Hello, readers. This week's article is a collection of random thoughts from the last month. I've done some local events, and planned the upcoming summer event season. It's going to be busy, as always. I'm looking forward to a Grand Prix, Nationals for a non-Magic game, Nationals Qualifier for Magic, and a Pro Tour—and that's just May. June, July, and August will be full of National Qualifiers, Pro Tour Qualifiers, prereleases, and Nationals.

Last Saturday I ran a Shadowmoor prerelease event with 39 players. We got many new DCI members. It seemed like some of them were quite good players and knew the rules better than the average newbie, so my current theory is that these were people who normally play Magic Online. It seems that every time I bring in another judge to help me, I get something like 20 players and we both get bored because there's not much to do. However, if I decide to judge alone, I get lots of players and wish I had a little bit of help.

Tatterkite was definitely the card of the day. Tatterkite vs. Wither, Tatterkite vs. Scarscale Ritual, Tatterkite this and Tatterkite that. I like the Scarecrow theme—the concept is fun, and the art on those things is really cool. Also, I have to love Pili-Pala because the name sounds Finnish—"pili-pali" means something poorly constructed and rickety. Since it's confirmed that Tarmogoyf got its name from a Finnish dictionary, I hope to see more cards with Finnish names in the future. However, my brother Tarmo wasn't at all impressed by his cardboard namesake.

All in all it was a prerelease I got another volunteer for my Nationals, I chatted with a new female player, and I introduced another player to the joys of Menger sponge making (see the best Magic Arcana ever). For a while, chats on #mtgjudge were very confusing because everyone was talking about building L1s and combining them into L2s. So far I've built a couple of L1s at work, and I made one fully paneled L1 at home.

A few weeks ago I ran a PTQ in another town. The winner of the event gave me a ride home, and during the two hour trip we talked about judging and big magic events in general. We discussed some rulings I made during the PTQ, and the player told me that he respects me because I don't have a problem with checking the rulebook if I'm not sure about a ruling. He then shared some "bad judge" stories from other events he had attended.

Let's discuss "bad judge" stories. Every player has them. They complain about tournament-procedure-related game losses that just seem so unfair. They complain about game play errors that were fixed in a weird way (or not fixed). They complain about rules questions that the judge got wrong. It's often wise to not comment on these kind of stories, because you were not there and you're only getting one side of the story. A player can't necessarily be objective about unfavorable rulings—that's human nature. Even if you intend to be objective, you might end up telling the story you want to tell instead of the whole, pure truth. If a player tells me about a judging situation in a private conversation, I will listen politely and give my opinion with the necessary disclaimers. I also tell them about appropriate ways to address their concerns (such as talking to the judge in question, talking to their TO, and writing a review on DCIX).

The actual rulings this PTQ winner was talking about are irrelevant; his main point was that the judge gave the impression of not really knowing what he was doing, but he made a ruling anyway. This is a bad thing even if he got the ruling right (although getting it right is definitely more important than looking good).

Fumbling your way through a correct ruling can make the player mistrust your ruling. It may cause an appeal that might have otherwise been avoided. It may inspire a player to complain about your ruling to anyone who listens. Think about your body language; certain gestures signal confidence while others show that you're uncertain. Think about your language; don't say "I think". Your rulings are not opinions, and they should not be based on opinions. They should be based on rules and facts.

Of course, sometimes we are just not sure what the rules say. I've heard some people say that you should make a ruling even when you're not sure. I don't agree with this. I think you should always make sure that you have the correct information before making a ruling. There's no shame in stepping away from the table to check a rules document, or asking another judge for help, or asking the players to explain the situation/question again. You can do all of this with calm confidence, and still maintain your authority in the eyes of the players. I've made rulings and realized later that I got it wrong, and felt bad about it. However, I've felt worse about the cases where I made a ruling without being sure that I got the rule or policy right. Being honestly wrong is bad, being dishonestly right is also bad. But which one is worse? Getting a ruling wrong is a bad thing, no doubt. It can be made worse or better by how you deal with the mistake when you discover it. Making a sloppy ruling and getting it right is bad because even though you got it right this time, you're not committed to getting the next one right, or getting all of your rulings right all the time.

However, one shouldn't become too reliant on documents. That can also give a bad impression to the players. Consulting the documents during the event is not a substitute for being prepared and studying the rules before the event. If you want to consult with another judge before you make a ruling, you should still deliver the ruling yourself. While writing this article, I realized that this is one thing I want to keep in mind when working with my judge candidates. It's sometimes too easy for me to step in and take over, instead of helping the candidate to make the correct ruling.

Finally, we all make mistakes sometimes. We should try to learn from our mistakes, try to avoid repeating them, and apologize to the players when we screw up. I don't think judges should pretend that they're always right. However, be careful when commenting on "bad judge" stories on internet messageboards, and remember that the judge in question may have had information that the player is not giving to you.

I have one final note for the players reading this: You have the righ to appeal to the Head Judge. Use it! The player who told me stories during the car trip didn't appeal, but appeared to have learned his lesson after discussing things afterwards with the Head Judge.

That's it for this month. My next article will probably be a PT Hollywood report. In the meantime, those who are interested in working at Finnish Nationals should keep their eyes open for a judge call, coming soon to a mailing list near you. Thanks for reading!

Johanna Virtanen
Level 3 Judge, L1 sponge maker, Finland
flame (at) bore.org
flame- on #mtgjudge (Efnet)