Rulings

Forum Archive : Rulings

 Checker knocked off bar

 From: Chuck Bower Address: bower@astro.indiana.edu Date: 15 September 2003 Subject: Ruling issue #1 Forum: GammOnLine

(Danny Kleinman) column:

24  23  22  21  20  19      18  17  16  15  14  13
+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
| X           O       O |   |     O   O           X |
| X           O       O |   |     O               X |
|                     O |   |     O               X |
|                     O |   |                     X |
|                       |   |                       |
X rolls  |                       |   |                       |
6-5    |                       | O |                       |
|                       |   |                       |
|                       |   |                       |
|                       |   |     X                 |
|         X   O   X   X |   |     X               O |
|         X   O   X   X |   |     X               O |
+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
1   2   3   4   5   6       7   8   9  10  11  12

> O has a man on the bar and X rolls 6-5, running a back man to the
> 13-point in the above position. In the process of moving, X's
> sleeve accidentally knocks O's checker off of the bar and almost
> perfectly onto O's 8-point. X is unaware of this and picks up his
> dice. Then X straightens the checker squarely onto O's 8-point (a
> fractional adjustment). O rolls a 5-3 (which would have danced).
> [Resulting position shown below.] Before O has moved, X calls for
> a ruling.

24  23  22  21  20  19      18  17  16  15  14  13
+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
| X           O       O |   |     O   O           X |
| X           O       O |   |     O               X |
|                     O |   |     O               X |
|                     O |   |     O               X |
|                       |   |                       |
O rolls  |                       |   |                       |
5-3    |                       |   |                       |
|                       |   |                       |
|                       |   |                       |
|                       |   |     X                 |
|         X   O   X   X |   |     X               O |
|         X   O   X   X |   |     X               O |
+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
1   2   3   4   5   6       7   8   9  10  11  12

How would you rule??

> A. Leave the checker in question on the 8-point and make O play
>    5-3.
>
> B. Void the 5-3 roll and give O the choice (before rolling) of
>    whether she wants her man on the bar or on her 8-point.
>
> C. Place the checker back on the bar and require O to dance with
>    5-3.
>
> D. Place the checker back on the bar; then require O to reroll.

x

 Daniel Murphy  writes: B and D are silly. If as in (D) the checker is to be on the bar, its placement has nothing to do with O's already rolled 53. B gives O the right to decide where the checker is, as if O had objected to an illegal play before rolling, and conjures up from no where an additional privilege to decided whether to reroll or not. But this isn't a case of O objecting (or not) to an illegal play, and if it were, O gave up the right to object by rolling. That leaves A. Seriously now -- which rule gives a player -- X in this case -- the right to object to his own illegal play after his turn is over? None. If X can't be more careful, he ought to go play online. And if the malplaced checker had been any but the one on the bar, A would be reasonable. But I've played on enough board whose bars seemed designed to make checkers fall off with or without the whispering brush of a sleeve. Chuck, you left out E. Provided there is no dispute that the fourth checker on the 8 point had been on the bar, then that checker is on the bar, O's 53 is a valid (and fanning) roll, X should be more careful, drink less or roll up his sleeves, and if O says one word about "condoning an illegal play" he ought to make sure the screen door doesn't smack his butt on the way out. Since E is not an option, I'll go with C.

 Robert-Jan Veldhuizen  writes: I think I like D, because otherwise X is aware of O's fanning roll which could influence his decision on whether to ask for a ruling. Even if that's not relevant in the actual position, it could be in the general case. Does that make sense or am I missing something here? In other words, if the idea is that X is going to correct his "move", then after that it's O roll again.

 Dean Gay  writes: I don't know what the rules say about this, but I think the fairest thing is to replace the checker on the bar and let O's 53 stand. It doesn't sound like there was a dispute as to whether the checker was on the bar, and O's roll is not affected by actual placement of the checker.

 Chuck Bower  writes: (This is probably going to be the least popular option of all, but I'll give my justifications.) I would rule that O's checker goes back on the bar AND O gets to reroll. A) X was of the opinion that the checker was on the bar. IMO, this is NOT an illegal move situation. In those cases the offender intentionally places a checker in an incorrect (illegal) location. Here the movement of the checker from the bar to O's 8-point was inadvertant. B) O was of the opinion that the checker was on the 8-point. Most likely he was (mentally) misapplying the illegal move rule. It sounds like he knew that the checker was inadvertantly moved to the wrong place, but thought it was his option to accept the game as it was presented to him prior to his roll. C) Director's action should be to rewind to game so that neither player has acted upon the INCORRECT checker location. That point in the game is after X has lifted his dice but before O has rolled. I realize that it sounds like the "checker goes to the bar; O's 5-3 (fan) roll stands" option is consistent with my feelings, but for one sticky point: O's feeling while rolling the dice was that 5-3 wasn't a bad roll when in fact it was. So?? If none of us believed in telekinesis (sp?) then it wouldn't matter. But some do. And I believe we don't want to drive those people from backgammon, even if we disagree. The telekineticists want a reroll. The antitelekineticists believe it doesn't matter; the 5-3 was random and the reroll will be random. So a reroll appeases the telekineticists but has no effect on the anti's. (Pardon me while I duck. I can see the replies coming at me fast and furious. :) Some might argue (we will see) that one player or the other should be "punished" for his actions. If director had knowledge that shady actions of a similar nature had been practiced before by one of these players, then maybe. But if it looks like an honest mistake (X was unaware that the checker was knocked off the bar and O thought he was within the rules by accepting the board as presented), then "punishment" is inappropriate.

