EC Champion Is...

Oh. As a follow-up to that other thread, just saw on the White Wolf message board that the winner was Dave Bastijns from Belgium. - Halcyan 2

[ quoted text not captured ] Did you read about the arrangements made with the tables on the second day ? did you know that the organising crew read the whole ubnch of decklist and then decided which player would be pitted against each others ? and that one of the organisators (who read the decklists) made it to the finals... It doesn't really sound like a VEKN tournament to me...

"reyda" <true_...@hotmail.com> a écrit dans le message de news: 3deb5cb9$0$13462$79c1...@nan-newsreader-02.noos.net... [ quoted text not captured ] WHAT ? Can't believe it! I trust you, Reyda, don't worry, but what the hell? Miller, confused... > >

"reyda" <true_...@hotmail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:3deb5cb9$0$13462$79c1...@nan-newsreader-02.noos.net... [ quoted text not captured ] have you been there reyda, or do you believe any bullshit you hear, first: the guy who according to you read all the decklists and made it to the finals was walter paolini. he is the computer guy who wrote a makro for the achron to make organizing a tourney easier, so he handled the program and entered the players names, but never saw the decklists. they where kept by the judges. the organising crew (i admit it was by far not the best organized event i have been) did not read the decklists and then assigned the tables the tables are asigned but the computer and can not be influenced by the organizers. but the real lowpoint where the two french players in the finals at the austrian qualifier who had wrong decklists and were not disqualified. and then helped each other during the finals. Proc_F > >

"Anarch Troublemaker" <a9505...@spamunet.univie.ac.at> a écrit dans le message de news: 3deb6fc3$0$12910$3b21...@news.univie.ac.at... [ quoted text not captured ] You've been there, I suppose? You were a player? An organiser? A judge? AFAIK, LSJ was there, and I'm sure he will enlight us concerning these facts. So, until then, please avoid slander. Miller > > Proc_F > > > > > > >

"reyda" <true_...@hotmail.com> wrote > Did you read about the arrangements made with the tables on the second day ? > did you know that the organising crew read the whole ubnch of decklist and > then decided which player would be pitted against each others ? and that one > of the organisators (who read the decklists) made it to the finals... It > doesn't really sound like a VEKN tournament to me... > reyda, it would be interesting to know where you got this information. can you back it up? or are you just spreading / creating rumors? i was present at the tournament (i participated in a side event on sunday) and i could see that the normal archon seating order chart was used to get the seating order during the european championship. if i think about it i'd say that pitting 73 players against each other according to their decklist was not feasible in a reasonable amount of time. and why would someone do that? the archon provides a convenient method of getting a seating order after all. pallando

reyda wrote: > > Halcyan 2 wrote: > > Oh. As a follow-up to that other thread, just saw on the White Wolf > > message board that the winner was Dave Bastijns from Belgium. > > > > - Halcyan 2 > > Did you read about the arrangements made with the tables on the second day ? No. > did you know that the organising crew read the whole ubnch of decklist and > then decided which player would be pitted against each others ? No. They had no time to do it, and they did not do it, since decklists were on a table and they did not even touch them until they decided to make same deck revisions during the tournament. > and that one > of the organisators (who read the decklists) made it to the finals... It > doesn't really sound like a VEKN tournament to me... Uhm... Reyda, where did you get this FALSE information from? Greetings, Damnans

Reyda, don't you think an apology from your side would be appropriate now?

reyda wrote: > Halcyan 2 wrote: > > Oh. As a follow-up to that other thread, just saw on the White Wolf > > message board that the winner was Dave Bastijns from Belgium. > > > Did you read about the arrangements made with the tables on the second > day? Which one? That Carl Pilhatsch managed to come up with enough tables for everyone, even the side events, even though technically, they weren't there? Yes, us much ignored Duel side event players were quite happy we didn't have to play or games at the bar, and would like to thank Carl for his efforts. > did you know that the organising crew read the whole ubnch of decklist > and then decided which player would be pitted against each others ? Anyone who pauses for even a second to think about how long exactly it would take for all organizers to read all deacklists and then discuss seating for 3 rounds of 73 player tournament (in order to give an edge to a particular player, which is exactly what you will be insinuating in the sentence I have yet to get to) realizes, quite unlike you, that the first round wouldn't have been played until today. > and that one > of the organisators (who read the decklists) made it to the finals... 1. Walter Paolini was not an organizer, he was just asked to work the computer and Archon program, because he's, pretty much, the resident expert. 2. The little pieces of paper he was reading was the data he had to feed into the Archon program. You know, starting with which of the 150 qualified players actually showed. 3. Walter took 1st place in this year's Viennese VTES League. We were not exactly surprised that he was able to stand his ground in international competition. You really should try to get your facts straight and your head clear of either crack or conspiracy theories (whichever of the two your problem is). Thomas Pichler

"Miller Delmardigan" <al...@club-internet.fr> wrote in message news:<3deb824f$0$7367$7a62...@news.club-internet.fr>... [ quoted text not captured ] I've been there too. It's correct that Walter did not see any decklists. He was at the computer, yes. But the decks were just inscribed in the computer by name. The content was on paperwork only. Fact. It correct too that the 2 french who won the final of the austrian qualifier had wrong decklists. Fact. If they made collusion is a matter that nobody can prove. For me, it was quite obvious that they did.

Angus, the Unruled wrote: || It correct too that the 2 french who won the final of the austrian || qualifier had wrong decklists. Fact. || || If they made collusion is a matter that nobody can prove. For me, || it was quite obvious that they did. ||| "Anarch Troublemaker" <a9505...@spamunet.univie.ac.at> wrote: |||| but the real lowpoint where the two french players in the finals |||| at the austrian qualifier who had wrong decklists and were not |||| disqualified. and then helped each other during the finals. Look at those beautiful answers from the austrian cream =) you can't go any lower... Two french guys in the finals and you're already upset... wait a bit to have all the information other players here are craving to know, then we'll see who is ashamed. reyda

Damnans wrote: || Uhm... Reyda, where did you get this FALSE information from? || || Greetings, || Damnans please just wait a bit ;)

"reyda" <true_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:3debd5b0$0$4064$79c1...@nan-newsreader-01.noos.net *snip* > Look at those beautiful answers from the austrian cream =) > you can't go any lower... Two french guys in the finals and you're already > upset... > > wait a bit to have all the information other players here are craving to > know, then we'll see who is ashamed. Reyda, you are just plain wrong. The French players both had incorrect deck lists. Whatever happened after that happened however. It is impossible to prove collusion happened, so it didn't. None of the other players in the game complained at the time so even we were not sure. -- Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

John Keech wrote: || "reyda" <true_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message || news:3debd5b0$0$4064$79c1...@nan-newsreader-01.noos.net || *snip* ||| Look at those beautiful answers from the austrian cream =) ||| you can't go any lower... Two french guys in the finals and ||| you're already upset... ||| ||| wait a bit to have all the information other players here are ||| craving to know, then we'll see who is ashamed. || || Reyda, you are just plain wrong. The French players both had || incorrect deck lists. I admit it. Does providing a wrong list have any impact in the game ? i guess not. The only thing you have to know in V:tes is if the crypt contains at least 12 crypt cards and the library is between 60 and 90 cards. Do you think a tournament player would put 5 return to innocence or 4 High stakes in his deck ? i guess not. || Whatever happened after that happened || however. It is impossible to prove collusion happened, so it || didn't. None of the other players in the game complained at the || time so even we were not sure. *At the time* : you've got the point =)

"reyda" <true_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:3debeb60$0$5521$79c1...@nan-newsreader-01.noos.net... > John Keech wrote: > || "reyda" <true_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message > || news:3debd5b0$0$4064$79c1...@nan-newsreader-01.noos.net > || *snip* > ||| Look at those beautiful answers from the austrian cream =) > ||| you can't go any lower... Two french guys in the finals and > ||| you're already upset... > ||| > ||| wait a bit to have all the information other players here are > ||| craving to know, then we'll see who is ashamed. > || > || Reyda, you are just plain wrong. The French players both had > || incorrect deck lists. > > I admit it. Does providing a wrong list have any impact in the game ? i > guess not. The only thing you have to know in V:tes is if the crypt contains > at least 12 crypt cards and the library is between 60 and 90 cards. Do you > think a tournament player would put 5 return to innocence or 4 High stakes > in his deck ? i guess not. Reyda, The problem with a deck that doesn't match its deck list is that the changes to the deck could have happened during the tournament. As I am sure you are aware, it is illegal to change your deck during a tournament. That is why deck lists are required. Did the French players change their decks? We don't know, but there is a possibility since they don't match the decklists they brought. That is what we Americans call "shady". It isn't bold face cheating, but it "smells like something is rotten in Denmark." It is just not good for the game and it make the tournament look unfair. I don't care that they were French. They could have been Cajun, Watusi, Armwrestling champions. It reeks that their decklists doesn't match up. Although before I get on a real rant, does anyone know how much different they were? -- Comments Welcome, Norman S. Brown, Jr. XZealot Archon of the Swamp

>Did the French players change their decks? We don't know, but there is a >possibility since they don't match the decklists they brought. That is what >we Americans call "shady". It isn't bold face cheating, but it "smells like >something is rotten in Denmark." It is just not good for the game and it >make the tournament look unfair. Then again, maybe the other three finalists changed their decks for the second and third round but had the sense to change them back for the final so they weren't caught... =P Halcyan 2

> Look at those beautiful answers from the austrian cream =) > you can't go any lower... Two french guys in the finals and you're already > upset... > > wait a bit to have all the information other players here are craving to > know, then we'll see who is ashamed. > > reyda any lower? I'm not upset, you seem to be (though i admit, i can't really see a reason...) I wrote about 2 facts and one opinion i got looking at the final (for the qualifier), whereas you just try to spread rumors...

"Halcyan 2" <halc...@aol.com> wrote in message news:20021202220824...@mb-cg.aol.com > Then again, maybe the other three finalists changed their decks for the second > and third round but had the sense to change them back for the final so they > weren't caught... =P Wish I'd thought of that for the third game - and brought some cards along to tweak what I was playing - I may have placed myself bleeding the Lasombra instead of having his filth all over me... Still, after all is said and done, I had a really great time and got some loot, which is a lot more than I expected. Big thanks to the Austrians for their hospitality, and the Italians for their sheer insanity! Oh, and Grumpy Old Bastard - you know who you are. [ quoted text not captured ]

> Although before I get on a real rant, does anyone know how much different > they were? AFAIK: one had too many memories of mortality and too less direct intervention the other had too many pursuits and too less blurs

No comment (yet) on the topic. Now to something completely different : Could all the people writing on such important topics add their real name to their posts? I know the people behind some nicknames but some I do not. I have nothing against nicknames when it is about deck strategy or whatever, but when you start accusing some people of cheating then you should add your real name. Thank you. Johannes Walch V:EKN Germany

It was 1 pursuit less and 1 more blur. I made my list 10 minutes before beginning and i made a mistake, i can arrive. Carl was logicaly clement and i take only a warning but imagine i've been disqualified because for 1 pursuit and 1 blur, too very similar card. Both can be cycle very easy in my deck then tell me why i can have cheat for a so sahdow change? How can u call it cheat? Give me one hour for the bullshit accusation of "anarch troublemaker" about the final, i can't accept that. Many spectator (not the finalist players) refused to speak stategy with me after this final. Thanks "Angus, the Unruled" <athosg...@gmx.at> a écrit dans le message news: 690c2085.02120...@posting.google.com... [ quoted text not captured ]

reyda wrote: > > Halcyan 2 wrote: > > Oh. As a follow-up to that other thread, just saw on the White Wolf > > message board that the winner was Dave Bastijns from Belgium. > > > > - Halcyan 2 > > Did you read about the arrangements made with the tables on the second day ? > did you know that the organising crew read the whole ubnch of decklist and > then decided which player would be pitted against each others ? Incorrect. The Archon seating charts were used to determine which players were pitted against each other, with the first round seating being randomized by computer. > and that one > of the organisators (who read the decklists) made it to the finals... It > doesn't really sound like a VEKN tournament to me... Do you have any evidence that he read the decklists? -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. Links to V:TES news, rules, cards, utilities, and tournament calendar: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/

"Angus, the Unruled" wrote: > > > > You've been there, I suppose? > > You were a player? An organiser? A judge? > > AFAIK, LSJ was there, and I'm sure he will enlight us concerning these > > facts. > > So, until then, please avoid slander. > > > > Miller > > > > > > Proc_F > > I've been there too. > > It's correct that Walter did not see any decklists. He was at the > computer, yes. But the decks were just inscribed in the computer by > name. The content was on paperwork only. Fact. Right. > It correct too that the 2 french who won the final of the austrian > qualifier had wrong decklists. Fact. Right. > If they made collusion is a matter that nobody can prove. For me, it > was quite obvious that they did. For me, it is not. Although Stéphane Lavrut had no predator during the entire game (i.e., no bleed, rush, or whatever from his predator), this fact does not prove the existence of collusion. I witnessed that final round from its start to its end, and I can only conclude that Stéphane's predator (Jean Noël) seemed to be quite an unexperienced player. The seating order was: Stéphane Lavrut (France) -> Carlo (Italy) -> Jeff Thompson (Atlanta, USA) -> John Keech (UK) -> Jean Noël Jourdan (France) John Keech was putting much pressure on Jean Noël, since he had successfully bled him twice or more (I think) with Stanislava for 5. Jean Noël only concentrated his efforts on rushing John Keech's minions. However, at a given moment of the game, Jean had 13 or 15 pool, and kept rushing John's minions, and even Jeff's. I think he was so obsessed with not being ousted by his predator and his future predator (Jeff), that he forgot he had a prey to oust ;-) I think Jean Noël received a Warning from Alex (a judge) for being so passive with his prey, and not apparently willing to get any victory point. As I have already said above, I think Jean Noël's behaviour was due to stress and unexperience, and not to collusion. Greetings, Damnans

