You must be logged in to view user profiles.
Final Level 1 Exam
Level 1 Electives
Advanced Comprehensive Rules
L2 Event Management
Level 2 Electives
Final Level 2 Exam
Leadership, Presence, and Charisma
Development of other Judges
Logistics and Tournament Operations
Stress and Conflict Management
Teamwork, Diplomacy, and Maturity
Penalty and Policy Philosophy
Running Digital Events
Digital Event Tools
Digital Magic Tournament Policy
Florian kümmert sich schon seit Jahren um die Magic Community rund um St. Pölten um die Spieler und den neuen Store der sich gerade etabliert. Er ist ein Pfeiler für Regelfragen und die Turnierlandschaft und bemüht sich dass nicht nur casual Events stattfinden sondern auch dass sich eine Competitive Scene entwickelt. Er ist eine gute Ergänzung in unserer Judgefamilie.
During our conversations I already got a very good impression of you and your motivations. I think you come across as someone who can stand up for his local community and take care of it and move it forward.
I\'m really looking forward to watching your development and working with you in the future.
Gabriele è un membro attivo e affidabile della comunità sarda di Magic, proattivo con i giocatori e ottimo conoscitore di regole e struttura degli eventi. Sono felice di fare questo Endorsment per lui, sarà un ottima aggiunta alla comunità arbitrale sarda e italiana.
Ciao Marco, questo è il mio endorsement per il tuo esame L1.
Ci conosciamo da qualche anno ormai, ti ho visto prima nei panni di giocatore e nell\'ultimo periodo anche di organizzatore di piccoli eventi per la tua community locale dove hai sempre gestito anche i vari dubbi che i giocatori presentavano.
Sei stato sempre interessato alle particolari interazioni di regole e anche di policy per essere meglio preparato ad affrontare le diverse situazioni che ti si si sarebbero potute presentare ad un torneo al quale avresti partecipato, ora tutte queste conoscenze ti hanno fornito una solida base per approcciarti al L1.
So che cerchi di mantenere un ambiente positivo e sereno all\'interno della tua community locale, anzi è un argomento di cui abbiamo parlato spesso: già ora come giocatore di spicco sei il primo a dare l\'esempio per mantenere sano e divertente l\'ambiente di gioco, ricorda che come judge questo atteggiamento sarà ancora più importante.
So che rimani principalmente un giocatore e che preferisci giocare gli eventi di spicco, ma magari potresti anche provare l\'esperienza \"dietro le quinte\" qualche volta, saresti un elemento che mi farebbe piacere avere in staff!
Ronald, as I mentioned, your day of Team Leading was the most as-expected day I believe I\'ve ever had. Nothing was lacking, but nothing was exceptional. You didn\'t miss a beat, but you didn\'t throw in any new ones. I would rate each category at about a 3.5, and I mean that positively, I think a deficiency far outweighs a above average proficiency or two. I had a very enjoyable day working with you and would gladly do so again, and you outrank many of the Leads I\'ve had. When I told you this feedback, you challenged me to tell you how you could have had an exceptional performance at things, and that\'s going to be the focus of this review, across the qualities that Day 2 Team Leads are evaluated against.
Success with Team Task:
We were Paper, this is something where I personally feel a Lead/Team *cannot* be exemplary without some external problem occuring. Posting Pairings/Standings and cutting/distributing Slips are both so straight-forward, that there\'s not really much of a difference between doing those perfectly and doing them at average quality (they do have a nearly bottomless floor, but that ceiling is not hard to reach). There\'s only one day in all of my Judge career that I\'d consider a Paper team to have been Exemplary, and that was a PTQ where WLTR went insane and started printing out the slips in a literally random order, and also wouldn\'t print the bottom quarter of the page for slips or pairings. I had to change plans of operation significantly in order to keep the tournament progressing, such as sorting the slips post-cutting to be able to distribute them quicker. Without some chaotic wrench being thrown into the works, I don\'t think there\'s really a way for the Paper Team to be significant and exceptional.
Similar to the Success with Team Task, there\'s too low of a ceiling with normal operations here. Some sort of unexpected problem needs to arise for delegation to be much better than normal. Same issues with Communication (for example, how well can someone tell their team the half round break is at 4 pm?). For how the day went, these tasks were too “simple”/“straightforward,” basically every instance is something that you can only mess up. With less experienced judges chore-wheeling (and how) vs not is a consideration, but with a team of two veterans it\'s a moot point.
This one is tough, because you mentioned that you don\'t find the random task exercise or random question engagement to be the best, I forget the terms you used but others have called them artificial engagement and “cutesy,” believing that something external to the event is not authentic team building. One positive example that stands out in my head is Jon Goud years ago asking us “if you wanted to Cheat at this event, how would you do it, and how would everyone else try and catch you?” It doesn\'t have to be a straight forward question, but I think that challenging the team to think differently than normal, and evaluate what we do and why in a novel way is exemplary team engagement. Especially the back and forth, cat and mouse aspect to this, remains the best example of Team Building I\'ve encountered so far, and it\'s from about four years ago now. Perhaps something a little off the wall like “you can\'t post pairings by last name. What\'s your next best way to post pairings?”
