| |
BGonline.org Forums
tournament rules and ethics--Sorry, I completely disagree with Falafel on this one
Posted By: Phil Simborg In Response To: tournament rules and ethics (falafel)
Date: Wednesday, 4 May 2011, at 7:41 a.m.
1. I am a strong proponent of requiring legal moves and making it both players’ responsibility, as much as possible to play legal moves. All of the arguments against it don’t seem to cause problems in money games, and for very important matches, a tournament official can be assigned to also point out illegal moves and settle any disputes.
2. In answer to Stick’s point, with the current rules I do NOT believe it is a violation of the rules to have your opponent correct his move to a legal move, as that is one of your options under the current rules. So if I sit down to a table and make a gentleman’s agreement that we will correct each other to a legal move if an illegal one has been made, regardless of whether the illegal move was a benefit to the other player or not, I do not see this as a conflict with the rules. Also, this will prevent the accidental placing of checkers on the bar.
3. I am a firm believer in having good rules, well written, with back up examples (in a separate guide) so that there is no question about how the rule is to be interpreted and enforced. Much of the problems that arise now are because we do not have this. However, whatever the rules are, I strongly believe they should be enforced and that all players have a responsibility to live by them to the letter of the rule. To expect your opponent to “be nice” and let you get away with an infraction in the name of “good sportsmanship” is, by definition, very poor sportsmanship on your part. If I put my own checker on the roof, shame on me, and I would never allow my opponent to let me change it. With that as my ethic, I then have no problem enforcing it. Can you imagine a tennis player letting his opponent take the point because he “forgot” that he couldn’t hit the net with his racket? Can you imagine a football player telling his opponent it was okay that he was offsides…go ahead and take the win because I don’t want to win that way? Players have a responsibility to their teammates in a Calcutta, whoever buys them, and to the entire backgammon community and officials to know the rules and live up to them and take penalties with grace if they break a rule, and they have every right to expect their opponents to do the same. If the backgammon community believes, as I do, that putting your own checker on the bar is a horrible way to lose a game, then the rule needs to be changed, but until it is, when you don’t enforce EVERY RULE then EVERY RULE becomes a gray area. Am I a bad guy if I call my opponent of a fast roll? What if he forgets that he can’t look at a match equity table during the match? It is impossible to draw the line when you start letting or expecting individual players to determine what rules should be strictly enforced and which ones should not be.
In spite of all of the above, even if we have extremely well-written rules with a comprehensive guide with examples and explanation, there will always be some gray areas, and if the tournament director is supposed to rule on the basis of “fairness,” it is TERRIBLY UNFAIR to all not to hold all players to the rules if and when they are clearly violated, even if it is an accident or by a beginner. Once I rolled too fast and it hurt me….I took it with grace and never rolled too fast again. Once I forgot to pick up my opponent’s checker when I hit it. I will never make that mistake again, and if I do, not only will I expect no mercy, I will not accept any mercy. Does that make me a bad guy? Not in my opinion….it makes me someone who respects the rules and respects the game and holds myself to the same standards that I hold my opponents to.
Now, having said this, in my local club tournament, when there is a beginner or a newcomer, I completely disregard all of the above and I patiently explain if he has broken a rule and make sure he is not penalized for it. I have done this, with witnesses, even when it cost me the match and even a tournament. But in a major event, when I enter a division that cost me a lot of money, and there is a lot at stake, and I am playing in a higher division than novice, I expect everyone to know the rules and live by them, and shame on them if they do not and shame on anyone who thinks I am a poor sport because I respect the rules. Bottom line, while I have great respect for Falafel, Neil, and others who believe it is wrong to enforce the rules strictly; in this area I believe their attitude is not good for the game and certainly not professional.
As soon as Falafel decides he wants to be a nice guy and not enforce a rule, he makes everyone else who lives by the rules and expects his opponents to (like me) seem like a bad guy. Falafel does not have the right to set standards for what rules should or should not be enforced, and he will have no dilemma about being a nice guy or not when he understands that by strictly enforcing and living up to the rules of the game, whether we like them or not, we are showing our respect for the game. I will not bore you with the long list of rules I don't like, but I abide by every one of them as that is the agreement I make when I enter the tournament.
Please don't anyone take this as disrespect for Falafel and Neil and others....there is no question their intentions are the best and they have proven many times over their love of the game and how good they are for the game...it's just that we do not see things the same way on this issue for all of the reasons stated above.
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.