As A Rule, I Say This ... #4
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS on the often tricky matter of fair and legal play
- By Michael Crane
Steve Pickard sent me this one after spotting it on the www.:
Q: As a tournament director/committee member, how would you rule in this situation? Black has just won a game, where white has the cube on 2. However both player's agree that during the game white first doubled to 2, black took, then later black redoubled.
White states that when black redoubled she did not actually turn the cube to 4, but placed it on the board with the 2 side showing - and so white accepted the cube with value 2 and black should get just 2 points from her win.
Black cannot recall whether she actually turned the cube to 2 or 4, but states that the intention of redoubling to 4 should be clear, and expects to be rewarded 4 points. Both agree that white did not mention that the cube was not turned to 4 until the end of the game.
Variant B: As above, but spectators can confirm that the redoubled cube was placed with the 2 side up (eliminating the possibility that white also cheated by turning a 4 cube back to a 2 cube himself).
Variant C: Black redoubles, and puts the cube on the table with the 2 side facing up. White calls the tournament director immediately to find out if he is allowed to take the cube at value 2.
A: Interesting, but I don't see much of a problem here. The answer lies in the text above: "However both players agree that during the game white first doubled to 2, black took, then later black redoubled. White states that when black redoubled she did not actually turn the cube to 4, but placed it on the board with the 2 side showing - and so white accepted the cube with value 2 and black should get just 2 points from her win."
Not just Black, but White also agrees that White first doubled and White openly admits that when Black redoubled the cube wasn't turned to 4. White knowingly cheated in not pointing out this error, hoping to gain I know not what. It begs the question, had White won would they have claimed 4 points or 2? Methinks White would have argued strongly for the 4 points, don't you?
"Black cannot recall whether she actually turned the cube to 2 or 4, but states that the intention of redoubling to 4 should be clear, and expect to be rewarded 4 points. Both agree that white did not mention that the cube was not turned to 4 until the end of the game."
Again White admits he knew all along and failed to mention it. Gamesmanship, not sportsmanship (more here).
"Variant B: As above, but spectators can confirm that the redoubled cube was placed with the 2 side up (eliminating the possibility that white also cheated by turning a 4 cube back to a 2 cube himself)."
It was a redouble (both players and spectators agree) and therefore couldn't be on 2 anyway. Spectators, though not allowed to interfere in a game are allowed to bring such matters to the attention of the Tournament Director - who, when so informed can bring the mistake to the players attention.
"Variant C: Black redoubles, and puts the cube on the table with the 2 side facing up. White calls the tournament director immediately to find out if he is allowed to take the cube at value 2."
No! As both players admit, it's a redouble; it's a redouble - no argument. Imagine if the mistake was made handing over the cube at 64 instead of the 4! Would White seriously expect to win/lose 64 points?
Although both players where guilty of not applying or understanding the rules on cube handling wherein it states that, "Both players should ensure that the correct level is displayed," [These are not just Biba rules but are international rules], in my opinion White was totally out of order with his argument.
- Michael Crane
|
DO YOU HAVE A query regarding rules or procedures? If so please send them to backgammon@msoworld.com
and I'll do my best to answer them. If you prefer to remain anonymous please state so when submitting your query. |
|
