| |
BGonline.org Forums
I don't think it is as cut and dry as that
Posted By: Barry Silliman In Response To: -1 (Daniel Murphy)
Date: Wednesday, 20 February 2013, at 11:38 p.m.
I don't think this is as clear-cut a decision as you make it out to be.
For example, in the recently released Simborg/Bower/Horton rules, in Section 6.1, Illegal Moves, it states Illegal moves include leaving or placing checkers on the bar or off the board that should not have been left or moved there, not picking up a checker that had to have been hit in order to move legally, or moving checkers to the wrong points. (Emphasis added). Now, if the tournament is not run as a "legal moves" tournament, as in the case of our recent event, then this implies that "illegal moves" are allowed. The situation at hand was specifically described as an example of an illegal move. Now, what to do about it? Well, the rules are not clear. Anybody can say "you can't allow an impossible position to remain", but where is that codified in the rules? And then there's Section 1.1.1 of the Simborg/Bower/Horton rules, in which it states When there is a doubt or question as to the application of a rule, a general approach is to tend to rule against the player who has, either intentionally or unintentionally, initiated an action that created the question or conflict in the first place. Well, letting the person who initiated the question or conflict lift the checker and place it where it belongs, will usually favor the person who created the conflict. Much more so than leaving the blots in place, where the aggrieved is next on roll and much more likely to be able to hit and point.
Let's extend this train of thought to Section 6.3, Illegal Initial Setup. It states this: If a game has begun and the checkers did not start out in their proper, initial position, a correction shall be made if the error was discovered before completion of the move corresponding to the second roll of the game. If the error is discovered after that, the game shall continue without adjustment.
Now, let's take this (perhaps extreme, but certainly possible, especially amongst the color blind) example- suppose on the initial setup checkers of different colors were commingled on the same point. But it was not discovered until after the completion of the move corresponding to the second roll of the game. (By the way, does that second roll mean the first roll of the player not winning the opening roll? Or the second roll for the player winning the opening roll? Or maybe the first roll if the opening roll had identical dice? I know, that last question is ludicrous, but I'm just pointing out how even the best-intentioned efforts to clarify the rules still leave ambiguities). Anyway, back to the situation-- checkers of different colors on the same point to start the game- not noticed in time. But the rules say to continue without adjustment. What to do? Should this be tolerated?
Having said all this, I'm beginning to come around to being a proponent of legal moves, even though I share Gregg Cattanach's distaste that it can have a tendency to make an honest person look like a bad guy if he misses an illegal move that favors him.
Now I'm not trying to prove that the ruling to leave the different-colored checkers on the same point is the correct ruling or not, I'm just trying to point out that a case can be made for it that at least has some merit.
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.