| |
BGonline.org Forums
Director's response to Michel Lamote (LONG)
Posted By: johnk In Response To: Director's response to Michel Lamote (LONG) (neilkaz)
Date: Thursday, 9 June 2016, at 4:47 p.m.
Neil: But what if the event wasn't Legal Moves, they surely there's no requirement to tell your opp to hit his clock prior to picking up the dice and rolling again while you're closed out. Am I correct with that statement?
It seems you are correct. And there is something unsatisfying about having to rely on Legal Moves to remedy the situation. The Eubgf rule goes a long way toward fixing this - except, as Barry the libertarian point out, it focuses too much on the penalties for a player not pointing out his opponenet's clock is running rather than on restoring equity - ie restoring a good portion of the player's lost time - perhaps with a small time penalty. I hope the ABT/usbgf adopts such a rule.It does seem the Eubgf rule is a recent one and also that for many in Europe clock handling does not fall under Legal Moves so it is understandable that Michel thought he was unfairly penalized.
Part of the problem is there's not widespread agreement on what the appropriate penalty should be for forgetting to hit one's clock with one group saying it's the players fault for forgetting so they should suffer any consequences and another group which I'm a part of thinking losing on time is way too steep a price to pay. It would be useful to remember the original purpose of clocks was to keep tournaments running smoothly. My opinion is directors should be given wide latitude to correct clock irregularities.
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.