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

BGonline.org Forums

backgammon contest nomenclature proposal

Posted By: Colin Owen
Date: Saturday, 24 December 2011, at 7:30 p.m.

In Response To: backgammon contest nomenclature proposal (Chuck Bower)

I posted on this matter a couple of months back, but got no takers. Some of the respondents rightly appreciate the logic of Chucks' proposal, though doubt we should change, which really aligns them with the others who don't care anyway and seem to think that - as we have been using the terms for 20 odd years - they should remain in misuse for ever.

Other than a weekly informal gathering of friends, I have not played in a tournament for some years. But if I do, and it is one of the 'best of x sets' type (to give it its proper term) I personally would always refer to the format in the logical way. And whilst I think it is ok - though technically incorrect - to refer to a 'series of matches' or even, if you must, 'mini-matches', I think it is ludicrous that we have reversed the tennis references, and refer to a 'set of matches'. A match is the WHOLE contest between the two players. And there shouldn't really be any issues whether we refer to match or set equity, DMP or DSP.

The relatively new format was thought by some to increase the skill factor, hour for hour. Henrik Bukjaer's recently posted findings suggest however, (unsurprisingly to me) that the opposite is true, and that the traditional format of a 'single set' favours the higher rated player. I personally have never liked the idea of playing sets - for one thing, I feel that every point should count. In sports like darts, for example, you could be 6-6 in the 'best of five leg' sets going into a final deciding one, yet be as much as 30-18 down in legs! (For the uninformed, a 'leg' is a game of darts.)

These tennis types of format are designed to create peaks of excitement within a match, but sacrifice the better players chances in doing so. We have enough luck in our game anyway, so it's therefore my hope that any debate about how we should refer to the new format becomes an academic one due to it becoming obsolete.

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.