Cheating in the Competitive Card Community

This is definitely a topic I’ve wanted to discuss since my return to blogging. Clearly, there would be no better time to discuss it then now, after the events of ARGCS Florida.

First of all, I’ll start with the technical definition of cheating, from Wikipedia:

“Cheating is the getting of reward for ability by dishonest means or finding an easy way out of an unpleasant situation. It is generally used for the breaking of rules to gain unfair advantage in a competitive situation. This broad definition will necessarily include acts of bribery, cronyism, sleaze, nepotism and any situation where individuals are given preference using inappropriate criteria.^[1] The rules infringed may be explicit, or they may be from an unwritten code of conduct based on morality, ethics or custom, making the identification of cheating a subjective process.”

What exactly does this definition include? The obvious cheating maneuvers in card games include stacking, drawing extra cards, marking cards and sleeves, and making illegal plays during phase. This definition will be stretched as my post continues.

At the ARGCS this weekend, a player named Travis Smith was disqualified on the premise that he was stacking and making illegal plays. The examples that have been public are using Gagaga Cowboy’s effect for game when a Unicore was on the field, and activating Effect Veiler while Majesty’s Fiend was on the field (so he can summon BLS). He was so close to winning the event as well; what a shame. I’m sure the accusations were obvious, and that’s why he was disqualified.

The above example is a clear-cut example of cheating, and the punishment that followed. Other plays have faced the same fate when doing similar maneuvers in the past. However, here’s another one for you, the one that probably stemmed today’s post:

At the ARGCS this weekend, Patrick Hoban and company were playing Nekroz, and this example is relative to their Nekroz mirror matches. Once game 1 concluded, he would ask the opponent if they wanted to both side out Djinn Releaser of Rituals. If the opponent agreed (which they probably did, because who likes to lose to the Djinn lock), Patrick would just remove the Djinn and place it on the mat, so the opponent knew he sided it out, and probably extended the same courtesy. What the opponent didn’t know was Patrick sided in a copy of the Djinn, until it was played, and probably won him the game because the opponent likely sided out Book of Eclipse and the like.

This event has been disputed ever since yesterday, when people started to find out. Some people consider it cheating, straight-out. Some people consider it “dirty play”, and unsportsmanlike conduct. I’ll attempt to break down the definition of cheating to determine whether or not this is actually cheating, or not.

Patrick Hoban is clearly smart, and based on his ARG articles, has a good enough command of the English language. He probably worded the question something like this: “Did you want to side out a copy of the Djinn?” Wording it like this would set a few distinctive rules. All he’s asking was to side out a single copy of this card. By setting this established question, he doesn’t directly reveal that he’s maining 2 copies or siding an addition copy. Technically, if he worded the question like this, he isn’t directly lying. All he did was propose an offer to the opponent, and the opponent accepted with proof that the terms of the offer were being met.

According to the definition I provided earlier, is this cheating? I’ll provide the first bit of the definition: “Cheating is the getting of reward for ability by dishonest means or finding an easy way out of an unpleasant situation. It is generally used for the breaking of rules to gain unfair advantage in a competitive situation.” On first glance, it would appear it is cheating. He wanted to win his reward by finding an easy out of the situation, by making the Djinn lock to win the game when the opponent sides out their counters.  However, he is not breaking the rules, even though he is gaining an unfair advantage.

Next, I’ll provide the other relevant part of the above definition. “The rules infringed may be explicit, or they may be from an unwritten code of conduct based on morality, ethics or custom, making the identification of cheating a subjective process”. I don’t believe this has ever happened before, so I suppose this could be considered “unwritten code”. However, if we apply by this final statement, then the question of whether or not Patrick Hoban was cheating or not would be considered subjective, otherwise known as opinion-based. As such, here’s my final opinion on the matter:

Patrick Hoban and friends did not cheat. They were deceptive, and they fought dirty, but they did not cheat, and as far as their thought process is concerned, it was a valid strategy. They played mind games with their opponent’s in the mirror match. I’m sure that they will face a good amount of disrespect from the card playing community, but they made it quite clear they’ll do everything they can to win, barring obvious cheating (I don’t think they’ve ever been accused of stacking or similar)… Now for the fun part of today’s post:

How far will you go to win a card event?

This can be as small-scale as Locals, to as grand-scale as Nationals. Every once in a while, somebody will be caught cheating, and then disqualified almost immediately. In the case of Travis Smith, he was disqualified right before the finals. If only he was playing properly, he could’ve won the entire event, potentially. If not, at least he would’ve been defeated with honour. Once you’re caught cheating, your reputation is ruined. If it’s done in your local community, you’ll be isolated as a cheater in your community. If it’s done at a larger tournament, you’ll be called out all over the Internet.

If Travis Smith was asked and forced to honestly answer the above italicized question, he would answer stating he’ll stack and make sloppy, illegal plays to gain an advantage. Usually, people that are identified as a cheater have a history that creeps up as time progresses (this isn’t just related to card games, I assure you). Travis Smith has other credentials, but now all those credentials will be questioned for sloppy play. His name will never be cleared, and he won’t have any respect from the larger population of the community.

If Patrick Hoban was asked and forced to honestly answer the above italicized question, he would answer stating he won’t cheat, but he’ll use any mind games to his advantage. Fortunately, he doesn’t have a history of this behaviour; he would’ve been called out on it a long time ago. However, he will lose respect from a good chunk of the community, and others will respect him for being a strategic genius. I’m sure he’ll write an article defending (or justifying) his actions, and I’m sure people will read it and base their own subjective opinion. His reputation will never be the same, but he doesn’t care, because all he cares about is winning, which is respectable in its own sense.

If I was asked and forced to honestly answer the above italicized question, I would answer stating that I don’t cheat, and I don’t engage in sloppy play. If I make an illegal play, it’s because I don’t know it’s an illegal play. I always try to remain up-to-date on rulings, and I’m not afraid to ask if I second-guess my own ruling. The point is I don’t intentionally cheat my opponent by making things up. As well, I would never stack, mark cards, or anything of the sort. There have been a few times where some butt-hurt people have accused me of cheating, but it’s never been proven, because it’s never happened. I also have not stooped as low as Patrick Hoban and friends, in regards to his decisive, dirty strategy for the Nekroz mirror match. I’d rather fight clean and honestly; it feels good winning the honest fights.

Also, just an aside, but why would you agree to side out the Djinn lock? I understand it makes the mirror match more skillful, but really? Why would you side out a win condition? Sometimes, you need a little luck on your side, and if you lucky enough to hold the Djinn lock in the Nekroz mirror match, you have a free win. On the opposite side of the coin, it sucks when it happens to you, but whatever, welcome to card games. To win an event, you need every advantage possible, and siding out a win condition goes directly against that. If I would’ve played Patrick Hoban or one of his friends, I wouldn’t have fallen for his trick because I wouldn’t have agreed to side out the Djinn lock. In my opinion, that’s just plain stupid. If you play an Exodia deck with only 4 of the 5 pieces, you deserve failure, and that example illustrated how I feel on this subject.

When I start topping more Regionals and other events, I want to make sure that I do it honestly and properly. If I ever cheated, and got called on it, my reputation would be tarnished forever, making my dreams and goals impossible to reach. Feel free to share your opinions, and thanks for reading!