This thread:

http://www.bgonline.org/forums/webbb....pl?read=55861

...reminded me to inquire re two rules disagreements that I was party to in Las Vegas -- one at the Jackson's Bar Tuesday game, and the other at the Open in November.

1) 7-game match at Jackson's Bar: At a critical point in the match I reflexively reverted to an old habit and rolled bare-handed without using the dice cup (When I last played live BG in the 70's, nobody bothered with dice cups - at least not in my circle of mostly tournament bridge players.). My opponent grabbed the dice just as they came to rest. "Don't do that again, please." Fair enough, mea culpa. Then he put the dice back on the board, quickly saw that the numbers were to his advantage, and then insisted that I play the roll -- his perogative under the "new rules", or so he claimed. My thought at the time: This guy shouldn't be handling my dice no matter how I rolled them -- but I was a stranger at Jackson's, I hadn't played live BG in decades, and I the only multi-point matches I ever played at all were in a beer-addled, zero-stakes tournament in college, so I took his word for it and played the lousy roll.

Was my opponent's interpretation of the "new rules" correct in this situation?


2) 7-game match, Las Vegas Open, $100-buy-in jackpot: Again a critical point in a game and in the match, and I reverted to another old habit and carelessly threw the dice on my opponent's (my left) side of the board instead of on my side. (When I played in the 70's, ANY rolled dice that landed flat were good -- on my side, on your side, on the bar, on top of a checker, on the table, and, yes, on the floor. Not cocked: the roll counted, period.) "Not a legal roll", he said -- but, as he quickly saw, a good roll for him. "It's my choice under the 'new rules', and I want you to play it." The guy seemed like a seasoned tournament player, and I was not, so I took his word for it and played the lousy roll.

Was my opponent's interpretation of the "new rules" correct in this situation?

OP link refers to illegal moves, OP question pertains to illegal rolls.

In my opinion, there is no option for opponent to accept an illegal roll, it must be rerolled legally. Premature rolls, however, opponent can either accept the roll , or force player to reroll.

http://www.chicagopoint.com/usrules.html

Both times you should have had the right to roll again.

I think in the 1st situation , the way you described it, your opponent touched your dice, that is illegal!
I think in those situations (if you had rolled with a cup though!), but opponent touched the dice it is actually you who can choose to play the roll on board now or roll again, but I am not sure about this.

In the 2nd situation it is really crazy.
Because what if you do intend to roll legally, but one die will accidently jump over the bar to land on other side of baord? Can then also the opponent say you have to play that roll? NO!
So not now either!
If you like fights maybe that is what you exactly should do against this person next time you play him!

Just read the "new rules" (thanks for posting the link, NC), and clearly I wuzz robbed. Twice. But it was my own fault since I didn't know the rules at the time, and I didn't call for a director in either case. Lesson learned. As a wise POTUS once said: Fool me twice, won't get fooled again.

I would probably have done the same.

This is utterly preposterous.

Why the heck didn't you ask a TD? That is why he is there. You could have asked a TD in the first situation as well.

ND: "At a critical point in the match I reflexively reverted to an old habit and rolled bare-handed without using the dice cup (When I last played live BG in the 70's, nobody bothered with dice cups - at least not in my circle of mostly tournament bridge players.). My opponent grabbed the dice just as they came to rest."

Atrifix: "I probably would have done the same."


Hmmmm. I humbly but emphatically disagree. Insist, adamantly if you must, that your opponent use a dice cup -- absolutely reasonable. Put your hands on your opponent's dice when they're on the board during live play, particularly while his turn is (or may be) still in progress -- I think not.


"Then he put the dice back on the board, quickly saw the roll was to his advantage, and insisted that I play it -- his prerogative under the new rules, or so he claimed."

Atrifix: "This is utterly preposterous."


My opponent's handling of my dice was, perhaps, a red herring -- the dice had come to rest an instant before he picked them up. He did not affect the outcome of the roll by grabbing the dice, nor did I imply otherwise. My thought was (and still is) simply that when your opponent grabs your dice off the board first and then makes his case second, he should forfeit any advantageous rights that the rulebook may have otherwise conferred on him. But I also recognize that the rule-makers cannot possibly contemplate every conceivable, petty scenario that might occur between two amateurs over the board -- especially when the actions of both players rise to the extraordinary level of dumbass-ed-ness that was evinced in this silly incident -- so I'm not surprised that the rulebook is silent on the matter.


Atrifix: "Why the heck didn't you ask a TD? That is why he is there. You could have asked a TD in the first situation as well."

I played cash games only in my day, long ago. We settled disputes privately. Old habits die hard. In the heat of battle it didn't occur to me to seek a ruling from outside. Next time, will do.

Atrifix, thanks for commenting -- it's not lost on me that these issues are not the usual grist for debate among top players.....

If my opponent rolls his dice and one of them jumps the bar or ends up resting on one of the checkers on my side, if it's close to me I flick the die in their direction to make it easier for them to pick up (unless the person is already reaching for it). Similarly, if it jumps out of the board completely, I'll try to catch it before it hits the floor. I don't see this as being any different from grabbing the dice when someone rolls on the wrong side. In some sense, it's saying to the other player "Roll again."

I think the really bad move here is to change his mind AFTER touching the dice to have you roll again. Putting aside any rule interpretation about a "legal" roll, it seems to me that if your opponent picks up your dice, he doesn't have any right to put them back down and make you play them.

I am a noob at BG but planning to reach a decent level to play a tournament once in a while. I was checking the website of the "Las Vegas Backgammon Club" when I found this:

I think your opp. mixed rule 4.2 and 4.6. Nevertheless I think he couldn't touch your dice in the first case ... When you would have thrown a premature roll and he touches your dice he can't let the premature roll stand I think.