Magic-League.com Forum Index Magic-League.com
Forums of Magic-League: Free Online tcg playing; casual or tournament play.
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

definition of stalling.



 
Reply to topic    Magic-League.com Forum Index -> Magic Rulings
Author Message
warwizard87



Joined: 04 Oct 2006
Posts: 201

PostPosted: Mon Feb 21, 2011 7:08 pm    Post subject: definition of stalling. Reply with quote

ok this is kind of a spin off the platinum angel post. but i have to ask. i attempted to do research on the events at gp boston in 05 with no luck so i dont know what was surrounding the dq. yet under my understanding u did not ever have to concide the game even when you had no outs. reminds me of the case with mike long years ago when he played pros bloom. mike had been forced to discard his only drain life his only win con. most players at the time played 2. mike continued the game calmly and started to combo off, looked at his opponete and said " do i really have to go through all of it?" his opponet scooped. by this ruling in 2005 it would seem u are conciderd stalling if u make ur opponet play it out. i would like some clerification here becouse this does fly in the face of the old "if u cant win hope ur opponet makes a mistake and u win."
Back to top
Ninja87



Joined: 11 Apr 2006
Posts: 94

PostPosted: Mon Feb 21, 2011 7:21 pm    Post subject: Re: definition of stalling. Reply with quote

Good question, I'd like to know too..
I guess this area of the rules is pretty vague.. Like you're allow to shuffle your deck everytime you search it.. So you can actually table shuffle it thus further stalling..

you can also shuffle your opponents deck whenever he searches.. stuff like that annoys me because i dunno to what extend they can do it..
Back to top
niknight



Joined: 14 Oct 2004
Posts: 261

PostPosted: Mon Feb 21, 2011 7:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Warwizard,

You are correct when you say that you are not forced to concede when you cannot possibly win. You are required, however, to advance the game state with your actions.

Advancing the game state means that the actions you take must, in some way, potentially advance your position. You don't have to show that that the action definitely advances your position, just that it potentially could. This is why playing uber-defensively is legal (it could, somehow, maybe advance your position).

What the Goblins player at GP Boston did was to attack with all of his creatures every turn while under a Confinement lock. Since the damage prevention is not optional, he can't claim that he's attacking in the hopes that his opponent will mess up (messing up with Confinement requires completely different circumstances). He also can't claim that he has a way through the scenario if his decklist doesn't include cards towards that end.

Since his actions couldn't, in any way, advance his position in the game, he was guilty of stalling. If he had just played his land and passed the turn in the hopes that time would run out, he would have been ok.


Ninja:
While searching your library, you are allotted 1 minute for process, which includes shuffling time. Realistically, for a simple search it shouldn't take you more than 20-30 seconds to find what you're looking for and shuffle. Similarly, your opponent isn't allowed to take all day while shuffling your deck either.
Back to top
moscowdemon
Level 4 Judge


Joined: 18 Dec 2008
Posts: 297

PostPosted: Mon Feb 21, 2011 7:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

edit: niknight beat me too it. Smile
Back to top
Ninja87



Joined: 11 Apr 2006
Posts: 94

PostPosted: Mon Feb 21, 2011 7:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

moscowdemon wrote:
edit: niknight beat me too it. Smile


niknight is a Level 5 Judge.. I'm sure he didn't simply just "eat you to it".. he would have totally pwned u.. XP
lol jk jk

But yea, thx for clarifying that.. =)
Back to top
warwizard87



Joined: 04 Oct 2006
Posts: 201

PostPosted: Mon Feb 21, 2011 8:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

i get it since he was attacking it was basicly a null attack and his turns should of been shorter then even the 15 seconeds or so he was taking. in his case the attacking into 0 effect on the table was actuly the game stall and not the fact that he had no out?
Back to top
magicman85



Joined: 22 Aug 2009
Posts: 555

PostPosted: Mon Feb 21, 2011 10:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Is there a limit to how long a turn can take? For example, if he tried stalling by just taking longer to play his land, and then sit there for a while pretending to think about the board.
Back to top
Conkisstador



Joined: 08 Sep 2004
Posts: 543

PostPosted: Mon Feb 21, 2011 10:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

level 5 is job, not any better rules knowledge. but yes it's right. if the player had a purpose for attacking (i want to see if he'll show me a card, or attacking different numbers to try and get him to miss his upkeep for confinement, whatever) then it's not stalling.

stalling is the manipulation of time for tournament advancement. other examples are playing your match at the 6-1 table and playing slowly to see if the 6-1 who got paired down loses, etc. Or activating sensei's top multiple times in a turn.
Back to top
Ninja87



Joined: 11 Apr 2006
Posts: 94

PostPosted: Mon Feb 21, 2011 11:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Conkisstador wrote:
level 5 is job, not any better rules knowledge. but yes it's right. if the player had a purpose for attacking (i want to see if he'll show me a card, or attacking different numbers to try and get him to miss his upkeep for confinement, whatever) then it's not stalling.

