Tournament rules regarding different backs on cards.

Kushiel wrote:

Xaddam wrote:

It might always have been a problem. Most of these arguments would have been the same 15 years ago had anyone brought the discussion up.

They did bring them up. Scroll back up the thread and check out that link to the Google newsgroup discussion that occurred when 3rd Edition was printed. If you really want to take up some archaeology, you can even find a thread about this very same topic from 1995, when the first V:TES set was printed. In all that time, it was never determined that sleeves were necessary, hence why I wonder what's changed to make them so.

The second sentence was merely clarification, I'm sorry I included it. It was obviously just confusing. This is my point:

Xaddam wrote:

It might always have been a problem.

Xaddam wrote:

This is my point:

Xaddam wrote:

It might always have been a problem.

Or, it has never been a problem.

henrik wrote:

What's your definition of marked cards?

"Marked" = changed

"Marked" = "to put a mark or marks on"

The printed cards as published are not marked.

To cheat by changing the cards backings, with pen/pencil/blade, is to mark it.

To use the published card as printed as not marking.

See also: Marked Cards

Adonai wrote:

henrik wrote:

What's your definition of marked cards?

"Marked" = changed

"Marked" = "to put a mark or marks on"

The printed cards as published are not marked.

To cheat by changing the cards backings, with pen/pencil/blade, is to mark it.

To use the published card as printed as not marking.

See also: Marked Cards

I see. I don't really see any practical difference (except that marked cards are harder to notice for others) but I'll try to use the term "differently backed" in the future.

Adonai wrote:

Or, it has never been a problem.

Right. This is what we're discussing.

Kushiel wrote:

In fact, given that there's been so little proven cheating involving those rules,

You want to prove a rule's efficacy with its history of not catching cheaters? That doesn't mean anything. If it's been faulty it would have failed to catch cheaters because it's faulty.

I can't see why you're assuming that a system of rules that's been in place for this long has always been a problem,

Just because it's always been like this it doesn't mean it's the best way. Change can be good.

Henrik wrote:

(except that marked cards are harder to notice for others)

I don't agree. As I tried to illustrate with the pictures I posted earlier, the difference in colour scheme between sets are quite distinct but subtle. I can imagine this difference is actually easier to use than jyhad backs (or marked cards) if you want to cheat (no personal experience, so if a cheater could pitch in with theirs!), at least with the current tournament rules allowing it.