[ASLML] Re: Kibitzing

[Bruce Bakken]

>
>Opinions vary on this issue...not surprising. However, I see nothing in the 
>ASLRB that makes playing by the rules optional based on whether a TD is 
>present or not.
>

Opposing players may always agree to make any rules optional.  It's their 
choice.  (A tournament may prohibit such an option.)  Discouragement from 
making non-optional rules, optional, is found in A.4.

>
>Disagree, playing by the rules is not optional.

In principle, I completely agree with you.  We can't just decide to 
deliberately "not play correctly".

As far as "playing correctly", often I have wished that some sort of 
regulating machine would just make sure that all DRM, effects, conditions, 
restrictions, and exceptions were applied correctly and all I had to do was 
devise strategy.  It is my desire that every single event of every ASL game 
I played is handled correctly and according to each applicable rule.

Alas, us poor humans have to keep track of all this ourselves.  
Unfortunately that means that I've sometimes not played by the rules.

>The opposing players, watchers, TD, etc have an inherent obligation to 
>point out rules violations.
>

I appreciate that you are specifically talking about "rules violations" -- 
which I interpret as any mis-application of a condition, restriction, 
option, modifier or exception, etc.

It is an interesting point you make.  I would rather know when I am applying 
something incorrectly.  It makes the playing more "valid" for me.  I would 
absolutely expect my opponent to point out any rules I was playing 
incorrectly, as I most certainly would point them out for him.

As far as spectators and tournament directors... well, I certainly wouldn't 
dismiss it out of hand if one of them pointed out a perceived rules 
violation.  I would have to look it up, of course -- and they better be 
right, or I will invite them to depart and not interrupt again.

However, I would far prefer it that spectators of any type don't say 
anything.

>If I was at a Chess tourney and witnessed a player jumping his pawns over 
>an opposing players peices I would let everyone in the vicinity know there 
>was a problem and quick...I don't see ASL as any different.
>

If the opposing player allowed the pawn jumping to go unchallenged, well... 
they deserve each other.

I understand that you are talking about principles here, and not comparing 
the games of ASL and chess.  However, in ASL there are *so many* rules to 
remember.

If both players are ignorantly playing a rule incorrectly, then that 
certainly is an element of their game experience.  Presumably in that case, 
they would each play it incorrectly in reverse situations.  Who would gain 
an advantage, and who would it hurt?  They are playing it equally (even if 
incorrectly).

>The rules are suppose to be the framework of the game _NOT_ the game 
>itself.
>

I wholeheartedly agree with this.  Making the application of the rules an 
act of gamesmanship is not acceptable.

Regards,
Bruce Bakken

_________________________________________________________________
Get business advice and resources to improve your work life, from bCentral. 
http://special.msn.com/bcentral/loudclear.armx