| |
BGonline.org Forums
Let the next thread on the subject begin
Posted By: Bill Riles In Response To: Let the next thread on the subject begin (Mike Main)
Date: Thursday, 1 September 2011, at 8:16 p.m.
I think all of the discussion is much too complicated.
I wouldn't mind some type of touch rule but I can see, as we are all seeing, that it could cause all types of foreseen problems (and the unforeseen are yet to be addressed).
I do recognize that people think and view problems in different manners -- some are better with spatial operations and relationships than others.
I would be quite happy with a convention that simply requires, for a provional position, that the provisionally moved checkers be offset and also requires provisionally moved checkers to be completely reset to the original position before another provisional position can be reviewed. I often use the offset/reset procedure for my own benefit on those rare occasions when I make a provisional move.
Provisional movements in unclocked matches will always be a time problem, as they are today. In a clocked match, with the offset/reset provision (a courtesy, in my opinion -- though I'd like it as convention), I really don't care how many or how often my opponent looks at alternate positions -- as long as his/her clock is running and we can always determine the original position and if, in fact, the ultimate play was legal.
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.