Given that he has a long history of questionable actions, I can't say I'm rooting for him. Judges don't do this lightly, and all of his defense for his past actions have been half-truths and dodges, to the tune of "I am not a crook" or "It depends upon what the meaning of the word 'is' is".
I got peeved (and I wasn't even playing) watching Saito play in GP Columbus. It's one thing to ask what some goofy card does. It's another to read Jace for the umpteenth time.
Saito is undeniably a genius player and builder--but the way he approaches the game feels wrong. I can't imagine that he's incapable of a brisk level of play--he finishes matches with regularity--but he has a style which is conducive to letting him push the boundaries, and that's not the kind of player I want in the Hall of Fame.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Be they worthy or just plain riff-raff, my warhead shall punish all without distinction. -Rip Van Winkle
That is a ridiculous oversimplification. If you want to maximize your EV, you need to go through various scenarios involving cards that your opponent might have and then you need to think about the likelihood that they have such cards.
But you need to remember that Saito's "defense" was that the board was complicated, and then supplied the information I worked off of. Without including further information about the creatures in play, the state of Tumble Magnet, what cards he had in hand and what mana he had open, and how many cards his opponent had in hand...it's hard to believe that defense.
If someone tells you the board position is complicated, and then proceeds to only mention only how many creatures he has, what his two artifacts are, how many creatures his opponent is swinging with, and what he's holding back...the evaluations we can make are limited and easily reached.
Now, if Saito had provided us with WHAT creatures he had, how many counters were on Tumble Magnet and it's state, what creatures his opponent had with -1/-1s for Contagion Clasp to work on, what creatures his opponent was swinging with, what creature he kept in reserve, how many cards he had in hand and what mana he had open, and a list of cards Saito had in hand and what mana he had open, I'd be included to agree that the board was complicated.
But for all we know, based on information Saito provided, both him and his opponent may have been top decking and neither person had any cards in hand (which is a very real possibility, considering there was 3 minutes left in the round), which would greatly simplify the "complicated" board.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I was driven from this once-great site by abusive mods and admins, who create rules out of thin air to punish people for breaking them (meaning the rule does not exist under forum rules) and selectively enforce the rules that are written on the forum rules. I am currently lurking while deleting 6 years and 2 months of posting history. I will return when ExpiredRascals, Teia Rabishu and Blinking Spirit are no longer in power.
A lot of people seem to be confused about the difference between "slow play" and "stalling". The two are entirely different entities. "Slow play" means only that, that you are playing slowly and need to pick up the pace. It is neither intentional, nor harshly punished. The penalty is a warning and a poke from the judge to play faster.
"Stalling" on the other hand, is completely different. From the Magic Infraction Procedure Guide - "A player intentionally plays slowly in order to take advantage of the time limit." Stalling is intentional by definition, something along the lines of "If I sit here and pretend to think for the next two minutes, the match will be a draw as opposed to me losing..." This is complete and blatant cheating.
I would also like to point out the fact that other than the initial post from the official event coverage, we are only getting statements from one side of the story. Grand Prix head judges have years of experience, and I trust that they understand all of these factors that are being discussed. As such, I will withhold making any judgments until (if?) we hear more from the judges in question.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Don't click here!
(\__/)
(='.'=)This is Bunny. Copy and paste bunny into your
(")_(")signature to help him gain world domination!
Stalling is intentional by definition, something along the lines of "If I sit here and pretend to think for the next two minutes, the match will be a draw as opposed to me losing..." This is complete and blatant cheating.
The results get even more skewed when someone stalls while 1-0 for the match and gets a win when it could have been a draw or, at worse, a loss if he has played at the correct pace.
Yeah - glad to see him finally get dinged for this.
Also happy to see Channel Fireball drop him - he's obviously a skilled player and intelligent, but having celebrity status in the MTG circle shouldn't allow him to circumvent rules without repercussions.
This will be a futile exercise since I'm positive that many of the kneejerk rabble rousing is done from people who don't read through entire threads, but I'll go ahead anyway.
I find that the vast majority of people who call "cheater" on pros are the same people who say the entire game is based on luck because it's easier to get mad and accept losses when you're positively horrible at the game.
I've seen Saito play in person half a dozen times and nowhere in any of his behavior did it seem like he was cheating. Yes, he plays slow. Yes, he's got a bullseye on him because he tends to play slow, but he isn't just sitting there. The calculations he does to give himself the best possible chance of not losing/winning take time and part of the reason he's so great is because he's able to do them effectively. The fact that a judge thought he took too long this time doesn't make him a cheater. It means stalling means different things to different judges and he got the wrong one this time.
