Our first mistake occurred a month before the event. We scheduled it on the same weekend as a large popular street festival. Luckily, the anticipated parking difficulties were less of a problem than we expected. I also went out and talked to the Boy Scouts selling parking in the lot next door and reminded them that our parking is reserved for customers only. They readily agreed to redirect festival-goers into their $10/space parking lot. (Yes, add this to the list of things I have done in a judge shirt!)
We heavily advertised the event since we know that GPTs are not a hugely popular format right now. They fill a nice niche for players who are looking for a chance to play competitively, but do not expect to win a PPTQ. We offered a pizza night the preceding Friday to get our players excited about the event as well.
The day of the event I opted to wear my 'formal' judge attire - the black button down shirt and black slacks - instead of the regional polo and jeans that I normally wear for FNM. I chose that outfit to increase the level of professionalism I exuded and stress the difference between a casual event and a competitive one. This distinction especially mattered to me since many of our local players have not only played with and against me, but many of them helped me learn to play as well. And let's be honest, how much respect does a judge really command without the look?
When I arrived at 11am, two players already waited outside the store. Two more arrived soon after. Since registration (and the store) weren't scheduled to open until 11:30, I greeted the players and let them know that the TO was en route. They seemed like a fun bunch, and I recognized a couple of them from previous events. At 11:20, the TO and I entered the store and started setting up. The players followed us inside and made themselves at home. They seemed to be old friends of the TO and laughed and joked loudly as I got things in place.
The TO fired up our Magic computer and set up the payment processing system while I rearranged the table numbers from our usual FNM setup. We chose the play area closest to the pairings board TV monitor we planned to use and set up space for the usual Pathfinder group at the back of the store, so that the two groups would not disturb one another.
By noon three more players had arrived, a boyfriend/girlfriend that are familiar players in the local scene, and one of our store regulars. I handled the seven registrations and set up the event in WER. I knew another of our players planned to attend, and the thought of having eight players sounded wonderful. Three rounds and done!
Then about ten minutes before start time, the TO brings me a scrap of paper with a name and DCI number. He informs me that this player called to say he's on his way and to go ahead and register him. I cannot seem to locate the player by name or DCI number despite trying multiple searches in WER. The TO simply inputs the name and number and enrolls the player anyway.
Then my local guy shows up at the same time as the player who called. I register my local and take payment from both of them. After double checking the MTR, I explain to TO that we will now be playing 5 rounds of swiss and then a cut to the Top 4. So much for a quick event!
Meanwhile the players seem to be having fun. All but the couple have gathered to chat while filling out decklists and it feels like a 'party' atmosphere in the room.
I pair the first round and get the pairings ready to post. I decide against assigning seats for the player meeting since it's a small crowd and they are happily settled at the first 2 tables anyway. I muddle my way through my 'Head Judge Announcement,' saying things I've heard other judges say many times, but it still sounds strange coming out of my mouth. I collect the decklists and tuck them into my clipboard as I am talking.
One of the players asks if they will be required to sit at assigned tables. Since I know one of my locals requires a fixed seat for a medical issue and I can see that a couple of the players may have trouble fitting into all of the seats, it seems to be a logical request. All of the players also seem comfortable with one another and all 9 are regular competitors in the local scene, although not all from the same stores. I respond by asking the players to use the first 2 tables and play 2 matches at each one, but that they can choose their own seats. They all seem happy with this arrangement.
As I conclude the announcement I realize that I forgot to use my notes . . . oh well, I covered everything, but maybe not in the clearest order. Things to improve for next time!
I post the round 1 pairings and the players eagerly get started. I watch some Magic, making note of who plays slowly, who seems to be newer, and other such things. Overall round 1 goes smoothly. Towards the end of the round, I take a moment to count and alphabetize the decklists. Since there are only 9, it's an easy task. None of them stand out in any way, so I opt to do a random table deckcheck at the start of round 2. In an attempt to minimize the time taken, I ask the TO to check a deck with me. He is not a certified Magic judge, but he has judged Regular REL stuff as well as other games. I assume that he can check off cards on a list. I also know that since there are 9 players, only 1 deckcheck is required to achieve the suggested 10%. This allows me to ask him to check a deck knowing that it may or may not be done with precision, but if he finds an issue, I can then investigate further.
