[Very little introduction is necessary for the judge we call Matt Tabak. He's Nevada's senior judge, a staple on the Grand Prix and Pro Tour circuit as both a judge and a player, and one of the funniest judges I've ever worked with. -Seamus]

In today's thrilling episode, we'll take a quick look at a situation I ran into recently at Grand Prix: Phoenix; we'll discuss how ethics and sportsmanship coexist with competitive play; and I'll sit down for a debate about bluffing with the only person who fully understands how full of it I am—me. Or will I? Stay tuned.

There's an old saying that goes, "If you're not cheating, you're not trying." Now, on behalf of all the judges out there, let me tell you this may be taking things a bit too far. But people like winning, and there is something to be said for cheating to make sure you beat your opponent. That something is, "You are disqualified, you moron. Please fill out a statement so we all may laugh at you while you're suspended." But sometimes the line between cheating and gamesmanship isn't so clear.

Play openly and honestly with your opponent, honorably seizing victory or defeat? Good. Add a Rakdos Guildmage to your sealed deck? Bad. Bluff your opponent into making a mistake? Depends.

Magic is a game of incomplete information. We don't always know what cards are in our opponent's hands or library. But more than that, we often don't know what our opponents know. They may be missing the play that seems to obvious to you. They may be scared of cards you may or may not be holding. They may have even committed the deadliest of deadly sins to all the pros out there—they may be bad at Magic. Seizing on this uncertainty and manipulating your opponent into a poor play can turn a sure loss into a close victory. Bluffing is a time-honored tradition, dating back to our ancestors poking their opponents with sticks and grunting, "Ug have Counterspell" while holding just a Prehistoric Caves of Koilos. But while bluffing about hidden information is fine, bluffing about the rules of the game can be dangerous territory.

When playing, judges and rules experts sometimes find themselves in the position, by virtue of their superior knowledge, of being able to manipulate their opponent's perceptions to their advantage. Consider the following, a somewhat, mostly, kind of true story from a recent Grand Prix somewhere in Arizona (names changed to protect Bob Anderson of Lubbock, TX, DCI # 80632203, who did this originally):

Lee attacks with a Silhana Ledgewalker. Seamus, the defending player [Uh, no relation —Seamus], controls an Aquastrand Spider and an untapped Forest. Appearing confused, Seamus asks Lee, "If I activate this, it can block flyers, right?" Lee calmly replies, "Flyers? Sure. But it doesn't gain flying." Lee then looks at his Silhana Ledgewalker pointedly.

You're the judge on the scene. You weren't called over; you just happen to be watching this exchange. Did Lee do anything wrong? Does he deserve a penalty? Chew on that while I pad my word count... I mean, "make a quick aside":

The first mistake Seamus made was asking his opponent a rules question. Even the most obvious of rules questions should always be addressed to a judge. Judges largely don't care whether you win or lose, and most will simply try to honestly and correctly answer your questions. This cannot be said of most opponents. Judges will help you. Talk to them. They're lonely.

So, what penalty, if any, did you come up with? If you said no penalty, give yourself 0 points. If you said a warning for Unsporting Conduct—Minor, give yourself 10 points. If you said a DQ for cheating, give yourself 100 points and know that your moon may be in Sagittarius. Look for a romantic encounter around the 28th. To talk about this question and the larger implications about ethics and sportsmanship, I sat down with my evil self for a little chat:

Matt: So, my even-more-evilly-goateed friend, did you come up with the right penalty?

Evil Matt: Penalty? For what? Lee never said anything untrue. He simply stated a few facts, given the board. He even answered his opponent's rules question correctly. Sure, he added in some extra info, but even that was completely true. How can you penalize someone for being truthful?

Matt: Truth isn't the issue. Check out the Penalty Guidelines and the definition of Cheating—Fraud: "A player intentionally misrepresents rules, procedures, personal information, or any other relevant tournament information." Lee knew what effect his statements would have. That "extra" statement about the Spider not gaining flying, that's the giveaway.

Evil Matt: How do you know? I mean, if it were me, I'd hope it would have that effect, but I wouldn't know. Isn't it Seamus's problem that he doesn't know the rules well enough to know the Spider could block the Ledgewalker?

Matt: Seamus is responsible for his own rules knowledge. But once Lee attempts to confuse the rules of the game, even if he uses truthful statements to do it, he's crossed the line into cheating. He's intentionally misrepresenting the rules, implying his attacker could get through unscathed, in order to gain an advantage.

Evil Matt: So I have to be honest with my opponents? That sucks. Why am I helping them win?

Matt: Well, not so fast. Bluffing is still very much a part of the game. You have no obligation to be honest about hidden information. That is, what's in your hand, library, sideboard, or any information your opponent doesn't know by the rules of the game.

Evil Matt: What if the sucker, er... opponent asks me a rules question? Then can I lie?

Matt: No. Your best bet there is to tell your opponent to ask a judge. Even if you are going to answer the question correctly, it's always best if the information comes from a tournament official. Remember, you don't have to answer theoretical rules questions from your opponent. But you have to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth if asked about the stats on a creature in play, how many cards you have in hand, or anything else that is considered public information.

Evil Matt: OMG. Your pansy rules suck. What, do I have to hug my opponent after the match and call him a "snuggy-bear" too? What happened to competition? Kill or be killed? Death to my enemies?! Why can't I use my opponent's stupidity against him?

Matt: You need to calm down. Find a relaxing hobby. Take up scrapbooking maybe. Competition is great, and we want people to use every legal means at their disposal to win, especially in tournaments. But the DCI has rules, and we have to follow them. Your opponent's stupidity? Sure, use that too, but do it within the rules. It's all about integrity. Look at it this way: in ten years, when you're up for the Hall of Fame, you don't want endless debates on what a sneaky bastard you were, right?

Evil Matt: Whatever. Next you're going to tell me hitting people with chairs after getting manascrewed is wrong. Or helping them shuffle for game 2 by throwing their deck at the wall.

Matt: Where on Earth would you learn such despicable practices?

Evil Matt: From you, alright? I learned it from watching you!

Okay, well, that's all the time we have for our little chat. Hopefully, amidst all the stale jokes and pleas for attention, you learned a little something about bluffing and sportsmanship.

Do:
• Refer opponent's rules questions to a nearby judge.
• Fully and honestly answer any question about public information.
• Swing for two.
• Bluff about hidden information if the situation calls for it.

Don't:
• Misrepresent the rules of the game or effects of spells and abilities.
• Lie about anything considered public information.
• Be a rude, unsporting idiot. Well, at least don't be rude or unsporting.
• Ask your opponent rules questions—those go to a judge.

The example above is a somewhat egregious example of trying to gain an unfair advantage through illegal deception. I'd hate for anyone out there, especially new judges, to think that this sort of thing is common and go headhunting. But, like all rule violations, it's something judges should watch out for and be aware of. Hopefully the players out there realize why allowing this sort of thing is really bad for the game, and those that employed these tactics in the past can adapt their game going forward. Hopefully we all, players and judges alike, use good judgment, intelligence, and proper behavior to carry Magic forward here in decade #2.

Keep it fair. Smash face. Hello and good luck. All that jazz.