Alpha Lackey's Lost Adventure--About Magic vs. Poker

N

Notepad

Guest
The following the the Lost Adventure of Alpha Lackey, a featured writer at Brainburst. After having submitted this article, Brainburst, having WotC as an advertiser on their website, felt the anti-Buehler, anti-Pro Tour content was too controversial. Alpha Lackey was able to mention the article, and where to get it, in his next, cleaner, submission, which was posted as a normal Adeventure of Alpha Lackey. I am posting this after having gotten it from Alpha Lackey, in order to share some pretty good points he made about the issue of Magic vs. Poker. If asked to delete this article by Alpha Lackey, I will do so. However, it remains posted until that time for all to read.

========

The Continuing Adventures of Alpha Lackey
"Magic, Poker and Randy Buehler"
Charles Mousseau
alphalackey@yahoo.com

[INTRODUCTION]

On with the show.

*Randy Strikes Again.*

Most of you are familiar with my opinion on Randy Buehler know that, despite my blustery rhetoric, I really don't begrudge him on a personal level. I don't know him on a personal level. Besides his unfortunate outburst to a teammate that didn't "play like a good team player" in a draft, all I've ever encountered him in is in his professional guise, which is to convey "the spin" from Wizards to the players.

It is in this role that I lambaste him.

Think of it as me having respect for the person that a professional wrestler might actually be, yet utterly despising his in-ring persona. Sometimes, of course, you can hate them both - even mentioning "JBL" to a modern-day wrestling fan will likely get a more violent "most undeserving champion ever" rant than you would get from mentioning "Marc Rajotte" to Gary Wise.

Having given a bit of respect to Randy, pointing out that he's usually just "doin' what he's gotta do", it's time for me to do what I gotta do.

About a month ago, on July 2nd, Randy wrote an article entitled <LINK TO http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=mtgcom/daily/af21> "Magic and Poker: Which is the better game? </LINK> on magicthegathering.com, mostly in response to the large number of Magic players who are starting to head into poker, either inspired by or in the wake of Dave Williams' outstanding second-place finish at this year's World Series.

Well, with a title like "Which is better, Game A or Game B?" on a website devoted entirely to promoting Game A, I'd surely expect to see an unbiased analysis that borders on being clinical in its impartiality... wouldn't you?

Please. In fact, looking at the title, I'm actually *glad* Randy Buehler wrote this article. He's the only one that could do it justice.

Let us begin.

*Part I: The Good*

Randy starts out by mentioning that Magic has been growing throughout it's entire ten-year existence, and offers up some elements which give Magic flavor as a game that poker will never hope to match. Yes, the fantasy element is something which you will not find in poker, unless you count the "Playboy Commemorative Card Decks". The art on Magic cards can border on outright amazing at times. I've spoken highly of the artwork on Hallowed Ground. Compare that to a Seven of Clubs.

Magic is also evolving, and has been since day one. Again, something poker will never hope to keep up with. You can have different poker games, to be sure, but the variations between one poker game and another are very minimal. They all have so much in common - groups of starting cards that are winners in the long run, typical winning hands, how often the best hand holds up at a given point, and so forth. Jumping from two very different poker games - say, no-limit Texas Hold'em to pot-limit "Kings 'N' Little Ones" - absolutely pales in comparison to the jump between pre-and-post-Skullclamp standard, to say nothing of when a set rotates!

Incidentally, I think it is these two things - flavor and never-ending variety - which will give collectible card games a market share for a very, very long time, and I will easily go on record as saying that as long as there is a collectible card game market, there will be Magic in it.

Of course, the opposite side of the coin also speaks well for poker. Poker is popular and easily accessible to the population *because* it is largely the same game played for about two centuries. Two *hundred* years, which sounds impressive until you consider how chess has been around in modern form for 500 years, and with a lineage traceable back 1,500 to 2,000 years, depending on whether you consider "Chinese Chess" to be the progenitor or just an unrelated game. For the record, that's between 19% to 25% of the entire history of civilization. There's something to be said for pedigree.