At the start of Round 2, I prepare the pairings, print the slips, and use WER to select the random table. I don't want to miss the swoop, so I pull the decklists as I post the pairings and set them on our deckcheck counter. The TO then walks up with the decks. While I didn't ask him to pick them up, I note that he is trying to be helpful. We quickly go to work checking. He uses the traditional method, I use Polish. I realize that I should have talked to him about this beforehand, but know that adding the 3 minutes for shuffling will still be faster than me checking both decks myself. He finishes his deck in about 6 minutes, stuffs it back in the box, and returns it to the player while instructing him to shuffle. I think to myself that I should have been much more explicit about what I expected of him in this process. I finish my deck at the 8 minute mark. Not great time, but with the TO's interruptions, it's ok. I return the deck, let the players know that there were no issues and give them a 9 minute time extension. The players shuffle, present their decks, and begin their game. One of them turns to me and says, "Good thing you gave us time to shuffle, I hadn't even taken my deck out of the box when TO picked it up." I wanted so badly to facepalm right then . . .
Upon later reflection, I set myself up there by not being clear with TO about what I needed him to do as a part of this deck check. Since we have completed it with no issues, I decide to consider it done and not worry about it. Had there been a problem, I would not have assessed a penalty given the complete situation. For future events, I made a mental note that I need to do a better job of communicating with my staff.
Round 2 proceeds with no problems, but 1 match goes to time and ends 1-0-1. I note that one of those players also had a 1-1-1 draw at the end of turns in Round 1. While I had not observed slow play when I had been at their table, I do make a mental note to watch more closely for it.
A player asks for standings before Round 3, so I put them up on the screen while I prepare pairings and slips. After posting the pairings, my 2 players at 6 points decide to draw. They sign the slip 0-0-3 and one heads out to the street festival.
Near the end of the round only one match is still going. Several other players and I are watching Natalie and Andy's game when she asks me to come away from the table and answer a question for her. Andy controls a Void Winnower, a few other creatures, and has 1 card in hand (Ulamog). Natalie's board state is much stronger, but she is handcuffed by the void Winnower. Natalie and I walk away and she shows me an Altered Ego and asks, "If I cast this, can he not cast even cost spells?" After a brief discussion she explains that she wants to cast it for X=3, thus giving it an odd Converted Mana Cost. I explain to her that yes, it will copy Void Winnower's rules text. I also tell her that yes, she can cast it using an odd value for X. She then says, "Will it do what I think it will do?" with a huge grin on her face. I tell her that I don't know what she thinks it will do, but I nod slightly. I follow her back to the table expecting her opponent to protest. She casts it, copying the Void Winnower. Her opponent then tosses down the Ulamog in mock anger and all the players start laughing. It was the play of the day by far!
Round 4 opens with standings again and play begins uneventfully. I walk among the tables watching Magic when I observe this interaction: Allen casts a creature with a triggered ETB effect. Ned says, "In response I Ultimate Price your creature." Allen picks up the creature and moves to place it in the graveyard. I intervene and explain that casting a spell in response means that you are casting while the previous spell is still on the stack and has not yet resolved. Therefore, the creature is not yet on the battlefield and cannot be the target of Ultimate Price. I then incorrectly issued Ned a GPE-GRV Warning for casting the spell illegally. I should have just backed up to the point before he cast the spell, which would have only untapped his lands and changed nothing else. Then Ned says, "Ok. I want to let the creature resolve and then Ultimate Price it." Allen places the creature in the graveyard while Ned is retapping the lands and placing the Ultimate Price in his graveyard. I tell Allen that the creature will still resolve and enter the battlefield before it goes to the graveyard. Allen then asks, "So I get the trigger?" I say yes and walk them through the interaction since they both seem confused. I decide against issuing any penalties to Allen since Ned's incorrect and confused actions seem to be the root cause of the issue.
