| |
BGonline.org Forums
The REAL difference between Intermediate and Open
Posted By: Phil Simborg In Response To: Difference between intermediate vs. Open (Robert Andersson)
Date: Friday, 7 September 2012, at 12:25 p.m.
Addressing the subject line of this thread, we really don't know what constitutes the difference between an intermediate player and an open player, as no official ruling body has clearly defined it. And of course, it should be clearly defined as people are often faced with the problem of what division to enter and whether or not they would be considered a "sandbagger" if they entered the intermediate after having won one or having played in the Open.
Right now, in the US the decision is left up to each individual tournament director. Does that sound like a good idea to you? Is that fair and clear and reasonable? I don't know exactly how it is done elsewhere in the world, but I suspect that someone who might be required to play Open in one country might well be allowed to play Intermediate in another, or even at another tournament in his own country.
Now, I am not about to get into the debate here as to when a player actually should be required to move up (and for how long), but it's obvious there should be some standards and policies set that are clear and applicable world-wide.
This is just another area that shows the need for a world-wide association with a world-wide set of standards and rules, or at the very least, a collaboration of the current organizations to agree on issues which affect all tournament players and directors.
Of course, there are current directors who like being able to set their own standards in this, and other areas (including rules and rule interpretation, their cut from the entry fees, their obligations for what they provide to the players, etc.) who have and will continue to resist any "outside" group from telling them what to do, even if that group is a representation of the players themselves (such as a democratic federation made up of the players).
Is that attitude fair? Is it conducive to the long-term growth and benefit of the game and fairness to the players? Doesn't the status quo of each tournament director determining his own rules and designations actually make it harder for the director to prove that he is fairly enforcing standards when there is a question or dispute?
Isn't it finally time for the players, directors and federations who are in favor of fairness and international standards and rules to grow a set and organize and do something about this?
For the record, I have always been suspicious of people who just criticize and don't try to do something about it, and for the record, I have not just been criticizing these problems for the past 20 years...I have tried to convince directors and organizations and players the need for better definition of rules and standardization of rules and policies for many years. When I was the first Chairman of the Rules Committee of the USBGF I took on that position with the hopes of doing just that, but far too many members of the board and influential tournament directors shot me down, so I stepped down from that position and have put my efforts into other areas and other ways I could help promote and advance the game.
Is it time now to do something productive and proactive in these areas? I don't know, but I haven't given up the battle completely, and I am hoping, as time goes by, to get more support from players who care and who understand the issues and who are also willing to speak up and try to get something to happen to resolve our world-wide lack of organization for the game we love and want to see move forward.
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.