This was something you were doing upwards more than downwards, your crowdsourcing of feedback and opinions on CJ as Head Judge should have a lot of value to him. Conversely, I didn\'t see much beyond normal mentorship, you were engaging us but it didn\'t feel like anything above and beyond. Ironically, when I mentioned the day was as-expected and you challenged me for instructions to make it exceptional, that\'s where I feel you displayed exemplary mentorship. I\'ve seen you do this before too, awhile back Brook was dissatisfied with his day of Leading and you provided a lot of feedback and helpful questions for consideration at the judge after-party. So I\'ve seen you be an excellent mentor to people, it just hasn\'t been during the course of the event, which is a timing consideration to bear in mind as it compares against your performance for the day.
Task Preparation and Event Overview/Feedback:
I\'m grouping both of these together because I feel they both operate the same. In order to be an exceptional day, something needs to fall apart and get fixed. It doesn\'t matter how flexible your plans are if they don\'t need to give at all, it doesn\'t matter how well you can spot problems on other teams if they don\'t have any.
A way to phrase my opinion of most aspects of the day, is not that *you* didn\'t do better, but that there wasn\'t better to do. You did all the things you did well, there\'s just only so well they can be done.
This review is going to include a logistic focused overview on End of Round, as software and procedures were entirely overhauled in the pandemic.
The number one thing for End of Round procedure right now is making sure that all the zone captains have Scorekeeper permissions. Being able to access a live list of outstanding matches is amazing functionality. Honestly all judges having SK permissions I tend to favor when the floor is sufficiently experienced, being able to help a match report or a player check their list to desideboard properly do all come up, and any judge on staff being able to accommodate that is a big value add.
Melee previously had a problem where match results needed an additional click to confirm their submission, and this led to impossible numbers of outstanding tables and was a huge tax on the judge staff at SCG Dallas. By comparison SCG Philadelphia was being run on WLTR and without Purple Fox, and while that was similarly not expeditious it was instead due to a worse execution of an end of round plan, given that few judges knew which time extensions existed and needed coverage.
The downside is that melee doesn\'t allow for any comments etc on matches. You can\'t denote time extensions, covered by a judge, or most urgently- missing results. There is a Mark as Feature Match function which can be used to mark either time extensions or ghost matches, but not both, and requires everyone to be on the same page, and while it does not appear to be a problem at present, a previous event had an issue with this overwhelming melee.gg and causing delays and lag on live displays and everything else.
The current \'best practices\' systems all use Discord to some extent, there\'s two versions.
1- All judges on staff put time extensions on Discord, emoji reactions to note when the table is covered or results are in or the table is missing. Judges also use Melee for a live list of outstanding tables to make sure everything is covered and to check for ghost matches.
2- All judges on staff put time extensions on Discord, and at X left in the round, the SK puts all outstanding matches into Discord, each as a separate message so those all can be emoji reacted to as above, and Judges use that list of outstanding table to check for ghosts.
Abe, you chose to go with version 2, and throughout the entire tournament we detected every ghost match with ample time to spare, which if memory serves was something like 3 or 4 matches throughout the entire event. The main value adds here form the EOR team were not catching missing matches, although of course that matters, it was reassurances that there were not unexpected ghost matches and also the reminding of players to submit their results which each round progressed the tournament forward discernibly faster than if we did nothing.
The difference between these two systems efficacy is fairly minimal, I personally originally preferred version 1 where the SK doesn\'t need to type 10-25 messages into Discord, which also could be typo\'d. Version 1 also lets any judge do a lap and check for ghost matches whenever they would like. The downside being that an outside judge can\'t look in one place and get an idea of the overall event, you need the matches in Discord where you can see what\'s covered and what\'s missing at a glance (sometimes a scroll). Version 1 also has judges toggling back and forth between two different apps on their phone, which can easily cause confusion or oversight, and has no central repository for which matches are covered, so a lot of judgepower gets wasted sending judges to the same tables or leaving some tables uncovered. In another event where we ran End of Round using version 1, and there was a discernible difference in how each zone captain performed, largely based on whether or not that zone captain could internally/personally keep track of where they had sent judges already. One zone captain lacked this ability and did not notice a sizeable number of ghost matches (6 if I recall correctly) until another judge stepped in and double checked things.