At the end of the round, one of the players tells me she wants to drop, so I drop her from the event. Then I pair the next round and pop the standings up on the screen. The players immediately erupt with cries of a problem. First of all, a player had marked the drop space on his slip and I had forgotten to drop him. Easy fix! Then they all insisted that a particular player had 3 too many match points, but everyone else's were correct. That seemed impossible. Someone suggested that he might have the bye for round 5 and I remembered vaguely that I had paired the round before pulling up the standings, but the player said, "No, I had the bye in Round 4. I wouldn't have it again." Turns out, he did have it again. So after dropping the player who dropped and adjusting for the bye, we had correct standings.
When we finally start round 5 my top two players decide to Intentional Draw into the Top 4. As the others begin the round, the player who called in his registration over the phone approaches me. He says, "My name's incorrect on the pairings sheet and I just noticed that my DCI number is wrong too." I ask him to write down his correct information for me, then he leaves to enjoy the street festival for the round. I consult TO, who apologizes for giving me incorrect information from the phone call. We then spend the remainder of the round deleting all the results from the event in WER, adding the correct player, dropping the doppelganger with the wrong DCI number, and re-entering the entire event including manually re-pairing each round. We finish with about 20 minutes remaining in the round.
Great news! The two matches are both concluding. I announce the Top 4 while 15 minute remain in round 5. Unfortunately one player has not returned from the street fair. The other players try to call/text him, but no one has his number. The other three remaining competitors say that they're not going to the GP so they don't mind conceding the byes to him if he is going, however they want to wait for him to return to discuss prize splitting. I tell them that play will start as soon as the previous round ends, with or without him, and they are all fine with that. He walks in as the clock hits 0:00. After a quick chat, the players decide to split the prize packs four ways, but two of them want to play for the title. The #2 and #3 seeds inform me that they would like to concede. I hand them each their prize packs, then place the 1st and 2nd place prize packs on the table for the top two to compete for. They quickly redistribute the packs into four equal piles and each take one.
I took a minute to update WER with this information as the two remaining players began their finals match. I munched on a slice of cold pizza and then joined the players at the table. The game proceeds slowly with both players building sizable board states. Neither is playing particularly slowly, they are just decks that ned time to develop. Then one player casts The Great Aurora. After it resolves, about 5 turns later, his opponent casts The Great Aurora as well. Both are also playing Seasons Past. It's a fascinating game to watch, but it's painfully slow for either player to make any progress toward winning.
A group of customers enters the store from the street festival. They ask about the game, so I try to explain it to them. I use a few cards and show them the basics. They try to watch the finals match, but quickly grow bored and leave. One of the players looks at me laughing and says, "This is probably the worst most boring game ever to show a new player." I agree.
After 90 minutes, Game 1 ends. The store closes. TO and I sit with the players watching Game 2. Yay untimed finals! Luckily the same player wins Game 2 and everyone is happy to go home!
Looking back on the event, we certainly messed up a lot of things. I cringed my way through debriefing this one with my judge mentor, but he followed each issue with the question, "What did you learn from it?" By reframing my mistakes as areas for improvement I realized that while the event may have been rough, I will be a much better judge for future events.
Things I learned:
- Before scheduling an event, check not only the store calendar, but the community calendar too.
- Be early - the players will be.
- Take time to ensure registration data (name/DCI) is accurate. It's a lot faster than fixing it later.
- Use your notes for the HJ announcement.
- If you ask a non-judge to help, be very specific about what you need them to do.
- Check the slips for drops when entering results.
- Post standings before you pair the next round.
- When you make a mistake as a judge, it's ok to fix it, and let the players know.
- Every mistake is an opportunity to improve for next time.
Note: This event took place on May 22, 2016. It just took me a few weeks to get the blog finished and posted.
No comments:
Post a Comment