| |
BGonline.org Forums
Adjusting Delay Settings
Posted By: Colin Owen In Response To: Cups + Baffle Box (Chuck Bower)
Date: Saturday, 17 March 2012, at 7:41 p.m.
Chuck, If baffle boxes (without cups/shaking) and dice tubes are significantly quicker than conventional rolling, then it does seem natural to reduce the delay settings accordingly. Your tests (and mine for what it's worth) show the Meyer Dice Tube to be about TWO seconds faster than a 3 shake 'normal' roll. Equally, if it can be properly established, then deduct one (or possibly two) seconds for a no cups baffle box. If official stats can be established for these alternative rolling methods, and show significant differences, then either player could request that the director adjust the delay accordingly, or the TD could insist on it himself. The TD could even have the power to reduce the delay after the match has started (in between games). I don't feel strongly about all this, but it does seem logical to make these adjustments.
What if it could be shown that these methods are actually slower? Well, they're not! True, a FOUR slope baffle box (with frets added) plus cups and a requirement to shake x times did come out a second slower, in my own tests, than x shakes thrown straight onto the board. But factor in reduced cocked dice with the box (I did the tests on empty boards) and it's not worth making an exception for that! A TD does of course have the power to increase the delay time, for a disabled player, and entirely at his own discretion.
Sure, with 'normal' rolling, as you point out, some players shake a lot more than others and/or roll harder and further; the latter not only taking longer but also tending to lead to more cocked dice. But I don't really see the association with the point I'm making. I'm aware of only one organisation that specify the number of shakes that should be performed. That's the WBF (3 to 5 shakes). If some players want to shake more than is needed then they will have to dig deeper into their delay to do it. Very often of course, they will not eat into their reserve because of this, particularly with the 15 second delay providing a big 'buffer zone' for repeat shakers and cockers. But I think it does argue for a few things:
1) That a minimum requirement for shaking is established in rules sets, rather than merely having the convention of three (or two). Desirable anyway, but more relevant with clocks.
2) In order to try to equalise the clock time players spend shaking their dice, consider setting that minimum at four, or possibly higher.
3) Enforce it! Yes, exactly how this might be done is a fraught subject. But mainly because there are players who know their lax attitudes to the rules (and their opponents therefore) or simply their 'forgetfulness' mean they will NOT shake sometimes, or not shake enough; and they expect to get away with it, because they nearly always do!
A final note. Despite what I've said about the advantage of the longer delay times, I feel that there is another factor to consider in selecting a delay, that argues for shorter delays (with a longer reserve therefore): Most moves can be legally completed in about half of the 15s delay, for example, so it makes no difference if a player takes 7 or 15s. A player averaging 15s is on the slow side; someone averaging 7-8 is FAST! I don't think 15s balances these factors properly, and maybe not even 12.
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.