| |
BGonline.org Forums
Electronic cubical dice - one advantage
Posted By: Colin Owen In Response To: Electronic cubical dice - one advantage (Michael Petch)
Date: Tuesday, 22 February 2011, at 7:11 p.m.
If you want to greatly reduce rerolling of cocked dice try a baffle box: It is amazing the difference it can make.
In Paul Weavers two recent UK visits we played 420 games of heads-up (including some nackgammon) all with a Phil Simborg baffle box. Though exclusively money play, all of the sessions were also clocked (digitally), and I noted the number of turns. As the cocked dice rate was so low, I also kept a note of that. There were over 18300 turns (ie 9150 each). If say around 10% were cube decisions then that means about 16-17000 rolls. Despite the fact that, at 8.7mm thick, the chequers were probably on the thin side of medium, were thinner in the middle and therefore more likely to retain dice, and that there was only room for 11 across - there were ONLY 17 INSTANCES OF COCKED DICE! How many would we have got rolling without? Five hundred to a thousand?
Of course, it takes a second for the dice to pass through a baffle box, but most players shake their dice less when using one, if at all. As long as the box is placed next to the outer tables (contrary to the US and Danish rules) it speeds up the game on most boards, and probably dramatically so on some.
I wholeheartedly agree with Rich Muniz's comments on the vagueness of the rules regarding a bona fide random roll. In the absence of baffle box preference it is lamentable how undefined a valid shake and roll is. Players should not be allowed to get away with merely skidding the dice around on the bottom of the cup, or less than several shakes proper, up and down shakes (even the term 'several' would be an improvement on all but the WBF rules), or looking in the cup. Some players do! The rules should spell this out too. A valid roll is harder to define, but 'discernable height' is not good enough. If an actual height was specified of course, there would be grey areas in a dispute, and you may need witnesses. But it would be something to aim at.
If we want to elevate backgammon as a competitive pursuit we need to improve the rules, and directors must not side with the player who breaks a seemingly innocuous one - like not shaking the die on the opening roll. If not a touch move then certainly a motion rule for example. It is ludicrouus that, though we have to do all calculations in our head, we don't have to visualise potential plays! And clock preference should apply in all main flights. If people want a really relaxed, cosy game, they can arrange this privately. We should expect something a lot more formal in competitive play.
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.