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

BGonline.org Forums

EUBGF News: Tournament Rules and Statutes

Posted By: Colin Owen
Date: Saturday, 6 February 2016, at 12:34 p.m.

In Response To: EUBGF News: Tournament Rules and Statutes (Jason Lee)

Of course there are all kinds of things that (can) facilitate cheating. Being allowed to visit the toilet unsupervised during a match is one such incidence. Because we don't cover them all do we cover none?

If there is a presumption of automatic guilt in not having the right to insist upon wearing headphones or using opaque dice etc then it's not unique in our game. With two honest players it should be perfectly possible to produce a random roll from the hand: shake the dice vigorously for a second or two, then give them a firm roll. The fact that we are not allowed to do this, and must use cups - lipped ones (where available) if either insists - is that not a presumption of guilt?

I emphasise that I merely stated that the using of headphones and/or opaque dice is not transparent behaviour. Surely you don't dispute that? By the way, the one opponent (out of a hundred or so) who wanted to wear headphones against me heard no objection, and I could have disallowed their use. In fact, they didn't ask, they just went ahead and used them. They were also unique in being the first to offer only opaque dice btw, to which I did object. Clearly unhappy, they went to the TD who required a roll off. Of the four players who supplied only opaque dice with their board I objected only to the two who did not use the baffle box, so there can be a bit of 'give and take' in these things.

Headphones are relatively new to the game so, for example, the BIBA Rule 1.5 which includes: 'Headphones can only be worn if opponent agrees.' seems perfectly reasonable to me, and there is no mention of having to give a reason. To me, sportsmanlike behaviour includes not only wanting a level playing field, but desiring this to be seen to be so by all parties (ie Transparency).

The omission of 'I believe...' in my statement, though technically wrong is shorthand, and is surely not uncommonly employed? Of course, only a God would not need it.

Messages In This Thread

 

Post Response
Your Name:
Your E-Mail Address:
Subject:
Message:

If necessary, enter your password below:

Password:
 

 

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

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