Menu

LEVEL 5

Description, Maintenance and Skills

November 13th 2024: Clarified time limit for the written exams.

May 28th 2024: Changed according to the adjustments introduced with the Extension of the Levels Transition Phase.

April 8th 2024: Changed according to the April 2024 Level Adjustments.

Table of Contents

Description

Level Five Judges are regional and international leaders. An L5 is an expert in leadership, policy philosophy, investigations, event logistics and community building. They are prepared to head-judge tournaments with a few hundred players, and several teams of judges, potentially with complex expectations from the tournament organizer, coverage, or other specialized tournament logistics. L5s guide tournament policy and define and innovate how tasks are done at large events. L5s are highly involved in their regional and the international community, mentoring judges for L3, L4, and L5 and participating in projects. Alone, an L5 is capable of identifying a new L1 with promise, mentoring them through L2, L3, and L4. 

o read more about the philosophy and explanations for certain items in this document, please refer to this article.

Level 5 Testing Manager: Jonah Kellman L5TestingManager@InternationalJudgeProgram.org

Advancement

To be promoted to Level Five, a candidate must complete the following requirements. Unlike the processes for Levels 1-3, these requirements occur in a prescribed order.

Step 1: Experience as an L4

These requirements may be completed in any order.

  1. Work at least six multi-day events, acting in any of the following roles at each of them (there is no time constraint on these events):
    1. Lead a team on Day 1 of a Large Competitive event ((20+ judges or Regional Championship. This includes SE manager at those day/events) or at a Pro Tour
    2. Shadowing, to provide feedback and evaluation, an L4 candidate in the L4 certification process
    3. Serve as head judge for a medium-sized competitive event
    4. Serve as a support judge, a head judge with a support judge, or one of multiple head judges for a single tournament
  2. Choose three. You may choose the same mode more than once.
    1. Write a review as an L4, in the previous year
      1. Must be from events that the candidate and the other judge both worked
      2. Each review must contain detailed and actionable feedback
    2. Participate as a panel member or practical evaluator for a Level Four process, in the previous year
    3. Perform a Level Three advancement interview, in the previous year. Regardless of the result, a review documenting the interview is required
    4. Actively participate in an IJP core project
    5. Create quality educational content (subject to approval)

Step 2: Self Review

The candidate must submit a self-review indicating their preparedness for L5 according to the following requirements. The review will be assessed by an approved L5 panel lead, who may advance them to the L5 panel process, or return the application with feedback for the candidate.

The self-evaluation should cover all of the quality categories and include:

  1. Strengths and weaknesses
  2. Examples that support the candidate’s evaluation
  3. A demonstration of understanding the quality
  4. Rating from 1 (exceeds expectations) to 4 (deficient) compared to baseline L5

Step 3: Recommendation Review

Candidates must also submit a recommendation from an L5 judge who was not their recommender for L4. This evaluation is a significant commitment of time and energy – to observe the candidate and then to provide them and their future panel with the feedback necessary for their growth and success. However, it’s an important part of the advancement process for a candidate to be able to find a mentor who is willing to put in the effort to help them succeed and who believes in them.

The recommendation should cover all of the quality categories and include:

  1. Strengths and weaknesses
  2. Examples that support the recommender’s evaluation
  3. Rating from 1(exceeds expectations) to 4 (deficient) compared to baseline L5

For qualities where the recommender gives a rating of 2 (meets expectations) or better, gives the same rating as the candidate and feels like they do not have anything substantial to add to the candidate’s self-review, they do not need to include a written segment.

The application, consisting of the checklist, self-review, and recommendation will be assessed by the L5 Testing Manager, who may advance them to the L5 panel process, or return the application to the candidate with feedback. 

The L5 Testing Manager may, at their discretion, refer the decision to advance a candidate to a committee of 3 randomly chosen L5s volunteers to assist with the decision. In the case of a returned application that was not referred to a committee, the applicant may request their application be reviewed by such committee. 

Step 4: Exam and Panel Selection

After being approved for the L5 panel process:

  • Once they are approved for the panel process, they may take the exams:
    Level 5 Rules test. 30 questions, time limit of 120 minutes (2h). Passing score of 85%.
    Level 5 Policy test. 20 questions, time limit of 80 minutes. Passing score of 85%.
    Those exams will be open book, proctored and timed.
  • After being approved for the L5 panel process, the L5 Testing Manager will choose an L5 approved to lead L5 panels as the panel lead. The panel lead and coordinator then choose one additional panelist and up to one observer

Step 5: Pre-Panel Interview and Practical

All candidates will be asked several basic questions that can help create a more developed picture of the candidate and allow for focusing the panel interview on areas of concern. The panel lead may choose to ask more questions during this pre-panel interview. The panel lead may lead the interview themselves, request that a panelist do so, or request that the L5 Testing Manager appoint a pre-panel interviewer. 