[ quoted text not captured ] Organizers read the decklist? Erhum, I was there. Players mostly wrote their decklists by hand. I'd be surprised if the organizers have even managed to read all the decks as of today :) If they have they should work with cryptology. I had a good time, a horrid performance (not one single GW) and a really new experience. Jeezz, do continental players deal about everything? Being ousted by prey twice I felt like some players made innovative interpretations of the tournamentrules, but most likely I was just very sour about getting ganged up on before even manging to become a threat. We don't do these VP-deals in Sweden, so it was definitely a new experience. Unfourtenately some proposed deals were on the wrong side of the limit of being merely innovative interpretations of the rules. I simply don't want to hear "I only need (insert less than gamewin) to make (insert any out of game goal)." during a tournament. Especially not an international one. In this case I'm the one who's doing the slander and my wife is the one who got really pissed off but satisfied by complaining to me afterwards. Most important though - thanks to the austrian crew for running a very large event with a surprisingly low amount of disorganisation. All the credit to you for a great work :) Sten During

Damnans <damna...@ono.com> schrieb: >Although Stéphane Lavrut had no predator during the entire game (i.e., no bleed, >rush, or whatever from his predator), this fact does not prove the existence of >collusion. I witnessed that final round from its start to its end, and I can >only conclude that Stéphane's predator (Jean Noël) seemed to be quite an >unexperienced player. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ hi, Jean Noel managed to qualify for the final of a tournament with 115 participants. Jean Noel's stats from the White Wolf site: Career Games: 32 Constructed : 19 Wins : 7 VPs: 34,5 Rating 36,84% Rank 56 Draw your own conclusions! Chris.QJ

[ quoted text not captured ] However, he seemed very nervous during the final round. Note that I have also wondered how he could qualify for the final round ;-) Maybe he was very lucky. Let him explain it to us. Greetings, Damnans

Jourdan Jean-Noel wrote: > It was 1 pursuit less and 1 more blur. I made my list 10 minutes before > beginning and i made a mistake, i can arrive. Carl was logicaly clement and > i take only a warning but imagine i've been disqualified because for 1 > pursuit and 1 blur, too very similar card. Both can be cycle very easy in my > deck then tell me why i can have cheat for a so sahdow change? How can u > call it cheat? > > Give me one hour for the bullshit accusation of "anarch troublemaker" about > the final, i can't accept that. Many spectator (not the finalist players) > refused to speak stategy with me after this final. > > Thanks The official take on this topic is as follows: The VEKN penalty guidelines are quite clear regarding the case when a decklist does not match the main deck. Game loss. It was decided that a game loss in this situation was not desireable and the penalty was downgraded to a "severe warning" - meaning the next simple warning would be upgraded to disqualification and forfeiting any prizes. At one point Jean Noel was reminded to keep his goal (maximizing VPs) in mind - no warning per se. There was no call from a judge regarding collusion at that time. Period. Players should not draw hasty conclusions if they don't know all the facts. Carl Pilhatsch (EC head judge)

"Angus, the Unruled" wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] Angus, I warned you! Never, ever again mention Blur and Pursuit in one sentence! You will bleed for that! :) Carl

reyda wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] Could you please be so kind and tell us all what we are supposed to be waiting for? You have not been there. Damnans was. LSJ was. Angus was. John Keech was. Ben Peal was. The Lasombra was. I was. You are either spreading false information gained from someone else or your own false rumours/conclusions. Please don't do that. Thanks. Carl

LSJ wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] I finally managed to do "it". :) Carl

Sten During wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] Well, in such a case always call a judge. Only once (!!!!) during the whole weekend a judge was called to evaluate a deal. The judges were there to help players, but we could not be listening to all deals being made. If you felt something was not legal, why didn't you call a judge? We were at the players' disposal. ;) > > Most important though - thanks to the austrian crew for running a very > large event with a surprisingly low amount of disorganisation. All > the credit to you for a great work :) > Hehe, disorganisation. True. I guess you cannot exclude some ammount of chaos in tournaments that big. :) Thanks for being there and having fun! Carl

Carl Pilhatsch wrote: > Sten During wrote: > > > > Well, in such a case always call a judge. Only once (!!!!) during the whole > weekend a judge was called to evaluate a deal. The judges were there to help > players, but we could not be listening to all deals being made. If you felt > something was not legal, why didn't you call a judge? We were at the players' > disposal. ;) > I know, and it wasn't my table :) > >>Most important though - thanks to the austrian crew for running a very >>large event with a surprisingly low amount of disorganisation. All >>the credit to you for a great work :) >> > > > Hehe, disorganisation. True. I guess you cannot exclude some ammount of chaos in > tournaments that big. :) > Thanks for being there and having fun! > Yup, that was the most important thing for me anyway. Getting away, being able to meet new players, complain about how horrible anything I'm not used to is, try to deal with it and play yet another game, and another game and... :) Sten During

>The VEKN penalty guidelines are quite clear regarding the case when a decklist >does not match the main deck. Game loss. >It was decided that a game loss in this situation was not desireable and the >penalty was downgraded to a "severe warning" Ergo: the tourney did not follow the VEKN guidelines I think that is basically all that has been claimed in this thread and it looks like you are admitting it. FC (innocent bystander)

FC wrote: > > >The VEKN penalty guidelines are quite clear regarding the case when a > decklist > >does not match the main deck. Game loss. > >It was decided that a game loss in this situation was not desireable and > the > >penalty was downgraded to a "severe warning" > > Ergo: the tourney did not follow the VEKN guidelines Incorrect. Quote from the same penalty guidelines document: Please remember that these are only guidelines. If the judge believes that the situation has significant, extenuating circumstances, he or she is free to modify the penalty as appropriate. [ quoted text not captured ]

( this post was originaly a response for anarch troublemacker so excuse the agressive style of the beginning) You speak about bullshit but you do the same thing when speak about a french help in final. I was the french player who play play the gun celerity deck. And you who were you? One of this nasty spectator who have cry to collusion cause he have a limited stategy vision? Or just xenophobic or too nationalistic? I hope it was the first explanation. I'll give you the fact not like you've done. You'll give me your stategic vision after, those from a wise and capable palyer not from a spectator who knows what my opponent have in hand ;-). In the whole game time i've got a Stanislava, with a secure haven :-(, dominate protean bleed steath like predator and i don't have any intercept, only five blood doll in my deck and my only reaction agaisnt aggression is to "bum's" a vampire. What i'm supposed to do? Stop to bloat as much as the bleed i take from a simple bleed from Arika and bleed my prey (a play four of five turn without a bum's rush in hand) to open a way to my predator and dig my grave? Or do my best to stay alive, hope the death of my predator for a next one more easy to kill and block, and deal with a player? If you've well watch and listen the game you know i've refused first the deal of my prey cause i want to destroy his minion and i negociate with Jeff, the Lassombra, a turn without bleed in order to play my deck and survive. And his response was simply clear, he'll continue to bleed me with his 7 minions with dominate for the majority (i've got only 3 vampire at this time not 4 like another one said). Then i must continue to make back rush. Then i ask to Carl what can i expect in this ending party and he explains the 4 scenarii: * I'm killed by Jeff and i'm the 5th of the tournament. * I killed Steph and after i'm ousted by Jeff, i'm 3rd of the tournament * I killed Steph who have amready ousted Jeff, i'm 2snd of the tournament * I killed my prey and my grand prey and i'm the winner At this time i influence my fourth vampire and i have 11 pool. Jeff'll die the next round but he still have 6 ready vampire (4 with dom) and i have 1 fame 1 haven encovered and 1 bum's rush in my hand. Steph have 1 untaped vampire and 1 war ghoul. I have then 2 solutions try to explode his two vampire and hoping to draw a second bum's but take the risk to bill killed by Jeff in 1 or 2 turn or put my fame on a vampire of Stpeh begin to rush him to prepare his destruction and keep 2 untapped vampires. I destroy one war ghoul and one vampire (Stephane have then 2 ready vampire and 2 war ghouls) i have to hope Jeff have some untap in hand. And he doesn't untap. After in the duel i'm lucky to draw one concealed weapon and one .44 magnum and i can ousted Steph in the next 3 round with fame. But renemeber i've used all my vampire. With a bleeding predator i have died before killing Steph. Second thing, i have to maximize my chance to win and like Jeff don't want to negociate with me i have more chance if he is ousted. In other way i'm the only player who can kick the war ghoul's ass of my prey but no one want to deal with me to lower pression on me and give me the opportunity to kill him. In fact all the other deck (expect perhaps for the Brujah deck) can't make cross table action, they are limited to bleed their preys and kill them. And i've to stay alive first. Perhaps Vtes, for you, resumes to a kill your prey and don't see the table Then if you think that continue to play bleed and steath deck and . But perhaps you prefere to see in others guys cheater cause you just don't want them to won or don't try to understand their choise. By the way the italian player pass all the final to defend agaisnt my prey, is-it a collusion to see Jeff win the game? Perhaps i'm not the most experienced player in the world but not a beginner. And not really a lucky guy. In fact the difference is in the national metagame and the resulting tunnel effect vision (therory from a canadian player). I think someone could open a new thread to discute that point. To conclude i have to say that some have think we'll colluse because were french and friends, but this one have forgotten two things: first i'm playing to win and i don't have made such a long distance and leave my wife and my son for tourism and for help friends to win. Secondly Steph is the first french player and i was third and it was a realy great and symbolical occasion to change that. Thanks for reading this long and boring post and sorry for my poor english ;-) . I'll post a another one to give my good impressions about organisation and players, because it was for me a great moment except for this final and when i'm reading some post i still have a bitter taste in my mouth. Jean-Noel Jourdan, Tremere Archon Vekn Paris "Damnans" <damna...@ono.com> a écrit dans le message news: 3DECC209...@ono.com... [ quoted text not captured ]

"Carl Pilhatsch" <carl.pi...@chello.at> wrote in message news:3DECCD22...@chello.at... > > The official take on this topic is as follows: > > The VEKN penalty guidelines are quite clear regarding the case when a decklist > does not match the main deck. Game loss. > It was decided that a game loss in this situation was not desireable As the judge of a MAJOR tournament every year, I'd like to know more about the conditions that made it undesirable to issue the appropriate penalty in this case. If you want to email me privately, Carl, that's cool. I just feel like I should know what these circumstances are in case they happen to me when I'm running 30+ player national tournaments. > and the > penalty was downgraded to a "severe warning" - meaning the next simple warning > would be upgraded to disqualification and forfeiting any prizes. > > > Carl Pilhatsch > (EC head judge) Kevin M. "Know your enemy, and know yourself; in one-thousand battles you shall never be in peril." -- Sun Tzu, *The Art of War* "Contentment... Complacency... Catastrophe!" -- Joseph Chevalier

"Kevin M." <you...@imaspammer.org> wrote in message news:S3gH9.4267$Xb3.3...@news1.west.cox.net... > > "Carl Pilhatsch" <carl.pi...@chello.at> wrote in message > news:3DECCD22...@chello.at... > > > > The official take on this topic is as follows: > > > > The VEKN penalty guidelines are quite clear regarding the case when a > > decklist does not match the main deck. Game loss. > > It was decided that a game loss in this situation was not desireable > > As the judge of a MAJOR tournament every year, I'd like to know more about the > conditions that made it undesirable to issue the appropriate penalty in this > case. Trying to keep this as abstract as possible and without going into the details of this specific judge's decision, I'd guess that the judges didn't see that it was "undesireable to issue the appropriate penalty" but rather that the guideline was deemed "undesireable" and what he/they saw as the "appropriate" penalty was issued instead. I suppose a big reason for decklists is for the purpose of ensuring that players aren't modifying their decks between rounds. With that in mind, some of the things *I*, personally, would consider would be: 1) Is the variation significant? If the decklist listed 79 cards and there were actually 80 and the one missing card turned out to be a 20th Weather Control, I might consider the variation insignificant. 2) My personal judging history dealing with that player. Have I found them to be dishonest in the past? 3) Missing/Extra cards? Is it the type of card that get's played on another player like "Pulled Fangs" which can easily be forgotten or accidentally passed between players? 4) Were players asked to bring decklists to the event or was it a last-minute judging request? 5) ???? Personally, I had something similar happen at a sealed deck event once where a player "accidentally" mixed in some cards from his pocket that he had earlier traded for. This looked really bad. I felt pretty comfortable that it was an honest mistake but it looked so horrible. He told me exactly what had been in his pocked and I found all of the cards in the deck. Fortunately, a few of the cards included were obviously not intended to be in there (wrong clan requirements, etc.) so that confirmed my guess of an honest mistake. I let him keep playing with some significant penalty imposed but it was short of a "GAME LOSS". -Robert

"Jourdan Jean-Noel" <jnjo...@free.fr> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:asjb5j$7r3$1...@news-reader11.wanadoo.fr... > ( this post was originaly a response for anarch troublemacker so excuse the > agressive style of the beginning) > > You speak about bullshit but you do the same thing when speak about a french > help in final. > well first i was not aggressive. second, dear jourdan i am not the only one who got that impression that you helped your friend in the finals. i just was the first to mention it and was backed up by quite a few posts. your comments about the wrong decklist? i heard from the judges that in your case i was more than a card involved. by the way the french were not disqualified because the 6 and 7 placed players where austrians and if carl would have rightfully disqualified you two then there would have beeen more lies and false rumour spread by reyda and others. proc_F (formerly the anarch troublemaker) t

