| |
BGonline.org Forums
Impossible Move in Connecticut
Posted By: Daniel Murphy In Response To: Impossible Move in Connecticut (Art Grater)
Date: Tuesday, 5 November 2013, at 9:48 p.m.
Art, of course. I said as much just a couple of days ago. And I haven't criticized Herb.
But I've seen numerous discussions of this kind of situation. And every time, there's a lot of hand wringing over what a good ruling would be, and what the ethical thing to do is and what a gentleman would do and what you or you would do, etc. etc. etc. Almost nobody ever says: illegal move, opponent's choice, end of story. Bill Davis is one of the few, and I applaud his untroubled opinion, even though I think the rule is bad for the game. The occasion that most sticks in my mind is when the director, glad that he didn't actually have to make a decision, praised the two players involved for being "gentlemen" by resolving the situation with an unlawful settlement! That's ridiculous.
Why do such situations keep being discussed? Why is Herb's conduct even an issue? You make a procedural mistake that costs you equity, you suffer! What do you expect, your opponent to play for your benefit?
Well, my impression from these past discussions is that almost nobody likes this rule. If they liked it, they ought to instantly support Herb for doing what's obviously in his best interest. But instead, seems to me, while a few people like the rule just fine, more people want it changed, and others may or may not want the rule changed but their response is "well he can do that, and that's not unethical, but I'd never do that myself." Something's wrong there, and I think what's wrong is the rule. Change it.
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.