| |
BGonline.org Forums
2011 New York Metropolitan Open
Posted By: Daniel Murphy In Response To: 2011 New York Metropolitan Open (Alan Grunwald)
Date: Thursday, 13 January 2011, at 10:20 p.m.
Alan writes: In years past the rule was very simple and clear, and left no room for questions of integrity. When the dice are still down, in a contact situation, a premature roll does not stand.
That was never the ABT rule on premature rolls. Not quite. From 1990 to 2008 the rule was "A premature roll must be rerolled." No exceptions for contact or noncontact positions. In 2008 the rule changed to "All premature actions (dice rolls or cube actions) shall stand if otherwise valid. An opponent who has yet to complete his turn or act upon the cube may then do so with foreknowledge of the premature action." In 2009 the rule changed to "The opponent of a player who rolls prematurely shall complete his turn and then either let the premature roll stand or require a reroll."
In 2007 I wrote:
Extant rules deal with premature rolls in one of three ways. 1. The premature roll always stands. This is the BIBA and WBA rule. 2. The premature roll is always void. This is the ABT rule. 3. The premature roll stands if opponent desires it to stand, otherwise it's void. This is the DBgF and WBF rule.I personally favor the third option -- the BIBA rule permits fast-rolling, an often annoying practice, and the ABT rule does not discourage it -- but there are reasonable arguments for all three options.Thinking about fast rolling and noncontact rolling, I don't agree with Alan that the old rule left no room for unsportsmanlike abuse and unfounded accusations of bad sportsmanship. And without rehashing all the other "reasonable arguments" for the three variants, ABT, BIBA, DBgF and WBF rules are now in agreement. I think that's good.
No doubt we do agree that rules should be clear, and minimize opportunities for abuse and for questioning one's opponent's integrity, justifiably or not. On many occasions, I have pleaded for the revision of rules which are (in many minds) best honored by ignoring them. For instance, the rules which to this day allow a player to win by permitting his opponent to put the wrong color checkers on the bar or off the board, although every time the situation comes up, nearly everyone agrees that winning like that would be unsporstmanlike. If the rule offends, change the rule! But I don't think the present rule on premature rolling is unclear or unfair or inferior. And I think anyone playing in a tournament has a responsibility to know the rules and follow them. Jason decided to disallow the premature roll. That was his right, and I don't second-guess his decision to "give a break" to an "inexperienced opponent." But he might also have decided to allow the premature roll; or his opponent might have rolled an entering number, and Jason might have decided to disallow it. Either way, if he had, I don't believe anyone should have applauded his integrity and sportsmanship any less loudly.
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.