Really? I would assume that you need at least a better knowledge of rules to be appointed or chosen to be a judge here..

And I actually don't get the meaning of the second part of your paragraph.....
Back to top
Clariax
Level 3 Judge


Joined: 16 Jan 2006
Posts: 174

PostPosted: Mon Feb 21, 2011 11:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

In the case of the goblins player who got DQ'd for continuously attacking into the confinement, it was determined to be stalling because it was determined the reason for his actions were to waste time to run out the clock. There is no set amount of time you're allowed to take for a turn. Such things are entirely relative. In one circumstance, taking 1 minute for a turn could be blatant stalling. In another circumstance, a turn could take 5 minutes and not be remotely close to stalling.

Stalling requires intent. It's not about what actions you take, it's about what you're intending to accomplish by taking those actions. The goblin player would eventually lose by drawing out every card in his deck. The confinement player was just returning the same card (squee, I think) and discarding it to confinement every turn, never even changing a card in his hand. The goblin player knew that eventually he would draw his entire library and lose, so he wished to make his turns take as long as possible so time would run out before that happened. He did this by declaring completely pointless attacks every single turn.
Back to top
Farseer
Level 3 Judge


Joined: 03 Oct 2004
Posts: 335

PostPosted: Tue Feb 22, 2011 4:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
6.1. Cheating Stalling

Definition
A player intentionally plays slowly in order to take advantage of the time limit. If the slow play is not intentional, please refer to Tournament Error Slow Play instead.

Example
A. A player has two lands in his hand, no options available to significantly affect the game, and spends excessive time "thinking" about what to do to eat up time on the clock.
B. A player is ahead in games and significantly slows down his pace of play so the opponent has little chance to catch up.
C. A player playing slowly appeals a warning in an attempt to gain advantage by having more time to make a decision.
D. A player intentionally exceeds the pregame time limit before the third game in an attempt to make it harder for his opponent to win in time.
E. A player losing a game starts slowing down the pace of play in an attempt to run out the clock.
Back to top
Conkisstador



Joined: 08 Sep 2004
Posts: 543

PostPosted: Tue Feb 22, 2011 10:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ninja87 wrote:
Conkisstador wrote:
level 5 is job, not any better rules knowledge. but yes it's right. if the player had a purpose for attacking (i want to see if he'll show me a card, or attacking different numbers to try and get him to miss his upkeep for confinement, whatever) then it's not stalling.

Really? I would assume that you need at least a better knowledge of rules to be appointed or chosen to be a judge here..

And I actually don't get the meaning of the second part of your paragraph.....


My 2nd paragraph was to show the definition of stalling- which farseer did much more thoroughly. Abusing the time limit = stalling and is Cheating - Stalling, and is DQ-worthy.
Level 1 judges pass a test
Level 2 judges pass a test
Level 3 judges are regional coordinators. There is an assumed increase in rules knowledge but functionally you're looking at someone who can organize a staff for a GP.
Level 4 generally are the same and maybe part of committees for determining bans and whatnot.

In ML the hierarchy is similar. level 1 judges are in j4u and run tournaments. they can answer questions. j2 can handle appeals and fix tournaments (change results, add/drop players, extend entries). j3 and up is staff.
Back to top
warwizard87



Joined: 04 Oct 2006
Posts: 201

PostPosted: Tue Feb 22, 2011 11:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Durango wrote:
6.1. Cheating ? Stalling

Definition
A player intentionally plays slowly in order to take advantage of the time limit. If the slow play is not intentional, please refer to Tournament Error ? Slow Play instead.

Example
A. A player has two lands in his hand, no options available to significantly affect the game, and spends excessive time "thinking" about what to do to eat up time on the clock.
B. A player is ahead in games and significantly slows down his pace of play so the opponent has little chance to catch up.
C. A player playing slowly appeals a warning in an attempt to gain advantage by having more time to make a decision.
D. A player intentionally exceeds the pregame time limit before the third game in an attempt to make it harder for his opponent to win in time.
E. A player losing a game starts slowing down the pace of play in an attempt to run out the clock.
F. Tomoharu Saito



thats epic XD
Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Magic-League.com Forum Index -> Magic Rulings All times are GMT - 7 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

All content on this page may not be reproduced without consent of Magic-League Directors.
Magic the Gathering is TM and copyright Wizards of the Coast, Inc, a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc. All rights reserved.


About Us | Contact Us | Privacy Policy