Now, if only Randy's article had ended here, perhaps with a nice comment about how they are going to be two different games for two different crowds, each with their own flavors, nothing would be wrong.

However, much like a homely man making overtures to a woman well above his station, where one extra sentence can spell the difference between 'romantic' and 'restraining order', Randy's article just couldn't stop when it should have.

*Part II: The Bad*

You _know_ what the beef is going to be about, right?

You got it - the prizes.

Now, for those of you who have only played Magic Online, you might not know what a "prize" is. In some games, when they run tournaments, they offer these magical things called "prizes", which represent an incentive to play your best, as these "prizes" are awarded to the highest finishers. They are similar to the "rebates" that you get for doing well in tournaments in your world, except the "prize" actually represents *more* than it cost you to participate!

I'll give a moment for the shell-shocked MODO players to soak it up. Yes, my sheltered friends, in some games, a "prize" actually represents a profit. If you ever get to speak to a veteran of MODO, perhaps they can spin a yarn about the "Never-To-Be-Replaced Eight-Four Drafts of Yore", which I assure you, featured actual prizes. Ahh, dose wuh da days!

Here's what Randy had to say about prizes, and how they differ between the two games.

_"In poker, you have to risk your own money if you want to win any prize money. In Magic, however, there's no gambling. Magic's Pro Tour is funded entirely by Wizards of the Coast - all you have to do is earn an invitation"_

Wait just a second.. I just need some time to clarify this.. Let's see.. in poker, you have to risk your own money to win prize money, but in Magic, all you need to do to win prize money to get a Pro Tour invitation?

Just how, might I ask, does one earn an invitation?

Do you solicit the help of the Buehler Fairy, the one that can just wave its wand to help you out, like when you are expected to simply "get your composite rating up to 1800" if you didn't like 4-3-2-2?

Perhaps you earn this Pro Tour invitation by writing six-thousand word missives on the sad lack of fair play and sportsmanship in Magic?

No no no, in fact, to earn a Pro Tour invitation, you play in, and place suitably highly in, a Pro Tour Qualifier.

Hmmm....

Maybe I'm mistaken, but this Pro Tour Qualifier you speak of... it sounds vaguely similar to, oh, I don't know, *a tournament you have to risk your own money to enter!*

Not only a tournament that they have to risk their own money to enter, but a tournament that ultimately has a negative sum expectation for the players - also like poker, which we'll detail shortly.

Consider a typical 64 man constructed PTQ that runs for $20 per head. That's $1,280 taken in. $250 goes out to first place, and six boxes of product at $70 per box. Remember, we are looking at wholesale prices, not retail prices. If a box goes for $100 in retail, that represents an added value to compensate for store space, staff expenses and expected profit margin, none of which are included in the raw inventory value. What's the net return? $770, or about 60 cents on the dollar.

Of course, some of these might return less, and some might return more - especially Canadian tournaments that run on the same prize schedule but charge $20 Canadian instead of $20 US. Replace the money taken in with Canadian currency at a typical 3:4 exchange rate, and you're returning $770 US on $977 US taken in, which is a much better 79 cents on the dollar. However, increase the entry fee to $30 US in the first example, and all of a sudden, that $770 return represents 40 cents on the dollar.

I suspect the truth is somewhere in between, and the first example is pretty indicative of a typical case, so it's probably really close. Until Wizards opens up their books and discloses some figures, we won't know for sure. Of course, they won't disclose what words are officially 'naughty', so I won't hold my breath, but since I've gotta do what I gotta do, here goes:

Dear Wizards of the Coast: I openly and outright *defy* you to show me the figures for 2003. Show me the total amount of Pro Tour Qualifier revenue generated - and we'll even let you exclude your ridiculous one-dollar pens from that total! - along with the total amount of PTQ prizes, and the total amount of Pro Tour money awarded. If it is not the case that Magic players lost money in 2003 "gambling" on the Pro Tour, I will loudly and quite visibly offer up my undying humility to you, in the form of an apology most unflattering to myself.

