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

BGonline.org Forums

Ruling Question

Posted By: Bob Koca
Date: Saturday, 27 November 2010, at 6:18 p.m.

In Response To: Ruling Question (Rich Munitz)

"So the only possible argument here would be for the player to lie or be so confused as to claim far after the fact that the checker was actually borne off by the player owning the checker after all checkers of that color (including the one removed from play) were already in the home board"

OK, let me accept for now that a play being condoned does not mean that an illegally born off checker becomes a legally born off checker. But there are more issues here. Speaking to the above quote note that just because every checker was in the homeboard does not mean that a born off checker was legally born off. Furthermore it is not always clear if a checker should be considered as legally born off in the first place. How would you rule in my 42 roll situation for example?

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.