| |
BGonline.org Forums
Stick was right
Posted By: Phil Simborg In Response To: Stick was right (Steve Mellen)
Date: Saturday, 9 March 2013, at 9:37 a.m.
The reason we now have a dilemma is that times have changed and the norms have changed. Years ago, when there were no clocks, it was acceptable to play very, very slow and hold up the tournament for hours and it was acceptable that the tournament director made you start a match after midnight and have to play until 2 in the morning. It was acceptable that you could not schedule leisure time or time with your family when you come to a backgammon tournament because you never know how late you will have to play or how early you might have to come and start again, because scheduling was impossible with no clocks and no restrictions.
Now that we have learned that with clocks and proper scheduling, you can have a tournament that starts at a reasonable time and ends at a reasonable time and you can plan on getting a good night's sleep. You can plan on having a nice dinner break to be with friends and family. And we have found that the tournament experience can be more enjoyable and less grueling. We also found that now that we have tasted the honey, players get very unhappy when they go to a tournament that is not run efficiently. Few of us can make every event, and one of the major reasons we will choose one event over another is if the entire experience is more enjoyable.
We have also learned that the clock adds a very interesting and challenging dynamic to the game. It makes you decide how to allocate your time, and that in itself adds some skill to the game.
And we have learned that when we have a clock we feel no resentment whatsoever if our opponent decided to take an excessive amount of time to make a decision. He's entitled to take as much as he likes, and we know that in total, we can never be "abused" or excessively delayed when there is a clock. Once you get used to that feeling, every time someone takes a long time and there is no clock you feel abused and impatient.
And, whether you feel it or not, I truly do, when there is no clock, feel uncomfortable taking a long time to make a decision. I feel I may be abusing the social, unwritten customs that require me to be a good sport and a friendly competitor and to be courteous to my opponents and to people waiting to play the winner etc. And because those unwritten customs are nebulous, it does create a tension and a problem. At least for me.
For you to tell me I have no right to those feelings just because you don't I believe is unfair and unjustified.
I don't want to have an ambiguous amount of time to play a match or make a decision, and I don't want my opponent to either. I do have a problem now, in the current culture.
I did have a problem with the old culture, but it was a different problem: tournaments were far more exhausting and less fun because of the lack of time controls. Now that we know the difference, and see what a vast improvement clocks and good scheduling bring to the game, it is aggravating to play "the old way" where you say there was no problem.
Another important issue, to me (maybe not to you) is that I believe clocks will make the game more popular as a spectator sport. I believe more people will watch important matches if they move at a reasonable pace. I believe streaming and hopefully, some day, televised matches will have far greater appeal. I believe it is important for the growth of the game to have matches move at a reasonable pace.
At dinner last night, both Neil and I stated that after this year we probably will never again go to a tournament where clocks are not required. We can't make every event, so why not pick those that are more likely to be enjoyable?
Yes, Steve, I do feel an ethical dilemma. Because times have changed and we now know it is not nice or fair to take "too long" to play a move or a game, and no one knows what "too long" means when you don't use a clock.
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.