The previous paragraph was a long winded way to say that your thoughts on EOR procedures were superior to mine originally, and after seeing things in action I have since been swayed over to your school of thought on the matter. I\'m not sure how much the juice is worth the squeeze on working on improving either of these Discord hybrid techniques, though, there are feature requests to Flats to have Melee add a time extension field and the ability to mark matches as covered or ghosts in Melee, and then it\'s a one-stop shop for all of your EOR needs.
Decks Lead – SCG Philadelphia
At Philadelpha I was the Deck Checks Lead for the Modern 10k(s). My team building was adequate, this review will focus instead of the logistical aspects of the event.
#1 – all judges need full permissions across multiple events on melee.gg
Not having permissions for all events led to challenges where a list could not be pulled up because the judge did not have permissions on the appropriate event. I think adding all judges with appropriate training on “do not reset the round” is the best way forward, that way any judge on the floor can randomly check a deck list if they see an unusual card in the main board, or a player can\'t recall the 15th card in their sideboard between rounds.
#2 – with virtually all digital decklists, more tablet devices are necessary for judges. I had to bring in my own laptop and split screen it to have two decklists up at once so judges could check a second match. Very straightforward problem with a straightforward solution – more tablets.
#3 – Melee needs a few features and until it has those, it requires a hodge podge of workarounds
A- No way to mark decks as checked
B- No way to mark a player as a paper list, or update their list, or enter a list
C- player\'s cannot submit a list late, as opposed to being able to submit a list late that gets flagged
D- decklists are sorted by card type, not color or CMC
E- 59 or fewer in the main can be submitted, 16 or more in the sideboard can be submitted, neither gets flagged
If all of these features get added to an upcoming build, it will be wonderful and make checks much easier. In the meantime a separate list of all checked players is needed, which involved a google sheet importing data from melee each round.
The few paper lists or decklists changes had to be checked through first each time we had a check, as well as lists coming in throughout round 1 because of the unexpected hard cut off on Melee submissions.
And every Judge needed to sort the decks by type which is highly unusual for most Judges.
A number of decks were submitted where the Companion was listed as the 61st card in the main and a 14 card sideboard, we believe this was a Melee error but also that this was an obvious error and needed no follow up/investigation. Same thing with the list that had a 15 card main deck and 60 card sideboard.
Yorion decks also take longer to check due to the 33% more cards than normal, an important consideration for the usual Lead + 2 system where you have the Lead check half of each floor judge\'s match.
Additionally, with the IPG update, presenting a deck in G1 that was not desideboarded is no longer a game loss. Philosophically, the line has been moved to the issue requiring a mathematical (by a possibly additional copy being drawn while normal copies are registered in the maindeck) or strategical (by opponent being aware of the card and able to explain the different choices they made) impact on a game being played in order to turn into a Game Loss. While I understand that, it does also mute the effectiveness of deck checks on enforcing desideboarding. I feel that Checks could be well served in the future by spot checking players in Melee simply for the correct archetype. You can run through many more players in the same amount of time, and without providing time extensions or possible delays to the tournament. Also judges being able to check in Melee if they see a particularly unusual card early in the round, that it is actually registered to the main deck and is not a pre-sided maneuver.
Deck Checks were disregarded in a few rounds to help with floor coverage, which tracks with my above paragraph about their reduced effectiveness.
I think we are entering an era of reduced staffing on the Decks Team, as with digital lists any non-legal lists can be flagged immediately. Additionally the ability to sort a decklist by Color of CMC will be a very helpful feature for Melee.
UPDATE: HJ\'ing at Pittsburgh, there were only a handful of lists not turned in on time, single digit out of 150 players. So as this continues to be the standard this problem will reduce similar to the infrequency of late lists at constructed events
Kevin has the makings of a Level 1 Judge. He has proficient knowledge in the comprehensive rules (More an a regular L1). I highly recommend him to be an official Level 1 Judge!
I\'ve known Andrew for several years now and he has played Magic with me several times. After learning I was a judge, he expressed interest and after some discussion, he wanted to take the dive. Andrew\'s biggest issue is some of the more complex rules (such as replacement effects and layers), but those are not required of an L1 judge, so he will come into that knowledge in time. I believe that Andrew will be an benefit to his local player base.
Questa è la mia raccomandazione per il tuo L2 riguardo il torneo svolto in Milano il 22/05/2022.
Ci conosciamo da un po\' di anni ormai, fui io che \"ai tempi del Judge Program\" ti certificai per il L1 e durante il corso degli anni abbiamo arbitrato assieme molti eventi anche dopo la tua certificazione a L2, sono molto contento che tu abbia deciso di ritornare ad arbitrare dopo questo lungo stop dovuto alla pandemia.
Hai sicuramente una esperienza differente da un nuovo arbitro L1, visto che hai girato il mondo arbitrando GP, e tutta questa esperienza non è appunto svanita: lo hai dimostrato chiaramente durante i tornei recenti in cui abbiamo arbitrato assieme recentemente dimostrando padronza di tutte le procedure necessarie per la gestione di un torneo.