 Ilia Guzei  writes: Chuck says: > A) X was of the opinion that the checker was on the bar. IMO, > this is NOT an illegal move situation. In those cases the offender > intentionally places a checker in an incorrect (illegal) location. > Here the movement of the checker from the bar to O's 8-point was > inadvertant. First off, I think the 53 roll is irrelevant in the discussion. Then, I disagree with A) above since illegal move situations occur as UNintentional most of the time. Secondly, who cares what Opinion was O's of when he picked up his dice? He could be of the opinion that his position was a double/beaver. Has it happened to you that as you make a move your opponent's checker(s) falls off the bar? Did you replace them there before picking up the dice? Now, the rules provide no room for a player to recall his illegal move. Thus, as much as I'd hate to be a careless X, I would accept O's decision on the checker placement. Also after the 53 it's too late to go back, no? Ilia

 Chuck Bower  writes: > ...Illegal move situations occur as UNintentional most of the time. Agreed. The distinction I see is the following: In an illegal move, a player intentionally places a checker in a certain place. (His intention is to make a legal move. He just fails to execute that particular intention.) Here the player doesn't even realize he has moved this checker at all. ...After the 53 it's too late to go back, no? I don't think so. In fact, in this same quiz in ChiPoint there is a situation where the players set up their homesides to move the *same* direction (e.g. both players are moving clockwise), then play a few moves before realizing what has happened and call the director. Are they supposed to continue the game from this point? If 'yes', which player gets to continue moving clockwise and which must now start moving counterclockwise?? (Danny's ruling was that the game be restarted, BTW. And one of the multiple choice solutions was to ban alcohol use for these two players. :)

 Chuck Bower  writes: Kleinman's solutions was A -- Leave the checker in question on the 8-point and make O play 5-3. Kleinman writes: > The motion of Black's sleeve was not an action by Black. It was an > accident, no more pertinent to the game than a passerby acidentally > knocking a checker off the bar. However, Black's adjusting of > O's checker after he'd lifted his dice was an illegal action, > though apparently not deliberate. He could have adjusted it legally > by putting it back on the bar. By rolling, O condoned it ... her > right, just as if in moving, Black had inadvertently shorted himself > a pip.

### Rulings

Checker knocked off bar  (Chuck Bower+, Sept 2003)
Clock rules and gin positions  (Chris Yep+, Dec 2007)
Clock rules end of turn  (Jason Lee+, Dec 2007)
Cocked dice  (Rodney Lighton+, July 2012)
Cocked dice  (Ed Rosenblum+, Dec 2009)
Cocked dice  (Chuck Bower+, July 2003)
Cocked die on first roll  (Cloyd Laporte+, Nov 2006)
Crawford game double  (Øystein Johansen+, June 2004)
Crawford game double  (Joe+, May 2004)
Crawford game double  (Raccoon+, Sept 2003)
Crawford game double  (Claes Thornberg+, Apr 1998)
Dice sliding  (Chris Yep+, Dec 2007)
Disagreement on final cube  (Chuck Bower+, May 2004)
Disagreement over cocked dice  (DeaconBlue+, May 2005)
Disputed roll  (Roland Scheicher+, Mar 2004)
Disputed roll  (Chuck Bower+, Mar 2000)
Doubling to wrong value  (Stein Kulseth+, Nov 1998)
Equipment changes  (Jason Lee+, Feb 2004)
Error in setup  (Stick+, Dec 2007)
Incorrect setup  (Ken+, Mar 2004)
Kibitzing  (Ilia Guzei+, Feb 2006)
Misplaced cube  (Ned Cross+, Mar 2004)
Misplacing a checker off the board  (Sam Pottle+, Apr 2006)
Misplacing a checker on the bar  (Jeb Horton, Dec 2002)
Moving checkers before you roll  (Gregg Cattanach+, Mar 2006)
Moving with two hands  (Jason Lee+, Jan 2011)
Opening roll loser picks up his die  (Chuck Bower+, Oct 2007)
Playing to wrong match length  (Klaus Evers+, Jan 2006)
Playing to wrong match length  (Marty Storer+, Mar 2005)
Playing to wrong match length  (Steve Mellen, Feb 1998)
Playing wrong opponent  (Hank Youngerman+, Oct 2005)
Premature actions  (Raccoon+, Feb 2008)
Premature roll  (Chris Yep+, Dec 2007)
Repositioning dice without notice  (Chuck Bower+, Oct 2007)
Rerolling cocked dice too quickly  (Raccoon+, Nov 2006)
Rolling 2 dice instead of 1 to start  (Bob Koca+, Oct 2007)
Rolling when opponent is closed out  (Raccoon+, Nov 2006)
Rolling wrong dice  (TarHeelFan+, Sept 2005)
Taking photos of positions  (Stick+, Dec 2007)
Touching the doubling cube  (Ken Bame+, Nov 2006)
Touching the doubling cube  (Chuck Bower+, Apr 1998)
Two cubes on the board  (Jason Lee+, July 2005)
Video dispute resolution  (Jason Lee+, Feb 2006)
When are the dice "up"?  (Ilia Guzei+, Feb 2006)
Writing down positions  (Klaus Evers+, Jan 2006)