Collateral damage

You are a floor judge of a Regional Pro Tour Qualifier. It’s round 5 and the EOR leader has asked you to gather as many entry slips as possible before time in the round. While you walk around, you see a match that ends, approach to the table and kindly ask them to fill and sign their result entry slip. Angus takes the slip while Charley is scooping his cards, records his loss 2-0 and both sign it.

Before leaving the table you ask to confirm, “So, Brad wins 2-0?” Charley quickly answers, “No! Charley wins 2-0.” You give them the result entry slip to fix it and find out that Charley is playing at the wrong table. Next to them Brad is still playing at the wrong table against Dan.

What do you do?

Judges, feel free to discuss this scenario on Judge Apps!

Thank you all for participating in this week’s scenario. Everyone clearly identified that Charley and Brad have commited Tournament Error – Tardiness because they sat at an incorrect table and played the wrong opponent. This is one of the 4 examples for this infraction we can find in IPG.

D. A player sits at an incorrect table and plays the wrong opponent.

For the penalty, we must look at the Additional Remedy section of the infraction to find the appropiate.

A player not in his or her seat 10 minutes into the round will receive a Match Loss and be dropped from the tournament unless he or she reports to the Head Judge or Scorekeeper before the end of the round.

According to this both Charley and Brad will receive a Match Loss. We must be very careful when explaining the penalty because Brad and, specially, Charley will be disgusted for the consequences of their error. Although the Additional Remedy states that they will be dropped from the tournament unless they report to the Head Judge or Scorekeeper before the end of the round, it is not necessary to apply this clause unless any of them really wants to drop.

As Matthew has stated, fixing the matches so that they match how Charley and Brad sat is not a good idea since it’s not supported by policy.

Finally, write down the correct match results and the infractions.

A Tragic Switch

Eight minutes into round five of a PTQ, you are called over to tables 35 and 36.

Albert and Yuval are sitting at table 35. Albert has just won a game, and they are just presenting their decks after sideboarding.

Bob and Zachary are sitting at table 36. They are in the middle of game one.

They called you when their results slips arrived. Upon looking at the slips, they realized Albert and Bob should have been playing at 35, and Yuval and Zachary should have been playing at 36.

They realize things aren’t what they should be, but they start arguing that they couldn’t know earlier that they were at the wrong table since it took sooo long until the result slips finally arrived. What do you do? What are the relevant infractions, penalties, and fixes, if any?

Judges, feel free to discuss this scenario on Judge Apps!

As many of you pointed out, playing the wrong opponent is an explicit example of IPG 3.1 Tardiness. Since this was discovered before the 10 minutes limit announced for Tardiness (as it usually is 0/10 for PTQs), Bob and Yuval are each going to receive a Game Loss. The existing games/matches are not part of the tournament and thus do not count so both matches are immediatedly stopped and any result is voided.
Since no official games have been completed (or even started), the Game Losses are applied immediately and Bob and Yuval go to play their own matches at the appropriate tables.

To fix the situation, seat the players correctly at 35/36. Bob and Yuval are both down one game, but will have the choice to play or draw for game 2. None of the players may sideboard for game 2 (so Albert and Yuval have to de-sideboard their decks). Give each table a time extension equal to the elapsed time in the round, which means 8 minutes in this case plus your ruling time so that they have the same 50 minutes for their matches as all the other players have.

So… Where is he?

You’re walking the floor at a PTQ when you notice a table with only one player. You glance at the clock and see that just over 10 minutes have elapsed, so you step in, pick up the match slip, and ask the player across from you “Are you Anton or Nikolai?” He replies “Oh, Nikolai’s here. We’ve played game one already. He saw I was going to sideboard and I think he went to get a soda.” What do you do?

Judges, feel free to discuss this scenario on Judge Apps!

View Answer
Thanks to everybody who participated this week! While the IPG says players not in their seats at 10 minutes into the round will be given a match loss, this pertains to players who have been absent since the beginning of the round. A player leaving their match in progress without a tournament official’s permission is guilty of slow play. The absent player will receive a warning, and the players will have two additional turns should their match go to extra time.

Kenneth Woo made a very good point that we’d like to highlight: If Nikolai won game one, this has a chance of being USC- Stalling. When Nikolai returns, a quick investigation to try to determine his motivations for leaving is a good idea.