| |
BGonline.org Forums
USBGF rule for dice-on-checkers - opinion of Ken Larsen
Posted By: Phil Simborg In Response To: USBGF rule for dice-on-checkers - opinion of Ken Larsen (Ken Larsen)
Date: Thursday, 9 February 2017, at 6:27 a.m.
Any rule, new or old, needs to be clearly defined or there will be problems (like the ones Ken showed in his pictures). If we play with the rule that the dice can be on the checkers and not be considered cocked, in order for that rule to not cause problems there should be a very clear description about the dice. For example, if it is okay for the die to be a little crooked, but it is still clear which number is facing up, then the rule should say that. If it is okay for the dice to be touching or even leaning against the center bar or a side wall, and the roll still counts so long as there is no doubt which number is up, then the rule should say that. If it is okay for a die to rest on two or more checkers at once, in such a way that the die is not completely flat, and the roll still counts if it is clear which number is up, then the rule should say that.
Rules that don't spell out these factors that are very likely to occur are the rules that cause problems, as the players, themselves, have not been give clear guidelines to apply the rule, and if we have to call the director, that does cause problems. It does delay the game, but also you run the risk of different directors making different determinations. Of course that can always happen anyway, but the more clearly the rule is defined, the less that is likely to be a problem.
ESPECIALLY when a new rule is added, there should be very detailed explanations (like the ones I stated above) to make sure everyone is made clear the intent of the rule.
Personally, I believe that since the intent of the rule is to speed up the game and stop having so many cocked dice, that the rule should be written so that virtually any roll is considered legal, even when it lands on checkers, and even if the dice is not completely flat, so long as there is no question which of the 6 sides is facing up. If written properly, I like the dice on the checkers...anything that speeds up the game and is clear and fair for all is fine with me. My only objection to this rule, and several other rules, is when they are not spelled out enough to handle problems that are likely to arise and things are left to interpretation of the players and the individual TD's. That's what causes delays and hard feelings and problems.
So, in short, if these things are addressed in the rules as I stated above, or something similar, then the examples in Ken's pictures would not be an issue...they would clearly be legal rolls. And so would almost ever other roll that lands on the checkers. (Crap tables have had tilted dice count for years by simply declaring which face is predominantly up, and it is almost never debatable or a problem.)
If, on the other hand, the ruling committee decides that to be a legal roll on the checkers, the die must not be in any way crooked or touching a rail, then fine, let the rule say that. I don't think that should be the rule, but I am sure that whichever is the intent of the ruling committee, that should be stated clearly.
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.