In June of 2017 at the judge conference at Grand Prix Las Vegas, I participated in an investigations workshop. At the time I had never done an actual investigation and excitement churned within me. I entered into it feeling confident and eager to show off my skills. Boy was I wrong! My scenario turned out to be a deck check where I found issues with both decks and had to speak with both players. Now, I am notoriously bad at deck checks so after laboriously checking 2 decks, I was mentally exhausted, stressed from being put on the spot, and confused because I had no idea what to do next. I picked a player and started asking questions. After spending far too long on a roundabout mess of queries and responses I still had no idea what to do, so I moved on to the other player to repeat this nonsense. I reached incorrect conclusions in both cases and wasted a ton of time. Afterwards one of the actors from the scenario, an L3 I had never met before, said to me, "You were pretty terrible." He was right; and the worst part was that I had no idea how to get better.
In September I worked Grand Prix Washington DC. My team lead, Khan Le Thien, and I chatted about investigations and he offered to send me some materials he uses to help judges improve their investigation skills. He suggested practicing on some test cases and looking for the critical information needed to make a decision. That conversation changed the way I approached investigations. I stopped trying to simply gather information in a vague generic sense. I started focusing on the critical pieces to make a decision. First I had to gather enough information to understand the situation. Khanh suggested describing the scenario in as few words as possible, which taught me to try and examine a situation and boil it down to its critical elements. Then I had to ask myself what comprise the important decision points (such as if a player is cheating or if I want to perform a backup), and what information I needed to make those decision. Next, I attempted to elicit the information from the players. Sometimes looking at a lifepad or asking a spectator helped, but usually I had to create lines of questioning that would yield the information necessary. Learning to investigate efficiently and not ask unnecessary questions came next. Finally, I had to get comfortable making and delivering a decision.
Using Khan's system, I studied and theorycrafted a lot. In practice, I investigated a few minor incidents, but nothing ever really felt like a 'real' investigation. I also attended a couple more investigations workshops where I got the scenarios impressively wrong. While I had a lot of new ideas, they just didn't seem to ‘click’ for me during an actual investigation. Something, I can’t even say what, still eluded me.
In March of this year, while Head Judging a PPTQ, I was faced with a situation in which I believed that a player lied to me. An odd thing happened, as I listened to my floor judge relay his explanation of the scenario, my brain laid out a path to follow. A 'checklist' of things to find out that pointed to clear conclusions. I spoke with the player, opponent, and spectators and reached a decision. While it wasn't my first disqualification, it was the first time that I as a HJ had to pull the trigger myself on a cheating disqualification.
I want to be very clear here. Disqualifications should never be taken lightly. They never leave you. While judges sometimes try to make light of them, I believe it's just to offset their gravity. I strongly believe that I made the right call. But it still weighs on me, and I have the player's name written in my judge notebook because I will always remember the responsibility that comes with judging and will never take it lightly.
So this weekend at Grand Prix Dallas-Fort Worth I took a call on Saturday in the main event regarding communication and a life total discrepancy. After speaking with both players, I reached out to Joe Klopchic to confirm a ruling. I expressed a concern to him and he suggested a line of questioning for me to investigate. He sat at the table and I took the player a few steps away to chat. After I delivered my ruling, HJ Carlos Ho handled the appeal. This complicated call actually led us to confirm with another burgundy and resulted an a 15 minute time extension (which luckily went unused). After the call ended, Carlos and I discussed my prior concern and my investigation. He seemed surprised that I had considered that angle, but appreciated my thoroughness.
Sunday evening, after working 3 days on the floor of the GP, I attended an investigations workshop hosted by the Investigations Workshop Project. This project sets up scenarios for judges to practice investigations and provides coaching and feedback allowing the investigating judge to get in some realistic practice as well as receive feedback from their peers. (As a sidenote, I appreciate these folks being willing to stay late on the last day of a long weekend to help judges get better.) Having done one of theirs previously, the opportunity came as a surprise and makes me even more appreciative.
What happened next can only be described as unbelievable. I observed the first two scenarios, and both times the correct line of questioning just popped into my head. Like Magic! I so clearly saw what to ask and why to ask it. I learned some neat tricks watching the other participants and loved seeing the reveals of what actually happened in each scenario. But for me, I just could not believe that it seemed so natural (even easy!).
Then came my turn . . . . That terror feeling started to creep into the pit of my stomach as I awaited the call. When it came I faced a not particularly helpful 'player' with a story that didn't seem quite right. I questioned him and his opponent and again the path just revealed itself in front of me. I fell into a comfortable zone in 'judge mode' as I asked my questions. While I didn't feel 100% sure, I make a choice and delivered a ruling, hoping that it was the right one. During the reveal, I realized that I had exactly nailed it! While I had lingered a bit too long and asked some unnecessary questions, I did in fact get it right! The folks running the situation later told me that this one presents more difficulty than most and that most people who have done it don't reach the intended resolution.
I floated out of the room on cloud nine. After several embarrassingly bad investigations workshops, I finally got one right!! But more importantly, I had seen the situations for all three on a deeper level and hadn't just gotten a correct answer but had understood the whole context and implications. I wasn't just taking a shot in the dark based on a pile of facts. I was soliciting details and curating a theory to offer an explanation on which I could base a critical decision.
Ironically, I also received an e-mail from the Player Investigation Committee affirming the disqualification from March. While the message itself wasn't a big deal, the timing (literally during the workshop) seemed fitting.
As I entered the judge party, I noted the actor who had previously called me terrible at investigating. How perfect that he should be present on the day that my investigation skills finally manifested as slightly more functional than before.
So back to the CFBE recognitions . . . . Head Judge Carlos Ho chose to recognize me for the investigation on Saturday. As I stood up to accept my award, I saw the actor grinning wildly and insisting that he had nothing to do with the recognition. I saw the folks from the workshop smiling and nodding. I saw my friends and coworkers applauding. I saw a mentor's face filled with pride. I felt Carlos embrace me. There in that moment, in that room, I knew that I had taken a tiny step forward as a judge. A hard fought step that I could never have taken without the support of the friends and family in my judge community.
Thank you to each and every person who has joined me on this journey. This recognition is for you, a little bit of return on the investment that you have made in me.
