Subject: Re: The Competition of Magic Date: Wed, 06 May 1998 21:09:47 -0700 From: "Gregory M. Keeling" To: fkusumot@ix.netcom.com Mr. Clarke's article struck several chords, and has elicited my response. In that, I belive his article has accomplished what he intended it to accomplish. My summary of his points, paraphrased, is as follows: 1. Pro Magic players are of 2 kinds, the ones who really are just playing for fun, and the ones who are there to win the big money. 2. Pro players can/should honestly use a model of examples like the ones he provided to help them decide into which of these two groups they best fit or belong. Rather than two groups, Mr. Clarke really places the whole lot of Magic Pros on a continuum, with the honest/ethical extreme at one end and the dishonest/cheater on the other extreme of a line. He seems to be saying all Magic Pros fit in there somewhere, and probably more toward the cheater side than they would like to admit. 3. Unethical though it may be in all forms, cheating occurs, and it must be dealt with in some way by virtue of that simple fact by players and officials at most/all events. 4. In the context of its being a fact which must be dealt with at most/all events, cheating is a part of the metagame inherent to the Magic enviroment. My responses to these points: 1. Generally, I agree that it is hard to play for fun AND go all out to win the money. It is hard; it takes a strongly ethical and maturely responsible person who can TRUELY win or lose with grace, dignity, and respect. 2. Saying there are two groups, the "fun players" and the "money wanters" is very loose, and I am not sure what Mr. Clarke meant. It would would seem to me more the case that almost all Pro players want to both have fun and win money. Are the "money wanters" more likely the dishonest and worst cheaters? Are the Pro players who do not win the honest "fun players"? Anyway, the idea of all players being on a continuum fits better for me, both because I think it is what Mr. Clarke meant, and because it better expresses the ideas for me, whether or not it works for him. If this *is* what he meant, I agree: Pro Magic players can be placed on and ethical continuum, and there will be a *few* at either end of the continuum with the large lump of players somewhere in the middle. If it is agreed that most all Magic Pros want to both have fun and win money, then placing Pro players into honesty/dishonesty groups is really a simple thing to do, by the way. There are only *those who cheat*, and *those who do not cheat*. 3. Here I agree with Mr. Clarke: First, cheating in all forms is unethical. Second, though I must rely upon the testimony of the posts by *those who know* (tourney and event participants), it seems to be agreed upon that cheating occurs at most/all events. Therefore, it must be dealt with by players and officials participating in these events. 4. Here Mr. Clarke and I part ways. Cheating is a choice the individual player makes. It is not a matter of "correcting an opponent's mistakes..." To cite one of his examples: If the dice rolls off the table and you know what it was, when he asks, tell him just that! "I know what it was, but I would rather not say." Or: "I know what it was, but I do not think it would be fair for me to say." Why cheat? He may still cut himself short on life, but you have OPENLY stated your position. Then it is just his mistake. Live with it and play on! Be ready to be treated the same way, though, when you make such a mistake! With this type of play enviroment, mistakes that suite you will go uncorrected, but at least in an openly stated manner! Mistakes that do not suite you, however, will be another issue. When the die rolls off the table and the opponent thinks he had two extra life..."Judge!" In the first case, the opponent asks you instead of calling on a judge. In the second case, a disagreement will have to be settled by someone who was probably not present when the mistake occurred. Which is better? You decide. Let's see...I can be honest and probably avoid the need for a judge, or I can contribute to the need for a judge to be present at every match...hmmmm... In closing, I need to comment Mr. Clarke's assertion that cheating as part of the Magic metagame. I can only assume this must be true of Mr. Clarke's metagame. If you know the rules, play by them or you are a cheater. If there are mistakes made by an opponent, discuss them openly if it needs to be or is discussed at all. Decide how to fairly respond to such situations when they occur, and live every game by what you decide. Include opponents in such discussions whenever possible, preferably before the match begins. When there are cloudy areas not covered by the rules or your "code", call the judge. Do NOT try to tell me cheating is "just" part of the game. If it is a part of th game, then it is the same kind of part that fouling and double-dribbling are in basketball: Fouling is strictly a judgement call, some incidents of the infraction are more obviously fouls than others, all require a referee to judge. Double-dribbling is a violation of the rules requiring no judgement call once the rules are known and understood. I will agree that there are problems not covered by the rules. There do NOT have to be situations not covered by establishing and playing (and living) by an ethical code of conduct. Either Pro Magic eradicates cheating by rising above other Pro sports, which have multiple "judges" (umpires, referees, etc.) or it becomes necessary for judges to attend every match. There is no middle ground. So whatcha gonna do? Contribute to judges becoming necessary for every match at Pro events, or play (and live your life) honestly, delaying that sad day? Again, in this *there is no middle ground*! Thanks for your time! Greg (gregk@cafes.net)