BGonline.org Forums

Question for all

Posted By: Rich Munitz
Date: Tuesday, 22 February 2011, at 3:21 p.m.

In Response To: Question for all (Steve Mellen)

"Discernible" has a dictionary definition, of course. Do you think it would improve the rules if some arbitrary number of inches (or centimeters!) were inserted in its place?

I do. Rules should be unambiguous so that if two players agree upon the facts, they will also agree upon the application of the rule.

Discernible is probably not the actual intent of the rule. Any height in which the cup is not physically touching the board is potentially discernible. A rule that says "at least 1 inch or 2 cm or whatever leaves no doubt as to intent. There might still be disagreement on whether the actual height was sufficient, but frequently both players do agree on the facts, they just don't know how to apply the facts given the ambiguity of the rule or the total lack of knowledge of the rule. For those that simply don't know the rule, if told "it needs to be at least 1 inch" will agree that it wasn't, or even if not sure they will pay more attention will adjust their rolling method for the future.

In the same way, I really do like the "second die must leave the cup before the first hits the board" rule. Again, if the two players don't agree on the facts it will often be impossible to make a ruling. But with this rule I have found that most frequently both players do agree on the facts and once the other player is told the rule they also agree on the application of the rule.

As for shaking "vigorously", that can and should be clarified. The rule should specify covering the top of the cup with the fingers sufficiently to prevent the dice from popping out, and shaking up and down at least N times sufficiently hard so that at least one die hits the fingers on each shake. Again, someone deliberately wishing to lie about the facts might not do this while claiming they did, but everyone will knows exactly what they need to do. Those who are unfamiliar can be explained the clear and unambiguous rule and will have complete understanding for the future.

Messages In This Thread

• Enforcing Little Rules, Pittsburgh Edition
  Jason Lee -- Monday, 21 February 2011, at 8:38 p.m.
  • Enforcing Little Rules, Pittsburgh Edition
    Adam Versaw -- Monday, 21 February 2011, at 8:59 p.m.
    • Enforcing Little Rules, Pittsburgh Edition
      Jason Lee -- Monday, 21 February 2011, at 9:20 p.m.
      • Enforcing Little Rules, Pittsburgh Edition
        Chiva Tafazzoli -- Monday, 21 February 2011, at 10:38 p.m.
        • Enforcing Little Rules, Pittsburgh Edition
          Henrik Bukkjaer -- Tuesday, 22 February 2011, at 12:20 a.m.
  • Question for all
    Chuck Bower -- Monday, 21 February 2011, at 9:02 p.m.
    • Question for all
      Jason Lee -- Monday, 21 February 2011, at 9:21 p.m.
      • Question for all
        Chuck Bower -- Monday, 21 February 2011, at 11:13 p.m.
    • Question for all
      Steve Mellen -- Tuesday, 22 February 2011, at 2:18 a.m.
      • Question for all
        Rich Munitz -- Tuesday, 22 February 2011, at 3:21 p.m.
        • Question for all
          Michael Petch -- Tuesday, 22 February 2011, at 5:01 p.m.
          • Electronic cubical dice
            Chuck Bower -- Tuesday, 22 February 2011, at 5:17 p.m.
            • Electronic cubical dice
              Bill Riles -- Tuesday, 22 February 2011, at 5:40 p.m.
              • Electronic cubical dice - one advantage
                eXtreme Gammon -- Tuesday, 22 February 2011, at 5:44 p.m.
                • Electronic cubical dice - one advantage
                  Michael Petch -- Tuesday, 22 February 2011, at 5:50 p.m.
                  • Electronic cubical dice - one advantage
                    Chuck Bower -- Tuesday, 22 February 2011, at 7:02 p.m.
                    • Electronic cubical dice - one advantage
                      Michael Petch -- Tuesday, 22 February 2011, at 7:50 p.m.
                  • Electronic cubical dice - one advantage
                    Colin Owen -- Tuesday, 22 February 2011, at 7:11 p.m.
                    • Electronic cubical dice - one advantage
                      Henrik Bukkjaer -- Wednesday, 23 February 2011, at 9:23 p.m.
                      • Electronic cubical dice - one advantage
                        Colin Owen -- Thursday, 24 February 2011, at 6:12 a.m.
                        • Electronic cubical dice - one advantage
                          Daniel Murphy -- Thursday, 24 February 2011, at 2:37 p.m.
                          • Electronic cubical dice - one advantage
                            Henrik Bukkjaer -- Friday, 25 February 2011, at 9:53 a.m.
                      • Electronic cubical dice - one advantage
                        Chuck Bower -- Thursday, 24 February 2011, at 3:15 p.m.
            • How about precision Electronic cubical dice
              Michael Petch -- Tuesday, 22 February 2011, at 5:57 p.m.
        • Question for all
          Steve Mellen -- Tuesday, 22 February 2011, at 6:13 p.m.
          • Question for all
            Rich Munitz -- Tuesday, 22 February 2011, at 11:31 p.m.
            • Question for all
              Stick -- Tuesday, 22 February 2011, at 11:35 p.m.
        • Question for all
          Daniel Murphy -- Wednesday, 23 February 2011, at 2:21 a.m.
  • Enforcing Little Rules, Pittsburgh Edition
    Chiva Tafazzoli -- Monday, 21 February 2011, at 9:11 p.m.
    • Enforcing Little Rules, Pittsburgh Edition
      Jason Lee -- Monday, 21 February 2011, at 9:26 p.m.
    • Enforcing Little Rules, Pittsburgh Edition
      Henrik Bukkjaer -- Tuesday, 22 February 2011, at 12:14 a.m.
      • Enforcing Little Rules, Pittsburgh Edition
        Chuck Bower -- Tuesday, 22 February 2011, at 12:50 a.m.
  • Enforcing Little Rules, Pittsburgh Edition
    Stick -- Monday, 21 February 2011, at 9:27 p.m.
    • Enforcing Little Rules, Pittsburgh Edition
      Chuck Bower -- Monday, 21 February 2011, at 11:07 p.m.