You MIGHT have been cheating for YEARS! 

I love you

Take my babies

Hiya coder!

You did great sweetie

Thanks for putting up with farfa's madness for our sake :)

@Alu Card and so sarcastic are you XD

Idiots:”It’S fOr KiDs” Also idiots: “I don’t understand this game, so confusing!” The kids: “wtf is this boomer bs???”

Gotta love Farfa... So quite and mature

well its just farfa being stupid. "I see some cards together I dont like, so I change that". If he cant see thats cheating, then he is rather stupid.

@@madsvigan2898 i think you're confusing ethically wrong to cheating. It'd be called cheating if there was a ruling against it, but since there isn't, you'll just come out as a massive chode but not a cheater.

I didn't even KNOW I was stacking!

They sent me no mail no message

If they can do it while playing at a reasonable pace then go for it. Also PSA just call a judge for slow play, just do it, if you think your opponent is slow playing you then they probably are. just call the judge

Jokingly making a video saying you did not stall for time. JOKINGLY

THEY HAD ONE JOB

I think it's cuz Coder was defending and Phoenix was prosecuting

lmao

I'm not a scientist, but do have a physics degree. If artificially affecting probability is considered cheating, then, yes, "declumping" is cheating. Having three cards stuck together is a valid random state. Just because they are the same card does not mean that their arrangement is not the result of a random process. The only way to "declump" them legally would be to simply shuffle the deck without splitting the clumped cards up first. The end result of a properly shuffled deck is still a random state. Mathematically, it should be okay. However, these are physical objects, and I'm sure all of us are familiar with cards or sheets of paper getting stuck together or being mildly attracted to each other. "Declumping" would articially break this kind of interaction. I'm not sure the significance this interaction would actually have on the state of the shuffled deck though. Best case would be to just shuffle, have your opponent cut the deck, and shuffle again. Edit: lol ignore this, I read another comment saying Konami has stated that a deck must be thoroughly shuffled after any sort of pre-sorting. So "declumping" is okay as long as it's properly shuffled afterward. I haven't played Yu-Gi-Oh in almost 8 years and just randomly stumbled upon this video.

@@aether9083 &&

@@aether9083 g

@@aether9083 *

THANK YOU

I was about to make this comment. The part that says “thoroughly shuffling AFTERWORDS” is what sells it for me

Yup, that's correct. HOWEVER, in order to truly randomize a 40 cards deck you need to perform more than 20 riffle shuffles, which no one does because it would take too long. Therefore, "declumping" your deck will have an effect on the deck you present to your opponent (which equals to cheating, somewhat). If your opponent happens to do this (which is very rare), take your sweet time to shuffle their deck

@@DXYS95 homie I don’t know if you understand a riffle shuffle because it’s literally random unless you perform a Farro shuffle which is perfectly spacing your cards one to one. Which takes a lot of precision. You’ll end up randomizing the cards just by having more than one card land in between each as you riffle.

@@burnpisces7733 I don't think you understand shuffle theory. You might want to look into it

but what if i was wrong but you're still not right?

I see your point but after having so much arguments IRL saying stuff like this is good enough... beats things like: "you obviously dont get it" or "i dont know how you could understand it that way but it is clearly this way" atleast saying that you interpreted the thing wrong gives a chance of you being wrong and accepting someone else's point... in the end people dont like being wrong no matter what side it is just helps when both try to be more open minded about it.

Anything in the entire *WORLD* to avoid saying; "I was wrong."

He truly is Edgeworth

That's exactly the problem though. The fact that declumping works demonstrates that the deck isn't truly random. Obviously we're not after true cryptographic randomness, but effective psuedorandomness is still important, and if declumping effects the result, you're clearly not shuffling you're deck sufficiently, which is why it's cheating. The 'cheat' isn't the stacking, it's the failure to effectively shuffle ,which, for the record, doesn't take dozens of riffles. The average is seven for a 52 card deck to be functionally indistinguishable from true randomness, and less for a smaller deck. So the problem isn't that the deck was stacked, it's that after stacking it, you shuffled it once or twice and maybe cut it, rather than actually shuffling properlly.

