| |
BGonline.org Forums
USA Contribution to Backgammon--another major factor
Posted By: Phil Simborg In Response To: USA Contribution to Backgammon (Rick Janowski)
Date: Saturday, 5 December 2015, at 3:21 p.m.
Something that I don't believe was mentioned (sorry if I missed it) but one major reason the Giants list is tilted toward USA and so many more USA players are recognized is that we have so many more major tournaments each year in the USA compared to any other country. So we have more people who have more opportunities to win and to demonstrate their skills and our names are seen in the winning column more often.
The obvious result is that a 5.0 player in the US might win a lot of ABT points if he goes to a lot of tournaments and he is going to be far more well known and recognized than a 4.0 player in Iran or Japan--those players would have to spend a hell of a lot of time and money to make it to as many tournaments as we get to play in.
At the same time, a 5.0 player who plays in 10 or 12 major tournaments a year and does well might, by some standards, be more entitled to be higher on the Giants list than a 4.0 player who only plays two or three times a year. As stated many times, this is a somewhat subjective list and never was intended to rank players strictly by PR.
Is this fair or right? Who can say...this is a gray area. So I have tremendous respect for the somewhat unknown player in Iran or Denmark or Japan or anywhere who plays under 4PR, but if he only plays in one or two or three tournaments, I am not sure he deserves to be very high, or even on the Giants list. He can get very high on BMAB and get recognition that way.
I also have tremendous respect for people like Gus, Sander, Falafel,Neil, Nack, Svobo, Pasko and others who I know are amazing players but choose not to compete in any or many tournaments. I respect them, but they are not going to be as high on my Giants list because they have chosen not to make backgammon competition a major priority in their lives. I don't fault them for their choice...I am not criticizing them (who wouldn't like to make Gus's money in poker?), but they are telling the world not to give them their votes, or put them as high on the Giants list.
So let's not be that critical of the USA having too many names on the list, because we are fortunate enough to live in a country with lots of tournaments, and because we do have so many tournaments, we obviously have more Open players eligible to vote for Giants, and of course we tend to vote for people we personally know and have played with and have learned to respect personally for their skill, sportsmanship, and even friendship, which obviously will influence our votes.
Is that fair to the rest of the world, no. But the dice prove that backgammon (and life) is not always fair, and the subjectivity of the Giants list by design makes it a subjective list of who deserves the be a Giant. So by definition, someone on the Giant list in not, because of their number on that list, supposed to be actually that number of his skill rating compared to other players around the world. Right now, BMAB is providing that service, and even that list is far from including all the best players, but eventually I think it will be pretty good, and that's why I support that organization and its efforts as well as the Giant process.
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.