Additionally, I'd like to add that Michael Jacob lost a game in a GP last year because a judge ruled that the Path to Exile search was mandatory. There are a lot of languages, a lot of people--many of them poor in social skills--and a lot of intricacies to this game. All those things together can make a difficult day for Saito, but it sure as hell doesn't make him a cheat.
This will be a futile exercise since I'm positive that many of the kneejerk rabble rousing is done from people who don't read through entire threads, but I'll go ahead anyway.
I find that the vast majority of people who call "cheater" on pros are the same people who say the entire game is based on luck because it's easier to get mad and accept losses when you're positively horrible at the game.
I've seen Saito play in person half a dozen times and nowhere in any of his behavior did it seem like he was cheating. Yes, he plays slow. Yes, he's got a bullseye on him because he tends to play slow, but he isn't just sitting there. The calculations he does to give himself the best possible chance of not losing/winning take time and part of the reason he's so great is because he's able to do them effectively. The fact that a judge thought he took too long this time doesn't make him a cheater. It means stalling means different things to different judges and he got the wrong one this time.
He's been under suspicion of stalling for a while now, and he finally got busted for it. Stalling has an official definition in the penalty guidelines, and he met that definition. He didn't "get the wrong judge." He was being watched for stalling, aka intentional slow play, because he's been suspected of doing so in the past. Finally he got busted for it.
Well in limited the board states tend to be a little bit different. You really don't know what your opponent might have in his deck until you actually see the cards itself hit the field. He could think about the cards that his opponent might have in his hand but the percentage of those should be clearly considered since this is limited we are talking about.
I can understand the slow playing in standard, extended, legacy, vintage once the board state is a little bit complicated, especially if your opponent is attacking with an aggressive deck. However, you should be able to know what your opponent is playing by third turn at the latest based on the lands and the creatures/spells they play in constructed formats.
The ruling on Sideboarding is that you have 2 minutes to sideboard/desiboard and shuffle your deck and present, if you don't believe me look it up. Most judges don't enforce this rule but I think they should, a lot of matches could come down differently if this was enforced, especially in big tournaments like Grand Prix, Pro Tours and PTQ's.
I personally believe he should have been Dqed and he deserved it. If he has done this before then karma is a "pain" and it will catch up to you eventually. Does it suck it has to be at this state of his career? Yes! Does it suck it has to be at a big tourney like this? Yes! He did it to himself though, he should just take it and improve his game from this mistake, which he will most likely say it was.
On the one hand, the idea of a false guilty verdict is always a terrible idea, but I tend to care less in the case of card games, even when a great deal of money is on the line. Too often, what I find are blatant cheats are ignored under the guise of "subjectivity," or they're considered "unintentional" or even "Jedi mind tricks." It's the same here; we don't know absolutely that he did it intentionally, but the results show that this is the most reasonable conclusion to draw.
At the level saito plays at, reading Jace to "See what his abilities are" more than once in a game (He apparently picked up his opponent's Jace 2.0, paused 20 seconds to read it, and then thought for another extended period of time for three consecutive turns in a row.) is pretty suspicious.
I've seen Saito play in person half a dozen times and nowhere in any of his behavior did it seem like he was cheating. Yes, he plays slow. Yes, he's got a bullseye on him because he tends to play slow, but he isn't just sitting there. The calculations he does to give himself the best possible chance of not losing/winning take time and part of the reason he's so great is because he's able to do them effectively. The fact that a judge thought he took too long this time doesn't make him a cheater. It means stalling means different things to different judges and he got the wrong one this time.
Except when the same person, who by your observation meets the very definition of someone who Stalls, has been infracted for that same problem in the past to the point where he is watched for that very problem, and is then caught and penalized for it... That's not bad luck, that's justice.
Except when the same person, who by your observation meets the very definition of someone who Stalls, has been infracted for that same problem in the past to the point where he is watched for that very problem, and is then caught and penalized for it... That's not bad luck, that's justice.
I didn't say it wasn't justice. I'm just saying I don't think he's a cheat in the least. In Columbus, he was taking forever to make a play and a judge said, "Warning." He clarified to make sure he got a warning (language barrier) then proceeded to play at a quicker pace. He's a deep thinker. He gets lost in the situation. It's why he smacks the crap out of himself all the time. He's a focus junkie.
I am in no way disagreeing with his disqualification. Read that a few times to make sure it sinks in. I'm just on the, "Yep, he stalled" mode of thinking vs. the "Take that you cheating jerk!" bandwagon.