Based

@@jsd4574 That fault ultimately falls to your opponent tho, because they're the one who has the final cut + by doing so agrees that the deck is sufficiently randomized. If you are unhappy with how your opponent shuffled their deck, tell them to shuffle it again.

@@EpicKingofFail If you attempt to stack your deck and the opponent fails to properly randomise, they may have been able to prevent it, but you're still the one initiating the cheat and you still get punished for it, not them

Failure of your opponent to undo your stack doesn't excuse you from said stacking

Kinda of a shame the guy named Phoenix was the one accusing Farfa, it would make more sense to have Coder as Edgeworth and Phoenix as, well, Phoenix

I think this whole debate is because yugioh players have such bad shuffling habits that they think that "declumping" will actually affect the randomization of the deck

@@jadegrace1312 You know i never thought about if i was mana flooded or screwed to play a tutor just to search and while searching to declump then shuffle

If the odds are the same, then why do they bother declumping their own deck in the first place? Its definitely illegal, and if not; it definitely should be

Because declumping offers peace of mind and can actually save time. I've witnessed people after they search and they see 3 cards stuck together. Since they can choose whatever method to randomize after, they choose to do a quick pile shuffle and then riffle while randomizing after the search eating extra time. The funny thing is: its isn't uncommon where after they split it up and riffle, they get clumped back together.

Shuffling isn't actually random until like 100 shuffles though, 1 or 2 quick shuffles is most likely not gonna split those cards and at most U may lose 1 of the 3. Are U allowed to rearrange Ur deck at all in Yu-Gi-Oh?

Light played speedrun

I mean, it does but not enough to matter

And then the opponent calls the judge for stalling while you are on your 5th or 6th shuffle.

If it doesnt matter then why do it :)

And people didn't take into account that clumping might happen again after the last cut...

It's not so much that it's trackable, it's that he is trying to consciously manipulate the deck to get a more even spread AFTER the randomization. If he's "properly" randomizing the deck, he shouldn't need to declump before randomizing.

@@LucianDevine this is the correct point. If anyone is actually doing any decent job of shuffling the deck, I WANT my clump to stay, because there's such a small chance of them sticking together after thorough shuffling.

@@Garchomp4LiFee The thing is: it does not matter if you de-clump or not in the first place, assuming you randomize properly. If it somehow makes you FEEL better to de-clump before you randomize, go for it. Doing so (AND not doing so) will not affect the end-result, if, again, randomized properly.

There are effects that send you a group of cards to the bottom of the deck in any order you want, I think Konami knows

It's option B and our human brains think that declumping influences the randomization. If properly randomized, it doesn't matter, but our brain doesn't like it.

Exactly this. You're shuffling anyway. That would do the "declumping." And randomized doesn't mean varied. If you were to flip a coin 10 times, it wouldn't be a perfect Heads -> Tails pattern. It's still entirely possible to get Heads 5 times in a row or only get Tails.

For me is just a mania, seen 3 card togheter while playing just triggers me, so i declump them just to calm myself then i riffle shuffle like 10 times and pass the deck to my opponent for cutting, so yeah the acty of shuffling the deck maskes the declumping miningless.

@@dkyu-gi-oh Unless you sit there doing a full shuffle at least 7 times every time you shuffle, then you aren't guy randomizing the cards, and the new locations depend on the previous locations. This is why casinos are constantly shuffling with shuffling machines.

@@Ms666slayer that's a really good explanation.

And then your opponent shuffles your deck and you draw red-eyes fusion anyway

@@louisfriend9592 this

when shuffling, depending on the method used there is a chance that those 3 cards happen to stay together, whilst not likely it can and does happen, by moving the cards apart you then know for 100% fact that they where not together before shuffling. when I play and do any search effect and see cards clumped together I often split them up and then make sure that I heavily shuffle the deck

@@TheLiverpoolOwen ... So then you're purposefully altering the state of your deck order then. There's either no point in doing this, or you shouldn't be doing it since it helps your odds.

know people be lazy shuffling though, sometimes riffle shuffle pass & opponent tap deck, cut pass back, and that was pre covid

@@joshuagroom7068 the 3rd option is the cards are legitimately stuck together by static or gunk on the sleeves, in which case I suppose you should change sleeves, but that's not feasible in the middle of a duel. Other option is player superstition, in which case it also doesn't really matter, so who cares if they do or don't do it?

