| |
BGonline.org Forums
I almost never say anything about Giants, but... agree and some other points...
Posted By: Bill Riles In Response To: I almost never say anything about Giants, but... agree and some other points... (Phil Simborg)
Date: Thursday, 3 December 2015, at 5:10 p.m.
I won't argue most of Phil's points -- in fact, in a surprise, I likely agree with most of them. I will make a couple of points to promote the discussion.
The PR phenomena is interesting. I've been one that promoted some of the interest with the Dual-Duel format. But PR is deceptive and it is not the 'end all, be all' that some assign to it.
Sure, some players are great technical players consistently posting most impressive PR's. Other very good players do not consistently post the best PR's but they manage to find ways to win -- and I don't think it is by accident.
I've not studied all of the PR lists in vogue today and I certainly don't know all of the best players in the world -- although I know quite a few of them. But I look at tournament performances. PR's are great indicators of good play and likely excellent predictors of success over the long term; however, there is much more to the game and in knowing how to win.
In my sphere and in my opinion there are a number of very very good players -- who are not among the best PR players (not to say they have bad PR's) -- that have tremendous tournament result records, even against the PR masters.
In the March/April 2014 issue of PrimeTime Backgammon there is an article on the 2014 Texas Backgammon Championships Dual-Duel final between Mochy and Ray Fogerlund. It is a great read on a classic match of contrasting styles. In the preface I stated it was a match wherein "arguably the best backgammon player meets the best player of backgammon". Now we can argue with the statement as it relates both to Mochy and to Ray; however, they both are certainly great representatives of the two categories.
But look at the tournament record performances of Akiko, Malcolm Davis, Ray Fogerlund, Stepan Nuniyants, and others. They are great players, they aren't the greatest technical players, but they know how to win. That intangible quality is lacking in many others, perhaps in some technically superior players. That is what makes the game even greater. Backgammon requires a lot of skill, the dice provide a lot of variance, and any number of psychological, emotional, and other intangibles contribute as well. Focus, discipline, determination, grit, and more are critical -- I know if I sit down against Akiko, Malcolm, Ray, and others that they'll get the absolute maximum out of the hand their dealt. They will never cede one fraction of equity before the end of the game. It's why we love the game, it's why we play the game, it's why it is the cruelest game.
So, in voting, I'll look at the PR's and I'll look at the results -- they're both critically important to determining the best players.
Now I'll disagree with Phil. Certainly, sportsmanship and contributions to the game should have a wee bit of influence to the voting for the Giants. But so much of those factors are subjective and are influenced by personal experiences, personal vendettas, personal agendas, and self promotion. One person's bad actor may likely be the well regarded hero of many others. Others may feel the person making the original claim is a bad actor. Still others may deem entirely different people as bad actors who are not good for the game. It's all subjective and personal. For me, in the regards of sportsmanship and contributions to the game, I'll go with my own personal knowledge and I will forgo the campaigns, agendas, protestations, and promotions of various squeaky wheels.
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.