| |
BGonline.org Forums
Farewell, Finnish Backgammon
Posted By: Henrik Bukkjaer In Response To: Farewell, Finnish Backgammon (Chuck Bower)
Date: Tuesday, 5 April 2011, at 4:02 p.m.
>>So let me get this straight. A country whose poker and backgammon players have brought it fame and recognition for their intellectual prowess, something the educational system (if nothing else) could wear as a badge of accomplishment, seriously considered dumping all that in the toilet?
Clearly we're not the only country whose leaders have problems with brain disconnect.
The short answer: Yes, you got that straight! And no, you're not the only country to have politicians with temporary brain disconnects!
Of course there are more detailed sides to the story, such as the law trying to bring clarity to the whole "gambling" market, with the objective of protecting the citizens, especially from gambling addictions! The law was written, technically splitting all activities into 3 major groups: skill games (such as chess), luck games (such as lotteries), and "combination" games (such as Yahtzee, bridge, poker and backgammon).
Now, poker was already being handled separately, and they quickly learned that tournament style bridge was ridiculous to ban under the "combination game" law, since it was played by so many people, under very controlled conditions and for relatively low stakes. Also it did not at all appeal to gambling addicts nor was it a game that turned people into such. Finally, due to the "pre-shuffled" cards being played by all, they could argue that the luck element was eliminated. It got exception from the law proposal very quickly.
Then the turn came to backgammon. Now, it was a bit harder to convince them that backgammon should be considered a skill-game, not a "combination game". Thus we had to speak to the matter that when played as a tournament game (opposed to money-games) in a controlled environment with proper regulated rules and under certain conditions (no rebuy, minimum matchlengths, etc.) it was not a gambling addict's game. And that no one could run backgammon tournaments more justifiable and responsively than DBgF - certainly not the "profit-organizations" that otherwise would buy licenses to operate, etc.
Initially, the response was: We agree, but looking strict at the law, backgammon is a combination game! We've granted Bridge an exception and we can't keep doing more exceptions before the law is passed, then the law ends up looking too silly! Roughly. And there's not any good PR in going forward and allowing backgammon, in these days of focus on gambling addictions.
The matters was not made easier, by the politics behind all this. The stakeholders involved were some internet-based companies, the former monopoly gambling and betting company (previously 100% government owned "Danish Games") and the union for land based casinos. They all wanted some piece of the backgammon market, which they could get if DBgF were out of business.
However, the chairman of the DBgF called every single member of the state's tax committee, representing all the major Danish parties (which accounts to 7 in this case). Each and everyone was convinced by the arguments, that granting an exception for tournament backgammon would be better for everyone involved. And thus in the third and final hearing on the law, backgammon was exempt.
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.