| |
BGonline.org Forums
The REAL difference between Intermediate and Open
Posted By: Chuck Bower In Response To: The REAL difference between Intermediate and Open (Daniel Murphy)
Date: Sunday, 9 September 2012, at 4:46 p.m.
I couldn't defend a "consistent" standard that makes bad decisions, just because it was consistent; I don't think you would, either.
Nor would I defend an inconsistent system that is worse. But that possibly is the status quo. FWIW I don't think this is currently a big issue in the US, but neither are 95% of the rules/ethics issues discussed on this website. However, I think most of us agree that 'small' problem in general can be still be 'large' to a few.
It's a bit ironic that this topic wasn't really the initiation of the thread. However I've had (even recently) people ask me what the rule or standard is for moving up and the current answer is a very emphatic "there isn't one". Should there be?
BTW, it seems as though the argument "it only affects an individual a small amount" if there are players in his/her division who are stronger than the field and really belong higher can be applied elsewhere. You could use that argument to say that putting a bot like XG or GNU, or what the Hell, both in the Open field shouldn't be a problem -- it only hurts your already low probability of cashing by a small amount.
I try to be consistent in my approach to rules that a rule shouldn't impact negatively a lot of 'innocent' people just for the sake of eliminating a few problems. My hypothetical example wasn't intended to be the final solution and I'm sure you and Tom realized that. If 5 legitimate intermediates were forced into the Open for every legitimate Open player moved up, then it would be a bad enforcement practice. The idea is to find a solution which takes care of the current problem without creating a worse one.
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.