"Robert Goudie" <rrgo...@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:FZgH9.3294$kz2.3...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net... > "Kevin M." <you...@imaspammer.org> wrote in message > news:S3gH9.4267$Xb3.3...@news1.west.cox.net... > > > > "Carl Pilhatsch" <carl.pi...@chello.at> wrote in message > > news:3DECCD22...@chello.at... > > > > > > The official take on this topic is as follows: > > > > > > The VEKN penalty guidelines are quite clear regarding the case when a > > > decklist does not match the main deck. Game loss. > > > It was decided that a game loss in this situation was not desireable > > > > As the judge of a MAJOR tournament every year, I'd like to know more about the > > conditions that made it undesirable to issue the appropriate penalty in this > > case. > > Trying to keep this as abstract as possible and without going into the details > of this specific judge's decision, I'd guess that the judges didn't see that it > was "undesireable to issue the appropriate penalty" but rather that the > guideline was deemed "undesireable" and what he/they saw as the "appropriate" > penalty was issued instead. > > I suppose a big reason for decklists is for the purpose of ensuring that players > aren't modifying their decks between rounds. "A big reason"? What else could it POSSIBLY be? The main thing that bothers me about this whole situation, all of which I know of via newsgroup information, mind you, is that someone made the decision to have people write down their decklists, and then that someone proceeded to show all the players that they really just wanted to WASTE everyone's time by not enforcing the very reason decklists are to be used in the first place. Ya ya ya they are "guidelines", not "rules" blah blah blah. You don't think that the next time that certain someone runs a tournament and asks everyone to submit deck lists, that the FIRST thing that will come to player's minds is how badly THIS situation was handled? How they are just being asked to waste their time AGAIN, since they all know that they stand a good chance of NOT being disciplined in any meaningful way? How this might influence some players to cheat? The Guidelines have obviously become dated and need to be formalized. > With that in mind, some of the things *I*, personally, would consider would be: > > 1) Is the variation significant? If the decklist listed 79 cards and there > were actually 80 and the one missing card turned out to be a 20th Weather > Control, I might consider the variation insignificant. If we ever want VTES to be any kind of popular, nationally known, *majorly successful* ccg, we have to *continue* to take the game seriously. (If you are one of those people who would prefer that the game never become popular, I'd prefer that you don't join in on this thread.) White Wolf already still doesn't take the issue of misprints seriously, and that single issue has kept at least one potential player I encountered from trying out the game. He stated to me that he wasn't willing to invest money in a game that is OK with all the misprints, and then just blows off their players by directing them to a website for the real card text. I'm not to that state... yet... but all the misprints can make it LOOK like WW doesn't *really* care about the product. I'd love to work for White Wolf in the capacity of Manager of Popularity. That would be an awesome job. It's definately something that WW could use a bit of help with, and I *want* this game to become intensely popular. If you're going to have rules, enforce them. If you're going to have penalties, use them. Yes, I realize that they are called the GUIDELINES, but they shouldn't be. They should be The Rules(tm). > 2) My personal judging history dealing with that player. Have I found them to > be dishonest in the past? If the rules are to subjective rather than objective, don't count on anyone ever being able to consistently enfore any rules. Also, make sure that you have plenty of time to devote to the infinite numbers of situations you'll have to put down to paper and send to every judge, so that they can make the right decision. Sound ridiculous? Alternative: play by The Rules(tm). Players know what to expect, and act accordingly. Judges know what to do, in which situation, and how to handle it, each and EVERY time. Potential players see that the game has a solid base of rule and law, they easily know what they can and cannot do, and they feel like they can simply pick up a pack or two of cards and start playing with their friends. I know of no other ccg that demands you have access to the internet to be playing correctly. And please don't be so naive as to say that you don't need to be able to go to the WW webpage or read this newsgroup to be playing correctly. > 3) Missing/Extra cards? Is it the type of card that get's played on another > player like "Pulled Fangs" which can easily be forgotten or accidentally passed > between players? Moot. See above. > 4) Were players asked to bring decklists to the event or was it a last-minute > judging request? What difference does that make? It's maybe 5-10 minutes to write down your decklist. It's just another thing that gets factored into the time it takes to play in the tournament. If players find it difficult to write down their deck lists, maybe they are thinking too much about cheating, else WHY are pre-tournament decklists used??? > Personally, I had something similar happen at a sealed deck event once where a > player "accidentally" mixed in some cards from his pocket that he had earlier > traded for. This looked really bad. I felt pretty comfortable that it was an > honest mistake but it looked so horrible. He told me exactly what had been in > his pocked and I found all of the cards in the deck. Fortunately, a few of the > cards included were obviously not intended to be in there (wrong clan > requirements, etc.) so that confirmed my guess of an honest mistake. I let him > keep playing with some significant penalty imposed but it was short of a "GAME > LOSS". I ask you: if our game is GOOD, and we have people play by The Rules(tm), and ONE TIME a really bad mistake made by the player screws him over, do you think he'll abandon the game? If he's any kind of reasonable individual, he'll deal with it and keep with the game. And more importantly: he won't make the same mistake again. If he's unreasonable, he was probably trying to cheat, realizes he can't get away with it in this game (since we play by The Rules(tm)), and will move on to something else. > > -Robert [ quoted text not captured ]

> If we ever want VTES to be any kind of popular, nationally known, *majorly > successful* ccg, we have to *continue* to take the game seriously. (If you > are one of those people who would prefer that the game never become popular, > I'd prefer that you don't join in on this thread.) I join anyway. VTES is allready popular, at least here in Europe (Hey, we had the biggest VTES tournament ever :-)). And it is popular for one reason : It is not the 2nd Magic: The Gathering. In VTES tournaments there aren't 100+ nerds hammering on each other for big prize money. The players play it for fun. The good use of their mostly rare spare time in fun games is more important than the competition. Read Jeroen´s private EC report about that. I agree with you that WW needs to take the game more seriously. But they allready made some changes and I believe that the situation will improve in the next time. Big things dont happen in days, give it some time. About Carl´s decision : It was a good decision. How come that some people from some thousand miles away start arguing about it without knowing one of the persons involved in the whole situation. If you ever played a game with Stephane Lavrut you would not think a single second that he is a cheater (I do not believe that of anybody without rocksolid proof anyway). And the error in the decklist (that was not made clear in this thread) was done by correcting the printed out list before! the tournament with a pen and writing one number one line too low. Most of the people on the spot agreed to the judging and I do NOT think anyone of them will try to cheat in the future. Probably the timing of Carl´s announcements about the situation was not very perfect, but the situation was a "first timer" to him and it was allready late in the evening. Again, if anything had been shady or not correct I think LSJ would have intervented. Again big applause to Carl and his organizational crew for making this event happen. CU all next year, and hopefully even more people from the new world show up. Johannes Walch V:EKN Germany see my report @ http://www.vekn.de/tournaments/pastresults/ec2002

> Unfourtenately some proposed deals were on the wrong side of the limit > of being merely innovative interpretations of the rules. I simply don't > want to hear "I only need (insert less than gamewin) to make (insert any > out of game goal)." during a tournament. Especially not an international > one. > In this case I'm the one who's doing the slander and my wife is the one > who got really pissed off but satisfied by complaining to me afterwards. I know what you are speaking of. I was in this particular game (the predator of concerned "i only need"). However, as long as no one pays attention to such proposed deals, i don't really care. Me, i made 2 deals at the beginning of the game, and both had nothing to do with any standings in the tournament. Then i just watched the others trying to make deals of all sorts (the game really went like 5 minutes playing and 10 minutes dealing, followed by 5 minutes playing etc etc etc...) In the end the game ran out of time, leaving me with 2.5 VP's and a gamewin. btw: My name is Sascha Holdmann

Angus, the Unruled wrote: > really went like 5 minutes playing and 10 minutes dealing, followed by > 5 minutes playing etc etc etc...) > > In the end the game ran out of time, leaving me with 2.5 VP's and a > gamewin. > *grin* Yep, we're not used to the intense dealmakings. At a few times it really felt like Vampire: The Eternal Haggle :) A stark contrast was the danish qualifier where during the three prelims 9 out of 12 tables were finished in less than 40 minutes. All in all it's probably an aspect of the game that we from the north will simply have to master. Another surprising thing was the large amount of allies. Most players here don't bring allies to a gunfight. Last time I saw a War Ghoul in Sweden I had one of my minions rush it. Sten During

Proc_F wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] Ok, I think this has gone on far too long. The event has happened, penalties have been issued and the game was played then and there. There has been no call for collusion from one of the judges, just a minor caution, and that's all. Let's leave this behind. I believe that nobody here in this thread is a racist, nationalist or anything else along this line. The EC weekend was a fine high-class event and I thank all the players for taking part and *having fun*! Carl (EC chief organisator)

[ quoted text not captured ] There was a lot of arguing about this, and believe me french people can also understand german, most of us studied it at school. Some of us keep a clear memory of what was said openly in german by some players and judges.

Sten During wrote: || Yep, we're not used to the intense dealmakings. At a few times it || really felt like Vampire: The Eternal Haggle :) It was the former specialty of UK / US players. Now european people are also dealing like clockers. || Another surprising thing was the large amount of allies. Most || players here don't bring allies to a gunfight. Last time I saw a || War Ghoul in Sweden I had one of my minions rush it. War ghouls are immune to Obedience, do not fear the "grapple", are not disturbed by aggravated pokes, can rush anyone without a bum's rush. They are perfect for munching those inner circles =)

reyda wrote: > > War ghouls are immune to Obedience, do not fear the "grapple", are not > disturbed by aggravated pokes, can rush anyone without a bum's rush. They > are perfect for munching those inner circles =) > > Yup, but as we've just ended a more than six month long period of seeing several long-range multidamage decks in each tournaments players have been understandably wary about fielding fragile allies. Decks without long-range capacity have either been S:CE or attempts to get back to close in order to get their potence-machinery flying. Hmm, Archie did play an Inner Circle :) Bad Archie *grin*. Noone, repeat noone, likes Gwendolyn. Nasty boy making her playable :) Sten During

Carl Pilhatsch wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] Hm, yes, I'm still waiting reyda. What for? Carl

"Kevin M." wrote: > > "Carl Pilhatsch" <carl.pi...@chello.at> wrote in message > news:3DECCD22...@chello.at... > > > > The official take on this topic is as follows: > > > > The VEKN penalty guidelines are quite clear regarding the case when a > decklist > > does not match the main deck. Game loss. > > It was decided that a game loss in this situation was not desireable > > As the judge of a MAJOR tournament every year, I'd like to know more about the > conditions that made it undesirable to issue the appropriate penalty in this > case. One argument would be that the mistake was discovered between games, not in the middle of a game. In the middle of a game, the error is nearly impossible to correct and therefore game loss is recommended. Between games, the error is much easier to correct. [ quoted text not captured ]

[ quoted text not captured ] other testimonies =) be patient ;)

reyda wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] No, not really. This looks like you desperately *want* to accuse someone of doing something somewhat wrong at some certain event. What's your point? You were the one who started this all I believe - but what are the motives behind this all? You just keep saying "please wait a bit " but all I can see is that those false rumours have been indeed *false*. Why keep on beating a dead horse? Why waiting for "other testimonies"? You could have been a testimony if you really had wanted to - it's not that hard to attend an international event abroad, it's normally announced waaaaaay ahead of time. You don't believe us Austrians. Fine. But you don't event believe non-Austrtian that have attended this years EC. Can't you just admit that you let yourself be drawn into some rumour-milling. As someone pointed out: an apology would be in order - not to me, but to all those who worked very hard to make this event happen and to ensure that the vast majority of the players had a lot of fun there. I don't mean to make you look bad or something, I just want this finally put to rest, so we can move on to more interesting topics. Agreed? Carl

"reyda" <true_...@hotmail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:3dede8dc$0$29699$79c1...@nan-newsreader-02.noos.net... > Some of us keep a clear memory of what was said openly in german by some > players and judges. > so please tell us what was said? proc_F >

Carl Pilhatsch wrote: || No, not really. This looks like you desperately *want* to accuse || someone of doing something somewhat wrong at some certain event. || What's your point? I don't doubt this was a well organized event, much kudos for you. || - but what are the motives behind this all? I heard complaints from my mates i couldn't tolerate. Some weird thinkgs happened, and they have to be told. Nothing personal, i don't even know you =p || You just keep saying "please wait a bit " yes because it takes time to make them say it in english, most of them are not very fluent in english,some other posted it on a french forum and don't have the time to translate it right away. Jean noel is the only one to have posted this far, because his baby prevents him from sleeping ;) I was trying to help him for the translation but he was too tired and posted his comment with lots a mistakes as you may have noticed. I know every player who went there,play with them regularly and never heard them complain so loudly. Some of them were outraged by the collusion assertion, some others by the ridiculous way to handle the seatings on the second day : they had constently players from the same country on the same table because of the strange seating, some had the same prey/predator position,which obviously should not be the case (archaon's fault?). Some complained about some decision, like the way. Even mundane things like distributing tee shirts to the austrian players first were not really smart. Some judge didn't knew how to handle the 8th card on a "delaying tactics" and shuffled it in the voter's deck. For the final "decklist" incident, if Stephane and Jean noel were not eliminated from the tournament it's because stephane understands german and heard you talking about it " being a good move to ditch the two visitors off the finals", then he argued to stay and play. Was he not in the direct vicinity of the judges, the two may have been eliminated anyway. Seriously, why on earth is the guy behind the computer checking the decklist one of the finalists ? why don't you chose someone who is not qualified to handle this ? don't you think it can be suspicious ? || Why waiting for "other testimonies"? Because when something is good, it's great to say it. When something is bad, it's important to point it too. || You don't believe us Austrians. I believe you to a certain extent, but crying collusion is easy when you're not seated at a table playing the game of the year, desperatly hoping not to be ousted like a dork. || Can't you just admit that you let yourself be drawn || into some rumour-milling. I don't think this is rumour milling, else i wouldn't post here. I beleive the people i play with =) || As someone pointed out: an apology would || be in order - not to me, but to all those who worked very hard to || make this event happen and to ensure that the vast majority of the || players had a lot of fun there. The vast majority of the players had fun, so, much credit to you. This doesn't exclude some regrettable things happened. And for the apology, no =) I was also quick to criticize the french EC about the over-picky judges (even if organized by people i know), so more credits to me too. || I just want this finally put to rest, so we can move || on to more interesting topics. Agreed? || || Carl After all why not ? If the other french players are not bold enough or are too lazy to express their thoughts i can't do it for them all the time =) with all the respect you deserved, reyda