On the spectrum of cheating, stalling, to me, falls somewhere between asking for a bathroom break during a match and seeing the bottom card of your opponent's deck accidentally he/she presents it. Yeah, it happens, but he didn't palm a card from his opponent's deck and kick it under the table.
On the spectrum of cheating, stalling, to me, falls somewhere between asking for a bathroom break during a match and seeing the bottom card of your opponent's deck accidentally he/she presents it. Yeah, it happens, but he didn't palm a card from his opponent's deck and kick it under the table.
I have to disagree with the sentiment. It's not at all. Stalling is a concious decision to deliberately affect the outcome of the match. It's not accidental, and its not the result of confusion. It's not simply alot of slow play. It's choosing to slow play to make sure you get a favorable result.
If stalling is allowed, then the winner of game 1 wins the match everytime. They simply get priority at the beginning of game 2, and refuse to ever pass it. Obviously, not an acceptable way to play magic. Stalling is simply doing something with that intent, but in a less overt way to avoid detection.
It's possible the Judge's were incorrect and Saito was not stalling, but merely playing slow. This happens. In my match against Saito in Columbus (Round 5, he beat me), he played slow at times. I don't think it had anything to do with stalling, but he was capable of both very slow play and very quick, yet intricate play. Just becuase he plays slow sometimes, does not mean he was not stalling in this case.
Stalling is a problem. It's nice to see the judges enforce it. It will be interesting to see how this affects the Hall of Fame ceremony in Chiba.
On the spectrum of cheating, stalling, to me, falls somewhere between asking for a bathroom break during a match and seeing the bottom card of your opponent's deck accidentally he/she presents it. Yeah, it happens, but he didn't palm a card from his opponent's deck and kick it under the table.
While the act is less obvious than actually manipulating the game to your advantage, the intended outcome is the same -- guarantee your three match points. Stalling when you're 1-0 and facing death increases your chances of getting 3 match points instead of 1. It disrupts the integrity of the tournament, and requires a disqualification pending an investigation.
It's a shame they didn't get him for the Jace stuff. I remember hearing about that. This is the most famous card printed in years, Saito writes an article about it, and then stalls his way through a tournament pretending he doesn't know what the card does. It was insulting to the other players at the tournament and the Magic community as a whole.
This will be a futile exercise since I'm positive that many of the kneejerk rabble rousing is done from people who don't read through entire threads, but I'll go ahead anyway.
I find that the vast majority of people who call "cheater" on pros are the same people who say the entire game is based on luck because it's easier to get mad and accept losses when you're positively horrible at the game.
I've seen Saito play in person half a dozen times and nowhere in any of his behavior did it seem like he was cheating. Yes, he plays slow. Yes, he's got a bullseye on him because he tends to play slow, but he isn't just sitting there. The calculations he does to give himself the best possible chance of not losing/winning take time and part of the reason he's so great is because he's able to do them effectively. The fact that a judge thought he took too long this time doesn't make him a cheater. It means stalling means different things to different judges and he got the wrong one this time.
Additionally, I'd like to add that Michael Jacob lost a game in a GP last year because a judge ruled that the Path to Exile search was mandatory. There are a lot of languages, a lot of people--many of them poor in social skills--and a lot of intricacies to this game. All those things together can make a difficult day for Saito, but it sure as hell doesn't make him a cheat.
So, what you're saying is that, because Saito wasn't cheating in your estimation, he is not a cheater at all. What a compelling argument. It's certainly not possible that A)just didn't feel the need to cheat then or B)that you're not that good at noticing it.
Are you even aware of the years worth of accusations against him? How about the fact that he got DQed(and possibly suspended, I can't recall for certain) for cheating before?
A person with a bad reputation, crossed over a thin grey line and is now facing potentially damaging results. I am glad Wizards published this information, and that CFB separated ways. That says more than enough information, not only that the player who was subjected to this tactic was intimidated, and that factor was abused. Not because of gameplay, but because of rulings.
This is a line that was crossed, and is being punished for, I honestly cannot see them inducting Saito into the hall of fame under such conditions. I would revoke it.
So, what you're saying is that, because Saito wasn't cheating in your estimation, he is not a cheater at all. What a compelling argument. It's certainly not possible that A)just didn't feel the need to cheat then or B)that you're not that good at noticing it.
Are you even aware of the years worth of accusations against him? How about the fact that he got DQed(and possibly suspended, I can't recall for certain) for cheating before?
