BGonline.org Forums

Jacoby Rule is a Compromise

Posted By: Phil Simborg
Date: Thursday, 10 March 2011, at 10:17 p.m.

In Response To: Jacoby Rule is a Compromise (Colin Owen)

I was with you until your last sentence. Just because we all play by the current rules does not at all mean that we don't question them. Many of us have proposed many rule changes and variations to the game that we believe makes it more interesting, challenging, difficult, or fun.

As much as I love these variations and rule changes, I also agree with the majority of people who believe it is not good to keep tampering with the basic rules of play...it confuses people and it sets up situations where the rules in one country or area may be very different from another, and that creates problems for people who travel, play on line, or even just in communication about positions (not to mention software problems).

So just because we don't keep changing the rules and we primarily play by the rules doesn't mean we are unthinking sheep. I, personally, have introduced and supported several side events and special tournaments with very different rules and games (can't make a point on the first move; cancelgammon, 3-man consulting teams, and randomgammon to name a few) and I prefer all of these variations to "standard" backgammon, but I don't propose we change the rules--just play with these changes from time to time for fun an variety (just like Nackgammon and Backgammon-to-lose).

Messages In This Thread

• Jacoby Rule is a Compromise
  Colin Owen -- Wednesday, 9 March 2011, at 6:47 a.m.
  • Jacoby Rule is a Compromise
    Keene -- Wednesday, 9 March 2011, at 3:40 p.m.
    • Jacoby Rule is a Compromise
      Stanley E. Richards -- Wednesday, 9 March 2011, at 10:07 p.m.
    • Jacoby Rule is a Compromise
      Colin Owen -- Saturday, 12 March 2011, at 6:58 a.m.
  • Jacoby Rule is a Compromise
    Phil Simborg -- Thursday, 10 March 2011, at 10:17 p.m.