| |
BGonline.org Forums
New Baffle Box Rule Idea
Posted By: Albert Steg In Response To: New Baffle Box Rule Idea (Colin Owen)
Date: Tuesday, 26 June 2018, at 7:28 p.m.
If a player is watching the roll then I believe they will know whether it went through. . . .
Not necessarily . . . some of the comments here may derive from people using different makes of baffle box.
At my last ABT tournament my opponent provided a snap-together box that was not a P-40 scrambler, and as I recall, there was a gap in the side large enough that a die would occasionally pop out the side and, sometimes, onto the board. The first time it happened we both clearly agreed it hadn't come out the bottom and re-rolled. The second time, I was sort of unclear on it, but my opponent was confident it was legal, so we let it stand. I felt we were both operating in good faith, and the roll was certainly 'random' enough -- but it bothered me that this could lead to a real dispute, against a different opponent, or on a more consequential roll.
I do think a suggestion like Phil's that imposes a consistent approach to this situation seems like a good idea. And in general, I think that in many "dubious rolling" situations, if the dice come to rest and the roll is revealed, there should need to be a very compelling reason to overturn it. For instance, we've all had rolls where one die catches on the rim of the cup and tumbles out just long enough after the first one that it seems arguable the dice didn't come out "together" -- but unless it's really clearly the case that they didn't (usually because the roller needed to make a second gesture to get the laggard out), once the dice come to rest and the resulting roll is visible, it's too late to debate the question. To cancel a roll you need to call "no dice" or grab the dice as they're still tumbling to cancel the roll. This is my approach in money games anyhow.
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.