La tua preparazione sui documenti è precisa: lo hai dimostrato più volte sia durante i tornei che durante le conference cui hai recentemente partecipato.
Ho avuto occasione di vederti all\'opera sia all\'interno di un team strutturato per un torneo da più di 200 giocatori dove ti sei occupato delle procedure di fine turno: hai sempre mostrato una ottima overview e avevi ben presente cosa fare e come farlo. Tavoli col tempo extra da verificare con priorità, tavoli senza giocatori che non hanno comunicato il risultato, assegnazione degli arbitri agli ultimi tavoli attivi, tutti compiti che hai gestito nel modo corretto portandoli a termine in autonomia.
Passando poi all\'ultimo torneo che ti ha visto come HJ (Commander Centurion) e che è specifico di questa review ho molto apprezzato il tuo discorso iniziale: sei stato chiaro e conciso con i giocatori fornendo loro tutte le informazioni utili e mettendo la giuste dose di \"giocosità\" per rendere l\'ambiente piacevole e divertente per tutti pur sempre tenendo presente l\'integrità del torneo andando ad intervenire anche in situazioni un po\' spinose come ad esempio in caso di slow play. In modo particolare ti ho seguito mentre spiegavi al giocatore i motivi della penalità che gli avevi assegnato: la tua spiegazione è stata semplice, corretta e soprattutto con la giusta dose di empatia necessaria per comunicare le tue ragioni.
Durante il torneo ti sei preoccupato sempre di tenere traccia dell\'orario di fine turno mettendolo a disposizione dei giocatori, hai creato una tabella per i tempi addizionali, tenendo sempre tutto in ordine in modo tale da poter fare un semplice passaggio di consegna durante i momenti di pausa: sai quali sono le necessità di un torneo e sai come pianificarle per poterle svolgere al meglio.
A fine torneo i tuoi feedback sono stati mirati e precisi sia verso l\'HJ del torneo principale che verso gli altri FJ, sintomo di capacità di osservazione nell\'individuarli e di maturità nel poi spiegarli nella maniera corretta (ad esempio la mancanza di un brief più completo ad inizio giornata). Ho apprezzato molto anche l\'autoanalisi su ciò che sentivi di poter fare meglio: l\'eventuale upgrade per slow play che alla fine hai deciso di non assegnare. Ritengo sia estremamente importante fare questo tipo di valutazioni perché dimostra che ci tieni a fare bene e che le tue decisioni non sono prese con leggerezza, ma con consapevolezza e che vengono rivalutate (anche chiedendo un confronto con altre persone) per potere sempre trovare uno spunto per migliorare.
Insomma, in passato sei stato un buon L2 ed ora mi sento di dire che sei tornato come un ottimo L2: questi anni ti hanno reso una persona più matura senza perdere la giusta dose di \"brio\" che rende le giornate di torneo in tua compagnia più divertenti ed interessanti. In definitiva un judge che mi farebbe piacere sempre ad un torneo e che raccomanderei anche ad altri TO.
Complimenti e spero di vederti ancora sul campo!
Ava has demonstrated an understanding of the comprehensive rules as well as an understanding of the JAR. She knows how to look through each document to find the answers she needs and if in need of help, the resources available to her to find the right answer.
Additionally, she has demonstrated she is mature and can navigate customer service issues with tact.
Building your reputation with your magic community and local store is a very important aspect of being a judge. As a judge, you are a leader in the community and must lead by example. Ava has shown she is both well-liked and respected.
I believe Ava is ready to step onto the path of a Level 1 Judge and I hereby endorse her.
I judged together with Anael on May, 21st and It was really awesome.
Your overall knowledge of the rules, the competitive environment and your presence were really great.
I really liked how you interacted with players and the quality of your answers to calls.
You looked for me when you wanted to confirm answers when you had a doubt, that\'s a proof of maturity.
Your knowledge is quite extensive. You might want to learn further into the Combat Phase and the work behind damage.
I honestly can\'t wait to judge with you again
I have known Saran for years through MTG. There were also a period that he owned a MTG store. Currently, he is still an advisor for that store. He frequently visits the store and help them to answer rules questions to players in various format such as draft, pre-release, commander, etc. When there are new players visiting the store, he helps to teach them as well. He also has knowledge about running a tournament from when he owned the store.
Good working with you again, you can see your visible growth as a judge gaining experience!
This review is mostly covering the Marked Cards issue we found, but overall, you did fine at the event (Modern 1K), I shadowed a few calls, and you did fine. A bit more speed in analyzing and taking the calls would be beneficial for you to work on, but sometimes it\'s just the time you need to recognize and figure out what cards or interaction is occuring at the table! You\'re doing great!
