Timeouts in Finals: Do they happen too often?

Izaak wrote:

If nobody manages to get the GW, tough luck - the guy with highest seed wins by virtue of better prelims.

There is a big problem with that: the top seed can just play to slow the game down, and if he is good enough at it he can win despite getting ousted with 0VP. That's why I proposed to give the tournament to the highest seed still alive instead, so that at least the top seed still has to defend himself from the his predator and the second seed at least.

the top seed can just play to slow the game down

Well, except that stalling is illegal.

And if four other players plus a judge don't mind the top seed stalling, then well... no change will help.

Izaak wrote:

Well, except that stalling is illegal.

Obvious stalling is illegal.

Non-obvious and non-obnoxious stalling, like not playing fast, taking 2 minute instead of 90 second on important actions, and more importantly turtling without forward action is legal, if only because undistinguishable from someone a bit stressed and/or tired.

Of course, if we have only the top seed that can do that instead of every finalist which have a reasonable hope for one vp before the end of the game, it will still lead to less stall.

Online magic had a system where each player had its own clock, which runned only when the player had a decision to make. It was pretty efficient, but it's a pain in the ass to do in real life.

Chaitan wrote:

Aside from judges giving out slow-play warnings is there anything that can be done to give players incentive to play faster?

Sure: Find judges that are willing to act like JUDGES, and after a warning for slow -- or "slower than normal" -- play, start adding time to the clock.

I played in a final recently where, near the end, I began playing slower than the rest of the players. The judge had been timing everyone's play and when mine got out of sync, he gave me a warning and said that he would start adding time to the clock. I disputed it for about 5 seconds, because I didn't think that I had been doing so, but he showed me the timer and I said "damnit!" and I sped up my play. I won the tournament.


It's completely anecdotal and I haven't researched the subject, but since I'm not saying anything new at this point, and I don't wish to dispute my good friend Emiliano any further perhaps it's best just to end my participation with this thought: Having been to only one EC, but having played with and judged dozens of European players -- both here in the US *and* at the EC, and at *all levels* of event-type, from "local" to the NAC itself -- I have noticed that European players have a MUCH greater tendency to dispute/argue with the judge. Perhaps it's this belief of mine that is making me suggest that Emiliano's issues are "local". Just a thought; I could be wrong.

Ohlmann wrote:

Obvious stalling is illegal. Non-obvious and non-obnoxious stalling, like not playing fast, taking 2 minute instead of 90 second on important actions, and more importantly turtling without forward action is legal, if only because undistinguishable from someone a bit stressed and/or tired.

With all due respect, that's complete and utter bullshit. Stalling is stalling, and stalling is illegal.

If you are unable to identify that a player is stalling, you are, quite simply, unfit to be a judge.

It may be that in your local area, everyone is at about the same skill level in terms of judging, and in those cases -- which I think are probably more hypothetical than real -- you do the best you can with what you have. In a "qualifier"- or "championship"-level tournament, you step out of the way and allow people who have shown the ability to judge properly and well to be in charge.

Izaak wrote:

Well, except that stalling is illegal.

Who said anything about stalling? Offering your Powerbase: Montreal around, rushing crosstable anyone who starts to get an edge, vote pool damage votes down, crosstable DIs/Delaying/Suddens,... There are plenty of ways to slow down a table that do not involve trying to decrease the actual number of turns that people can play in 2 hours.

That's not stalling. If you manage to do that and win the tournament because of it, you're playing with fish.

Which, given the decks I see at final tables in some smaller tournaments may well be the case.

5 (known) of the 6 events held at the EC2012 had finals that timed out.
silence of death - 5 VP sweep


vtesone.wordpress.com/2012/10/28/results-ec-2012-european-championship-day-1/
vtesone.wordpress.com/2012/10/27/results-ec-2012-last-chance-qualifier/
vtesone.wordpress.com/2012/10/27/vtes-ec-2012-nations-cup/
vtesone.wordpress.com/2012/10/29/results-ec-2012-first-chance-qualifier/
vtesone.wordpress.com/2012/10/31/results-ec-2012-silence-of-death/

At EC Brian had a nifty, if somewhat cumbersome, way of motivating finalists against timeouting.

Brian, you can explain it so much better than me, so if you please, can you explain it to others too?