[ View Thread ] [ Post Response ] [ Return to Index ] [ Read Prev Msg ] [ Read Next Msg ]

BGonline.org Forums

ruling in Madison

Posted By: Matt Cohn-Geier
Date: Friday, 11 September 2009, at 5:51 a.m.

In Response To: ruling in Madison (Gregg Cattanach)

So if the presumption is always innocence (under a 'legal plays' rule) when I fail to correct an illegal play, why should I bother correcting it at all?

Maybe because you are an honest and ethical guy?

Non-responsive. Your point out possible issues with the current setup, but don't make any case for a 'legal plays' rule. Your argument suggests we should add a penalty when someone makes an illegal play, not force their opponent to let them off the hook every time.

My argument is that an environment with 'legal moves' is more likely to be honest and fair than the current one. At the very least, the players I have played where we played 'legal moves' seemed honest and fair, and the players I have to constantly watch for illegal moves are not really hindered by the current rule at all. I do not claim that 'legal moves' is a perfect rule, just a better one. But I am open to anything.

I'm talking about codifying a rule that FORCES a player into weighing his desire to win with his need to follow the rules EVERY time his opponent makes a bad illegal play. It isn't related to an artificial hedge arrangment between two players.

I still don't see what the dilemma is. If you are aware of an player's illegal play you correct it. It doesn't matter what the equity is. Why is that a dilemma?

Messages In This Thread

 

Post Response
Your Name:
Your E-Mail Address:
Subject:
Message:

If necessary, enter your password below:

Password:
 

 

[ View Thread ] [ Post Response ] [ Return to Index ] [ Read Prev Msg ] [ Read Next Msg ]

BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.