Marked cards call:
You found the inner sleeves issue with the player when I didn\'t initially notice it, so great on your for that! You did fine with communicating with the player, and your assessment of the severity of it was well placed as well! We talked with the player, didn\'t get a sense of him cheating, and were great with customer service to get them playing again.
You asked how it could go better (some of this should have been on me too):
-When bringing over a player, never refer to what deck they\'re playing, use \"you\" pronouns if you have to, but spend the extra moment to catch their name, or return the other deck and say to the other player, \"we need to speak with you\'.
-The time it took to get them playing again was a bit long - partly on me and the investigation. However, once you found the concern, there\'s a fast procedure to speed things up: pull every card with the marked issue, and try to identify if it\'s a visible problem that the player could recognize (and benefit from) asap. We spent a little too long discussing which cards and needing to find some, when we could have streamlined that to identify if it was a problem, or just a minor inconsistency. You did great, btw, with seeing that there was a concerning pattern, and suggesting the upgrade!
-So, process for finding marked cards issues to streamline: Notice issue, pull cards asap, see if they can be identified against non-marked cards, discuss path (investigate/GL?/solution/fix), and get moving. The goal for any call, even investigations, is under 15 min (as a soft goal). We didn\'t hit it at 18 min+3 for shuffling.
thank you Marcus, please reach out if you\'d like to discuss anything!
We\'ve been judging together at the Polish Nationals in Kraków, held on 22-24.04.2022. During that event I had some opportunities to see how you work.
I think the most remarkable was your will to improve and proactivity in seeking guidance. Whenever a topic had come up during the discussion that you were not familiar with, whether it being rules question, ways to handle tournament logistics or how to behave at big events, you never hesitated to ask more questions and get as much out of it as possible. You were also proactively seeking feedback regarding your work during the weekend, with the self-improvement in goal, which is a very good trait for a judge to have.
Most of the time you were present on the side events part of the weekend, and you have excelled in this environment. There were lots and lots of events happening besides the main event, and not a lot of judges were present in that area, and yet it seemed that everything was going smoothly and without problems. You have also identified some issues within the Pauper tournament on Saturday, and opted for being more strict on the Sunday, which shows you\'re not \"just there\", but actively participating in those events.
Because you were mostly tied to side events I hardly had chances to see you on main event, but when I did see you during a judge call there (or on any other competitive event during the weekend) I could see that you had no problems on this part as well. Your rulings were well presented and players were comfortable with how you are handling the situation.
As for the using the tournament software, you\'re much better than me on this part, even showing me some cool functionalities within the EventLink software.
Before the event started you asked to watch your work and provide you with some constructive criticism regarding your work, but after the weekend I can seldom pinpoint any particular situation that would show that there\'s an area with large room for improvement. The best advice I can come up for you is - judge big events more! You definitely possess the skill set required to work on a big event, an there\'s not a better way to further hone your skills than to judge them.
In the end, I can conclude that you\'re definitely ready to level up, so good luck, and see you on Pyrkon 🙂
For context and reference, I was a player in Alesha\'s competitive Modern 1K event where she was the only judge for the event.
Alesha displayed excellent communication skills with players and the TO to address needs and concerns and disseminating information during the progression of the event. Announcements were loud, clear, concise and easy to follow. Store staff seemed responsive to her requests for assistance and her requests were made in timely manner instead of being put in a position of being behind and rushing to catch up. Round turnaround times were spot on. Rulings were addressed promptly, given thorough and thoughtful considerations, and were met with solid answers and solutions. For a first time head judge and running it by herself, Alesha gave the impression that this was very natural and she was experienced with the logistical flow.
My only piece of advice that I could find to give to help further improve was to consider a different approach in deck checks when soloing. The suggestion was to fully deck check only one of the two and to check only the sideboard of the second. Most deck and decklist problems will still be caught. This also allows the judge to return to the floor and be responsive and present for judge calls without extending a deck check out even further and still maintaining integrity and professionalism of the event.
All in all, I as a player was greatly satisfied with Alesha\'s performance as head judge. And as a judge and mentor, I am extremely proud of Alesha and have a great amount of respect for the professionalism, work ethic, and determination she brings to each event she works. I recommend Alesha for Level 2.
It has been a pleasure working with and getting to know you over the greater part of the last year. After today\'s interview and shadowing your performance last week at FNM, I am proud to give you this endorsement to take your Level 1 Exam! You have demonstrated all of the qualities that I look for when deciding to provide an endorsement for a Level 1 judge, and in fact exceed beyond some of those standards. Of course, there is always room for improvement (that\'s true of myself, too!), and I believe that you have the self-awareness and maturity to continuously learn and grow through the Judge Program.
Best of luck - keep in touch!
I am thrilled to endorse Jacob. I know that he\'ll be a great asset to his community.
