Kansas City, Kansas | Standard
Time: Friday May 31st – Sunday June 2nd
Players: 858 Winner: Ben Friendman

Friday – Scheduled Sides


Back to Basics
Lately on the circuit I feel like I've been doing a lot of non FJ stuff, and while it's really awesome to be able to expand my skillset it has the detriment of making me lose touch a bit with the more standard roles on the circuit, such as being a FJ on scheduled sides. I forgot to check the time limit for construction for my sealed event before making my opening announcements, because I simply haven't done it in quite a while, and even just being float on sides was kind of weird and I almost felt a little lost. So while my day wasn't super exciting, it did really help remind me of what being a circuit judge means to most people, and helped remind me of how much fun just working the floor really is.

By the Book
Sometimes, reading policy too strictly can lead to some strange outcomes. Such a scenario was brought to me, a player used Thief of Sanity to exile and play his opponents Wildgrowth Walker, then a few turns later he played a Merfolk Branchwalker off the Thief of Sanity, explored, gave Wildgrowth Walker a counter, but forgot to gain 3 life. I think most judges (myself included) would rule GRV for the Thief of Sanity player and FTMGS for the opponent, however one judge brought up the idea that our current MT policy operates on the philosophy that the owner of the card is responsible for the correct execution of the card, and therefore, if we applied that same philosophy here the infraction would instead be double GRV.

When Calls Go Awry
Sometimes hearing about a bad call gives us insight as to why policy is the way it is. A judge let me know about a call that had occurred in LCTs, where there was a Vivien, Champion of the Wilds that had exiled two lands. Somehow the player had accidentally shuffled the two lands into their hand. After determining no cheating, the judge on the call ruled GRV and took two cards at random out of the hand and exiled them under Vivien. Unfortunately these cards ended up being two creatures, and were therefore now castable off Viven, Champion of the Wilds. This call should've been an HCE, and the hand should've been revealed, and the opponent should've chosen the two cards to be exiled under Vivien, Champion of the Wilds. This would've resulted in a much fairer game state, however as the call was handled here, the Vivien player accrued significant advantage from their mistake. Luckily neither player was terribly upset about the resolution, but this is a very good example of why HCE fixes and GRV fixes are handled the way they are.

Saturday – Kickstart


Discordant Spirit
I haven't been on kickstart in a long time, so it was nice to have another shot at that team! At the beginning of the day there was a bit of a dissonance between me and the kickstart lead, we're both fairly independent people and didn't communicate regarding the distribution of responsibilities, which resulted in a lot of things being done twice or missed. I brought this up with them as soon as we had a moment to spare, and simply asked what they'd like me to do to ensure the day went more smoothly. We worked out a plan that distributed tasks and responsibilities to both our satisfaction, (the lead seemed to want to find the starting table numbers and do announcements and HJ interface, whereas I seemed to prefer putting up the cover sheet, moving the flag and prepping the area and product) for the remainder of the day things went really smoothly. It was a nice reminder that sometimes coordination is just as important as skill or experience when it comes to getting the job done.

Sunday – MCQ Team Lead


Stop Hitting Yourself
This isn't particularly educational or event relevant, but it is hilarious. A player mentioned to me that if AP has Gruul Spellbreaker in play and NAP has a Chandra, Fire Artisan and there are no other planeswalkers in play, if Chandra, Fire Artisan loses loyalty counters, she is forced to target herself, which causes her to lose more counters and have to target herself again. Rinse and repeat until Chandra is dead.

Mirrored Infractions
AP controls a Teferi, Time Raveler and Narset, Parter of Veils, NAP also controls a Teferi, Time Raveler and Narset, Parter of Veils. AP activates his Teferi, Time Raveler, and draws a card. On NAP's turn, he does the same and passes turn, at which point both players realize that neither of them should've drawn a card and they called a judge. The correct ruling is double HCE and both players thoughtsieze the other, however this is incredibly disruptive. The HJ thought about it for a moment and decided to deviate, and ruling that both players would get a GRV but there would be no fix, as both players have accrued equal advantage from the error. A few of us on the MCQ liked this fix as it felt clean, but were a little concerned at the choice of issuing a GRV instead of the more correct HCE.

To Infract or not to Infract
The top 4 of the MCQ was all midrange Gruul decks, which meant matches went long and there were a lot of decisions throughout. Often players would be in the tank for long periods of time, longer than would normally be acceptable, however since both players were spending equally long times in the tank, and because the rounds were unmetered. I opted not to issue slow play warnings. There were also a few distinct times where players made small mistakes but were able to resolve them without my or another judges intervention, so I opted not to issue an infraction. This one's a little more awkward, because a player usually won't push for an infraction if you're sitting there watching, since they expect that you've seen the interaction, and have determined it's not infraction worthy, whereas from my perspective it falls under the IPG line of “both players have solved a problem to their mutual satisfaction without the intervention of a judge”.

What Does it Mean to “Reveal My Hand”?
Early on in the event I got called to a table where AP cast Thought Erasure, chose a card, finished surveiling, and then looked back up to write down the contents of his opponents hand, only to discover that the hand had been scooped up! I ruled that the NAP needed to keep revealing his hand until the AP had finished taking down all the cards. I was appealed and upheld.

Cheating or Negligence
I was asked to watch a player for suspicious behavior, AP was supposedly making and taking back a lot of plays and NAP was getting frustrated. At one point while watching him he tried to play a land from his hand while Experimental Frenzy was in play. I stopped him and fixed the issue, but didn't issue an infraction immediately. After thinking about it for a little while, I decided I had made a mistake and issued the infraction after the game. NAP was obviously unhappy with this, and let me know that if it had been AP's third infraction he would've been pretty frustrated being screwed out of a GL due to a judge mistake. I agreed that I had made a mistake and apologized to the player. Luckily it was only AP's second GRV, however after speaking with the other judges on the event, one of them admitted that he had also corrected a small error while watching without issuing an infraction. I was fairly suspicious of this player and let the HJ know that I felt like this may very well be a cheating case and asked what he'd like me to do. The HJ decided to sit down and chat/investigate the player, later he let me know that he didn't particularly think the player was cheating and decided not to DQ him.

Leader in Name Alone
I was TL on the MCQ again, my responsibilities constituted everything that had nothing to do with deck checks. I think the most interesting thing I organized was the break schedule. I sent a member of my team and a member of deck checks on break at the beginning of the round and then someone in the middle of the round to minimize the damage to the event. This way neither team was crippled for an entire round, but rather than having a 3 hour span of breaks (2 people each round), we had a 2 hour span of breaks (2.5 people each round). This was important because I was starting breaks at R3, which meant that if I opted for the 3 hour model I'd be sending the last wave in R6 which is over 6 hours into the shift and kind of unacceptable. Other than breaks I didn't really coordinate too much, the two people on my team were super competent and I felt like every time I missed or forgot something one of them had me completely covered. It was really great to have such a reliable team!

...In Conclusion
Overall I had a good time at MF Kansas City, I felt like this event I got to interact with harder skills more than at most events, which I always appreciate. Hearing about interesting rulings and interactions is a fun part of any event I'm on. Unfortunately I wasn't quite functioning at full capacity and felt about 80% most of the weekend. Luckily I think the difficulties I was encoutering on this event seem to have been resolved, so I should be back up to a full 100% Tobi for SCG Con and Washington!