be in the event?

do you award a Game Loss for the player of the Sangan in Scenario 2? do you let them search?

there is never a right answer to any of these questions. someone is going to benefit, and the other is going to be penalized in some way. you should think about how you would resolve the conflict and then think of how you would justify and explain your solution.

just think about it....

- Gary Haynes
Level 3 - Yu-Gi-Oh!


Here is the link to several responses to this post. Makes interesting reading,

http://lists.upperdeck.com/read/messages?id=5113#5113

That is not always true as there will be times when you are unable to do anything with the cards you have and are forced to pass. I've had to rule on situations that involved both players missing the resolution of a mandatory effect after 1 turn, and there were many times when the game was halted before any major change was made to the game state (they just drew a card, they haven't played anything, he's resolving an effect like Messenger of Peace, etc) and I allowed the controller of the effect to resolve it and continue play with a warning to both players for sloppy play.

Obviously things don't always work out so easily and the attending judge will need to make a call that will have a profound result on the record of one of the players (if not both). There is no comprehensive policy on EVERY situation that will arise in a tournament, however this gives us (the judges) the opportunity to make a call on what we feel is the correct remedy for the problem and hopefully learn from it afterwards when we discuss what happened with the other judges.

If a mandatory effect has been skipped and play has continued to a point where the impact of that error has caused the game-state to be comprimised, then play must stop and a penalty must be given according to the Tournament Policy. We judges must use common sense to determine when that point has been reached, and based on what has been presented to us we can make whatever adjustment we need to.

A game loss is usually awarded for something like this, a warning is simply not going to cut it as the infraction is too severe. The only time a match loss should be considered is if a player has been found to consistently cause the same error on more than one occasion and has been reprimanded for it throughout the event.

There's no need for this discussion to continue the way it's currently going, if it does then neither of you are going to learn very much from it (as there is ALWAYS something to learn from a discussion). Take it for what it is and just leave it at that: an open-ended discussion about a common infraction and what to do about it.

I will summarize everything in one post before I close this thread.

Mandatory effects will and always must be resolved.

If Player A is aware of Player B's mandatory effect and chooses not to say anything and we find out that Player B was witholding this information on purpose, Player B would be DQ'ed on the spot.

If both players did forget about the effect and the game state has not been damaged beyond repair, then we rewind it to the point where the game state was when the mandatory effect was to be resolved. Judges should always make an effort to repair the situation and not immediately issue game losses left and right, as much as I love doing so. =P

Game losses are usually the last resort that a judge would resort to. I say this because all incidents are different and separate and should be treated so. ALWAYS my friends, ALWAYS.