He got suspended and DQed before and none of it was for cheating. Furthermore, there isn't an overwhelming majority of pros who think he cheats either which is why they and those closest to the game voted him into the Hall. If I'm not good at noticing it, then neither are the hundreds of players who play with him on a nearly weekly basis.
Furthermore, Conley Woods lost a match at State Champs this past year because he didn't read Koth and it was in his native language.
The Jace Story is more exaggerated every time I hear it. "He read Jace. WTF, he's a pro!" "He picked up Jace 3 straight turns! Wtf?!" Pros read cards all the time to cover themselves from getting blown out by an easy oversight.
He got invited to the HoF because too many Magic pros pull the same stunts that he does, and don't want to feel like hypocrites. 'Pro'(what an oxymoron anyway) Magic is filled with cheaters/shady characters.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I got peeved (and I wasn't even playing) watching Saito play in GP Columbus. It's one thing to ask what some goofy card does. It's another to read Jace for the umpteenth time.
Saito is undeniably a genius player and builder--but the way he approaches the game feels wrong. I can't imagine that he's incapable of a brisk level of play--he finishes matches with regularity--but he has a style which is conducive to letting him push the boundaries, and that's not the kind of player I want in the Hall of Fame.
But you need to remember that Saito's "defense" was that the board was complicated, and then supplied the information I worked off of. Without including further information about the creatures in play, the state of Tumble Magnet, what cards he had in hand and what mana he had open, and how many cards his opponent had in hand...it's hard to believe that defense.
If someone tells you the board position is complicated, and then proceeds to only mention only how many creatures he has, what his two artifacts are, how many creatures his opponent is swinging with, and what he's holding back...the evaluations we can make are limited and easily reached.
Now, if Saito had provided us with WHAT creatures he had, how many counters were on Tumble Magnet and it's state, what creatures his opponent had with -1/-1s for Contagion Clasp to work on, what creatures his opponent was swinging with, what creature he kept in reserve, how many cards he had in hand and what mana he had open, and a list of cards Saito had in hand and what mana he had open, I'd be included to agree that the board was complicated.
But for all we know, based on information Saito provided, both him and his opponent may have been top decking and neither person had any cards in hand (which is a very real possibility, considering there was 3 minutes left in the round), which would greatly simplify the "complicated" board.
"Stalling" on the other hand, is completely different. From the Magic Infraction Procedure Guide - "A player intentionally plays slowly in order to take advantage of the time limit." Stalling is intentional by definition, something along the lines of "If I sit here and pretend to think for the next two minutes, the match will be a draw as opposed to me losing..." This is complete and blatant cheating.
I would also like to point out the fact that other than the initial post from the official event coverage, we are only getting statements from one side of the story. Grand Prix head judges have years of experience, and I trust that they understand all of these factors that are being discussed. As such, I will withhold making any judgments until (if?) we hear more from the judges in question.
(\__/)
(='.'=)This is Bunny. Copy and paste bunny into your
(")_(")signature to help him gain world domination!
Or maybe Cheatyface.
Standstill would be better suited I think.
Cheaters destroy the game. Actions against them are always nice to see. Keep the game clean...
Current signed cards count (31.12.16):
Artist alters: 828
Beta Project: 2574/2853
Grand Total signed cards: 42'091
All my stuff in a FB group
Me@WOTC
Also happy to see Channel Fireball drop him - he's obviously a skilled player and intelligent, but having celebrity status in the MTG circle shouldn't allow him to circumvent rules without repercussions.
shrug, works for Antoine Ruel.
goose, meet gander.
I find that the vast majority of people who call "cheater" on pros are the same people who say the entire game is based on luck because it's easier to get mad and accept losses when you're positively horrible at the game.
I've seen Saito play in person half a dozen times and nowhere in any of his behavior did it seem like he was cheating. Yes, he plays slow. Yes, he's got a bullseye on him because he tends to play slow, but he isn't just sitting there. The calculations he does to give himself the best possible chance of not losing/winning take time and part of the reason he's so great is because he's able to do them effectively. The fact that a judge thought he took too long this time doesn't make him a cheater. It means stalling means different things to different judges and he got the wrong one this time.
Additionally, I'd like to add that Michael Jacob lost a game in a GP last year because a judge ruled that the Path to Exile search was mandatory. There are a lot of languages, a lot of people--many of them poor in social skills--and a lot of intricacies to this game. All those things together can make a difficult day for Saito, but it sure as hell doesn't make him a cheat.
Oli Ruel.
He's been under suspicion of stalling for a while now, and he finally got busted for it. Stalling has an official definition in the penalty guidelines, and he met that definition. He didn't "get the wrong judge." He was being watched for stalling, aka intentional slow play, because he's been suspected of doing so in the past. Finally he got busted for it.