Yes, we can't forget, the invitation has a cash value of its own. If you consider a typical Pro Tour event to have $50,000 in total prizes divided among 250 PTQ winners, each invitation has a value of about $200. Of course, there is the factor that if you place suitably high, you get invited to the next PT, which has some additional value, but if the number of "gravy trainers" is constant from tournament to tournament, then that will be exactly offset by the hit to the prize pool by those gravy trainers who are in the PT you are playing in.

To summarize, then, with our examples:

A typical PTQ will generate $1,280 in cash. It will give out $770 in prizes and an invitation with an approximate value of $200. Net result: Players put $1,280 in and get $970 back out, for a return of 75.8 cents on the dollar.

Not only is Pro Magic not the "free ride" that Randy implies that it is, it's actually *more* expensive than poker, in which a typical rake is 9.09% cents on the dollar, and even in a two-tier system (which we will get to shortly), with a 9.09% rake on each step PLUS the typical 3% 'mandatory gratuity' (that oxymoron the service industry so loves to hear) on the final step, you are still looking at 80.2 cents on the dollar in return.

This reminds me of the FBI shutting down the mob-run "numbers rackets", partly justified by saying that the customer was getting ripped off, then replacing them with state lotteries that pay back far less per dollar than the mob ever did.

Believe me, I can understand why Magic has been so desperate to escape the shadow of "gambling" which has plagued their game since the first Contract From Below was ever cast. I'm sure you noticed, as I did, that Randy snuck in "In Magic, there's no gambling", even though we've proven quite conclusively that there is. Not only is Pro Magic a gamble, it's a relatively bad one, three times worse than any modern slot machine with their "mere" 8% take, five times worse than the worst table games and, even if you didn't count cards at blackjack, the house edge would be between 25 and 50 times slimmer playing that game.

If I were a lawyer from Wizards of the Coast, I would be quick to point out that Wizards does not profit from this gamble. Indeed, the Pro Tour - in and of itself - is most certainly a money loser. Yes, they collect money on a per-head basis from the players, as well as make money from the implicit sale of packs of products for the top 8, but this does not offset what they pay out to run it. It's a promotional tool, first and foremost, and where it earns its value is in the *oodles* of product that people buy in an effort to be competitive on the Pro Tour.

Just because Wizards loses money on the Pro Tour, however, does *nothing* to change the fact that I've pointed out - that the players lose money on it too. They have to front money to play in it, unlike what Mr. Buehler said, and the rewards compared to the cost actually make it a very poor gamble.

Now, I briefly mentioned a two-tier system to poker, which I will get to while I dissect Randy's next piece of nonsense.

_"Prizes for winning poker tournaments are obviously much larger than those for winning Magic events, but that's only possible because each competitor is putting up thousands of dollars of his or her own money in order to play. Sure you can win more money playing poker than you can playing Magic, but only if you have a lot of money that you're willing to risk losing."_

In the 2004 World Series of Poker, a reasonable estimate would hold that 90% of the players did *not*, I repeat, did *not* enter by paying thousands of dollars of their own money.

They got in by entering poker's equivalent of a PTQ - a satellite.

A satellite is a tournament where a bunch of pay an entry fee - usually *cheaper* than a sealed PTQ, by the way - and the winner gets an "invitation" (a prize package including air fare and spending money) to play in the bigger event.

The satellite system is, without a doubt, the single biggest factor in the explosive boom of poker, leading to massively swelling participation in each and every high-stakes poker tournament, and it's easy to see why. Chris Moneymaker entered a WSOPTQ.. umm, I mean a satellite - at less cost than a Magic: the Gathering PTQ, I should add! - and got to play in PT: Las Vegas.. pardon me, the World Series of Poker.. and set the poker world on fire by parlaying skill and a *lot* of good luck to win the championship.

See the similarity now?

PTQ is to "World Series of Poker satellite" as PT is to "World Series of Poker".

The only difference is that you _also_ have the _additional_ option of fronting the massive entry fee to enter the WSOP. Before online poker, yes, Randy's statement would have been at least somewhat true, that to win the big bucks you have to front the big bucks, even though many smaller buy-in tournaments were also quite commonplace. Nowdays, those paying the big bucks to enter are in the very minor minority.

