| |
BGonline.org Forums
OtB and RO?
Posted By: Henrik Bukkjaer In Response To: OtB and RO? (Bill Riles)
Date: Tuesday, 19 February 2013, at 2:18 a.m.
Bill, I do agree you did everything by the book.
I've re-read both the US ABT rules now, the Danish ones and the JebChuckPhil rules.
I noticed something in the current ABT rules that I must admit points towards your ruling:
Players are responsible for playing to the posted match length. The first player to reach the posted match length is the winner.
The latter part of this sentence is left out in the DBgF rules. But the other parts of the rule is more or like the same. That makes a ruling with DBgF rules a lot easier, since the problem here simply is that the players played to the wrong number of points, but they were in fact playing a 9 point match.
Now, the word posted (2nd instance in bold) is what makes me be more open towards your ruling. This wording seems very deliberate when you think about it.
I still feel that the overall outcome here is so unfair, that I as a TD would have ruled otherwise. But I surely understand how you could end up with the ruling you did, with the rule-set you had to work with.
----
Regarding the votes cast in the committee, my question was just out of curiosity, not to indicate that I thought something was mishandled in the given situation. I hadn't noticed that the original ABT rules required unanimous decision to overturn. Both the DBgF and JebChuckPhil rules requires simple majority. I had simply forgotten that we changed the rule back in the days when we did our Rel. 2.0. And I didn't recall this as a listed change for the JebChuckPhil work.
----
May I ask if the committee voted 2-1 for or against overturning the decision?
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.