@@TheMatt_SD There are two reasons to do it: superstition and cheating.

Yeaa EXACTLY.

This!

the thing is the same result can be achieved by shuffling your deck really thoroughly and nobody has an issue with that. declumping is just a shortcut to save time. unless of course you prefer to sit there and let your opponent shuffle until they know they are no longer clumped (which is legal)

@@fazdingo29 the shuffle should always be enough to randomise the deck. So there is no reason to "de clump" or "clump" cards togther. If the deck is randomised it's random. Unless you explain what reason you have for de clumping other then increasing the probability of not seeing certain cards togther? But that would means your manipulating the chances of a better outcome

@@fazdingo29 yea dude I'd rather let homie shuffle till he's content than watch him declump. Something bout that doesn't sit right w me

how many people do this and then do not thoroughly shuffle, so we as opponents should thoroughly shuffle every time they give us an option to cut... bunch of time waste.

this is probably the best way to put it.

I agree that it has an influence on the shuffling, but that doesn't automatically rule it as cheating. Different methods of shuffling have varying effectiveness, the "right" ones are the ones pointed out by Konami. By experience, shuffling quickly in certain ways makes the deck have not only 3 copies _very_ close to eachother, but also in a similar order regarding more than 5 cards (specially notable when you shuffle a deck that has 3 copies of each card divided by groups, like starters or extenders, one after another), and yet most judges deem it sufficient. In cases like these, separating cards can help out spreading randomization more evenly throughout the deck, resulting in a "more randomized" spread than it otherwise would have been. Of course, this regards shuffling after separating cards and the opponent's cut.

@@gtdfg4594 I think the issue is more about the intention of the action the player is taking. They are putting their cards in a certain way that they deem could give them an advantage by making it, in their minds, less likely to, "Draw multiples of the same card." The shuffling afterwards really isn't the issue. It's what they're doing mechanically with intent to produce a more "ideal" outcome.

Well, no, if your deck is going to be thoroughly shuffled afterwards and then your opponent is also going to thoroughly shuffle it, then it really shouldn't matter. Its not something i do since i just don't pay attention to the order of my cards when i'm searching through my deck (its gonna get randomized afterwards anyways). I do think it affects random chance to some degree, but as far as what's currently written in the rule book, i don't see an issue with this whatsoever and it personally doesn't matter to me. The deck is gonna get thoroughly shuffled anyways. I think its the responsibility of the judge to rule when someone is stacking, and this doesn't exactly look like stacking, so i have no real issue with this. And if an opponent takes issue with it, they can spend as looooong as they're allowed to to shuffle your deck and ensure randomness. That being said, i'm not a judge. I'm just a casual player, lol.

@@four-en-tee oh I agree it really doesn't matter if the deck is getting properly randomized afterwards, realistically I disagree with this rule, but my viewpoints are not what is at hand here. We are talking about how konami judges are supposed to interpret cheating as per the official policy docs. Like I said the issue is not randomization, but what the intent of the player is, which is a huge part of how they determine what constitutes cheating.

except for the people that can read, however hard that is

Good point.

Cause shuffling is not a true randomization

but your telling the yugioh community to actually read LOL

spread aleister you say?

Nah m8 back to back aleister is the way for sure

Wide spread aleister

*A L E I S T E R*

the thing is, you can also declump on the first 2 riffle shuffles knowing about where the clumped cards are

And farfa as judge

That would only be true if you did not shuffle the deck after doing so. If you randomize the cards, they WILL be random. It does not matter where you put them. If you stack your entire deck and then shuffle it about 7x , you're good. that's not stacking or "affecting the randomness". Being random is a binary thing. Either it is, or it is not random. You changing the position of cards in the deck PRIOR to that process has no impact on the end-result.

even then saying how random something is is the same as saying that something is close to infinite, it's either random or it isn't and it isn't actually random at all, that just happens to be the buzzword that people typically use incorrectly. the term that should be used is uncertain and since one way or another the final result is uncertain it doesn't matter whether you declump or not therefore it's allowed

