| |
BGonline.org Forums
Why the obsession with forcing early cube commitment?
Posted By: Phil Simborg In Response To: Why the obsession with forcing early cube commitment? (Tom Keith)
Date: Monday, 16 April 2018, at 2:56 p.m.
I agree with your conclusion. A double should occur when it is clear, by some definitive definition, that a double has occurred. Right now it is by touching the cube (in the US). It could be as you say, when the cube is placed on the board; or when the clock is hit (if there is a clock).
But there is a difference between moving the checkers and other half-plays than with the cube, as a cube "fake" could elicit a telling response from the opponent, and the other examples you gave do not.
Should someone be required to double if they say "I think I will double you here." And the opponent says, "I am taking." And then the first player says, I didn't say I was doubling, and I didn't move the cube.
So there are gray areas and questions of fairness that do need to be defined. I have my thoughts on exactly what the rules should be and how they should be interpreted, but it would be the first time in the history of the world if everyone agreed with me (or anyone).
But what I have been fighting for, for over 30 years, is that WHATEVER THE HELL THE RULES ARE, they should be spelled out clearly and not left wide open for all kinds of different interpretations and rulings, and that they should be universal so that wherever we play in the world, and whatever streams we are watching, we all know what the rules are.
We still have far too many poorly written rules; far too much ambiguity; far too many rules that are different in different places; and far too much "individual experimenting" going on in different places as opposed to an international committee to establish clear rules. Each Federation and TD that has, with good intentions, decided to change the actual rules and the writing of the rules on their own has done more harm than good with this approach.
This is, of course, my opinion, and many others I have spoken with, but obviously many don't agree. Until we can convince the people in authority (which I am not) that we need clear rules and they should be universal, it simply won't happen.
Those who make arguments that it is good to have all kinds of different rules at different tournaments so that people can pick and choose to go to those tournaments that have the rules they like, in my opinion, are missing how much damage that does overall. And those who believe that since we cannot please everyone, we are better off not having rules that some might hate, are also missing the bigger picture.
I am sure I will never like every rule, but shame on me if I decide to give up the game because of dice on the checkers, or not being able to wear my headphones, or not being able to use my baffle box, or because I don't like legal moves, clocks, one set of checkers, being recorded, or any other rule I don't happen to like.
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.