If you need a little more help to see how similar the two systems are, imagine this: If *everyone* had to pay money to the Horseshoe to play in a satellite, because they controlled *all* of the sanctioned poker matches, and no, you were playing not to win cash prizes, but to win an invitation to the WSOP, and they cooked the books so that the satellite entry fee actually won you this limited edition Alpha Lackey bobble-head doll, and the WSOP payouts came from the Horseshoe's promotional division.. well, you'd have Magic. Add the option to Magic to front a massive entry fee to play in a PT, and voila! You have poker, down to a 'T'. Not so far apart, are they?

*Part III: The Ugly*

After dropping the potential touchdown pass from that dashing quarterback known as Reality, our beloved Randy then goes on to talk about some subjective issues involving the two games. Once again, the results are predictable.

First of all, he mentions the "fun factor":

_"It's worth noting, however, that most poker players won't play “for fun.” If there isn't any money riding on the game, poker isn't really worth playing. In Magic, however, the so-called “casual players” vastly outnumber the tournament players."_

Three words, Mr. Buehler: Fun. Money. Tables.

Online casinos offer plenty of fun money tables, with no real money on the line to speak of, and they are always hopping. Want to know something else? They are fun to play as well as being an *excellent* training ground for new players to learn the mechanics of the game, along with some fundamental strategy.

While "fun tables" do not come in tournament flavors, most every online poker room will have about three times as play money games for each actual money game. Up until recently, this number was much higher, but the advent of poker at stakes so low that they may as well be free games (literal penny-ante games), but a lot of other free poker has sprung up at other sites as well. All in all, there are probably ten fun games of poker played for each "real money" one played online. I wonder if the proportion of competitive Magic players is that low. It might be lower, but "poker for fun" has much more of a following than Randy would suggest.

Remember, the chips in poker are the life totals of Magic - they're just the way to keep score. If Randy is trying to compare casual Magic to a game of poker where you just play the game and don't bet anything at any point, then he needs to compare Magic where you don't bother with life totals. Wouldn't that be fun? I'll attack for lots, oh what are you at, oh it doesn't matter, it's your turn... yeah.

Part of the "game" of poker is that each player has a fixed amount of resources to wager with. Whether these resources represent actual money, or just "points" (as they do in tournament poker), these resources are just as much a part of the game of poker as life points are to Magic.

Finally, Mr. Buehler talks about the social aspects of the two games, to wit:

_"Another point worth noting while we're talking about which game is more fun is that many of the professional Magic players who have made the leap over to poker still play Magic. They fully admit that they could make more money if they spent their weekends chained to a laptop, grinding out a few more pots at an online casino. However, they would rather spend their time flying to a Pro Tour where they can hang out with their friends. In my opinion, the social dynamic in the Magic community (both on the web and at the events themselves) is far superior to the poker equivalent."_

First of all, Randy is making a big mistake comparing live-action Magic to internet poker. Yes, the social aspect in live-action *anything* is going to be better than anything else on the internet, because - by definition - to do things in real life, you do have to obey the most basic tenets of social conduct, like getting dressed, and actually having to look face-to-face with the person you are going to insult with your "leet slander". I leave hygiene off that preceding list for obvious reasons.

Let's compare the two games on equal footing.

Fact #1> Internet poker has a much better social dynamic than internet Magic.

Internet poker rooms are so far superior to Magic Online in every conceivable way, it's just not funny. There are no 15-year old hall monitor Unadepts to threaten you with a banning for violating some horribly-written self-contradictory Code of Conduct, or some mysterious chat filter. Yes, people get grumpy when they lose at poker online, because they are losing money instead of product for which they've already lost the money for, but on a whole, it's miles ahead of online Magic.

Incidentally, do you wonder, as I do, why Randy didn't talk specifically about online *play* at all when comparing the two games? Probably because he would have had to admit just how poker can be played for a lot cheaper, with a stable and *much* more secure, cheating-free environment over the internet than you could *ever* play Magic Online.

