| |
BGonline.org Forums
SURVEY Q5 - If you could change ONE thing...
Posted By: mamabear In Response To: SURVEY Q5 - If you could change ONE thing... (Prince Barlow)
Date: Friday, 8 June 2012, at 10:27 p.m.
The analog chess clock, which is more or less what you are describing, is not suited for backgammon. I have played a few matches with an analog clock, and believe the problems with it are insurmountable for backgammon. At the root, this is because a backgammon match does not have the predictable structure of a chess game. However, it does have an ending when a certain number of points is reached by someone. As you note, you "can play all day" on the delay...but only if you can somehow prevent either party from reaching the target score.
If a backgammon match is long, interesting, and complex, with an analog clock it's quite likely that both players will be in serious time trouble at the end, even if they have been playing at what any reasonable person would call a respectable speed. This results in an undignified scramble at the end, with the contest turned into one of dexterity, not backgammon skill or even time management.
I think there's a reason that a consensus has developed favoring the 12-second delay and two minutes of reserve per point. It makes allowance for the complexity of the game without permitting the game to become a contest of either prestidigitation on the one hand, or Sitzfleisch on the other.
I will not use up my "one change" recommending "Clocks required" in the Open, but I can say that is my preference. I would also like to see more aggressive behavior on the part of directors in clocking the extremely slow intermediates, because there are intermediates put off not so much by the possible prospect of a clock being put on maybe just one of their matches, but rather by the prospect of having to wait four hours to play a match around midnight.
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.