| |
BGonline.org Forums
Non-biased Legal vs. non-legal moves poll
Posted By: phil simborg In Response To: Non-biased Legal vs. non-legal moves poll (Art Grater)
Date: Monday, 3 March 2014, at 8:49 p.m.
I know several very prominent players that have said that whether or not a tournament uses clocks would have a major impact on whether they attend or not. I am very strongly in favor of clocks, especially for the Open and Intermediate Divisions (and Masters and Doubles and Seniors)--everything but novice and short side events. But I have not been able, with others, to convince enough tournament directors to make clocks mandatory, so I still go to tournaments without mandatory clocks. But it is a factor in my decisions.
I strongly favor tournaments that have Swiss and double elimination. It is a factor.
I absolutely hate NLM and have for many years, but never enough to keep me from going to a tournament. In fact, I go to the Barpoint Club every Tuesday night where Non Legal Moves is Bill Davis' rule.
I can't imagine that having legal moves would stop you, Art, or anyone from going to a backgammon tournament. I believe it is a gross overstatement of your dislike for the rule. But if it is true, you will be missed. You are a nice guy and most pleasant to have around, but you know the saying: "you can't please everyone."
You made another point I find excellent: when you go to ABT events you should play by the ABT Rules. I couldn't agree more. That is why we are trying to make the ABT rules better. Bill Davis won't budge on this issue and on many others where the ABT rules have been lacking because of ambiguity or poor wording or simply not good rules for the game (in my opinion and that of many others), so to change ABT rules we are forced to appeal to the individual tournament directors who apparently are able to choose whatever rules they want and still be considered an ABT event. And that is exactly what we are doing here. Making our case for better rules and hoping the ABT, as a result, will be a better, fairer, friendly place to play backgammon.
Anyone who says, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" is simply denying that it is broke. This is just one rule that has been broke and should be fixed. Thank goodness people like Jeb Horton and Pat Gibson and Rory Pascar agree. They listen to people like Mochy who think it's better. To people like Neil who think it is disgusting to win a match because a guy accidently left his checker on the bar. To people like Chuck Bower who believes LM sends a message that we are to play like gentlemen and women and not try to have draconian rules to protect us from cheaters that don't exist and can be dealt with in other ways.
Thank goodness the people all over Europe have started going to Legal Moves, as they see the need to improve that game in this way. I believe Chiva did it first....there's a TD who doesn't need to worry about people taking shots unfairly at others...he'll kick them out on their can in a second.
Change is not always welcome...."nobody likes change but a wet baby."
If you have ever played in a money game or chouette, you have played Legal Moves. It's not terrible even if you don't like it. You'll get used to it. If you choose to stay away from tournaments because of it, that you loss and the backgammon community, but as Mochy, Jeb, myself and others pointed out, we've already lost too many new players and others because of the negative atmosphere of play that NLM encourages and creates, and this is one way to improve the tournament experience for all. Yes, that is an opinion, but it is becoming the majority opinion as will clearly be seen the more we see more and more federations, associations, tournament directors, and experienced players come out in favor of Legal Moves.
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.