Fact #2> The social environment in live Magic is an absolute abomination compared with live poker.

Do I really need to spell it out? Well, I will anyways.

In poker, players who are 'bratty', obnoxious, downright unhygenic and ill-tempered are the minority. This is because poker is an adult game played by adults. Those who act like little children are egregious offenders whose behavior is seen as unacceptable. In Magic, well... yeah.

What about cheating and fair play?

Do you consider that part of social conduct?

If so, then once again, poker is a runaway winner. I have witnessed so very little cheating in poker as to be funny, and that is because, unlike Magic, poker does not open itself up very well to cheating. It does not have highly exploitable rules. It has dealers that handle the cards and do the shuffling, not shifty-eyed Orcish Spies and players with selective sleeving policies. Players are eliminated from tournaments the moment they are mathematically eliminated, thus, poker has no lap traffic to exploit, no X-2-0 bracket to play on in the hopes of cashing in on an unexpected expected gratuity acting as an implicit bribe for a timely concession. Strict rules against such things are in place. People face lifetime bannings from events and a never-ending suspicious glare for breaking such rules that Magic players flout on a never-ending basis. Larry Flynt once did at a WSOP tournament what countless Magic players do in every event from PTQs to the world championships. I say "once" because Jack Binion, the Horseshoe's 'proprietor' at the time, caught wind of it, immediately disqualifying Larry on the spot and banning him for life.

Not even close at all.

*The last word: on Randy's last word.*

Even though I found most of what Mr. Buehler had to say about the two games to be borderline fraud, I would be remiss if I did not give him credit for the very, very solid fact which he used to end his commentary with.

_"Interestingly, the poker world is starting to notice that a lot of its young, smart up-and-comers cut their teeth on a different card game."_

Bingo.

Underneath it all, Magic is a good-if-not-excellent way for young players, not yet of a legal age to play poker, to learn how to play a card game, learn how to handle the pressure, and learn (hopefully) how to stand above poor sports and be a good one themselves - certainly they get a baptism by fire in this regard.

You can expect poker players like David Williams - and Mattias Anderson, who also made the top table, yet hasn't been given nearly the recognition from the Magic world, even though Mattias willingly put "Magic" in his list of hobbies for his pokerpages.com WSOP profile and David did not! - to come from Magic and show the world that they have learned the things common to every card game from this little game called M:tG.

In the end, though, once players get to the age where poker is an option, I can't help but imagine that, if they like them both, they will come to choose poker as their main competitive card game. The rewards are bigger, the game is better on so many levels, and the opportunities are exploding. Sadly, this will portend a younger and younger Magic demographic, less used to competition and less used to being a good competitor. I can't help but wonder if this means that a lot of the problems I've touched on in my articles aren't just going to get a whole lot worse.

Until next time, thanks for this one.

Charles Mousseau
alphalackey@yahoo.com

* * * * *

"Gambling:
It is not as destructive as war or as boring as pornography.
It is not as immoral as business or as suicidal as watching television,
and the percentages are better than religion."
--Mario Puzo
 
N

NorrYtt

Guest
I must say, I also had a hard time reading Randy's article. All my friends did as well. I can't really sit and read something that says:

Magic has pretty pictures.
Magic is cool.
I like Magic.
Magic is awesome.
Buy more Magic cards.
Buy them now.


My friends and I play No Limit Texas Hold'em every Friday and it's a blast. I find it facinating that a simple set of rules for a game can be deceptively complicated and have such huge appeal. There's even psychology and behavoir analysis built in to the game.

Also, I've said this before, but I'll say it some more, the Alpha Lackey has a massive heart for Magic. His written words are only there because of love; otherwise there'd be no reason to write them.
 
N

Notepad

Guest
Agreed, about Alpha Lackey. If only his love hadn't been smashed by the stupid punks of Magic, then he'd write more. Fed up with the game, how is a writer supposed to keep on trekking? His articles are always cool, though, even if they come a month apart now. :D
 
N

Notepad

Guest
Got some ammo for what? ??? :confused: ??? Are you gonna shoot the jerk kids that play Magic? Or better yet, gonna shoot WotC?
 
