[ View Thread ] [ Post Response ] [ Return to Index ] [ Read Prev Msg ] [ Read Next Msg ]

BGonline.org Forums

Tournament Rules and Guidelines

Posted By: Henrik Bukkjaer
Date: Friday, 30 November 2012, at 11:51 p.m.

In Response To: Tournament Rules and Guidelines (Daniel Murphy)

I agree 100% Daniel, exactly my thoughts on the matter.

And add to that, why a rule set currently in use (such as the DBgF/WBA one), might be a better starting point, if you want to end up with a WW unified rule set:

- It has been thoroughly field tested, and subsequently adjusted. In more than one iteration.

We are currently working on a new thorough revision of our rules, which we will have in place in advance for the 25th anniversary Nordic Open in 2013!

Furthermore we will consolidate (probably rewrite) the English translation of our rules. I know that the current state of the English version is a bit sad - we have to different translations of to different versions out there, and as far as I know, the changes in the latest version was never translated 100%, since the Nordic Open rules a couple of years strayed away a bit from the genuine DBgF rules, in order to "fit" in with the tours it was part of (something we will avoid in the future, by adopting a few changes to our rules).

I can tell you, that "coming closer" to world wide rules is an aspect we ALWAYS consider, when we go about a rule change. We read different rule books from around he world, considers them, consider our preferred rule, and only if we really feel that our preferred rule are to the best, by a clear margin, we will adopt a rule that isn't the current world wide de facto standard.

And even though not a single tournament has been played by "your rules", I can tell you, they are being viewed and considered when we review our rules.


Somehow somewhere I suspect a little bit, that Phil has seen things the same way - or at least acknowledged that a LOT of people would see things that way - and I can't help but to think, that one priority Phil has with a world wide set of rules, is that he is co-author of them, and that they take the form and shape he thinks are best!

Otherwise, why else go about the work the way he's done so far, steering very clear of the entities that would otherwise be instrumental in getting to the target? I mean, no-one at the DBgF has ever been resistant or dismissive towards unified rule work, or sharing our experiences with others. I'd guess the same applies for Chiva, BIBA, Japan and so on...

And even cooperation with the USBgF was broken, it seems at a point in time where USBgF invited Phil to work on the subject for them.

I'm left with an impression, that Phil has cut the "team" so thin at the end, that he'd be damn sure he got what he wanted, then "published" his rule set here on bgo and started to push it towards individual TDs and select federations, until momentum had gathered enough, to convince more key federations, and so on.

I really can't help but think that, seeing how the task has been carried out so far. It might be far from the truth, I know, but why else would you do what you've done?

This impression is amplified by the fact, that you have not yet mailed you newly suggested rules to the DBgF info box, the board, the tournament committee nor to me personally (and you do have my email and know that I'm working with rules there). Though you claimed to have sent your input to federations all over the world.

Please enlighten me, as you can see Phil, I'm a bit puzzled by your tactics compared to your claimed objectives?

Messages In This Thread


Post Response

Your Name:
Your E-Mail Address:

If necessary, enter your password below:




[ View Thread ] [ Post Response ] [ Return to Index ] [ Read Prev Msg ] [ Read Next Msg ]

BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.