Rulings

Forum Archive : Rulings

 Doubling to wrong value

 From: Stein Kulseth Address: steink@my-dejanews.com Date: 9 November 1998 Subject: Ruling? Forum: rec.games.backgammon Google: 7267ul\$l8b\$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com

```As a tournament director/committe member, how would you rule in this
situation:

Black has just won a game, where white has the cube on 2.
However both player's agree that during the game white first doubled to
2, black took, then later black redoubled.
White states that when black redoubled she did not actually turn the
cube to 4, but placed it on the board with the 2 side showing - and so
white accepted the cube with value 2 and black should get just 2 points
from her win.
Black cannot recall whether she actually turned the cube to 2 or 4,
but states that the intention of redoubling to 4 should be clear,
and expect to be rewarded 4 points.
Both agree that white did not mention that the cube was not turned to 4
until the end of the game.

Variant B
As above, but spectators can confirm that the redoubled cube was placed
with the 2 side up (eliminating the possibility that white also cheated
by turning a 4 cube back to a 2 cube himself)

Variant C
Black redoubles, and puts the cube on the table with the 2 side facing
up. White calls the tournament director immediately to find out if he is
allowed to take the cube at value 2

--
Stein Kulseth
```

 Julian Hayward  writes: ```I think in the absence of an explicit rule for this situation, the nearest analogy is that White can condone an illegal checker play once Black has picked up his dice. In all three situations, it would appear Black has made an illegal play (double) by passing the cube back on 2 and certainly in A and B White condoned the play by taking the "double" and the game continued. In situation C it seems a lot harsher to rule against Black, but the equivalent of picking ones dice up has to be releasing the cube from one's hand (there's no other sensible way of defining the point at which a double is made, IMHO) and so it has to be the same - White can either condone the illegal double by taking the cube on 2 or reject it and insist that the cube be turned to the correct position, i.e. 4. -- Julian Hayward 'Booles' on FIBS julian@ratbag.demon.co.uk +44-1344-640656 http://www.ratbag.demon.co.uk/ ```

 Hank Youngerman  writes: ```I don't know what the specific rules of backgammon are, and they are relevant. What EXACTLY do they say about the act of doubling? The following is copied off the Chicago Point web site: 5.4 CUBE HANDLING. Player may double when it is his turn only before rolling the dice, but not after rolling cocked dice. To double or redouble, player moves the cube toward his opponent at the higher value while saying "double" or words to that effect. To take, one draws the cube toward himself while saying "take" or words to that effect. To reject the double, one says "pass" or words to that effect, enters the score and resets the board. The cube should not be handled capriciously; either verbal or physical acts may be interpreted as cube actions In this instance, it is clear that the act of placing the cube at the higher value is integral to the act of doubling. Hence, there was no double. It is the same as if Black took the cube and put it in his pocket or threw it out the window. More realistically, it is as though Black said "Would you mind holding the cube for a while, I don't want it over on this side of the board." White cannot "condone" the illegal double, because it never happened. Black still controls the cube as 2. Now, if it happens that the table action caused Black to not realize that he was still holding the cube at 2, that is, I suppose, his bad luck. As to variant C, it is clear (to me) that he cannot take the cube at 2. There is no provision in the rules to pass the cube. The rules on illegal moves are clear, that they can be condoned. But there is no rule that permits "condoning" an illegal double, or non-double as the case may be. Just my opinion. ```

 Steve Pickard  writes: ```I posed this one to the tournament director of BIBA (British Isles Backgammon Association),Michael Crane mailto:BIBA@compuserve.com- these are his comments Steve (pix on FIBS) -- Interesting, but I don't see much of a problem here. The answer lies in the text below. However both player's agree that during the game white first doubled to 2, black took, then later black redoubled. White states that when black redoubled she did not actually turn the cube to 4, but placed it on the board with the 2 side showing - and so white accepted the cube with value 2 and black should get just 2 points from her win. Not just Black, but White also agrees that White first doubled and White openly admits that when Black redoubled the cube wasn't turned to 4. White knowingly cheated in not pointing out this error, hoping to gain I know not what. It begs the question, had White won would they have claimed 4 points or 2? Methinks White would have argued strongly for the 4 points, don't you? Black cannot recall whether she actually turned the cube to 2 or 4, but states that the intention of redoubling to 4 should be clear, and expect to be rewarded 4 points. Both agree that white did not mention that the cube was not turned to 4 until the end of the game. Again White admits they knew all along and failed to mention it. Gamesmanship, not sportsmanship. Variant B As above, but spectators can confirm that the redoubled cube was placed with the 2 side up (eliminating the possibility that white also cheated by turning a 4 cube back to a 2 cube himself) It was a redouble (both players and spectators agree) and therefore couldn't be on 2 anyway. Spectators, though not allowed to interfere in a game are allowed to bring such matters to the attention of the Tournament Director - who, when so informed can bring the mistake to the players attention. Variant C Black redoubles, and puts the cube on the table with the 2 side facing up. White calls the tournament director immediately to find out if he is allowed to take the cube at value 2. No! As both players admit it's a redouble, it's a redouble - no argument. Imagine if the mistake was made handing over the cube at 64! Would White seriously expect to win/lose 64 points? Cheerio, Michael ```

 Chuck Bower  writes: ```I'm not a tournament director (but I play one on TV ;), but if I were on a committee I couldn't imagine how another committee member could convince me that the cube value should be 2. Both agree that a double AND a redouble occurred. At backgammon that means the cube is on 4. Pretty simple. These kinds of shenanigans by white should be strongly discouraged by the tournament director. I believe the directory should PRIVATELY point out to white that this kind of action is an attempt at abusing the rules and not in the spirit of the game. If white doesn't heed this advice, stronger action should be taken. But, "a word to the wise..." Chuck bower@bigbang.astro.indiana.edu c_ray on FIBS ```

 Bob Sisselman  writes: ```Michael Crane said: > White knowingly cheated in not pointing out this error, hoping to gain > I know not what. It begs the question, had White won would they have > claimed 4 points or 2? Methinks White would have argued strongly for > the 4 points, don't you? I would think it is quite obvious what White hoped to gain. When Black redoubled, he presumably had the advantage. White would therefore prefer to continue playing for 2 rather than 4 points. By not pointing out that the cube had not been turned, he hoped to gain the advantage of having the cube on his side for "free." I think it is also clear that White would, upon winning, argue for four points. However, if we wish to be fair, he can't be allowed to have it both ways. If we treat this in the same manner as we would treat a misplay of the dice, we must leave the cube at 2. If White did not insist on turning the cube to 4 immediately, he cannot be allowed to claim 4 points later. ```

### 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)