T

train

Guest
I'd say the latter - but then it would be pre-meditated... I'd rather it be spontaneous... at the same spontaneous time I'm carrying the weapons, and at the same spontaneuous time I'm heading into their office building...:p
 
N

Notepad

Guest
You still haven't mentioned just what exactly this ammo is. WHat in the world were ya talkin about back there, anyway?
 
T

train

Guest
Stopping the oppression WoTC subsidiaries place on the Magic community because we have our opinions...

ammo = ammunition
 
N

Notepad

Guest
Okay. I see now. But...that makes for another question--How in the world do the players stop WotC's super-grip control on the game? Or the subsidies, too?
 

Spiderman

Administrator
Staff member
Kinda hard when WOTC is the maker and owner (disregarding Hasbro's greater ownership) of the game.

In fact, that'd pretty much be the only way to do it, for Hasbro to take control over the current WOTC and hand over the reins and procedures to a totally different group.

But I don't think that will ever happen, barring a disaster of some sort.
 
N

Notepad

Guest
Yeah, agreed. There's nothing *really*wrong with the game. My main gripe is the amount of draft chaff that's put into normal booster packs. Especially when boosters are bought primarily to help constructed decks, and not for drafts.

Yes, drafts are nice, but they shouldn't overwhelm design and rarity aspects of the game.
 
E

Exaulted_Leader

Guest
What about cheating and fair play?

Do you consider that part of social conduct?
Oh, MAN!

This issue gets me EVERY damn time I hear it anymore.


PTQ Columbus. I make the huge mistake of allowing my friend to convince me to travel to Edmonton with him (a 2 hour drive from where I live) and pay $20 to enter the tournament.

'It'll be fun.'

That'll be the last time those 3 words talk me into anything.


I'm playing a fairly standard-fare T&N deck, and things are going more or less like I'd predicted (scrubbed my first opponents for some 2-0 leverage, then ran into some challengers that forced me into 2-1 positions). Eventually, I'm looking at one match that will determine whether I or my opponent will enter the Top 8.

Now, silly me, I figured that cheating was one of those issues that was unheard of in sanctioned play. There were T.V. cameras. Judges. Stakes.

Besdies; everyone I'd played against thus far in the event was very civil and friendly.

I take the first game, my opponent takes the second. He's playing Ravager Affinity. On my final turn of the 3rd game, I'm at 5 life but staring-down my opponent with a Leonin Abunas and Darksteel Colossus. The only permanents I've left him with (thanks to Tel-Jilad justice, Oxidize and Eternal Witness) are a tapped Darksteel Citadel and tapped Great Furnace, which he had just used to Shrapnel Blast me from 10 life to 5 on my upkeep.

I swing him down to 9, and use a Witness to grab Tel-Jilad justice again - blowing-away his Furnace to try and curtail the possibility of another Shrapnel Blast. Then, in case my opponent manages something tricky (I'm not sure what I possibly could've been worried about, thinking back on it), I drop a Jens and go on a land hunt.

I pass the turn to my opponent, who drops a Great Furnace and Shrapnel Blasts me for the win. I figured he probably just top-decked the Blast and it was my play mistake for not dropping Platinum Angel with the Leonin Abunas. Silly, silly me.


We go home more or less empty-handed (free T-Shirt, though - woot!) and I tune-in to Access the next day, because they'd been filming my match! (C'mon - EVERYONE likes to see themselves on T.V.) I wasn't sure they'd show it at first, being that it wasn't a top 8 performance, but wouldn't you know it - they had an amatuer segment that featured my match for the 8th seat.

I was excited. This was TOTALLY going to make my $20 worthwhile.

I followed the plays, explain what was going through my head to a couple of friends who wanted to watch the event with me (including Tyler, who placed 2nd in the event with Capless Affinity, and was the one who nagged me to come along - and who also got to watch himself play on T.V.), winced at my play mistakes... and then got to counting.

