The day's start inspired hopes for great things. We started on time and the SK brought doughnuts and kolaches! He then demonstrated putting a kolache in the pocket of his judge shirt for easy access later making our whole team laugh. Such a great group of guys!
Finding a way to cover all the event's needs without the manpower to create true teams comprises one of the Head Judge's challenges. Our HJ opted to use the Taskmaster System. I had never encountered this system previously, and to be honest, I didn't like it. He assigned a judge to be in charge of each task, and that judge's responsibility included getting the task done by locating available judges to do it. While simply asking others to help made sense, in reality few were available and willing when the need arose. Since most of our team had little experience working together, we lacked both the personal chemistry and the understanding of one another’s roles to effectively employ this method. It felt awkward and unorganized to me.
An example: In my role as slips taskmaster, I needed to ensure the distribution of match slips at the start of each round. The SKs printed these a few minutes after each round began. At previous events, my SKs had used multi-print to produce slips with the pairings, so my expectation of earlier slips often led to me hanging around the paper cutter awaiting my slips. I likely could have waited until pairings posted, and then head to the judge station, however I did not want to appear late or unavailable when the time came to complete my task. Also, the HJ had asked another judge to take the slips off the printer and hand them to me. Neither of us really understood this request, and we joked about it each round as he handed them to me. As far as actually passing them out: Some rounds, three judges grabbed slips. Some rounds no one was ready, so I handled them solo. When I asked the HJ to pass out slips, he griped, and I wondered if I’d done something wrong.
My frustrations built throughout the day, but after some serious debriefing with the HJ, I have a much better understanding of this system. He carefully explained the reasoning behind each of his decisions as well as where he felt like he could improve his implementation of the process. After that conversation I am eager to try it again. Moral of the story: If you don't understand something, don't be afraid to ask. Sometimes veteran HJs don't realize that a new person will need a more detailed explanation.
Backup? Amir and Niko call me to the table during combat. The board state clearly shows declared attackers, however both players insist that an activated Gideon should have a +1/+1 counter on it from Nissa's second ability. My initial thought was, 'easy fix, here's your counter,' but I knew that such a partial fix is not supported by policy. The idea of a backup came to me next - just go back, add the counter, and then redeclare the attackers. I asked the players to wait, and sought the HJ's approval. When I explained what I wanted to do, he quickly authorized me to do it. I returned to the table and explained the fix to both players, who happily started to back things up on the board. I stopped them so that we could walk back through it step-by-step when they began telling me all the things that had happened at the beginning of combat including flipping a morphed Den Protector and sacrificing a creature to an Evolutionary Leap. I instantly realized that this backup signaled an imminent disaster. I returned to the HJ and relayed that due to additional information from the players I no longer wished to perform the backup. He again supported my decision. I informed the players that too much had happened to back up, so the board state would remain as it was. I did issue a GRV and a FtMGS for the missed counter and the game resumed. The moral of the story: No matter how much you may want to 'fix' the game state, sometimes that's not possible. And my judge lesson: Ask better questions before reaching a conclusion.
My first appeal. Nick called me to the table and stated that he was controlling Avery's turn due to Emrakul's ability. He wanted to cast a Spell Queller and use its triggered ability to target itself. I picked up the Spell Queller and read it just to be sure of how the ability's wording read, then I explained that he would not be able to do that. Since it is a triggered ability, it would not trigger until after the Spell Queller resolves and enters the battlefield, thus at that time Spell Queller would no longer be a spell on the stack and therefore not a legal target for the triggered ability. It seemed to me to be a relatively straightforward call, so my surprise must have been evident when Nick politely appealed. I marched with purpose to the HJ, who busily conversed with another judge. I remembered my training and opted to interrupt since appeals are time sensitive. When I approached he said, "You look like you have an appeal." I replied affirmatively and explained the situation as we walked to the table. The HJ introduced himself to the players and confirmed my ruling, which they readily accepted. The whole thing felt rather anticlimactic to me. An appeal of a straightforward ruling with no issues and happy players. Well, I guess that's how it's supposed to go.
Randomizing the last round. As we approached the end of the Swiss rounds, I overheard the TO ask the SK if she knew how to randomize the final round of Swiss. My ears perked up as this made no sense to me. Wouldn't randomizing the last round effectively destroy the standings? Afraid to ask, I watched and waited as the round began. Since my role cutting slips kept me at the scorer's table, I observed as a judge went through the pairings and marked relevant matches, and then assigned judges to watch those tables. I finally realized that the pairings were not adjusted, just the seatings. Clearly intended to reduce the impact of players watching one another to see who plays and who draws, it seemed to add confusion to the situation as well. I can't say I particularly liked the idea, but I can understand its purpose, and I'll keep an open mind when I see it again.
Questionable call. As Amos and Nathan entered game 3, Nathan realized that he only had 59 cards and called a judge. After noting that they had matching sleeves, I quickly located the card in Amos's deck. Realizing that this situation called for a D/DLP penalty, but qualified for a downgrade, I approached the HJ to ask for the downgrade. The HJ approved it, but instructed me to give both players Warnings. It felt off to me because Nathan had not yet presented his deck when I was called, but since the HJ told me to do so, I did. The players were not pleased. After handling the situation with the players, I returned to the HJ and asked him to further explain his ruling to me since I didn't understand. He stated that his option reduced the likelihood of Amos waiting until he knew Nathan was missing a card to call a judge, thus trying to gain an advantage from the situation. It still felt off to me, so after chatting some more and talking to other judges, the HJ said that he probably should have ruled it differently. Also I should have been clearer about the fact that Nathan had not yet presented his deck when he called a judge. Lesson: If you believe that an error is occurring, speak up. Second lesson: Ask the HJ if you don't understand his decision. The ensuing discussion is really enlightening.
Group debrief. At the end of the day I sat down with the HJ for a debrief. I really appreciate him taking the time to talk with me about the event, even while the Top 8 played. He offered me a few simple pieces of advice such as moving faster, saying that I did well and he really didn't have much for me. Then one of the most senior judges from the event joined us and gave me his evaluation. Next the TO who is also a judge came by and said, "Can I get in on this?" Inwardly I laughed at the panel-style debrief and felt a little bit overwhelmed but also so grateful that so many judges want to help me improve. After a few minutes, just the TO and I were left alone and we talked a long time, with a few interruptions. Being our first time working together, we had a lot more than just the event to discuss, and we skimmed the surface of quite a few topics. My mind filled with so much more that I longed to cover, but our time ran out and we both needed to get home. While I left once again frustrated, I felt like I had a lot to think about.
In the week that followed this event, the HJ and I chatted a lot over the internet. In fact, we combed through the minutia and he answered every single question I asked. I learned so much about tournament operations and how things are done at a mid-sized event. While it comprised a bit of a tough day for me, I loved every minute of being on the floor and working with my fellow judges. I'd like to send an extra special thanks to my Head Judge for staffing me, teaching me, debriefing me, and as always having confidence in me. I look forward to my next event with him!
No comments:
Post a Comment