| |
BGonline.org Forums
About "changing" the rules of the game--clarification and recommendation
Posted By: Phil Simborg In Response To: USBGF Rules--My take--answering Art's question (Timothy Chow)
Date: Wednesday, 19 October 2016, at 3:17 p.m.
Just to clarify a point I believe was not correct: I am not a big proponent of changing the rules of the game. I think backgammon, with the current rules, is a great game. I spent a tremendous amount of time and work (with Jeb and Chuck) "refining" the rules to remove ambiguity and to better define what should happen when a rule is violated...two things that were greatly at fault with the (then) existing rules.
The biggest "controversy" about any "change" was over the legal moves issue, and I want to go on record as saying that "we" did not "change" that rule, as legal moves is and was the rule in many places around the world, by mutual agreement of most top players in tournaments that had non-legal moves, and by popular vote. We had to put it the rules one way or another, and if you go all over the world, you will see legal moves is pretty much the standard. Further, since most people were playing legal moves, we thought it was important to state how legal moves should work, as we had not seen it in writing very well anywhere. It was not clearly defined what happens when a legal move is detected after the other player rolled, for example.
Other than that, virtually everything else we "changed" was a clarification or better definition of the rule. For example, there were always arguments and ambiguity about what constitutes a legal (or proper) roll. So we made it more definitive about shaking up and down and releasing the dice from a height so that they bounce and roll and stating that the fingers should not touch the dice after the dice leave the cup, etc. etc. Again, no "change," but rather a more specific and clear definition in order to end arguments, arbitrary rulings by TD's, and lack of clear direction for the players.
Now, on a completely different topic, I do love to come up with variations where we change the rules, starting position, number of dice, cubes in play, etc. etc. to creating interesting and challenging situations. I find these variations not only fun, but often quite educational and challenging.
Play PaskoGammon for a while (start in a deep back game) and you'll have a ball playing and defending back games and you'll really get a feel for it when it happens in a standard game of backgammon.
Play Pineapple Bluff Gammon if you want to try a game that not only challenges your playing skills, but also gives you a chance to bluff. Add to that an additional skill of deciding which two of the three dice gives you the optimal roll, and you've got a game that takes you out of your normal comfort zone and makes the game more complex (and intricate and fun). PBG also forces you to use mathematical calculations that are far more complex, using 3 dice, instead of two.
And of course, the very popular Nackgammon is a great variation which makes the game more complex.
I could go on and on about these variations, but because I like coming up with and playing variations doesn't mean I want to change the basic rules of the game, and I have never recommended that these variations be incorporated into the basic rules of the game.
I don't think that counting a die on top of a checker, for example, "changes" the game of backgammon. We still make the same moves and cube decisions. I don't think a baffle box changes the basic game...again, whether you like it or not, it does eliminate many problems with dice rolling, but it certainly doesn't "change" any of the strategy or play of the game.
Stating in the rules that verbal remarks are binding (if you say you are going to double, you must double) does not "change" the game, but the rule keeps the game at a higher level. Even if you don't agree it is a better game if people are held to their verbal statements, I hope you will agree that we should have rules that state whether or not this is the case so there are "standards" we can all live by, to prevent arguments, and to keep a level playing field.
So, if I were allowed to change any of the basic rules of the game, are there rules I would "change?"
Yes. There are some actual rule changes that I think would improve the game, but I also agree with those who say that there is a "cost" when we make basic changes and that we should not be making real changes to the rules unless it is a clear improvement to the game...and that is highly debatable. But I will give you one fundamental change that I think would greatly improve the game:
I believe the Crawford Rule should go into effect at 2away/2away as well as the next game, if there is one. Yes, the negative is that matches will often take one or two games longer to finish, but the positive is that there will be more skill in determining the winner of close matches. Right now, all good players double quickly at 2away/2away and whoever wins that game wins the match. Further, that last game is DMP and the gammon factor is removed, making the game less complex. And the end result is that after a 25 point match (or 7 point match) it all boils down to one game where the luck factor becomes a bigger part of who wins the match. If no cube is allowed, now you have a match that is more likely to go to the player who plays more skillfully. And now you will have many more complex checker decisions relative to playing for or saving gammons in that 2away/2away game. I believe this is a change that clearly improves the game and is worth the "cost" of making the change. (The biggest cost is making sure everyone knows and understands the change, and I think most tournament players are smart enough to remember and make this adjustment and eventually remember it just as they do the current Crawford Rule.) The other "cost" of this change, again, is that matches are lengthened, as many matches will take 2 more games to finish. I think it is well-worth the extra time to make the very end of our matches more complex, interesting, and skillful.
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.