Carl Pilhatsch wrote: || just want this finally put to rest, so we can move || on to more interesting topics. Agreed? Can you give me an explanation on this : Why did the whole things i posted on WW's forum suddenly disappeared after your intervention, Carl ? am i so annoying to you ? why did you replaced my answers with yours ? Can i have a reason for that ? if you have nothing to hide, why make my posts vanish in the first place ? What kind of method is this ? after you answer this we'll move to some other topics. showing you less respect now, reyda

reyda wrote: > Carl Pilhatsch wrote: > > || You just keep saying "please wait a bit " > > yes because it takes time to make them say it in english, most of them are > not very fluent in english,some other posted it on a french forum and don't > have the time to translate it right away. Jean noel is the only one to have > posted this far, because his baby prevents him from sleeping ;) He did express his points well enough. :) > > I was trying to help him for the translation but he was too tired and posted > his comment with lots a mistakes as you may have noticed. > No, it was quite good to read, the mistakes did not detract from the points he wanted to make. > > I know every player who went there,play with them regularly and never heard > them complain so loudly. Some of them were outraged by the collusion > assertion, Which happens in almost every major event, and which is highly subjective. The nature of collusion is that it is not openly discernible, right? Jean Noel was cautioned to play more towards his own VPs, and that was all about it. There was no call for collusion. For Alex (judge) it was quite possible (after looking at Jean's hand) that he *might* have been able to kill off *all* minions of Stephane, his hand was quite good at that moment. In this situation, everything was possible, Lasombra might even have agreed to some sort of deal just to be kept in the game, Jean didn't try. Stephane wasn't prepared for long range combat, and the War Ghouls would have been no match for the Brujah. Really not. > some others by the ridiculous way to handle the seatings on the > second day : they had constently players from the same country on the same > table because of the strange seating, some had the same prey/predator > position,which obviously should not be the case (archaon's fault?). Yeah, there were problems with the Archon. They were solved as best as possible, and all tables where the exact same prey-predator relationship occurred the seating was changed. If they didn't say anything - then we are not to be held responsible. Sorry. > Some > complained about some decision, like the way. Even mundane things like > distributing tee shirts to the austrian players first were not really smart. Excuse me? The T-Shirts were first distributed to the Princes who held their national qualifiers and were present. After that we handed them out to whomever stepped forward first, as long as he had qualified in the Austrian qualifier. > > For the final "decklist" incident, if Stephane and Jean noel were not > eliminated from the tournament it's because stephane understands german and > heard you talking about it " being a good move to ditch the two visitors off > the finals", then he argued to stay and play. Was he not in the direct > vicinity of the judges, the two may have been eliminated anyway. Now this is great bullshit. I never *ever* would considering such a move just to remove "visitors". It also wouldn't have mattered, as there was clearly a violation of the tournament rules. The decklists did not match the main decks. No way arguing that away. It was coincidence that it happened to both French players in the final, and that each had exactly one card less *and* one card too many of two certain types in the deck. - I would have given them a game loss, if I hadn't remained calm and considered it carefully. I knew at this very point that the Austrian Nationals were tainted, no matter what decision was made. Also, I want to point out that Viennese is quite different to German and some words are very different here. :) > > Seriously, why on earth is the guy behind the computer checking the decklist > one of the finalists ? Walter didn't do that. > || Why waiting for "other testimonies"? > > Because when something is good, it's great to say it. When something is bad, > it's important to point it too. Right. But you have to agree that with all the fanfares and all the suspense you try to build up it's looking not like you just wanted to point things out so that we all learn from mistakes... don't you think so? > > || Can't you just admit that you let yourself be drawn > || into some rumour-milling. > > I don't think this is rumour milling, else i wouldn't post here. I beleive > the people i play with =) > > || As someone pointed out: an apology would > || be in order - not to me, but to all those who worked very hard to > || make this event happen and to ensure that the vast majority of the > || players had a lot of fun there. > > The vast majority of the players had fun, so, much credit to you. This > doesn't exclude some regrettable things happened. And for the apology, no =) > I was also quick to criticize the french EC about the over-picky judges > (even if organized by people i know), so more credits to me too. > No, I cannot in good faith let you get away with that. It was you who tried to let the EC organisatorial team appear in some bad light. As far as I remember, after last year's EC there have also been some rumours, and even though I didn't know Stephane personally at that time, I believed him and not those rumours. I still stand to this: you are the one who owes my team an apology for starting this campaign of rumour mongering unwarranted. > > If the other french players are not bold enough or are too lazy to express > their thoughts i can't do it for them all the time =) > By doing it for them you are distorting what may have been valid points (if there were some). This is what bothers me. You heard something and immediatly jumped on the train... > > with all the respect you deserved, > reyda The same, with all due respect, Carl

reyda wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] Careful now, reyda, you are on the verge of getting on my nerves, and *that* is not an easy thing to do as can be assured by various people on the NG. I'm *not* an employee of WW, and I have *no* saying about what is allowed in the forum and what is deleted. Honestly, I don't even remeber you posting there something long. I believe you posted something about "wait for the *big* news on the NG". Right? I don't need to have anything deleted, I can defy all the false accusations against the EC 2002, the team and myself. *You* are the one who is constantly trying to bring the efforts of the organisators down, even more aggravating because you were not even present! For someone who only heard things you are faaaaaaar to noisy. You are now directly attacking me, my credibility and my reputation, and I won't let you get away with that so easily. You can apologize and I will accept that and it won't stand between us, but you will have to admit that all your accusations are untrue. Carl

Carl Pilhatsch wrote: || reyda wrote: || ||| Carl Pilhatsch wrote: ||||| just want this finally put to rest, so we can move ||||| on to more interesting topics. Agreed? ||| ||| Can you give me an explanation on this : ||| ||| Why did the whole things i posted on WW's forum suddenly ||| disappeared after your intervention, Carl ? am i so annoying to ||| you ? why did you replaced my answers with yours ? Can i have a ||| reason for that ? if you have nothing to hide, why make my posts ||| vanish in the first place ? What kind of method is this ? ||| ||| after you answer this we'll move to some other topics. ||| ||| showing you less respect now, ||| reyda || || Careful now, reyda, you are on the verge of getting on my nerves, || and *that* is not an easy thing to do as can be assured by various || people on the NG. First of all i don't fear you. i don't fear your friends. I spit on your threats. I'm a grown adult and i don't like your methods. || I'm *not* an employee of WW, and I have *no* || saying about what is allowed in the forum and what is deleted. Then why were my *innocuous* posts deleted the minute you posted yours ? why did you rush to defend your organisation the second you saw a player complain about the organisation ? || Honestly, I don't even remeber you posting there something long. Which is true. But hey, how do you knwo that ? You track and take notes about every poster on this WW forum ? Or do you have access to some data which we are not aware of ? || I believe you posted something about "wait for the *big* news on the || NG". Right? I don't need to have anything deleted, I can defy all || the false accusations against the EC 2002, the team and myself. You saw my post. You answered. Now my post it not there anymore. I want an explanation. It has nothing to do with the EC this time (see the previous post), now IT IS BETWEEN YOU AND ME. || You are now directly attacking me, my credibility and my || reputation, and I won't let you get away with that so easily. Tell me why all my posts (even those including answer on rules questions) were deleted. Is this what we call in french "intervention divine" ? || You can apologize and I will accept that and it won't stand between || us, but you will have to admit that all your accusations are || untrue. NEVER, EVER. Now i will reconsider all the things i heard about you. Maybe they are true, after all.

Okay, a lot here I could say things about... but I'll cut to the chase, and just comment on the two core problems. reyda wrote: > Carl Pilhatsch wrote: > || You don't believe us Austrians. > > I believe you to a certain extent, but crying collusion Let me rephrase that for Carl: You do not believe Carl - or anyone else from Austria - when they tell you you accusations against the Austrians in general and Walter Paolini are unfounded, while at the same time demanding your and your friends' denial of the collusion accusation of two French players be believed. Is that not right? [btw, Carl did not, apparently, think there was collusion involved. If he had, they'd have been off the tourney that very moment. Head organizer and judge, you know.] > || As someone pointed out: an apology would > || be in order - not to me, but to all those who worked very hard to > || make this event happen and to ensure that the vast majority of the > || players had a lot of fun there. > > The vast majority of the players had fun, so, much credit to you. This > doesn't exclude some regrettable things happened. And for the apology, > no =) > I was also quick to criticize the french EC about the over-picky judges > (even if organized by people i know), so more credits to me too. > If I had critizized last year's EC based on hearsay after not having been there myself, what would your reaction have been? Answer in all honesty, and you'll know why everyone has been flying in your face for your accusations. And yes, an apology would be in order. Thomas Pichler

This will do, Reyda! I ask you to sleep a night over your posts and try to get a less emotional view of things. Carl can do nothing about the WW forum, even if he wants to. If your contributions to the newsgroup resemble the style and level of your current posts here, it surely doesn't take a Carl Pilhatsch to delete them... next to every random mod will do. Sascha Neumayr Prince of Wels

>> I suppose a big reason for decklists is for the purpose of ensuring that >players >> aren't modifying their decks between rounds. > >"A big reason"? What else could it POSSIBLY be? The main thing that bothers >me about this whole situation, all of which I know of via newsgroup >information, mind you, is that someone made the decision to have people write >down their decklists, and then that someone proceeded to show all the players >that they really just wanted to WASTE everyone's time by not enforcing the >very reason decklists are to be used in the first place. Was there a decklist form or did people just write them on blank paper? >> With that in mind, some of the things *I*, personally, would consider would >be: >> >> 1) Is the variation significant? If the decklist listed 79 cards and >there >> were actually 80 and the one missing card turned out to be a 20th Weather >> Control, I might consider the variation insignificant. > >If we ever want VTES to be any kind of popular, nationally known, *majorly >successful* ccg, we have to *continue* to take the game seriously. Note that in Magic, a game loss can be recovered from. Also, it doesn't screw up seating tables. A proper remedy might be to take away VPs, change someone's seeding, or the like as funky as those could get. >White Wolf already still doesn't take the issue of misprints seriously, and >that single issue has kept at least one potential player I encountered from >trying out the game. He stated to me that he wasn't willing to invest money >in a game that is OK with all the misprints, and then just blows off their >players by directing them to a website for the real card text. Which CCGs don't have this problem? I can't think of any. >If you're going to have rules, enforce them. If you're going to have >penalties, use them. Yes, I realize that they are called the GUIDELINES, but >they shouldn't be. They should be The Rules(tm). Because blindly enforcing rules is just? >> 3) Missing/Extra cards? Is it the type of card that get's played on >another >> player like "Pulled Fangs" which can easily be forgotten or accidentally >passed >> between players? > >Moot. See above. There are numerous CCGs where you don't have multiple opponents and don't play cards on your opponents' cards, removing much of the opportunity for this sort of thing. Now, it might be a good thing to punish people for not recovering their cards as it encourages everyone to be more diligent about it - it's kind of annoying to lose a Disarm from one's collection. >> 4) Were players asked to bring decklists to the event or was it a >last-minute >> judging request? > >What difference does that make? It's maybe 5-10 minutes to write down your >decklist. It's just another thing that gets factored into the time it takes >to play in the tournament. The process of writing out decklists takes longer. For one thing, people screw them up all of the time. One person redoing a decklist "doubles" the time it takes. >If players find it difficult to write down their deck lists, maybe they are >thinking too much about cheating, else WHY are pre-tournament decklists >used??? Difficult probably isn't the word. But, it's far more important to be accurate than quick which slows people down. Besides, it's tedious. >I ask you: if our game is GOOD, and we have people play by The Rules(tm), and >ONE TIME a really bad mistake made by the player screws him over, do you >think >he'll abandon the game? If he's any kind of reasonable individual, he'll >deal >with it and keep with the game. And more importantly: he won't make the same >mistake again. If he's unreasonable, he was probably trying to cheat, >realizes he can't get away with it in this game (since we play by The >Rules(tm)), and will move on to something else. Well, there's another side to this. Where's the balance between preventing cheating and making a tournament casual player friendly. I could see some folks not wanting to go through the rigmarole because they aren't there to compete so much as play more. A player well familiar with the rules may be both less likely to produce infractions and be more likely to take penalties in stride realizing that they could have been avoided with greater diligence. Thing is I can't get that excited about any multiplayer CCG being taken as seriously as a two player CCG. The two really aren't that similar due to player personality and the ability of player cooperation. Put another way, IMO, only two player CCGs can be fair. Rather than enlarge the stick, I prefer cutting up the carrot to discourage people from putting so much emphasis on winning that cheating is considered.

