Author |
Topic: The 3g rule (Read 1269 times) |
|
omar
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #2
Gender: 
Posts: 1003
|
 |
The 3g rule
« on: Nov 10th, 2011, 2:01pm » |
 Quote  Modify
|
3g Rule: If one of the players times out before move 3g is played, the winning player has the option of declining the original result and playing a make-up game. The make-up game must be scheduled and played before the end of the current round. The make-up game becomes binding once move 3g has been played. If the make-up game is not played before the end of the current round, the original result stands.
In the past we have used this several times. I am contemplating if this should be made part of the WC tournament rules. There are pros and cons to mandating this in the rules as opposed to leaving it up to the tournament director to decide. Would like to know what others think.
|
|
 IP Logged |
|
|
|
chessandgo
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #1889
Gender:
Posts: 1244
|
|
Re: The 3g rule
« Reply #1 on: Nov 11th, 2011, 5:43am » |
Quote Modify
|
I like.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Fritzlein
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #706
Gender:
Posts: 5928
|
|
Re: The 3g rule
« Reply #2 on: Nov 11th, 2011, 6:11pm » |
Quote Modify
|
I'm ambivalent. The more tournaments I go through, the more uncompromising I tend to be about rules. It would be possible to make a mistake setting up on 1g, realize the error after seeing 1s, and time out purposely for a second chance at setting up properly. I certainly wouldn't like the rule without a requirement that the game be resumed from the position at which it timed out.
With that caveat in place, I might be OK with the rule; sometimes Internet issues pop up in the very beginning of the game that can be resolved before restarting the game. But if the main objective is to be explicit to take the decision out of the hands of the tournament director and out of the hands of the players, I would have a slight preference for not allowing the game to be replayed, ever, and letting timeouts for any reason other than server error (which the TD can verify) being irrevocable losses.
In this year's World Championship, it looks like each win will be worth about $36, and each loss costs a third of the entry ($27) making it a $63 swing if someone decides to be sporting to an opponent who has just timed out, allows a replay, and then loses. Like it or not, this year it is more about money and less about playing for the love of playing. In that context it seems less appropriate to create a situation where someone feels social pressure to allow a replay that could have a noticeable financial ramification. If it were only about the glory of being crowned champ, I might not even want a cheap win due to timeout, but if it is about money, I might not want to give away $$$$ just for the love of playing Arimaa.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
UruramTururam
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #2537
Gender:
Posts: 319
|
|
Re: The 3g rule
« Reply #3 on: Nov 12th, 2011, 7:49am » |
Quote Modify
|
It may be fine for more or less casual play. But I would certainly not use such a rule for serious tournaments like World Championships...
|
|
IP Logged |
Caffa et bucella per attactionem corporum venit ad stomachum meum.
BGG Arimaa badges - get your own one!
|
|
|
Nombril
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #4509
Gender:
Posts: 292
|
|
Re: The 3g rule
« Reply #4 on: Nov 14th, 2011, 9:16pm » |
Quote Modify
|
I dislike rules that leave a choice in the hands of a player.
As Fritz points out, the monetary stakes are a bit higher now. I don't think it would be a comfortable decision to make. (I had a tough enough time deciding how long to wait on the AWL game where my opponent didn't arrive on time - I wanted to be generous and wait... but the longer I waited the more risk I had of my "playing window" closing...)
Also, I don't see why there should be a difference between 3g, 3s, 4g, etc. With no concrete reason for a place to draw the line, I wonder if this makes the rule too arbitrary to be included.
If it is important to keep this grace period, I suggest making it a mandatory make-up game, and not at the discretion of the winner.
So my preference:
high: No 3g rule
middle: Mandatory 3g rule
low: Discretionary 3g rule
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Hippo
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #4450
Gender:
Posts: 883
|
|
Re: The 3g rule
« Reply #5 on: Nov 15th, 2011, 11:41am » |
Quote Modify
|
Yes, I don't support the 3g rule unless conditioned by repetition of game till the timeout.
In the case the game does not follow the original, the original result should stand. (As the winner decides to allow the repetition, he has no incentive to deviate).
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
omar
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #2
Gender:
Posts: 1003
|
|
Re: The 3g rule
« Reply #6 on: Nov 23rd, 2011, 2:09pm » |
Quote Modify
|
Thanks for the feedback. For now I will leave this out and it will be up to the TD to decide if the situation calls for this.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Arimabuff
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #2764
Gender:
Posts: 589
|
|
Re: The 3g rule
« Reply #7 on: Nov 27th, 2011, 4:59am » |
Quote Modify
|
I am with Fritz on this one, someone could use that rule to get out of a bad initial set-up especially after they have seen what their opponent's response would be.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
|
Home
Help
Search
Members
Login
Register
Reply
Notify of replies
Send Topic
Print