The pre-panel interview is a long-form conversation about the candidate’s skills, knowledge, and opinions. Generally, the interview lead provides multiple open-ended questions for the candidate to respond to, and subsequently, the interviewer may ask for additional responses, pose additional questions, or ask for clarification. This is usually done via written responses to the interview questions, but the option to complete the interview via in-person chat or online interview is also available. 

The contents of the pre-panel interview, notes from the interviewer, and an evaluation from the interviewer are provided to the panel lead and panelists.

The assigned panel lead then requests a practical evaluation, focusing on areas of improvement highlighted in the candidate’s application and pre-panel interview. The assessment happens at a multi-day event where an evaluator and the candidate are both on staff. The evaluator observes the candidate’s proficiencies, leadership, and success at the event and writes a review assessing the candidate. The evaluator provides the review to the panel lead.

The review should cover a broad range of skills expected from a Level Five Judge, including, but not limited to:

  1. Pre-event communication
  2. Preparation for team or head judge tasks
  3. Communication with other judges, leads, and head judges
  4. Success at team tasks
  5. Mentorship

Evaluators are strongly encouraged to include any assessment or feedback relevant to the L5 skillset.

It is possible that during the Pre-Panel Interview or Practical, a significant deficiency is detected. In the event that occurs, and the panel lead believes that the candidate will fail the panel, the candidate is given the appropriate feedback and guidance, with the opportunity to resubmit their application once they have had time to address the concerns.

Step 6: Panel Interview

The L5 Testing Manager, candidate, panel lead, and panelists will coordinate an appropriate time and venue for the panel. In-person panels are highly recommended, but online panels may be considered in circumstances where an in-person panel would be extremely difficult to schedule. 

The panel is a group interview where the panel asks questions of the candidate to assess them in each quality. The questions will vary, depending on the candidate’s known strengths and weaknesses. 

The panel lead will assess the candidate in each of the 5 quality categories, including each subcategory. 

Each category will be evaluated and assessed on this scale.

  1. Exceeds Expectations
  2. Meets Expectations
  3. Area for Improvement
  4. Deficient

Candidates who are evaluated by the panel lead during the panel to meet expectations in a majority of categories, with no deficiencies, are promoted to Level Five at the panel.

L5 panels are additionally regulated by the Level Five Panel and Testing Guide, maintained by existing L5s. Portions of the requirements are included here as examples. Generally, the L5 process is designed to assess whether the candidate: 

  1. Is capable and comfortable head-judging a competitive event with 300+ players and large teams of judges.
  2. Is capable and comfortable team-leading a team with 5 judges at a multi-day event
  3. Is an expert in the logistics and philosophy of large events
  4. Is capable and comfortable mentoring judges to become L4 and L5, including writing recommendations. 
  5. Has extensive personal skills that enable head-judging, team-leading, mentorship, and participation in the community

Level Five Judge Qualities

This is a brief description of how an L5 candidate might be evaluated on each quality. This is not exhaustive but serves to give examples of how candidates might be evaluated and what general expectations are. 

Game Knowledge

  • Rules
    • Tested by the Advanced Rules/Policy Exam
    • With the exception of sections 801-809 and 811, the entire Comprehensive Rules may be included on this exam. Candidates should have a clear understanding of the rules of the game and be able to articulate its building blocks from memory
  • Tournament Policy Application
    • Tested by the Advanced Rules/Policy Exam
    • The entire MTR, IPG, and JAR may be included on this exam. Candidates should be able to answer questions about infractions, penalties, and remedies from memory, including application to situations not directly described in examples, and to select the most applicable of each for described situations
    • Knowledge of the Digital MTR or other community supplemental tournament policy will not be tested
  • Tournament Policy Philosophy
    • The candidate must show expert understanding of the underlying philosophies that inform the MTR, IPG, and JAR 
    • The candidate must be able to explain the philosophy behind specific sections or lines of tournament policy, to reinforce why a particular ruling is correct philosophically.
    • A deficient candidate can only repeat the text of policy and cannot explain to a less-experienced judge why policy is designed the way it is. This candidate demonstrates this by deviating not by conscious choice but by failing to understand the appropriate policy or how to apply it to a situation. 