One. Two. Three. Four. I blinked, and at first I thought I must've just mis-counted. That couldn't have been his last Great Furnace that I blew-up. He kills me with one next turn...

Then one of the commentators mentions it:

'Smart play by Brown. By nuetralizing (name withheld)'s last red mana source, he's eliminated any chance of a Shrapnel Blast victory - and probably secured the win.'

"...But I thought you said he killed you with a Shrapnel Blast?"

"He did."

The commentators are both really taken aback when the Furnace is played, followed by the blast.

'Oh... Did we mis-count?'

'...I didn't think I had...'

So now we go back to playback footage. Oh, look - 1 Great Furnace, 2 Great Furnaces, 3 Great Furnaces... yup, that certainly was the fourth one that I exploded. But we were both deck checked before the match. Did the judge just 'miss' an extra Furnace, somehow...?

'Oh, no - look at that! While Brown is searching for his land card, look at what (name withheld) does with that Great Furnace he's picked-up from play and tarted moving to his graveyard**... he puts it back on top of his library.'

'Oh, no. I can't believe this. What poor sportsmanship.'

I lost a game not by merit, but because my opponent had been a cheater!? THAT was the kind of conduct a player could exepect to find in sanctioned play for real prizes!?


That's the last competitive M:tG event I'll ever attend.

(** I was a little nervous and shaky at this point, so I wasn't pausing for 'breathers' between spells to make sure my opponent had actually done what he had supposed to. I dropped the Justice, then immediately dropped Jens and began to search for my land without so much as glancing over at my opponent - which is why I never caught even a hint of what he'd done. My friends argue that I should've watched my opponent more carefully. I argue that I shouldn't have to. We're adults, for Christ's sake.)
 

Spiderman

Administrator
Staff member
But even though I don't play in such events, I've learned by reading and watching that you have to take matters in your own hands and double-check and watch everything because you can't trust anyone. The majority are nice people, no doubt. But it only takes those one or two exceptions to take advantage of it and ruin it and that's why you have to be careful.\

It is surprising he managed to pull it that off with all that stuff going on but he's probably crowing about it. Were there any further repercussions? Like him getting DQ'd or did that matter (like he wasn't in contention for the top spot despite making it to the Top 8)?
 
E

Exaulted_Leader

Guest
He made it to the 6th seat, as I understand it, only to be crushed by Big Red (which is fairly fitting - Big Red is T&Ns worst match-up, and where I also would've probably lost the match).

I would doubt that there were any repercussions (it's not like Access calls the DCI hotline to report cheaters everytime they catch one) - but I couldn't be sure.
 
O

orgg

Guest
I'd assume you've got that episode on tape, right?

Sounds to me like y'need to make a copy of the tape and send it in to the DCI.

There's been documented evidence that has gotten people banned to hell and back before. Trey whatsisname was photographed looking at Zvi's pack during a draft, and was kicked for five years.

Send in the videotape and listen to what happens to this buttnugget cheater. You've got him CHEATING ON TAPE. He's history if you get that tape into the right person's hand.
 

Spiderman

Administrator
Staff member
I agree, it's worth a try. If you're successful, that'd put a crimper in his day when he's notified :)
 
N

Notepad

Guest
The guy who double-stool pidgeoned with me, Al Sanson...his life pretty much fell apart when he lost the ability to play tournament Magic. Of course, he was obsessive and made Magic his entire life, even ignoring his wife and kids in order to play at FNMs and such. I don't know what exactly happened, but after he stopped playing Magic, he divorced his wife and moved, or at least thats how people tell me who've seen him. Pretty crazy. Maybe the "bad day" will go something like that.

But yes, just being notified sucks. It makes for a very bad day.
 
N

Notepad

Guest
Yeah, it surprised me to hear about the falling apart of his life just from Magic suspension as a catalyst. Then again, when I thought about it, I remembered he was real obsessive over the game. Definitely an urban legend type person. When I introduced him to Diablo II, he got obsessive about that, buying something like $900 worth of SOJ rings within the first couple of months.
 
Top