Teamwork, Diplomacy, Maturity - 3 (Adequate)
According to my panel, this was a minor deficiency, and one of my reviewers rated it a 2. I certainly have gotten better at this since I made L3.
My teamwork at an event is quite strong, others on the events know I am present and ready to help, and I keep an awareness eye on the entire event.
My diplomacy has gotten better as well, I originally rated myself too highly partly because a key aspect to this quality is other\'s perception of you rather than your perception of yourself. My communications with other judges have been received appropriately in almost all cases, the ones where they haven\'t have been significant and exceptional (eg when Ben Valenzia made his multiple transmisic statements publicly, my efforts to educate him he viewed as more of an attack since he \'clearly couldn\'t be transphobic he has trans friends\').
Maturity is also appropriate for an L3, finally. I was originally taking this too much as literal maturity (eg I still laugh at goofy jokes like \"do you need a Class in Clues for how Close Klause is?\") and not interactive maturity. I learned to not be the center of attention and to take criticism better, and can take diplomacy failures from others in stride. In short, I feel most judges in the program would be happy to have me on an event with them in any context, as they would feel I bring a positive contribution without monopolizing the focus.
Leadership, Presence, Charisma - 3 (Adequate)
The three other L3\'s who evaluated me on this quality for my advancement to L3 have rated me a 2, 3, and 4 in this quality, I originally rated myself a 3, and I think that is accurate still.
Presence and Charisma are what I am (in)famous for, I can talk endlessly about judging and scenarios and, if I\'m not careful, myself. My own ego left me a huge blind spot that most people didn\'t want to hear me talk about how great I think I am. Once that was explained to me, it was very eye-opening, and I significantly shifted how I conducted myself at events. More time discussing other people positively, because I can still enjoy a good story even when I\'m not the protagonist. I regularly discuss calls and situations with crowds of judges in an enthralling way, same for in person presentations, but I have also shown a (for some) newfound ability to not continually try to pull the spotlight onto myself.
As for Leadership, I\'ve gotten better at making my team members feel valued and appreciated. I also have not usurped any leads or head judges authorities, although at SCG Pittsburgh I did take over a call from a newbie L1 who was not giving up, but instead just needed some guidance. I rehashed this scenario with them later and apologized for the overstep. My leadership by example has improved in that the quality of my work is high, but I am no longer actively pointing it out everyone constantly. My leadership as a Head Judge still needs some more reigning in, for example my HJ announcements in the morning are too lengthy and detailed, I need to provide more big picture plan and let the Leads lead, with observation and engagement when appropriate.
Eric has demonstrated an understanding of the comprehensive rules as well as an understanding of the JAR. He knows how to look through each document to find the answers he needs and if in need of help, the resources available to him to find the right answer.
Additionally, he has demonstrated he is mature and can navigate customer service issues with tact.
Building your reputation with your magic community and local store is a very important aspect of being a judge. As a judge, you are a leader in the community and must lead by example. Eric has shown he is both well-liked and respected.
I believe Eric is ready to step onto the path of a Level 1 Judge and I hereby endorse him.
Sean has demonstrated an understanding of the comprehensive rules as well as an understanding of the JAR. He knows how to look through each document to find the answers he needs and if in need of help, the resources available to him to find the right answer.
Additionally, he has demonstrated he is mature and can navigate customer service issues with tact.
Building your reputation with your magic community and local store is a very important aspect of being a judge. As a judge, you are a leader in the community and must lead by example. Sean has shown he is both well-liked and respected.
I believe Sean is ready to step onto the path of a Level 1 Judge and I hereby endorse him.
Austin has displayed all the necessary skills and traits to become a judge. I think he will make a great addition to the judge program.
João auxilia a comunidade de maneira excepcional.
Utiliza seus recursos para auxiliar juízes para serem certificados.
Como juiz ele ajudará ainda mais a comunidade
I have known Laurent for many years, his experience has a competitive player and former level 1 judge should be more than enough to allow him to be an excellent level 1 judge again.
Brandon A worked a 2K modern event with me. During our time, I encountered a conscientious, teachable, and safety first judge candidate.
Brandon has a strong relationship with a home LGS and is a suitable candidate for L1.
I would like to endors Ivana to become a Judge. She showed exceptional engagement in community.
Shiibi has displayed knowledge and skills that are in -line with the requirements for Level 1. It is my honor to endorse them for Level 1 and I look forward to seeing where their path takes them in the program. <3
*** Penalty and Policy Philosophy
This is a very technical pillar as it relates to Magic documents only. I honestly went through the documents once in the past 2 years and it was very recently before an event in Pisa this month. I discovered that I did not remember many of the remedies or detailed fixes for some of the infractions (Deck problems or HCE for example). But I did remember clearly the philosophy parts of the IPG and by reading them again I found them clearer than before. Probably forgetting the details of intricated remedies, allowed for more space to give to philosophy.
