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

BGonline.org Forums

Director's ruling at the Chicago Open...

Posted By: Colin Owen
Date: Tuesday, 31 May 2016, at 2:00 p.m.

In Response To: Director's ruling at the Chicago Open... (walter meuwis)

Your highly theoretical take on this situation has been well dissected by others here but, as one who has been anonymously referred to negatively, and as I was away from the forum for over 24h, I will address it.

You state that the player's turn had not ended because they had not pressed the clock, and feel that the many subsequent dice rolls by the player during this 'single turn' did nothing to change the situation. Presumably then, if the opponent of the closed out player had rolled a double, played four legal moves, then simply continued making moves, you would feel that the closed out player should - or at least could - remain silent until contesting the players action if they finally did press their clock? Also, of course, that they could claim victory if a time out occurred?

This hypothetical situation is much more bizarre than the one that occurred, of course. Yet, because it lacks multiple dice rolls within the 'same turn' it is, perhaps less extreme. For sure, either could be equally difficult when trying to reconstruct the original position: this is where practicality has to override hypothetical notions of whose turn it is, or of not distracting a player whose clock is running.

Taper Mike's suggestion that there should be clarification in the rules for the appropriate action by an opponent in this situation is welcome. If commonsense was always applied by players then no such guidance should be needed, but it wasn't here, and might not be in the future. Also better for a TD to have recourse to the rule book.

"I read the whole thread and i saw several people publicly condemning him as an unfair player and even a cheater while they even don't know the player in question."

This is a forum, and people react to situations that are described, with named or unnamed players, as their instincts dictate. And, if we're dealing in theories and hypotheticals, there is an argument that we should take a players good or bad reputation OUT of the picture. Personally, even if I knew the player in question AND felt them to be a very honest and fair minded player, I might still have to review that perspective - at least somewhat - in the light of the situation that occurred. If they were a backgammon friend this wouldn't, of itself, end that friendship. But if they repeatedly refused to discuss the situation with me, or if they did discuss it but were adamant that their inaction was right, then that might indeed lead to the end of it.

There are few players, I believe, who would want to 'win' a match in such a situation, or who would allow that situation to continue in the first place. Was it cheating? Certainly not like introducing biased dice would be but, hypothetically, it might well be in the grey area.

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.