Cutting prey's deck.

henrik wrote:

Depending on the restrictions I ask for in my first question, it could be allowed to look through the backs of the crypt/library (in order to count the number of cards I cut, for example).

Incorrect interpretation.

The tournament rules states that cutting should be done without looking at the cards faces but does not mention the backs. And, of course, this wouldn't be able to give me any significant advantage (or my prey any significant disadvantage) since the differently backed cards should be sufficiently mixed to avoid any such situation.

You ignored the section on Definition of Terms, which states, "Cutting: One time only, removing a single portion of a deck and placing it on top of the remaining portion without looking at any of the card faces. Anything more than this one cut is considered a shuffle." Now, while you ARE allowed to shuffle an opponent's deck when they present it to you for a cut, if you manipulated and/or checked and/or counted the cards, I could charge you with Unsportsmanlike Conduct under 5.1 "Manipulating which cards are drawn from your deck or from an opponent's deck" if you wish to be ejected from a tournament.

How about you just cut the deck like 99.999999999999999% of the other players, instead of you getting ejected from a tournament?

KevinM wrote:

How about you just cut the deck like 99.999999999999999% of the other players, instead of you getting ejected from a tournament?

There's no need for hostility like this when all I've done is ask a question.

henrik wrote:

There's no need for hostility like this when all I've done is ask a question.

There is no need for hostility in this forums at all, regardless what anybody says.

I'd feel surprised if somebody looked at my cards that way you described (counting my cards, looking at the backs and those things). I'd call a judge then. So if you like to avoid bad tensions and keep up a good mood at the table I'd recommend you just cut the deck without taking such a close look on it.

You'd call a judge if someone counted your crypt cards?

Under the current rules I wouldn't cut like that either. But that's not what under discussion.

It's an ambiguity in the rules which makes this interpretation possible, and rules should not be up for interpretation, if possible. The point is valid.

1) If a shuffled deck is sufficiently mixed the deck is randomized enough to not incur a significant advantage.
2) Non-significant advantages can be ignored.
3) If a shuffled deck is randomized it does not matter which number of cards you cut when cutting the deck, the result will still be a randomized deck.
Conclusion: Choosing which number of cards you cut can be done by any method, including card-backings, dice roll or your favorite number.

Something like this would be the argument in its strongest. (1) and (2) are important premises in the discussion about sleeves/no-sleeves, so they cannot be attacked without attacking the no-sleeve argument. And disproving the no-sleeve argument would make this discussion void, so they are necessary.

I had never thought that deck shuffling and cutting could be such a "problematic" (and important!) process ... all until I read this article on extrala's blog:
extrala.blogspot.com/2012/01/sufficiently-randomized.html