This has been mirrored during the pandemics whenever a judge contacted me for questions. I had difficulties in discussing many rules interactions or specific fixes to mistakes (requiring me to go back to the parts of the needed documents). But I never found the same difficulty in explaining why we were ruling in a specific way or what the goal of a fix should be. For example I recently was asked by a fellow L3 how to fix a situation where a player draws an additional card out of a Brainstorm, puts 2 cards on top and then cracks a fetchland. The L3 judge was focused on findind the best fix (\"OMG the set of cards is no longer existing, so we cannot do anything!\") while I faced the problem from the philosophy side (\"Let\'s work on the final set of cards that is still incorrect but we can negate the advantage\").
While, I believe to still be proficient enough in our PPP, this does not mean that I should still dedicate more time to get updated on what the documents offer us in terms of remedies and other details.
Jo has reached out to me for a recommendation for L1. We have had numerous discussions over the past few months and it has been gratifying to see them progress in confidence and understanding through our online discussions, and their efforts to learn and connect with the community are very much representative of the attitudes I want to see in new judges. Jo is quite remote, and has no local judges to work with and learn from. I have been extremely impressed by their willingness to reach out and discuss judging with people they haven\'t had a chance to meet yet, and they have been very effective at self-learning and development.
I feel comfortable recommending Jo for level 1 based on my observations and look forward to seeing them continue to grow and develop as a part of the judge program.
*** Teamwork, Diplomacy and Maturity
This used to be one of my strengths and I believe I\'ve been nurturing these qualities a lot over the pandemics. My daily job is about leading people and I\'ve been working a lot on enabling new leaders in the company I work for, to mentor them and to place myself as often as possible either in their teams or in a same level relationship. I must confess that I imported many of the ideas from the Judge Program and from my experiences at large events and they do translate exceptionally well. The new leaders in the company grew a lot in these 2 years but above all we all cooperate effortlessly and in harmony. Our large goals are in common and we support each other in achieving them.
I touched base previously with another effort of mine in keeping a relationship with No-Vax friends, people that I care about but I disagree on most things nowadays. I\'ve been a mediator and I\'ve been both a listener and a fact checker. This experience provided me with an infinite amount of opportunities to defuse, accommodate and compromise thus giving me ample grounds to further develop my Diplomacy skills, especially in expressing opposing ideas, facts and opinions to many people who have been on defensive stances for a long period of time.
And finally, well I wasn\'t the youngest person in the judge program 2 years ago and this is not going to change in the future 🙂 Age does not equate to maturity, yet I believe that ageing does provide further insight into maturity.
Something different that I noted in my behavior in the last months is a more relaxed approached to \"holding the ground\" for others, meaning defending constantly people who didn\'t ask me to be defended. This caused me to be more open about what I think about some people and I am still learning on how to be supportive but not in a blind way as before. Sometimes I feel I should shut my mouth, sometimes I see surprised reaction about what I share. It will be a learning curve with my baseline always on being respectful even when publicly not blindly supporting other senior judges.
The hardest part about writing a review for Matthew is making it not sound like hyperbole. The fact is that Matthew brings it all to the table: rules knowledge, policy knowledge, tournament operations knowledge, and bundles them all up with interpersonal skills to the moon and back. Matthew has a heart of gold, and it shows in every interaction. They\'re an asset to each and every event they\'re a part of, no matter the role. I could not imagine ever passing on Matthew for an event.
Melissa has always demonstrated exceptional interpersonal skills, a highly useful and beneficial trait for the Judge community. While she does sometimes struggle with rules and policy, I have no doubt she will continue to improve. I offer my endorsement without reservation.
Franco is a great candidate for L1.
When I first met Franco, he still had a lot to learn, but he showed me commitment and his skills have improve considerably. He has shown good knowledge of CR and JAR. An area of opportunity that he has and recognizes is that he must practice a bit more MTR.
He seeks to become a judge in order to create a better gaming environment on his local stores. This is awesome as his store is in a far region of Costa Rica that do not have any judges nearby.
Based on my evaluation of him and seeing his commitment, is that I recommend him for L1.
Mike has been a part of the magic community for years and finally wants to take the step to get more involved and become a judge. Since I know Mike for a long time and know how he behaves in mtg tournaments, I can give him my endorsement with good conscience. Rules-wise mike is fit and the JAR and the turnanemt rules are quickly internalized / taught.
After talking with Jason and interacting with him during an online conference, I feel comfortable endorsing him.
Frank is enthusiastic about judging to help build his local communities and help grow Magic the Gathering with a focus on a welcoming and fun environment. After meeting with Frank to discuss judging, I am confident he will make a great addition to any store or event team and look forward to his contributions towards community building and education of players. For these reasons, I fully endorse Frank to be a Magic judge.
Patrick Narsavage has demonstrated he has the knowledge and demeanor to be a skilled judge.