I can understand the slow playing in standard, extended, legacy, vintage once the board state is a little bit complicated, especially if your opponent is attacking with an aggressive deck. However, you should be able to know what your opponent is playing by third turn at the latest based on the lands and the creatures/spells they play in constructed formats.
The ruling on Sideboarding is that you have 2 minutes to sideboard/desiboard and shuffle your deck and present, if you don't believe me look it up. Most judges don't enforce this rule but I think they should, a lot of matches could come down differently if this was enforced, especially in big tournaments like Grand Prix, Pro Tours and PTQ's.
I personally believe he should have been Dqed and he deserved it. If he has done this before then karma is a "pain" and it will catch up to you eventually. Does it suck it has to be at this state of his career? Yes! Does it suck it has to be at a big tourney like this? Yes! He did it to himself though, he should just take it and improve his game from this mistake, which he will most likely say it was.
Currently Playing:
T2 - Jund Wolf Ramp
T2 - Bant Pod
Legacy - Maverick
Legacy Decks:
Legendary Maverick GW
Except when the same person, who by your observation meets the very definition of someone who Stalls, has been infracted for that same problem in the past to the point where he is watched for that very problem, and is then caught and penalized for it... That's not bad luck, that's justice.
Buy from me on TCGPlayer::Twitter::Flickr
I didn't say it wasn't justice. I'm just saying I don't think he's a cheat in the least. In Columbus, he was taking forever to make a play and a judge said, "Warning." He clarified to make sure he got a warning (language barrier) then proceeded to play at a quicker pace. He's a deep thinker. He gets lost in the situation. It's why he smacks the crap out of himself all the time. He's a focus junkie.
I am in no way disagreeing with his disqualification. Read that a few times to make sure it sinks in. I'm just on the, "Yep, he stalled" mode of thinking vs. the "Take that you cheating jerk!" bandwagon.
On the spectrum of cheating, stalling, to me, falls somewhere between asking for a bathroom break during a match and seeing the bottom card of your opponent's deck accidentally he/she presents it. Yeah, it happens, but he didn't palm a card from his opponent's deck and kick it under the table.
I have to disagree with the sentiment. It's not at all. Stalling is a concious decision to deliberately affect the outcome of the match. It's not accidental, and its not the result of confusion. It's not simply alot of slow play. It's choosing to slow play to make sure you get a favorable result.
If stalling is allowed, then the winner of game 1 wins the match everytime. They simply get priority at the beginning of game 2, and refuse to ever pass it. Obviously, not an acceptable way to play magic. Stalling is simply doing something with that intent, but in a less overt way to avoid detection.
It's possible the Judge's were incorrect and Saito was not stalling, but merely playing slow. This happens. In my match against Saito in Columbus (Round 5, he beat me), he played slow at times. I don't think it had anything to do with stalling, but he was capable of both very slow play and very quick, yet intricate play. Just becuase he plays slow sometimes, does not mean he was not stalling in this case.
Stalling is a problem. It's nice to see the judges enforce it. It will be interesting to see how this affects the Hall of Fame ceremony in Chiba.
While the act is less obvious than actually manipulating the game to your advantage, the intended outcome is the same -- guarantee your three match points. Stalling when you're 1-0 and facing death increases your chances of getting 3 match points instead of 1. It disrupts the integrity of the tournament, and requires a disqualification pending an investigation.
This time was no surprise.
So, what you're saying is that, because Saito wasn't cheating in your estimation, he is not a cheater at all. What a compelling argument. It's certainly not possible that A)just didn't feel the need to cheat then or B)that you're not that good at noticing it.
Are you even aware of the years worth of accusations against him? How about the fact that he got DQed(and possibly suspended, I can't recall for certain) for cheating before?
This is a line that was crossed, and is being punished for, I honestly cannot see them inducting Saito into the hall of fame under such conditions. I would revoke it.
He got suspended and DQed before and none of it was for cheating. Furthermore, there isn't an overwhelming majority of pros who think he cheats either which is why they and those closest to the game voted him into the Hall. If I'm not good at noticing it, then neither are the hundreds of players who play with him on a nearly weekly basis.
Furthermore, Conley Woods lost a match at State Champs this past year because he didn't read Koth and it was in his native language.
The Jace Story is more exaggerated every time I hear it. "He read Jace. WTF, he's a pro!" "He picked up Jace 3 straight turns! Wtf?!" Pros read cards all the time to cover themselves from getting blown out by an easy oversight.