| |
BGonline.org Forums
Rationale
Posted By: Timothy Chow In Response To: Rationale (Matt Cohn-Geier)
Date: Wednesday, 30 December 2009, at 5:36 p.m.
MCG wrote:
And it's not like chess where you have an hour to write down one move.
This discussion, along with several similar discussions that come up regularly here, illustrate to me backgammon's split personality: Is it a gambling game or a strategy game?
If it's a gambling game, then you ought to play quickly, and keeping the bar for entry low is a good thing. Thus touch-move or game-recording is anathema because it might scare off the fish. Clocks are introduced with the purpose of making sure that people play fast.
If it's a strategy game, then you ought to have plenty of time to think, and the game ought to be played seriously. You want to see the titans battle it out and you don't care if the fish are scared to play. Touch-move and game-recording lend an air of seriousness to the game and are taken for granted. Clocks are introduced for the purpose of fairness, but time controls are generous because you don't want the clocks to interfere with the game any more than necessary.
I'm personally interested in backgammon for the strategy aspect, and not for the money. That is why I intend to record my moves if I ever enter a tournament, even if it causes me to play worse, because I'm more interested in studying the game afterwards than I am in maximizing my winning chances.
From my point of view, therefore, the solution to the issue that Tad Bright raises is to increase the time controls so that you have time to write down the moves. For example, we could add an extra five seconds per move to the current time controls. This of course would be anathema to those who think the games are being played too slowly already, but philosophically, it is consistent with treating the game as a strategy game.
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.