| |
BGonline.org Forums
Sounds like another unfortunate Monte Carlo final.
Posted By: Bill Riles In Response To: Sounds like another unfortunate Monte Carlo final. (Strato)
Date: Tuesday, 15 July 2008, at 8:09 p.m.
Michael --
I was in attendance at Monte Carlo last year and in the audience watching the Savio/Pan final. I have also watched many times the videotape of the final ten minutes.
I have no doubt the original tipping of the die from a 6 to a 5 was unintentional. I am also personally of the opinion that Savio knew full well the roll was originally 6-3, he made several moves looking at various positions resulting from a 6-3 play.
He then, in my opinion, took advantage of the confusion of the circumstance and played the much more advantageous 5-3. Your position is mine: "...in his place, I would have insisted the roll was a 6-3...".
All parties are to blame. It is Pan's joint responsibility to make sure his opponent's plays are legal. It is Savio's responsibility to play legally. I would like to think it the responsibility of the referee to ensure such violations do not occur.
The players knew the match was being filmed and if there was ANY uncertainty it could have been easily checked by reviewing the film.
A similar situation had occurred the previous day, again with Savio, at the very end of his semi-final match with Richard Munitz. Savio, playing very rapidly, moving checkers back and forth, and sometimes moving checkers with two hands, played five threes off a 3-3 roll while bearing off. Munitz caught the error and tried to have it corrected. Savio disagreed there was an error. They then agreed, as only a couple of rolls remained, that if the subsequent rolls determined that the playing of five, or four, threes was critical they would then go to the videotape to confirm the position and play. Ultimately, it did not matter. However, Savio was well aware that this was an option.
If players repeatedly makes mistakes by virtue of their fast play, their manipulation of checkers to various positions, and/or their use of two hands in moving (which is counter the rules of backgammon in some, if not all, jurisdictions) then they should slow down, use a single hand, and leave moved checkers offset until they make their final decision. Similarly, if they have repeated trouble reading dice perhaps they should be more careful and, if not using a clock, not lift their dice until the opponent acquiesces -- I've requested such courtesy in the past from opponents who seem to have a repeated problem reading the dice.
Perhaps I'm a cynic, but I am not so naive to believe all actions of these types are always innocent.
In this year's final, which I did not attend, I reacted only to the GammonVillage reporting of the "controversial Championship match" and the statements "however, the match was marred by a string of illegal moves by Sequeira, though Trabbi noticed only one" and " the recorder could not keep track of the dice on the big screen and the illegal moves by Sequeira". I inferred the writer had little doubt of nefariousness. Perhaps, I was wrong. However, we all, doubtlessly, have seen such behavior and, unfortunately, must remain ever vigilant while playing.
Bill
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.