Event Skills

  • Tournament Operations Proficiency
    • The candidate shows expert knowledge of each team and task utilized at large tournaments and can be assigned to lead any team with any number of team members.
    • The candidate can run end of round for or distribute product to a tournament with hundreds of players.
    • The candidate can articulate the advantages of multiple methods of handling Limited decklists and can provide a plan for resolving missing lists in a timely manner.
    • The candidate understands the needs of a video coverage team, how to support them, and balance the integrity and needs of the tournament with coverage.
    • A deficient candidate might only be proficient in one or two teams, and may not be able to substitute on the day of an event for a team lead who is unexpectedly unavailable.
  • Tournament Operations Philosophy
    • The candidate shows expert knowledge of tournament philosophy and can provide solutions to problems caused by technology failures, logistics difficulties, or new procedures.
    • An exemplary candidate can describe past historical methods of accomplishing a team’s tasks and when it might be appropriate to fall back to those methods.
    • A deficient candidate can only repeat procedures they saw other team leads perform and cannot improvise new solutions that best fit a given problem.
  • Investigations
    • The candidate can perform a card count in any format, can make a determination with a reasonable degree of certainty, can explain that situation to players, and can do these things in a reasonable amount of time.
    • The candidate can provide floor judges with some questions to ask a player after a deck problem is discovered to determine if the Head Judge should be involved.
    • The candidate can balance an active investigation with other competing priorities as the head judge, delegating as necessary to both ensure tournament integrity and timeliness.
    • A deficient candidate may only ask questions that they have seen used in other investigations or may approach an investigation without a clear plan to determine the truth of a situation.

Leadership Skills

  • Team and Event Coordination
    • The candidate communicates appropriately with head judges, team leads, and other judges in preparation for and at events
    • The candidate demonstrates understanding of the communications needs of large tournaments, having the ability to coordinate all of the communication needed to head-judge a main event, or provide detailed and accurate instructions while leading a team of five judges with varying experience levels.
    • A deficient candidate may isolate themselves as a team lead, have difficulty communicating with other leads, be unable to delegate tasks, or be unable to teach tasks.
    • A deficient candidate may also be unable to manage a team while maintaining team morale and mentorship.

Personal Skills

  • Conflict Management
    • The candidate is capable of handling conflict whether it involves themselves or is between other judges.
    • A strong candidate is trusted by their peers and the community as a mediator to solve conflicts amicably.
    • A deficient candidate may avoid conflicts in ways that are detrimental to themselves or be unprepared to deal with a conflict between players.
  • Diplomacy
    • The candidate is mature, trustworthy, amiable, and well respected by their peers
    • A strong candidate is trusted by their peers to be the person talking when a difficult situation is anticipated and to take that situation in stride 
    • A deficient candidate may have trouble working with others, or often fail to maintain decorum, diplomacy, and tact, either in person or online.
    • A deficient candidate may have accumulated a trail of other judges who don’t like working with them and is unable to resolve any of the issues that created this rift.
  • Self-Evaluation
    • The candidate articulates their strengths and weaknesses with examples and evaluates themselves accurately.
    • The candidate articulates a plan to improve in their weaker qualities.
    • A deficient candidate’s self-reflection lacks accuracy or depth, and the candidate may not put effort into actively improving where they are struggling.
  • Maturity
    • The candidate is understanding of others, punctual, and understands and embodies professionalism.
    • A deficient candidate may be often regarded as negative, tardy, irritating, difficult to work with, and might favor complaining about a problem over and over rather than trying to find a solution.
  • Stress Management
    • The candidate is capable of dealing with stress and understands how they operate in a stressful environment.
    • A deficient candidate may fold under pressure or actively avoid stressful situations that they would be expected to address.
  • Teamwork
    • The candidate works well with a team and knows their place within leadership structures as they change event-to event.
    • An excellent candidate thrives as a team member, bringing up the morale and teamwork of the entire team, while making their team look good.
    • A deficient candidate might have trouble taking directions or trying new things that a lead asks them to do. They might also attempt to take over from an inexperienced lead instead of helping them grow.

