Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [DBA] Standard Set of Rulings

Expand Messages
  • TERRY GRINER
    I agree that interps can (and maybe should) vary from venue to venue. However, I don t think they should vary among events held by the same sanctioning body.
    Message 1 of 4 , Dec 1, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      I agree that interps can (and maybe should) vary from venue to venue.
      However, I don't think they should vary among events held by the same
      sanctioning body.





      You say: "Phil does not think a standard set of rulings for umpires is a
      good idea because it can
      cause too many problems. Interpretations become changes, changes become
      amendments, etc."



      Then you say: "There are, however, certain particular issues that need to be
      dealt with in an advance ruling, for tournaments, at least."



      It seems to me these concepts are in conflict. I obviously feel the second
      is more important. But how are the players to know about these advance
      rulings if they are not written down?

      I don't see a problem with a Tournament sign Up Sheet saying "This
      tournament is sanctioned by NASAMW. In cases of disagreement, umpires and
      players should be guided by the NASAMW Tournament Umpiring Guidelines.
      These Guidelines may be viewed and printed by going to the following web
      site:..." This would also be an answer to "Another reason that has been
      cited for not having a set of interpretations is that not all players would
      know these."

      I certainly understand Phil's concern that a guideline could eventually
      become a rule. However, there is also a concern that DBA play could become
      less attractive as players bicker over their own privately held ideas about
      how certain rules should be interpreted.



      A possible solution would be to hand out a sheet of "issues to be resolved"
      by the players themselves before each game, such as:

      1. What constitutes corner to corner overlap?

      2. What happens when an El recoils into a friendly EL?

      3. I am sure others could add a couple more open issues.





      Said sheet could also include the issues where Phil has made a recent ruling
      as per your web site:

      1. rear shooting

      2. timing of overlap contact

      3. the meaning of "elements that can shoot at each other must do so"

      4. if a recoil is completed, then edges can touch



      Terry in Spokane


      _____

      From: DBA@yahoogroups.com [mailto:DBA@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Bob
      Beattie
      Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2006 9:05 PM
      To: DBA@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: [DBA] Standard Set of Rulings



      Terry writes
      "Surely, a superior method for NASAMW (or any sanctioning body) would
      be tohave a standard set of rulings for umpires to rely upon and players
      to be able to study. "

      Bob replies

      I have already stated a number of times that Phil does not think a
      standard set of rulings for umpires is a good idea because it can
      cause too many problems. Interpretations become changes, changes
      become amendments, etc.

      There are, however, certain particular issues that
      need to be dealt with in an advance ruling, for tournaments, at
      least. Rather than have each umpire make a decision, the organizing
      group made a decision for how to do this in NASAMW games.


      Another reason that has been cited for not having a set of
      interpretations is that not all players would know these.



      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Greg
      Okay, here s a compromise... 1) Write up a collection of the rulings. Perhaps mark with stars the ones made by Phil. 2) Write THESE ONLY APPLY TO NASAMW
      Message 2 of 4 , Dec 1, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        Okay, here's a compromise...

        1) Write up a collection of the rulings. Perhaps mark with stars the
        ones made by Phil.

        2) Write "THESE ONLY APPLY TO NASAMW EVENTS" in huge letters across
        the top.

        3) Hand them out at registration or sign-up to each player at each
        NASAMW event.

        Therefore, everyone knows the rulings; they know they only apply to
        that con; and there is less need to call the referee over so
        frequently.

        In a more philosophical light, I think Phil is right, there is too
        much rules bickering among DBA players. But I think closing some of
        the gaps (when they actually exist and are not a matter of reading the
        rules insufficiently close) would reduce, not increase, the frequency
        of discussion.

        One last note,... I'm in the PRC on a conference trip, and

        http://www-personal.umich.edu/~beattie/dba/bobcmts04.html

        is blocked by the national firewall (congrats!) ...

        Could someone email a copy of the document to me?

        gregory.bard@...

        ---Greg

        --- In DBA@yahoogroups.com, "TERRY GRINER" <TGRINER@...> wrote:
        >
        > I agree that interps can (and maybe should) vary from venue to venue.
        > However, I don't think they should vary among events held by the same
        > sanctioning body.
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > You say: "Phil does not think a standard set of rulings for umpires is a
        > good idea because it can
        > cause too many problems. Interpretations become changes, changes become
        > amendments, etc."
        >
        >
        >
        > Then you say: "There are, however, certain particular issues that
        need to be
        > dealt with in an advance ruling, for tournaments, at least."
        >
        >
        >
        > It seems to me these concepts are in conflict. I obviously feel the
        second
        > is more important. But how are the players to know about these advance
        > rulings if they are not written down?
        >
        > I don't see a problem with a Tournament sign Up Sheet saying "This
        > tournament is sanctioned by NASAMW. In cases of disagreement,
        umpires and
        > players should be guided by the NASAMW Tournament Umpiring Guidelines.
        > These Guidelines may be viewed and printed by going to the following web
        > site:..." This would also be an answer to "Another reason that has been
        > cited for not having a set of interpretations is that not all
        players would
        > know these."
        >
        > I certainly understand Phil's concern that a guideline could eventually
        > become a rule. However, there is also a concern that DBA play could
        become
        > less attractive as players bicker over their own privately held
        ideas about
        > how certain rules should be interpreted.
        >
        >
        >
        > A possible solution would be to hand out a sheet of "issues to be
        resolved"
        > by the players themselves before each game, such as:
        >
        > 1. What constitutes corner to corner overlap?
        >
        > 2. What happens when an El recoils into a friendly EL?
        >
        > 3. I am sure others could add a couple more open issues.
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > Said sheet could also include the issues where Phil has made a
        recent ruling
        > as per your web site:
        >
        > 1. rear shooting
        >
        > 2. timing of overlap contact
        >
        > 3. the meaning of "elements that can shoot at each other must do so"
        >
        > 4. if a recoil is completed, then edges can touch
        >
        >
        >
        > Terry in Spokane
        >
        >
        > _____
        >
        > From: DBA@yahoogroups.com [mailto:DBA@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Bob
        > Beattie
        > Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2006 9:05 PM
        > To: DBA@yahoogroups.com
        > Subject: [DBA] Standard Set of Rulings
        >
        >
        >
        > Terry writes
        > "Surely, a superior method for NASAMW (or any sanctioning body) would
        > be tohave a standard set of rulings for umpires to rely upon and
        players
        > to be able to study. "
        >
        > Bob replies
        >
        > I have already stated a number of times that Phil does not think a
        > standard set of rulings for umpires is a good idea because it can
        > cause too many problems. Interpretations become changes, changes
        > become amendments, etc.
        >
        > There are, however, certain particular issues that
        > need to be dealt with in an advance ruling, for tournaments, at
        > least. Rather than have each umpire make a decision, the organizing
        > group made a decision for how to do this in NASAMW games.
        >
        >
        > Another reason that has been cited for not having a set of
        > interpretations is that not all players would know these.
        >
        >
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.