"Curevei" <cur...@aol.commetal> wrote in message news:20021204131002...@mb-mt.aol.com > >> I suppose a big reason for decklists is for the > >> purpose of ensuring that players aren't modifying > >> their decks between rounds. > >"A big reason"? What else could it POSSIBLY be? The main thing that bothers > >me about this whole situation, all of which I know of via newsgroup > >information, mind you, is that someone made the decision to have people write > >down their decklists, and then that someone proceeded to show all the players > >that they really just wanted to WASTE everyone's time by not enforcing the > >very reason decklists are to be used in the first place. > Was there a decklist form or did people just write them on blank paper? There was a deck list form. Many people brought theirs in pre-printed from ELDB or from a spreadsheet type of program. Carpe noctem. Lasombra http://www.TheLasombra.com -- Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

"reyda" <true_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:3dee2d6c$0$20269$79c1...@nan-newsreader-01.noos.net > First of all i don't fear you. i don't fear your friends. I spit on your > threats. I'm a grown adult and i don't like your methods. I'd start acting like one if I were you. Maybe you're upset or something because you didn't show up and see for yourself what happened, I don't know and I don't care. Please either apologise and shut up or just shut up. You are now pushing the borders of the argument, and you are getting really insulting, a sure sign of the losing side of a discussion > NEVER, EVER. > Now i will reconsider all the things i heard about you. Maybe they are true, > after all. The toys have been thrown well and truly out of the pram haven't they? Time to quit Redya, whilst you are behind. JK [ quoted text not captured ]

John Keech wrote: :: "reyda" <true_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message :: news:3dee2d6c$0$20269$79c1...@nan-newsreader-01.noos.net :: ::: First of all i don't fear you. i don't fear your friends. I spit ::: on your threats. I'm a grown adult and i don't like your methods. :: :: I'd start acting like one if I were you. Maybe you're upset or :: something because you didn't show up and see for yourself what :: happened Thank you, i had a *wonderful* report of this final from Jean noel, since you were his predator your vision may be different actually. Are you sure you're not the one talking out of spite ? :: I don't know and I don't care. Please either apologise :: and shut up or just shut up. you bet i will =p :: You are now pushing the borders of :: the argument, and you are getting really insulting, a sure sign of :: the losing side of a discussion no, no, as you can notice the post i wrote this afternoon was quite conciliant, and i was eager to leave the subject where we left it since none of my mates are back to work and don't have the courage to answer with *synergy*, or the will to act all together. Maybe it's not even worth it. If for you a forum is a place where everyone talks about how cool the world is and how fine the game is, and other auto/mutual-congratulation stuff we don't have the same definition of what a forum is. ::: NEVER, EVER. ::: Now i will reconsider all the things i heard about you. Maybe ::: they are true, after all. :: :: The toys have been thrown well and truly out of the pram haven't :: they? Time to quit Redya, whilst you are behind. Absolutely not. Arguing about the EC is one thing, seeing my posts from WW forum deleted is another one. I'm not crying to create some diversion from the main subject, else i would not post here in the first place. I wanted from the beginning to gather the complaints i heard, as shown in the posts i put in the WW forum. I'm still waiting for an explanation about that. It's that simple. And john, if you don't like me, i'm fine with it. Just block send me. reyda

"reyda" <true_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<3dee2d6c$0$20269$79c1...@nan-newsreader-01.noos.net>... [ quoted text not captured ] Getting paranoid, huh?

"Kevin M." <you...@imaspammer.org> wrote in message news:ihjH9.6347$Xb3.3...@news1.west.cox.net... > "Robert Goudie" <rrgo...@earthlink.net> wrote in message > > I suppose a big reason for decklists is for the purpose of ensuring that > > players aren't modifying their decks between rounds. > > "A big reason"? What else could it POSSIBLY be? Just trying to leave wiggle room in case I think of some additional reasons. :) > Ya ya ya they are "guidelines", not "rules" blah blah blah. Don't get me wrong. I am a big fan of playing "by the rules". Locally, we are known for being very strict (probably even overly strict). In fact, I'm a fan of playing by *all* of the rules, "including" the rules that say that the judges can use their judgment with respect to the appropriate penalty for tournament violations. > You don't think > that the next time that certain someone runs a tournament and asks everyone to > submit deck lists, that the FIRST thing that will come to player's minds is > how badly THIS situation was handled? How they are just being asked to waste > their time AGAIN, since they all know that they stand a good chance of NOT > being disciplined in any meaningful way? How this might influence some > players to cheat? > The Guidelines have obviously become dated and need to be formalized. They formally allow the judges to use their judgment and modify penalties. > If we ever want VTES to be any kind of popular, nationally known, *majorly > successful* ccg, we have to *continue* to take the game seriously. (If you > are one of those people who would prefer that the game never become popular, > I'd prefer that you don't join in on this thread.) Of course. However, I don't equate judges making judgment calls as "not serious" and it certainly doesn't equate to a game that cannot be popular or nationally known. Don't forget, these penalty guidelines were taken directly from the DCI's penalty guidelines. I am aware of at least one Pro Tour event where judges have strayed from the baseline penalties in the DCI's guidelines. That games also seems to be doing OK with respect to notariety. :) > If you're going to have rules, enforce them. It sounds like the rules against incorrect decklists was enforced... > If you're going to have penalties, use them. ...and a penalty was issued. > Yes, I realize that they are called the GUIDELINES, but > they shouldn't be. They should be The Rules(tm). I'm thrilled you take the rules so seriously. I just don't see judgment calls or penalties that can be adjusted by the judge as being antithetical to playing by The Rules(tm). > > 2) My personal judging history dealing with that player. Have I found them > > to be dishonest in the past? > > If the rules are to subjective rather than objective, don't count on anyone > ever being able to consistently enforce any rules. Also, make sure that you > have plenty of time to devote to the infinite numbers of situations you'll > have to put down to paper and send to every judge, so that they can make the > right decision. I don't believe it is possible to have fair rules that take the subjectivity out of judging. Judges will always have to use their subjective judgment. For example, the issue of stalling is best handled by a judge who can take all the factors into account and use his judgment to determine if someone is stalling. This judgment cannot fairly be replaced by, for example, a time limit of X minutes per turn. Collusion, bribery, unsportsmanlike behavior, foul language, deal-making, stalling, slow play, cards below the table, cards viewed while shuffling, etc. etc. all require judgment calls. I suspect that you are a good judge because people value your judgement and trust that you have integrity and will run a fair event--not just that you are a walking rulebook. -Robert Robert Goudie Chairman, V:EKN rob...@vtesinla.org

Angus, the Unruled wrote: :: Getting paranoid, huh? i am not the one menacing a usenet user =)

reyda wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] Firstly: nobody threatened you. Secondly: you are the one resorting to threats and other non-friendly behaviour. Carl

reyda wrote: > John Keech wrote: > :: "reyda" <true_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message > :: news:3dee2d6c$0$20269$79c1...@nan-newsreader-01.noos.net > :: > ::: First of all i don't fear you. i don't fear your friends. I spit > ::: on your threats. I'm a grown adult and i don't like your methods. > :: > :: I'd start acting like one if I were you. Maybe you're upset or > :: something because you didn't show up and see for yourself what > :: happened > > Thank you, i had a *wonderful* report of this final from Jean noel, since > you were his predator your vision may be different actually. Are you sure > you're not the one talking out of spite ? I'm quite sure John is not acting out of spite - he doesn't strike me as someone who wouldn't need to be bitter as he enjoyed himself immensely at the EC weekend. > > > :: I don't know and I don't care. Please either apologise > :: and shut up or just shut up. > > you bet i will =p > > :: You are now pushing the borders of > :: the argument, and you are getting really insulting, a sure sign of > :: the losing side of a discussion > > no, no, as you can notice the post i wrote this afternoon was quite > conciliant Excuse me, but what do you consider "consiliant"? You were the one accusing me of deleting your posts on the WW forum without substantial proof, you were the one constantly trying to impute that this years EC was handled not correctly - this is insulting not only to me, but the *whole EC team* who worked extremely hard to make this event happen! > , and i was eager to leave the subject where we left it since none > of my mates are back to work and don't have the courage to answer with > *synergy*, or the will to act all together. So you finally admit that you wanted to have some kind of co-ordinated effort to put the EC 2002 in a bad light? Great. Great. > Maybe it's not even worth it. If > for you a forum is a place where everyone talks about how cool the world is > and how fine the game is, and other auto/mutual-congratulation stuff we > don't have the same definition of what a forum is. > Even in a forum you should not post blindly false accusations and you should not start insulting others based on some hearsay that may or may not be true. > > ::: NEVER, EVER. > ::: Now i will reconsider all the things i heard about you. Maybe > ::: they are true, after all. > :: > :: The toys have been thrown well and truly out of the pram haven't > :: they? Time to quit Redya, whilst you are behind. > > Absolutely not. Arguing about the EC is one thing, seeing my posts from WW > forum deleted is another one. You are the one mixing it all together. You are still short of giving me two apologies: one for accusing me personally of deleting your messages (which I don't even have remotely the power to do) *and* for putting my EC organisational and judge team in unwarranted under a bad light. > > I'm not crying to create some diversion from the main subject, else i would > not post here in the first place. I wanted from the beginning to gather the > complaints i heard, as shown in the posts i put in the WW forum. Are you jealous that the EC was not held somewhere near you? Or that it was apparently highly successful? Do you really believe that in any *huge* event there could possibly no errors at all? > > I'm still waiting for an explanation about that. It's that simple. > Perhaps someone from WW can shed some light here. > > And john, if you don't like me, i'm fine with it. Just block send me. > > reyda reyda, please calm down and re-read your posts. You are acting strangely. Carl

Carl Pilhatsch wrote: :: reyda wrote: ::: no, no, as you can notice the post i wrote this afternoon was ::: quite conciliant :: :: Excuse me, but what do you consider "consiliant"? You were the one :: accusing me of deleting your posts on the WW forum without :: substantial proof, you were the one constantly trying to impute :: that this years EC was handled not correctly - this is insulting :: not only to me, but the *whole EC team* who worked extremely hard :: to make this event happen! The final post i sent on this rainy afternoon was ending with this sentence : " You : || I just want this finally put to rest, so we can move || on to more interesting topics. Agreed? || || Carl Me : After all why not ? If the other french players are not bold enough or are too lazy to express their thoughts i can't do it for them all the time =) " Frankly I was on the verge of considering what my mates said like over-exageration after a harrassing and tiring tournament... Then, shortly after posting that, i went back to the WW forum and found that *all* my posts there simply vanished. I saw answers from you carl, right where my posts should be. So my reaction was like "if he has nothing to hide, why are my posts deleted ?" This coincidence was simply too gross. :: Are you jealous that the EC was not held somewhere near you? Or :: that it was apparently highly successful? Do you really believe :: that in any *huge* event there could possibly no errors at all? No because i like to travel a lot, i always have money for that, and I went to play in various countries, met really cool people while doing so. I don't want to discredit the whole EC team, because there is no doubt that this year's EC was a success, like last year's EC was, but there were some oddities, and they are to be pointed. Errors can occur, yes. Oddities raises suspicion, as you may well know. I propose you something : let's continue this on private mail, i'm sure other people are tired of this. Here is my mail carl : true_...@hotmail.com , write me if you have something to say about those deleted posts. (and no it's not my professional mail, sorry, this one is for chitchatting)

reyda wrote: > Frankly I was on the verge of considering what my mates said like > over-exageration after a harrassing and tiring tournament... Then, shortly > after posting that, i went back to the WW forum and found that *all* my > posts there simply vanished. I saw answers from you carl, right where my > posts should be. So my reaction was like "if he has nothing to hide, why are > my posts deleted ?" This coincidence was simply too gross. Carl doesn't have the power to remove your posts. While I do, I don't have the power to remove all of your posts en masse (and I didn't remove or even see the post in question). Likely what happened is that one or more of your posts violated the terms of use you agreed to every time you log in, and therefore some moderator removed your posts. But I couldn't say for sure, since I have no evidence of any of that activity recently. > :: Are you jealous that the EC was not held somewhere near you? Or > :: that it was apparently highly successful? Do you really believe > :: that in any *huge* event there could possibly no errors at all? > > No because i like to travel a lot, i always have money for that, and I went > to play in various countries, met really cool people while doing so. > I don't want to discredit the whole EC team, because there is no doubt that > this year's EC was a success, like last year's EC was, but there were some > oddities, and they are to be pointed. Errors can occur, yes. Oddities raises > suspicion, as you may well know. > > I propose you something : let's continue this on private mail, i'm sure > other people are tired of this. Here is my mail carl : > true_...@hotmail.com , write me if you have something to say about those > deleted posts. Why didn't you just email Carl directly? You have his email address. [ quoted text not captured ]

LSJ wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] This has been settled now, we have talked about in private, and reyda acknowledged that nothing of this mysterious post-disappearing happened due to my interventions or such. This has been solved peacefully. :) Carl

> > || Reyda, you are just plain wrong. The French players both had > > || incorrect deck lists. > The problem with a deck that doesn't match its deck list is that the changes > to the deck could have happened during the tournament. As I am sure you are > aware, it is illegal to change your deck during a tournament. That is why > deck lists are required. > > Did the French players change their decks? We don't know, but there is a > possibility since they don't match the decklists they brought. That is what > we Americans call "shady". It isn't bold face cheating, but it "smells like > something is rotten in Denmark." It is just not good for the game and it > make the tournament look unfair. The differences between the list of jean noel and his deck were : 6 blur instead 7 and 7 pursuit instead 6. Is it cheating ? Do you disqualify someone to such minor errors ???? The same about the judge who enter the results and prepare the seating order. It was in final, and i think it's forbidden by the vekn rules. This man was or was not an organizer ? If it was not, why does he enter the results ? If yes, he CANNOT enter the tournament... All the bullshit on collusion is that : bullshit from austrian guys. The lasombra have helped his predator at a moment. It's normal, because, it is game balancing. When Stanislava bleed you by 5 every turn, and your predator influence out dylan, and ingrid rsso, perhaps you want to defend yourselves, before rushing your prey... When you talk to your predator, and ask : "do you want to bleed me next turn, and he tells you "yes, i will" (sportmanlike conduct;-) jeff !!), you cannot go forward... If list were wrong why carl don't disqualify the two french ? If he saw such collusion you describe, why not disqualify the two french ? Stop that bullshit ! You (not only the guy i copy his messages) doesnt't there. Talk to TheLasombra, he was in the same game...