Nobody is putting a deck in a shuffling machine though, if stuff is clumped it could stick together through a halfhearted shuffling, especially if 2-3 sleeves are stuck to each other. In theory none of this should happen but sleeves wear out, get sticky or have static all the time and most shuffling methods don't fix this by themselves.

it isn't a waste of time because you aren't technically randomizing your deck by the definition of random. in most cases those cards will not be declumped during the average attempt at shuffling

@@fazdingo29 I understand what you and Luminous are saying but my issue with that argument is that you can't prove that those clumped cards would not have naturally been the cards you would draw. Once you start deliberately moving cards around the deck ceases to be random because randomness implies a lack of purpose or intent with the way you are shuffle. If you see three ash blossoms together and move them around because you don't like that they're in close proximity then that is not random. I don't want this to turn into a war, because this is just a game so I'll leave it at that. We can just agree to disagree. Have a nice day.

Damn Dzeef

Is there a rule on declumping because Im reading through the doc and I can't see any

@@dandok3996 Their isnt, hes just spreading false information

If they had that rule, the only thing that confirms is that the rule-maker had no idea what they were doing, because that does not make any sense.

I mean I would agree with you unless the cards are actually stuck together for whatever reason and then separating makes sense since they may remain together. I have been in virtual games where my opponent drew Ash Blossom every turn when I checked the replay and to be frank from that standpoint I kinda like declumping.

Cards can be stuck together unnaturally, eg. due to moisture, when they're put into the deck. Ash blossoms are a playset, you usually put them together when you put them into the deck, it absolutely makes sense you want them to be separated before you shuffle, because otherwise your shuffle isn't legit.

people are lazy & don't thoroughly shuffle even though they should, the opponent's shuffle is their responsibility in maintaining the gamestate by ensuring the deck is getting properly randomised, and people who are good at it can stack/declump while shuffling while looking like a completely normal shuffle, so even though declumping like this looks more sus any opponent should really be trying as hard to randomise the deck as though they knew 100% the opponent's deck had been stacked the biggest issue here is the time rules, particularly towards end of time the randomness of the game state is maintained worse & worse as players rush through steps/attempt to at least be seen to be going through actions quickly so that they don't lose to a judge call on stalling but the current time rules mess with the integrity of the game in a bunch of ways anyway, even without this

@@igotveemon For unnatural causes like that I totally agree. With that said I feel like this should be done before a match right? My point pertains to when you shuffle before a duel, and by random change copies of a card are clumped. In that case it's perfectly valid in the definition of randomness. Randomness does not equal spread apart exclusively.

@@Anans1_Spyd3r agreed with all your points. If the cards are unnaturally stuck, then yeah of course separate and clean your sleeves! The sad thing is with virtual sims their "randomness" actually means all cards are spread out. It's a fun excersize in a coding program. Have the computer randomly generte numbers between 1 and 1000 a total of 1000 times. Then separate those numbers into 4 columns (1-250, 251-500, 501-750, 751-1000). You will see that these four groups all end up being 25% of the total numbers meaning it's not random. These virtual sims use the same computing logic sadly.

Why though?

Effects overcome game mechanics :)

It depends on who does it really. If someone is known to keep track of and has a less than healthy sense of competition then they may need a bit more monitoring.

​@@firepuppies4086 then thats the opponents fault for not cutting shuffling his/hers opponents deck after a shuffle. You are allowed to cut, shuffle a deck after your opponent is done with searching/randomizing their deck.

@@SkumleBones issue is, my statement applies to the opponent who is cutting.

@@firepuppies4086 their are going to be cheaters, but the game literally give you the tools for this specific kind of cheating. If you dont like cheaters dont play these types of games. Just like anything, if you dont pay attention and or look away, thats the moment anyone will need, this is what you mom teaches you so your wallet doesnt get stolen, come on now....Like any law, its not a safeguard....its your responsibility to protect yourself. Nothing you can do about shitty people. All you can do is abuse the tools given to you to safeguard urself, hence .... shuffle the deck, dont trust anyone. But if anything I think its just sad that people have less common sense now.

@@SkumleBones ... did you just say not to play the game if you don't like cheaters? That does not look good on the game, if you are at THAT point.

And what did you walk away with? I’m still questioning if it’s cheating or not hahaha

Vsauce video: "What is random?"