Backgammon Online

18-Jun-2013
04:20 PDT

and I reversed that match for tawnya-

it is wrapping up isnt it-

i dont think i made the top 8--

 

18-Jun-2013
04:22 PDT

thank you for participating and good luck

18-Jun-2013
05:46 PDT

Servechilled takes peterhill. Thanks for the games

18-Jun-2013
06:01 PDT

Peterhill won easily vs Steelerhead 5-1

18-Jun-2013
06:52 PDT

Thx r4. Looking like this is all of the accolades we'll get.   It has been great fun. Already looking forward to the next Tourney. We all owe you a debt of gratitude. Stay cool in the Honduras!  

18-Jun-2013
08:24 PDT

thanks a lot for the congratulations but the hard work is yet to be done in the play-offs , so to all those that make it good luck  

18-Jun-2013
13:00 PDT

Some good games!  

18-Jun-2013
17:34 PDT

First and foremost, I want to echo the rest of my fellow BG players who have already thanked R4 for doing such a great job as host of this great Tourney! I have finished all of my games with apparently little or no hope of advancing to the final 8 and want to take a minute time to offer a few thoughts about this Tourney and make a list of a few things that we have all learned along the way. We all know that BG is a fascinating and sometimes frustrating game! For example, 7 of my matches were tied 4-4; I managed to lose 6 of the 7! Ouch! Here are a few other observations that I want to share with the hope of improving on what has truly been a fun experience. Please take these in the spirit in which they are intended, ideas and discussion points that can be improved on by our group.

1. Crawford Rule. This is a good rule but I believe many of us were unfamiliar with it prior to this Tourney. Given this, it was entirely appropriate that when violations occurred reasonable solutions were sought and applied with no penalty. In future Tournaments we probably should decide whether we want to impose a penalty in Matches where a violation occurs (e.g., loss of game, loss of Match, or some other logical penalty that fits the particular infraction). On the other hand, if we agree that there will be no enforcement of the Crawford Rule, we probably should remove it from the rules altogether.

2. Dead Cube Rule. This is another good rule that I believe most of us were unfamiliar with. My comments in #1 also apply here.

3. Determining the Winners of Tie Games. I think the process that R4 has posted in the rules is apt, equitable, and fair. One possible suggestion would be to use the order of players finishing all games as a secondary criterion, after head-to-head results being the primary criterion. This might provide a small incentive to maintain a reasonable pace of play.

4. Pace of Play. It would be good to have a few future tournaments with a MATCH/WEEK pace requirement. I suggested 5 matches/week in an earlier post (and itisme suggested something similar) but that number could be adjusted to meet the needs of all players. Perhaps we could hold Tourneys with a stated 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 Matches/Week pace. Other Tourneys could keep the current format where there is no stated pace imposed. That way, players could pick and choose the pace that best suits their preferences. For example, in the current Tourney, there are some players playing at about a 10 Match/Week pace, and other players playing at a 1-2 Match/Week pace. Giving players the flexibility to choose the pace they feel most comfortable with would reduce the frustration of being forced to play too fast or too slow.

5. Etiquette and Politeness. Again, R4 has done a nice job of posting how important this issue is in the Tourney rules. Fortunately, my experiences have been 99.99% positive and friendly with the opponents playing in this Tourney. Unfortunately, there were 2 posts in our Forum a few days ago that clearly violated R4s E&P rule; these posts were also in violation of at least 4 of ZEs own rules and guidelines. For any future violations (and my hope is that this will not be necessary), I suggest that the host first privately warn the violator. If the issue continues after a warning has been issued the host should then document the issue in our Forum and ask for a public vote of all of the players of whether or not to impose a penalty (e.g., loss of game, loss of Match, or some other logical penalty that fits the particular infraction). For a repeat offender, the players could be asked to vote whether or not to remove the offender from the Tourney. The accused would also be allowed to vote. A vote of all of the players would take the pressure off of the host from having to make such a decision solely by themselves. It would also provide a mechanism for full transparency and openness. It is a shame that this needs to be addressed but I think we can all agree that this type of behavior needs to be nipped in the bud because it is clearly not in line with what the vast majority of us deems acceptable.

I hope everyone takes these suggestions in the spirit in which they are intended, i.e., to help improve on R4s pioneering efforts (this will not be easy)! The initial ideas suggested here can surely be improved upon and I look forward to reading all constructive comments and suggestions from my BG colleagues.

Cheers!  

18-Jun-2013
20:09 PDT

done before I sleep.

good luck!!

r4

18-Jun-2013
22:44 PDT

whisk won over abefromann.
Score: 5-2