> > ||| Carl Pilhatsch wrote: > > ||||| just want this finally put to rest, so we can move > > ||||| on to more interesting topics. Agreed? Is the guy behind the computer was an organizer ? If not, why does he enter the results ? If yes, it's an obvious breach of vekn tournament rules. I think your way to organize a such event is an interesting topic. I have organize a national championship, three tourmants each gathering more than 40 people, and co organize a another national championship and a european championship. If you, vekn board director, do not respect the rules you contribute to install, i don' t see why another organizer have to do the same. I pass on your ridiculous mistake on the delayings tactics played and judged incorrectly in the final of the biggest event of the world. I pass on the ridiculous way you overcome the precedent results (convince two girls to participate after the first round...). I pass on the quite unfair reaction of one your referee ("Yeah !!!") when understanding that an austrian were in final. But i do not admit this major breach to happen without any reaction. Can you respond, please ? Thank you. Kamel SENNI, a.k.a. Kindred SPIRIT, for this marvelous world of Vampire...

"reyda" <true_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:3dee4e2d$0$17244$79c1...@nan-newsreader-03.noos.net > Thank you, i had a *wonderful* report of this final from Jean noel, since > you were his predator your vision may be different actually. Are you sure > you're not the one talking out of spite ? I read Jean Noels report too. You'll notice I haven't been slanging him about his game or the way he played. If I had a complaint, I should have uttered it at the time, when it would have done some good... Sorry, not acting out of spite. Notice I haven't been bandying wild accusations about. > no, no, as you can notice the post i wrote this afternoon was quite > conciliant, and i was eager to leave the subject where we left it since none > of my mates are back to work and don't have the courage to answer with > *synergy*, or the will to act all together. Maybe it's not even worth it. If > for you a forum is a place where everyone talks about how cool the world is > and how fine the game is, and other auto/mutual-congratulation stuff we > don't have the same definition of what a forum is. Conciliant? Where you spit on people? I can appreciate people get angry - I am quite a lot of the time, but not over a card game that happened over 1000km from where I was. I also think that you were out of line in your statements. The whole purpose of a forum is to have a discussion of the game, not a slanging match, which is what I have been dragged into much to my dismay. > :: The toys have been thrown well and truly out of the pram haven't > :: they? Time to quit Redya, whilst you are behind. > > Absolutely not. Arguing about the EC is one thing, seeing my posts from WW > forum deleted is another one. > I'm not crying to create some diversion from the main subject, else i would > not post here in the first place. I wanted from the beginning to gather the > complaints i heard, as shown in the posts i put in the WW forum. > I'm still waiting for an explanation about that. It's that simple. I am glad to notice that you and Carl have sorted things out. > And john, if you don't like me, i'm fine with it. Just block send me. > > reyda I don't hate you - I don't know you. I have no idea who you are, but in this instance I dislike your attitude and the way you expressed it. I think that there are better ways to go about this. Like I said earlier I am glad you have this sorted with Carl, but I felt a need to reply to your points about me. [ quoted text not captured ]

Kamel SENNI wrote: > > > > ||| Carl Pilhatsch wrote: > > > ||||| just want this finally put to rest, so we can move > > > ||||| on to more interesting topics. Agreed? > > Is the guy behind the computer was an organizer ? No. > If not, why does he enter the results ? Someone has to. He was chosen, I believe, based on his skills in computer operation and MS Excel experience, particulary his experience with using Archon. [ quoted text not captured ]

> Is the guy behind the computer was an organizer ? > If not, why does he enter the results ? Walter Paolini was just a helping hand, a player who offered to do the computer work in addition to playing. He did in no way organize the event. The "way of the Archon" is a science itself. Few people understand the Archon well enough to be able to actually adapt the formulas and thereby improve this file. Walter is capable of doing this, so he was the logical choice for these matters. Best regards, [ quoted text not captured ]

Kamel SENNI wrote: > > > ||| Carl Pilhatsch wrote: > > > ||||| just want this finally put to rest, so we can move > > > ||||| on to more interesting topics. Agreed? > > Is the guy behind the computer was an organizer ? No. > If not, why does he enter the results ? He and Judges Kasika and Utner were entering results because it had to be done by someone. Walter didn't acutally enter all the results. When problems occurred I asked him for help, because he knows and understands how the Archon works. Which is important if you want to correct mistakes. > If yes, it's an obvious breach of vekn tournament rules. Not an organzier - no breach of VEKN tournament rules. > I think your way to organize a such event is an interesting topic. > I have organize a national championship, three tourmants each > gathering more than 40 people, and co organize a another national > championship and a european championship. Your point? Other people have also organized a lot of events, perhaps even more. > If you, vekn board director, do not respect the rules you contribute > to install, i don' t see why another organizer have to do the same. What explicitly is your problem? > I pass on your ridiculous mistake on the delayings tactics played and > judged incorrectly in the final of the biggest event of the world. Hm... > I pass on the ridiculous way you overcome the precedent results > (convince two girls to participate after the first round...). Well, that't not correct. > I pass on the quite unfair reaction of one your referee ("Yeah !!!") > when > understanding that an austrian were in final. Ok, that was maybe not politically correct, but understandable nonetheless. > But i do not admit this major breach to happen without any reaction. > Can you respond, please ? I responded, and explained the points you wanted to know. So, is there anything else you want me to tell you? I remember especially you having a good time in Vienna. ("Put you hands up in the air, put your hands up in the air!"). Please accept that no cheating by the organisational team was done. It was a fair event, with a good mood, where a lot of respect was applied towards all players. Carl

> > Is the guy behind the computer was an organizer ? > > No. > > > If not, why does he enter the results ? > > He and Judges Kasika and Utner were entering results because it had to be > done by someone. Walter didn't acutally enter all the results. When > problems occurred I asked him for help, because he knows and understands > how the Archon works. Which is important if you want to correct mistakes. > > > If yes, it's an obvious breach of vekn tournament rules. > > Not an organzier - no breach of VEKN tournament rules. In the German Championship/Qualifier this year with about 50 people I was entering the results in the computer and I was an organizer and even helped with judging. Big breach of V:EKN rules. But nobody complained. Why ? Because there was such a good mood at all the event and everybody was happy. For you Carl and everbody organizing the next ECs there is one very important thing to learn : Talk more to the people. If problems arise (and they are likely to arise in such a big tournament) tell the people about it. Make clear statements using the mic so everybody can hear it. And try to calm everybody down., do not make hectic decisions. A lot of agression was build up in Vienna because of the lack of information. Little things stacked up to big anger, that could have been prevented. A good tournament is not manageable "top-down", you have to work with the players and get more feedback. Also a hint for the players : Do not hang around with your playgroup the whole day. Try to talk to other people you have never met. It could be even fun :-) That way the country vs. country things could be avoided. just my 2 euro-cents johannes walch v:ekn germany

Carl Pilhatsch <carl.pi...@chello.at> wrote in message news:<3DEFEE66...@chello.at>... > Kamel SENNI wrote: > > > > > ||| Carl Pilhatsch wrote: > > > > ||||| just want this finally put to rest, so we can move > > > > ||||| on to more interesting topics. Agreed? > > > > Is the guy behind the computer was an organizer ? > > No. > > > If not, why does he enter the results ? > > He and Judges Kasika and Utner were entering results because it had to be > done by someone. Walter didn't acutally enter all the results. When > problems occurred I asked him for help, because he knows and understands > how the Archon works. Which is important if you want to correct mistakes. At this moment, he became an organizer :"someone who help the head judge to organize correctly the event". > > If yes, it's an obvious breach of vekn tournament rules. > > Not an organzier - no breach of VEKN tournament rules. It was not an organizer when you declare the event to WW, but he was really an organizer. > > I think your way to organize a such event is an interesting topic. > > I have organize a national championship, three tourmants each > > gathering more than 40 people, and co organize a another national > > championship and a european championship. > > Your point? Other people have also organized a lot of events, perhaps > even more. Sure. Just here to tell that i 'm not just a player, and i can understand the difficulties of running a big event. > > If you, vekn board director, do not respect the rules you contribute > > to install, i don' t see why another organizer have to do the same. > > What explicitly is your problem? Explicitly ? I 'm not very happy to listen the referee tell me to go out the room of the tournament, and see another player stay in this room, because he works of the archon. Is it fair ? At least, it's not very well handled. > > I pass on your ridiculous mistake on the delayings tactics played and > > judged incorrectly in the final of the biggest event of the world. > > Hm... Such errors can happen... > > I pass on the ridiculous way you overcome the precedent results > > (convince two girls to participate after the first round...). > > Well, that't not correct. The number of 115 people playing together is not a happy new in fact : in one year, we gain 2 people to an EC ? It 's a bad new for the game, and it's not your fault. We have to think a lot to gain more player and continue to develop the game. > > I pass on the quite unfair reaction of one your referee ("Yeah !!!") > > when > > understanding that an austrian were in final. > > Ok, that was maybe not politically correct, but understandable > nonetheless. But not excusable. > > But i do not admit this major breach to happen without any reaction. > > Can you respond, please ? > > I responded, and explained the points you wanted to know. So, is there > anything else you want me to tell you? I remember especially you having a > good time in Vienna. ("Put you hands up in the air, put your hands up in > the air!"). Yes, i admit vienna is a beautiful city, and friends all over Europa make my holidays there a great moment. I 'm happy that your remember me. I hope my pleasure was seeable. > Please accept that no cheating by the organisational team was done. It > was a fair event, with a good mood, where a lot of respect was applied > towards all players. I do not use the word "cheating". I think the way your team have handled the event is the cause to all these rumors and complaining. You have made choices on the organisation taht can be discuss, but it's yours, and it's a way to run a such event. But, the problem of the archon have created a really big problem : a player have worked on the results of the tournament. That player have been in the final round. I trust you, when you said that this man doesn't touch to deck list...But it was possible. Just this fact is sufficiently to make any organizer re ask about his own methods. And you ? > Carl Regards, Kamel PS : Ah, last thing, i think it was not a good idea to contact this week some french players to ask about stephane lavrut's methods of management. It sounds like a backstab. I 'm not sure this is a "fair method" of work.

Kamel SENNI wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] If you are referring to the Sabbat in France - I didn't. They are to recieve prize support and I was asking how things are going and if problems have been settled, which indeed have been worked out. Good for the game. You know, I have to be informed. Carl

Kamel SENNI wrote: > Carl Pilhatsch <carl.pi...@chello.at> wrote in message > > He and Judges Kasika and Utner were entering results because it had to be > > done by someone. Walter didn't acutally enter all the results. When > > problems occurred I asked him for help, because he knows and understands > > how the Archon works. Which is important if you want to correct mistakes. > > At this moment, he became an organizer :"someone who help the head > judge to organize correctly the event". So all the players who wrote their game results down on scraps of paper for later entry into the Archon became organizers, too, and were then improperly playing in subsequent rounds? It's a good thing your spurious definition of organizer isn't the official one. [ quoted text not captured ]

> So all the players who wrote their game results down on scraps of paper > for later entry into the Archon became organizers, too, and were then > improperly playing in subsequent rounds? Just to be picky(tm) : We had to call a judge to write the results of a game down. At least I did so in my 3 games.

[ quoted text not captured ] "We called a judge" is different than "We had to call a judge". But, by calling a judge, you are spared being labeled an illegal organizer-player by the previous spurious definition of organizer. Not all players are so spared (myself included - silly me, trying to help things run more smoothly. tsk :-) [ quoted text not captured ]

"Kamel SENNI" <kamel...@yvelines.pref.gouv.fr> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:1b066664.02120...@posting.google.com... > > > || Reyda, you are just plain wrong. The French players both had > > > || incorrect deck lists. > > > The problem with a deck that doesn't match its deck list is that the changes > > to the deck could have happened during the tournament. As I am sure you are > > aware, it is illegal to change your deck during a tournament. That is why > > deck lists are required. > > > > Did the French players change their decks? We don't know, but there is a > > possibility since they don't match the decklists they brought. That is what > > we Americans call "shady". It isn't bold face cheating, but it "smells like > > something is rotten in Denmark." It is just not good for the game and it > > make the tournament look unfair. > > The differences between the list of jean noel and his deck were : > 6 blur instead 7 and 7 pursuit instead 6. > Is it cheating ? > Do you disqualify someone to such minor errors ???? > yes one should at such a large tournament. i guess it is acceptable to think that also french players should be able to write down a deck list without any mistakes. but then again maybe not? if this the case a player could ask the head judge to help him write down his decklist! > The same about the judge who enter the results and prepare the seating > order. It was in final, and i think it's forbidden by the vekn rules. stop spreading lies. walter neither was a judge nor did he prepare the seating order. (as an organizer you should know that the seating order is randomized by the archon) > This man was or was not an organizer ? he was not an organizer > All the bullshit on collusion is that : bullshit from austrian guys. and if i remember correctly from italians, spanish, and players from other nations, who are to polite to mention their concerns in this newsgroup (to prevent a flamewar), yes i know two such players. > If list were wrong why carl don't disqualify the two french ? imagine what would have happened if carl would have enforced the rules and would have disqualified the two french players (or shall i say the two cheaters), even now some french players are creating lies and rumours. > If he saw such collusion you describe, why not disqualify the two > french ? see point above > Stop that bullshit ! yes please do so. please spare us from your lies and dirty accusations Proc_F

LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:<3DEFAB1D...@white-wolf.com>... > Kamel SENNI wrote: > > > > > > ||| Carl Pilhatsch wrote: > > > > ||||| just want this finally put to rest, so we can move > > > > ||||| on to more interesting topics. Agreed? > > > > Is the guy behind the computer was an organizer ? > > No. > > > If not, why does he enter the results ? > > Someone has to. He was chosen, I believe, based on his skills in > computer operation and MS Excel experience, particulary his > experience with using Archon. Skills in computer operation ? MS Excel experience ? To enter results on a Excel sheet ? It's an operation my grandmother can accomplish. The optimal seating order was not used at the EC (there was players with the same relations prey-predator, same starting position...). This is a fact a lot of princes can attest. And it is not an error, this method is only recommanded, after all. When in charge with this, this man had the possibility to know the results of his future adversaries. Meanwhile all others players get out the tournament room, he rested into. So he had the possibility to look at the others players deck. I've heard the referee said it's unfair. Is it unfair to let this possibility to a player ? Remember: i do not say that he had done that. I said he had the possibility to do that. And i do not point HIS responsibilities, in fact, he had helped us all. I point the responsibilities of the organizer of this event. And i propose to him to think about that, to not always make the same errors. (sorry for the gramatically incorrect sentences...My english grammar lessons are goe far in the mists of my memory;-))) Kamel SENNI.