Program Construction Skills

  • Mentorship
    • The candidate is capable of mentoring judges to achieve Level Four.
    • The candidate understands the definitions of all IJP levels, and is able to appropriately evaluate judges based on those definitions.
    • A deficient candidate may be unable to identify any meaningful weaknesses in their peers or unable to provide critical feedback.
    • A deficient candidate might not understand the requirements for L4 or L5, and might not be able to participate meaningfully in evaluating a candidate.
  • Community building
    • The candidate is able to provide value and help build the judge community in some way
    • An excellent candidate collaborates with the judge program in one or more ways, like writing educative articles, presenting educational seminars, participating in projects, etc.
    • A deficient candidate has no interest in participating in any way to construct the program or does it only with the intent to pass an evaluation

Maintenance

To maintain the Level Five certification, a judge must complete the following items each year

  • Choose one —
    • Pass three out of four advanced set update quizzes throughout the year
    • Pass an Advanced Rules Practice and Advanced Policy Practice test
  • Choose three, at least one A and one B must be chosen. —
    • Work 6 days total in any combination of working the Pro Tour or leading teams at competitive events (A)
    • Head-judge an event with at least twelve judges (A)
    • Head-judge a large competitive event (Regional Championship are always considered large competitive events) (A)
    • Work at least six multi-day events (A)
    • Serve on one or more advancement panels (B)
    • Write three or more reviews resulting from L3+ certification process interviews (pass or fail) (B)
    • Actively participate in a core project (B)
    • Create educational content (ex: article, conference presentation, video, etc.), subject to approval (B)
  • Write a self-review
  • Maintain membership in the IJP by being up-to-date on their membership dues

Level 5 can only be maintained three times before an evaluation maintenance is required. This maintenance has three requirements:

  1. Passing the Advanced Rules and Advanced Policy tests
  2. A recommendation from an L5 judge who has not recommended you previously
  3. A panel evaluation (similar in structure and format to L5 Advancement panels) by two L5 judges who have not previously served on a panel for that individual

The primary goal of evaluation maintenance is to make sure that L5s remain sharp, as well as to help ensure that high level judges are receiving in-depth feedback.

Unsuccessful advancement

Work in progress

Regional Special Rules

There are no regional special rules for Level 5 certification.

International Judge Program

All rights Reserved

Facebook-f Twitter Instagram Reddit
We use cookies to personalise content and ads, to provide social media features and to analyse our traffic. We also share information about your use of our site with our social media, advertising and analytics partners. View more
Cookies settings
Accept
Privacy & Cookie policy
Privacy & Cookies policy
Cookies list
Cookie name Active

Who we are

International Judge Program is a community-driven, nonprofit association for judges with the goal of providing certification and education to its members. And creating an inclusive welcoming enviroment.

Comments

When visitors leave comments on the site we collect the data shown in the comments form, and also the visitor’s IP address and browser user agent string to help spam detection. An anonymized string created from your email address (also called a hash) may be provided to the Gravatar service to see if you are using it. The Gravatar service privacy policy is available here: https://automattic.com/privacy/. After approval of your comment, your profile picture is visible to the public in the context of your comment.

Media

If you upload images to the website, you should avoid uploading images with embedded location data (EXIF GPS) included. Visitors to the website can download and extract any location data from images on the website.

Cookies

If you leave a comment on our site you may opt-in to saving your name, email address and website in cookies. These are for your convenience so that you do not have to fill in your details again when you leave another comment. These cookies will last for one year. If you visit our login page, we will set a temporary cookie to determine if your browser accepts cookies. This cookie contains no personal data and is discarded when you close your browser. When you log in, we will also set up several cookies to save your login information and your screen display choices. Login cookies last for two days, and screen options cookies last for a year. If you select "Remember Me", your login will persist for two weeks. If you log out of your account, the login cookies will be removed. If you edit or publish an article, an additional cookie will be saved in your browser. This cookie includes no personal data and simply indicates the post ID of the article you just edited. It expires after 1 day.

Embedded content from other websites

Articles on this site may include embedded content (e.g. videos, images, articles, etc.). Embedded content from other websites behaves in the exact same way as if the visitor has visited the other website. These websites may collect data about you, use cookies, embed additional third-party tracking, and monitor your interaction with that embedded content, including tracking your interaction with the embedded content if you have an account and are logged in to that website.

Who we share your data with

If you request a password reset, your IP address will be included in the reset email.

How long we retain your data

If you leave a comment, the comment and its metadata are retained indefinitely. This is so we can recognize and approve any follow-up comments automatically instead of holding them in a moderation queue. For users that register on our website (if any), we also store the personal information they provide in their user profile. All users can see, edit, or delete their personal information at any time (except they cannot change their username). Website administrators can also see and edit that information.

What rights you have over your data

If you have an account on this site, or have left comments, you can request to receive an exported file of the personal data we hold about you, including any data you have provided to us. You can also request that we erase any personal data we hold about you. This does not include any data we are obliged to keep for administrative, legal, or security purposes.

Where your data is sent

Visitor comments may be checked through an automated spam detection service.
Save settings
Cookies settings