| |
BGonline.org Forums
Onetime shuffle rule
Posted By: Nack Ballard In Response To: Onetime shuffle rule (KenB)
Date: Wednesday, 11 November 2009, at 12:33 a.m.
Ken: What would be the penalty for the two shuffle?
Nack: The player would be required to make the move he completed after his reset. An attempt at a second reset (which you have the option to allow or not) is treated just like an illegal play -- there is no penalty other than possible embarrassment.
Gregg: Almost all confusion occurs when only some of the dice roll is 'tried', or rolled back incompletely.
Nack: Yup. I advocate full reset whether under current rules or with the one-shuffle rule. I haven't seen anyone disagree that it is a sensible practice to reduce confusion and disputes.
Ken: If you make 1/2 of a move can you take it back and make another 1/2 move?
Nack: Fine. I've used my reset and so far I've made half of my (unalterable) move. People often make half/partial moves.
Neil: I feel that it is nice to keep the checkers moved high on the points...
Bill R: I, too, find checker-shuffling quite annoying and, as we've all experienced, an easy source of errors and/or chicanery. I try to use the offset checker method on the rare occasion I make a move with the idea I might not select the move
Nack: I agree with you two (and others) that "high pip" / "offset" is an improvement (in conjunction with either the one-shuffle rule or the current unlimited-shuffle rule), because it all but eliminates disputes about the original position. But it doesn't solve the problem that you (the player not on move) are being mentally pushed around by your opponent -- you have to visualize the original position and consider other moves he might play while at the same time keeping an eye on what he is actually moving. In short, I like touch move best and one-shuffle + high-pip second best.
Tom K: "...release move" rule. You can move a checker forward without penalty, but as soon as you take your finger off the checker you can't move it back. This would allow players to look ahead one move (by keeping their finger on the checker) while allowing the opponent to follow what's happening.
Nack: Forgive me if I misunderstand, but that seems to mean that you move a checker within or to your opponent's side of the board, you would reach over with your arm obscuring part of the playing surface. I like "high pip" better than "release move." In any case, both of those corollaries are independent of the one-shuffle versus unlimited-shuffle issue: they're not mutually exclusive.
RDR: Shuffling makes it difficult to think during the opponent's turn... With clocks, it may be essential to do things such as counting a race on the opponents time. Shuffling checkers could be used maliciously or innocently to defeat such practices. It could also be used to mask an illegal move during time pressure.
Nack: Excellent points.
Phil: Many of the problems with the current rules can be improved greatly if we apply one set of rules for Open (and with clocks) and another for Intermediate and below.
Adam: IMHO the more inexperienced players are more likely to forget where the checkers should go when they return to the original position, and so they are likelier to screw things up by shuffling. Put me down as being very much in favor of touch-move.
Nack: Bill and I agree with Phil that some new rules are better to "tier" --implement them for Open/Championship and decide later when or if to change them for the other levels. At the same time, Adam makes a compelling case that touch move or one-shuffle is a rule better not tiered.
Neil: I clearly prefer that BG become touch move.
Ken: I would prefer the "don't touch the damn checkers unless it is for real" rule, like the touch move in chess.
David L: "Touch-move" would be a huge improvement. It would eliminate a goodly number of illegal moves, inadvertent or otherwise, and save the energy required to detect them.
Nack: I agree wholeheartely. If we can get there without a transitional rule, I'm all for it. But my opinion (at least to this point) is that partway is better than nothing. It's a matter of how big a bite people (the ones who believe they are better served by visual aids than others) can accept.
Touch move support is not unanimous, even on this highly progressive forum. So far, Steve M. is a dissenter (and maybe others from old posts, I don't know), and Seth and Keene (while supporting full reset, as we all do) have offered articulate support in favor of leaving the current rule (no cap on shuffling) unchanged.
Nack: I hope for touch move eventually. In practice, though, what I envision happening with the one-shuffle rule is that people would gradually be broken of the habit of shuffling, yet during the transition they would be forgiven for one slip per turn or for forgetting. When they fail to say "reset," their opponents should say "reset" for them (I certainly would, just as I would remind someone to punch his clock) and for the rest of the turn they're alerted to being at touch move. After a while, they might well gravitate to no shuffle even though they've got one if they want it.
Nack
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.