> Skills in computer operation ? > MS Excel experience ? > To enter results on a Excel sheet ? It's an operation my grandmother > can accomplish. Gosh! I'd like to see your granny write a macro tro register late players and dismiss dropped players... If she can, all props to her. > The optimal seating order was not used at the EC (there was players > with the same relations prey-predator, same starting position...). > This is a fact a lot of princes can attest. And it is not an error, > this method is only recommanded, after all. Which is the result of players dropping. In this case Archon switches back to a different seating chart which *can* cause problems, since players are assigned new "numbers". > When in charge with this, this man had the possibility to know the > results of his future adversaries. Meanwhile all others players get > out the tournament room, he rested into. So he had the possibility to > look at the others players deck. I've heard the referee said it's > unfair. > Is it unfair to let this possibility to a player ? > > Remember: i do not say that he had done that. I said he had the > possibility to do that. And i do not point HIS responsibilities, in > fact, he had helped us all. > I point the responsibilities of the organizer of this event. And i > propose to him to think about that, to not always make the same > errors. Yes, and you had the opportunity to do some brain builing prior to the tournament, build an eidetic memory, then accidently topple the judge table before round one and get a quick glance at the deck lists falling on the ground in the resulting turmoil which is enough to memorize them. Has some similar probability of success than memorizing deck lists while frantically trying to corrent a not too simple Excel sheet which Walter didn't code himself and rewrite some critical parts to get a fine seating order and a results sheet for 130 players. [ quoted text not captured ]

Carl Pilhatsch <carl.pi...@chello.at> wrote in message news:<3DF08E05...@chello.at>... > Kamel SENNI wrote: > > PS : Ah, last thing, i think it was not a good idea to contact this > > week some french players to ask about stephane lavrut's methods of > > management. It sounds like a backstab. I 'm not sure this is a "fair > > method" of work. > > If you are referring to the Sabbat in France - I didn't. They are to recieve prize support and I was > asking how things are going and if problems have been settled, which indeed have been worked out. > Good for the game. You know, I have to be informed. > > Carl I have never talk about the possibility of using your power on dispatching prizes for tournament in the way to blackmail groups of players. It's not in my mind, and i do not even suppose it. I even think it's quite a weird idea, and it's disgusting for me to suppose that i can think such a thing like this... I just find strange to enter in a private discuss with french players, the week after the EC, on the topic of his methods of handling the tournament scene in Paris. I don't know if others people on this newsgroups find it the same way i do. Perhaps i'm wrong, and it's obviously normal. And all princes will find these methods quite respectable. If others players find it totally normal, OK, let it vanish... Kamel SENNI.

Sascha Neumayr wrote: >>Skills in computer operation ? >>MS Excel experience ? >>To enter results on a Excel sheet ? It's an operation my grandmother >>can accomplish. > > > Gosh! I'd like to see your granny write a macro tro register late players > and dismiss dropped players... If she can, all props to her. *grin* We're running that stuff on a separate program that reseats everyone. Players and organizers tend to either work professionally with computers or being undergrad CS students and none of us even considering hacking it into the Archon. Guess we could rent his granny :) <SNIP> >> >>Remember: i do not say that he had done that. I said he had the >>possibility to do that. And i do not point HIS responsibilities, in >>fact, he had helped us all. >>I point the responsibilities of the organizer of this event. And i >>propose to him to think about that, to not always make the same >>errors. > > > Yes, and you had the opportunity to do some brain builing prior to the > tournament, build an eidetic memory, then accidently topple the judge table > before round one and get a quick glance at the deck lists falling on the > ground in the resulting turmoil which is enough to memorize them. Has some > similar probability of success than memorizing deck lists while frantically > trying to corrent a not too simple Excel sheet which Walter didn't code > himself and rewrite some critical parts to get a fine seating order and a > results sheet for 130 players. Considering we still have to see the winning deck from the qualifier published here I take it they still haven't managed to read all the submitted decks. Knowing my own feelings when I'm given a handwritten decklist I can sure understand why... 100+ handwritten decklists *shudder* Sten During

Kamel SENNI wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] Don't be vague. Please tell what I supposedly did, and I'll be able to answer that. I don't find it strange having discussions with players from different cities. I don't need to tell anybody how to handle "his" playgroup. Kamel, you are trying very hard to make me look like I'd be evil. I'm not. I'm not even on America's Most Wanted list. ;) Carl

LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:<3DF0A787...@white-wolf.com>... > Johannes Walch wrote: > > > > > So all the players who wrote their game results down on scraps of paper > > > for later entry into the Archon became organizers, too, and were then > > > improperly playing in subsequent rounds? > > > > Just to be picky(tm) : We had to call a judge to write the results of a game > > down. At least I did so in my 3 games. > > "We called a judge" is different than "We had to call a judge". > > But, by calling a judge, you are spared being labeled an illegal organizer-player > by the previous spurious definition of organizer. > > Not all players are so spared (myself included - silly me, trying to help things > run more smoothly. tsk :-) The results on your table is part of your experience. You have the right to play the subsequent rounds of your tournament with your experience as a player, isn't it ?;-))) But, when you can see the results on the others tables, and when you have the possibility to look at the results of your future adversaries, EVEN if you don't do it, it's an unfair advantages, that shouldn't be possible. And it cause discussion, and aggressivity. At least, it's hypocrit to say : "Knowing this results is not an unfair advantages, it is using it that is out of game. And no proof on the use of these informations on the reste of the tournament". I do not tell about cheating, as some austrian and spanish disappointed people, and even Carl P. I talk about the future of the game and the way we can handle this type of problem in the future. I am tired of trying to convince the officials of vekn and WW that this incident recover a big problem: the possibility to organise big and international event. Carl P. think his own power is attacked, and defend his event with all arms at his disposal. LSJ, i suppose, don't want to be part of a flamewar between players. The EC 2002 is dead. Perhaps we can use our brain, and not our virtual tongues, to assure that the next will be the best ???

LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:<3DECAC95...@white-wolf.com>... > > Did you read about the arrangements made with the tables on the second day ? > > did you know that the organising crew read the whole ubnch of decklist and > > then decided which player would be pitted against each others ? > > Incorrect. > The Archon seating charts were used to determine which players were pitted > against each other, with the first round seating being randomized by computer. I do not follow reyda on this point. But : Is it possible for two players in a VTES tournament, when using Archon table ofoptmial seating order, to start with the same relations predator prey ? Is it possible to a player to start two dfferent rounds at the same starting prosition (first, dsecoond, and second, for example) ? If the answer is : no, then the archon optoimal seating order were not used in vienna. Because these events happens during the tournament. I repet: it was not a fault, because, in my knowledge, it's only recommanded, not mandatory to use archon optimal seating order.

Kamel SENNI wrote: > LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:<3DF0A787...@white-wolf.com>... > > But, by calling a judge, you are spared being labeled an illegal organizer-player > > by the previous spurious definition of organizer. > > > > Not all players are so spared (myself included - silly me, trying to help things > > run more smoothly. tsk :-) > > The results on your table is part of your experience. > You have the right to play the subsequent rounds of your tournament > with your experience as a player, isn't it ?;-))) 0 points for poorly executed moving-target defense. You claimed that anyone recording results was to be classified an organizer: Kamel SENNI: "Why [does Walter] enter the results?" Carl: "because it had to be done by someone" Kamel SENNI: "At this moment, he became an organizer" I illustrated that that criterion is nonsensical. > At least, it's hypocrit to say : "Knowing this results is not an > unfair advantages, it is using it that is out of game. And no proof on > the use of these informations on the reste of the tournament". So anyone who overhears the results of the neighboring table becomes an organizer? > I do not tell about cheating [snip handwaving] You do not consider "an obvious breach of vekn tournament rules" to be telling about cheating? What would that be, then? > I talk about the future of the game and the way we can handle this > type of problem in the future. That would be constructive. > The EC 2002 is dead. Perhaps we can use our brain, and not our virtual > tongues, to assure that the next will be the best ??? I much prefer when player exhibit the use of their brains, yes. EC 2003 may well be "the best". And there will be players who carry on "aggressive discussions" afterward, as well, some who use their brains and, I'm sure, some who do not. [ quoted text not captured ]

Kamel SENNI wrote: > > LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:<3DECAC95...@white-wolf.com>... > > > > Did you read about the arrangements made with the tables on the second day ? > > > did you know that the organising crew read the whole ubnch of decklist and > > > then decided which player would be pitted against each others ? > > > > Incorrect. > > The Archon seating charts were used to determine which players were pitted > > against each other, with the first round seating being randomized by computer. > > I do not follow reyda on this point. > But : > Is it possible for two players in a VTES tournament, when using Archon > table ofoptmial seating order, to start with the same relations > predator prey ? Not when using the optimal seating charts, no. But if even one player drops or is added, the optimal seating charts are no longer usable. > Is it possible to a player to start two dfferent rounds at the same > starting prosition (first, dsecoond, and second, for example) ? Yes, but only when that situation is "optimal". > If the answer is : no, then the archon optoimal seating order were not > used in vienna. Because these events happens during the tournament. As has already been addressed many times - as the result of drops and adds. > I repet: it was not a fault, because, in my knowledge, it's only > recommanded, not mandatory to use archon optimal seating order. It is not even possible to use the seating charts (without modification) after drops and adds. [ quoted text not captured ]

"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> a écrit dans le message de news: 3DF49B03...@white-wolf.com... > 0 points for poorly executed moving-target defense. > > You claimed that anyone recording results was to be classified an organizer: > > Kamel SENNI: "Why [does Walter] enter the results?" > Carl: "because it had to be done by someone" > Kamel SENNI: "At this moment, he became an organizer" > > I illustrated that that criterion is nonsensical. having a player enter the results of a tournament gives him a significant advantage. it doesn't make sense, either. it's ok in a small tourney since multi-judge is allowed anyway. it's not ok in a tournament like the EC. (snip ) > I much prefer when player exhibit the use of their brains, yes. Kamel uses his brain. He dedicated a considerable amount of time to the survival of jyhad back when the game belonged toWotC. When White Wolf got in charge, he worked hard in order to have regular and large tournaments in Paris. And he did a pretty fine job. He also happens to be one of the best players in Paris. His remarks are not the average complaints of gamers who have no clue of what it takes to organize and run a tournament of this size. He knows the point of view both of players and organizers since he co-organized the EC 2001, among many other things. So even if you want to provide support regarding the EC, it's pretty cheap to bring this kind of sarcasm. Definitely not the kind of public relations expected from a netrep. Stone

Stone wrote: > > "LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> a écrit dans le message de news: > 3DF49B03...@white-wolf.com... > > 0 points for poorly executed moving-target defense. > > > > You claimed that anyone recording results was to be classified an > organizer: > > > > Kamel SENNI: "Why [does Walter] enter the results?" > > Carl: "because it had to be done by someone" > > Kamel SENNI: "At this moment, he became an organizer" > > > > I illustrated that that criterion is nonsensical. > > having a player enter the results of a tournament gives him a significant > advantage. > it doesn't make sense, either. > > it's ok in a small tourney since multi-judge is allowed anyway. it's not ok > in a tournament like the EC. You left off "in my opinion". Or, if that is not just your opinion, please cite the rules reference that supports you position. > > I much prefer when player exhibit the use of their brains, yes. > > Kamel uses his brain. He dedicated a considerable amount of time to the > survival of jyhad back when the game belonged toWotC. When White Wolf got > in charge, he worked hard in order to have regular and large tournaments in > Paris. And he did a pretty fine job. > > He also happens to be one of the best players in Paris. His remarks are not > the average complaints of gamers who have no clue of what it takes to > organize and run a tournament of this size. He knows the point of view both > of players and organizers since he co-organized the EC 2001, among many > other things. > > So even if you want to provide support regarding the EC, it's pretty cheap > to bring this kind of sarcasm. Definitely not the kind of public relations > expected from a netrep. It is true that I prefer the exhibition of brain usage. I said nothing about Kamel's particular exhibition with that statement (although I did point out some less-than-fully-considered statements he had made in other parts of his posts). If you feel that he is not exhibiting the use of his brains, then OK. But I didn't say it. [ quoted text not captured ]