Work on being more technical in your explanations and practice reps to be smoother in your flow of answers.
Highly Recommend for L1.
Dan Bleck was a judge before me. He helped teach me how to judge at large events way back at my first event in 2014.
I have seen what he\'s capable of and, given time to derust, I know he\'ll be an even better judge than before in no time.
I wholeheartedly endorse Dan Bleck.
Dan is one of the most skilled candidates I\'ve ever had the pleasure of working with. A significant part of that is that Dan was an L2 Judge for years, getting to the stage where he was head judging large PTQ\'s. Time has only improved his soft skills and knowledge, and I wholeheartedly endorse Dan for L1. The list of good things to say is endless. His ability to work with people, knowledge of the JAR, knowledge of the rules, and more is simply peerless - although he\'ll need to brush up on the changes to the IPG if he wants to run Comp REL events again!
Chevanna is a recent member of the Alberta magic community, who, while learning the game, expressed significant interest in how the game functions at a deeper level, including from a rules perspective, policy perspective, and event pragmatics. Because of this, they reached out to me with an interest in becoming a judge.
After getting to know Chevanna, I quickly learned that they are extraordinarily passionate about Magic and their community. They expressed interest in learning WHY certain interactions work the way they do, instead of just how certain things interact. On top of that, it became quite clear to me over time that Chevanna has a great relationship with their local community, and has working relationships with some of their local game stores.
Chevanna also possesses a skill that many judges, including myself, struggle with: being humble and willing to ask for help. No matter how much you try, it is nearly impossible to memorize the entire CR and policy documents. While I feel Chevanna has a good baseline understanding of these documents, what I find more important is knowing where to find this information or knowing when you need to ask for help. In my experience, Chevanna has taken these opportunities in stride and used them to learn and grow, which is a sign of an excellent judge.
Between Chevanna’s passion for Magic and judging, their involvement within the community, their extremely welcoming personality, willingness to grow from their mistakes and being willing to ask for help when needed, I have no doubt in my mind that Chevanna will make an excellent addition to the Alberta judge team.
Alfred has spoken to me wanting to be a judge to become more familiar with the rules and policy. He has shown keen interest in learning particularly the rules. Alfred is welcomed in multiple playgroups and stores as he is an approachable individual who is always willing to assist by attempting difficult ruling questions and pondering about the philosophy of policy by asking what the infraction is trying to fix the broken game state back to be as fair as possible.
Alfred has Head Judged at today\'s Games Haven Legacy event with 50 players at competitive REL. For a 1st time judge, he has exceed expectations of both an L0 and L1 while showing qualities necessary for L2.
Area of improvement is when someone calls for a judge and you are busy with either a judge call or deck check, acknowledging the players calling for you will go a long way as much as I know the event if flooded to the brim. Letting players calling for quite some time might incur some frustration which might result in annoyed players who are much harder to deal with. Also deck checks should not be conducted at the 10 minute clock mark as it will lengthen the round end time which you definitely have realised today. We have also spoken on having your own timer so you can immediately tell players how much time is left, imagine your current location to SK area is a 5 mins weaving walk between players and another 5 mins back! There is also the player diplomacy element, similar to how we should deliver the missed trigger penalty when the player missed their own Chalice. Remember the best method to achieve diplomacy with players is that we are punishing the behaviour / action not the individual when we hand out penalties for infractions.
Seeing how multiple players approaching you at the end of the event thanking you for your hard work is testament enough that you are ready to proceed onto L1. I like how you are able to pinpoint your areas of improvement and also identify that you need to obtain more judging experience to be able to better deliver rulings. Me, Matthew and Jin Yi are all impressed with your 1st time judging and as a Head Judge. Great job today, FRED!
Kenji has spoken to me wanting to be a judge to become more familiar with the rules and policy. He has shown keen interest in learning particularly the rules. Kenji is welcomed in multiple playgroups and stores as he is an approachable individual who is always willing to assist by attempting difficult ruling questions.
Kenji has also Floor Judged at today\'s Games Haven Legacy event with 50 players at competitive REL. For a 1st time judge, he has exceed expectations of both an L0 and L1. Area of improvement is when someone calls for a judge and you are busy with either a judge call or deck check, acknowledging the players calling for you will go a long way as much as I know the event if flooded to the brim. Letting players calling for quite some time might incur some frustration which might result in annoyed players who are much harder to deal with. Also deck checks should not be conducted at the 10 minute clock mark as it will lengthen the round end time which you definitely have realised today. Otherwise great job!
Seeing how multiple players approaching you at the end of the event thanking you for your hard work is testament enough that you are ready to proceed onto L1.
Peter, I\'m happy to give you an endorsement after our conversation about you recertifying. I hope you continue to run great events at your store, and that recertifying helps to bring those events to an even higher standard.