| |
BGonline.org Forums
New Rules in LA--What is the verdict?
Posted By: Phil Simborg In Response To: New Rules in LA--What is the verdict? (Bob Koca)
Date: Tuesday, 11 June 2013, at 6:09 a.m.
Good point, Bob. But there are many solutions for people who are not sure who is on roll. If you cannot understand that the person who last moved the checkers is not the same one who next rolled the dice, I have the following possible recommendations:
1. Go get a frigging I.Q. test and if you are under 30, don't bother watching backgammon on a computer...you probably couldn't find the site anyway.
2. We could have the player with the white checkers wear a white glove, and the player with the red checkers wear a red glove.
3. We could use two baffle boxes (my preference).
There is an old saying: "If you don't want to do something, any excuse will do."
So if you don't like a baffle box, keep looking until you can find some argument against it.
When the debate about boxes came up, people came up with all kinds of ways you could still cheat using the box, or you could have a rigged box, or some other crap. The point is not whether it is still possible to cheat, but whether or not you get more assurance of random rolls when no one is cheating, and whether or not you get fewer cocked dice; and whether or not you have fewer disputes about irregularities in shaking and rolling the dice. But if you don't like boxes, you can say they block some of the view; they make it hard to tell who rolled; they cost money; it lines Phil's pockets; it doesn't "feel" good; you don't like the sound; you don't like the looks; and they smell funny too. Any excuse will do.
And sane people like us have to answer those bull**** arguments.
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.