>I do not follow reyda on this point. >But : >Is it possible for two players in a VTES tournament, when using Archon >table ofoptmial seating order, to start with the same relations >predator prey ? >Is it possible to a player to start two dfferent rounds at the same >starting prosition (first, dsecoond, and second, for example) ? >If the answer is : no, then the archon optoimal seating order were not >used in vienna. Because these events happens during the tournament. >I repet: it was not a fault, because, in my knowledge, it's only >recommanded, not mandatory to use archon optimal seating order. IIRC, using the Archon is not *required* for all tournaments. I'm sure everyone's been to tournaments that have been sub-optimal. Most of the tournaments I go to, they just end up using randomized index cards to determine everything, even though this leads to similar predator/prey relationships at times, and allows someone to go first three times in a row. Not perfect but sometimes you just have to work with what you've got. I think following VEKN tournaments rules (discussed more thoroughly in another thread), but even more importantly, the rules should have the flexibility to deal with imperfect circumstances (which they clearly are able to deal with, as shown in the EC 2002). Halcyan 2

>But, when you can see the results on the others tables, and when you >have the possibility to look at the results of your future >adversaries, EVEN if you don't do it, it's an unfair advantages, that >shouldn't be possible. >And it cause discussion, and aggressivity. >At least, it's hypocrit to say : "Knowing this results is not an >unfair advantages, it is using it that is out of game. And no proof on >the use of these informations on the reste of the tournament". >I do not tell about cheating, as some austrian and spanish >disappointed people, and even Carl P. >I talk about the future of the game and the way we can handle this >type of problem in the future. >I am tired of trying to convince the officials of vekn and WW that >this incident recover a big problem: the possibility to organise big >and international event. >Carl P. think his own power is attacked, and defend his event with all >arms at his disposal. >LSJ, i suppose, don't want to be part of a flamewar between players. Agreed. Knowing the results of other tables can be a *major* advantage because it can let you know how well you have to do. It is a very significant advantage if, based on everyone else's results, you know you'll get into the final with just 1 GW and 3 VP's. If you're unsure, you may try to extend yourself to go for a sweep since you can't be guaranteed 1-3 is enough. Thus knowing that information is a crucial factor. However, this issue then gets a bit cloudy. Clearly, scouting (watching other tables) might be considered bad form. Technically however, you shouldn't be allowed access to results from the previous games as well. So what? Are we going to ban players from discussing how well they did in previous rounds? Once again, immediate and transparent knowledge of results is not a good thing but in many cases, it's not too significant of a problem. As I mentioned in another post, I have been to plenty of tournaments when such info was openly shared and I did not find it to detract from the experience at all. Then again, those weren't Championships... Halcyan 2

"Stone" <mc_judg...@yahoo.fr> wrote in message news:at27kj$c1q$1...@io.uvsq.fr... > > "LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> a écrit dans le message de news: > 3DF49B03...@white-wolf.com... > > 0 points for poorly executed moving-target defense. > > > > You claimed that anyone recording results was to be classified an > organizer: > > > > Kamel SENNI: "Why [does Walter] enter the results?" > > Carl: "because it had to be done by someone" > > Kamel SENNI: "At this moment, he became an organizer" > > > > I illustrated that that criterion is nonsensical. > > having a player enter the results of a tournament gives him a significant > advantage. Judging from your email address, I'm guessing that you're from France. Do they have crack in France? 'Cause you're smoking it. How does having a player in the tournament hit a few keys on a keyboard give them a "significant advantage"? Especially since a tournament as large as the one we're talking about means that, in the first 3 rounds, you will never play again with anyone you've already played with. > it doesn't make sense, either. You've right, it doesn't make any sense, but that doesn't mean that any "significant advantage" has been gained. > it's ok in a small tourney since multi-judge is allowed anyway. it's not ok > in a tournament like the EC. Agreed. > (snip ) > > > I much prefer when player exhibit the use of their brains, yes. > > Kamel uses his brain. He dedicated a considerable amount of time to the > survival of jyhad back when the game belonged toWotC. When White Wolf got > in charge, he worked hard in order to have regular and large tournaments in > Paris. And he did a pretty fine job. > > He also happens to be one of the best players in Paris. His remarks are not > the average complaints of gamers who have no clue of what it takes to > organize and run a tournament of this size. He knows the point of view both > of players and organizers since he co-organized the EC 2001, among many > other things. > > So even if you want to provide support regarding the EC, it's pretty cheap > to bring this kind of sarcasm. Like the "significant advantage" crack-smoking comment from your email? > Definitely not the kind of public relations expected from a netrep. Just what DO you want to allow LSJ to say and to not say in this case, then? > > Stone Kevin M. "Know your enemy, and know yourself; in one-thousand battles you shall never be in peril." -- Sun Tzu, *The Art of War* "Contentment... Complacency... Catastrophe!" -- Joseph Chevalier

>Agreed. Knowing the results of other tables can be a *major* advantage >because >it can let you know how well you have to do. It is a very significant >advantage >if, based on everyone else's results, you know you'll get into the final with >just 1 GW and 3 VP's. If you're unsure, you may try to extend yourself to go >for a sweep since you can't be guaranteed 1-3 is enough. Thus knowing that >information is a crucial factor. > >However, this issue then gets a bit cloudy. Clearly, scouting (watching other >tables) might be considered bad form. Technically however, you shouldn't be >allowed access to results from the previous games as well. So what? Are we >going to ban players from discussing how well they did in previous rounds? > >Once again, immediate and transparent knowledge of results is not a good >thing >but in many cases, it's not too significant of a problem. As I mentioned in >another post, I have been to plenty of tournaments when such info was openly >shared and I did not find it to detract from the experience at all. Then >again, >those weren't Championships... Knowing the results of other games - This doesn't bother me. Besides being exceedingly difficult to keep a lid on, all the knowledge does is cause players to adjust how they play to a tournament which they would do based on their best guess of how they need to do anyway. At worst, someone tries to manipulate how well current opponents do based on how well they are doing to set up a favorable final. But, that's tricky to achieve and not likely to be worth the effort unless you are a lock for the finals already. Scouting, i.e. finding out information about other people's decks that you haven't played against - This I find obnoxious, though there's little that can be done about it. It penalizes trick decks. It rewards people who finish quickly. It rewards people who come with a bunch of buddies. Etc. While the info gained may often be trivial, it can also win or lose games. One of a number of reasons why I think there should be tournaments where people freely switch decks between rounds.

> Agreed. Knowing the results of other tables can be a *major* advantage because > it can let you know how well you have to do. It is a very significant advantage > if, based on everyone else's results, you know you'll get into the final with > just 1 GW and 3 VP's. If you're unsure, you may try to extend yourself to go > for a sweep since you can't be guaranteed 1-3 is enough. Thus knowing that > information is a crucial factor. I don't know how you play, but i always play for a game win with a maximum of VP's. No matter if i still got chances for a seat in the final or not.

[ quoted text not captured ] I don't know how you play, but I at least can do some simple math. I think someone said it best fairly recently about how the more reliable decks end up getting 3 or 4 VP's a round while decks that sweep usually end up not doing so well the next game. Let's say that you're doing pretty well in the current game. If you continue to play conservatively and defensive, you have a 95% chance of getting the Table Win (with a 5% chance of having your plan foiled due to some surprise). On the other hand, you could also try to go for a sweep even though it may overextend you. It's a lot riskier and you only have a 5% chance of getting the sweep (and a 95% chance of falling flat on your face and netting you nothing). Of course in reality, you don't have such neat percentages to rely on, but the general estimates might be in the same neighborhood. If I know the results and standings of the other players, and know that I'm going to need the 5 VP's to make it to finals, then I sure as hell am gonna try for the sweep, even though there's only a slim chance to do so. If I know that 3 VP's is enough to make the finals, then I'm not going to run off and take riduculous and unnecessary risks. Are you saying that you do? That you consistently tap out and play with the intention of getting all the VP's on the table? (Note that this would also imply doing extra KRC/Conservative Agg damage to your grandprey, even if your prey was a heavy bleed deck that your grandprey couldn't handle the bleeds. Or playing an Anarch Revolt when your prey has lots of pool but your grandprey has 2-4 pool). Going for a sweep means that you have to oust your current prey as soon as possible so you have to deal as much damage to them as you can regardless of how it affects the rest of the table (because if you wait too long and someone else gets a VP, you've already failed). Saying that you always play for a maximum of VP's (5), no matter what the situation seems to me a lot like saying that in horse racing, you always bet on the horse with the worst odds since that offers you the maximum amount that you can gain. Anyway, IIRC, you are not required by the rules to "play for a game win with a maximum of VP's." All you need to do is to play to win. If you win with 3 VP's or 5 VP's it doesn't matter because you can choose the manner in which you win. Halcyan 2

LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:<3DF49B03...@white-wolf.com>... > Kamel SENNI wrote: > > LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message news:<3DF0A787...@white-wolf.com>... > > You claimed that anyone recording results was to be classified an organizer: > > Kamel SENNI: "Why [does Walter] enter the results?" > Carl: "because it had to be done by someone" > Kamel SENNI: "At this moment, he became an organizer" > > I illustrated that that criterion is nonsensical. I think there is a diference between write on a piece of paper his own results (or the results ont the table you've just played) and knowing others tables results. Add the possibility to know the results of our future adversaries (then, the most dangerous of them, in the race to the final), and you have in my opinion the poossibility of an unfair advantages. > > At least, it's hypocrit to say : "Knowing this results is not an > > unfair advantages, it is using it that is out of game. And no proof on > > the use of these informations on the reste of the tournament". > > So anyone who overhears the results of the neighboring table becomes > an organizer? No, of course. Let a players the possibility of acquiere an unfair knowledge of others results is az faults, howewer. > > I do not tell about cheating [snip handwaving] > > You do not consider "an obvious breach of vekn tournament rules" to > be telling about cheating? What would that be, then? If, as an organizer, play in a more-than-twenty-players-tournament, because i don't know the rules of multijudging system, it will be "an obvious breach of vekn tournament rules". But not cheating. Cheating is voluntary. I have never said the mistake (in my opinion) made in the EC 2002 was voluntary. I'm not very proud of my english grammar. My vocabulary is better, and if i would tell about cheating, i would use that word... > > I talk about the future of the game and the way we can handle this > > type of problem in the future. > > That would be constructive. Perhaps some guidelines to organizer and referee for big events, can be constructive ? Like : no players should have access to the computer...perhaps somethings else...

"Kevin M." <you...@imaspammer.org> wrote in message news:<3C3J9.29176$r4.15...@news1.west.cox.net>... > "Stone" <mc_judg...@yahoo.fr> wrote in message news:at27kj$c1q$1...@io.uvsq.fr... > Judging from your email address, I'm guessing that you're from France. Do they have crack in France? 'Cause you're smoking it. I think it's not a very solid demonstration. Read again Socrate, Platon and Ciceron. > How does having a player in the tournament hit a few keys on a keyboard give them a "significant advantage"? Especially since a > tournament as large as the one we're talking about means that, in the first 3 rounds, you will never play again with anyone you've > already played with. LSJ have answered that with the add of new players between rounds, people can play together more than once. More : when you know the results of a given player, and you know his results, you can determine if it's a dangerous challenger in the race to final. Then, it could affect your play (by conclude, or not conclude an alliance with him). > > So even if you want to provide support regarding the EC, it's pretty cheap > > to bring this kind of sarcasm. > > Like the "significant advantage" crack-smoking comment from your email? Why using this type of terms ? I've whipped myself for using terms like "bullshit comment", because people reading that type of comments are less capable to understand the rest of the message. > Kevin M. > "Know your enemy, and know yourself; in one-thousand battles > you shall never be in peril." -- Sun Tzu, *The Art of War* > "Contentment... Complacency... Catastrophe!" -- Joseph Chevalier Kamel S. "Respect your enemy. Tomorrow, you could become like him". Kamel Senni, "My own crak-somking comments"

Kamel SENNI wrote: > > > I talk about the future of the game and the way we can handle this > > > type of problem in the future. > > > > That would be constructive. > Perhaps some guidelines to organizer and referee for big events, can > be constructive ? > Like : no players should have access to the computer...perhaps > somethings else... The actual guideline, if it were written, would be more along the lines of having the person best able to record results be assigned the task of recording results, with acknowledgement to the fact that that person may in fact also be a player. -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. Links to V:TES news, rules, cards, utilities, and tournament calendar: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/

> I don't know how you play, but I at least can do some simple math. crap > I think someone said it best fairly recently about how the more reliable decks > end up getting 3 or 4 VP's a round while decks that sweep usually end up not > doing so well the next game. What's the point regarding the issue? > Saying that you always play for a maximum of VP's (5), no matter what the > situation seems to me a lot like saying that in horse racing, you always bet on > the horse with the worst odds since that offers you the maximum amount that you > can gain. The "maximum" of VP's depend on the situation in the game. You simply cannot always make them all. But i always try to get as many as possible, with the least risk possible.

halc...@aol.com (Halcyan 2) wrote in message news:<20021209112431...@mb-mu.aol.com>... > Agreed. Knowing the results of other tables can be a *major* advantage because > it can let you know how well you have to do. It is a very significant advantage > if, based on everyone else's results, you know you'll get into the final with > just 1 GW and 3 VP's. If you're unsure, you may try to extend yourself to go > for a sweep since you can't be guaranteed 1-3 is enough. It may be wise to implement something from "the other game" to settle this. In a Magic tournament, the results are posted for everyone to see after every round. Nobody gets any advantage; everybody knows exactly how well they have to do. -Snapcase