Slitherine

dave_r wrote:Once you have turned 90 degrees you are beyond the BG. Nowhere does it say that you have to be beyond from your starting position.

To not be would, IMO, not be consistent with the spirit of the rules at least and, quite probably, with any common sense reading.

Dan ruled correctly - hence the small round of appluase we gave him (even if he knows not) when we were told the ruling.

I did hear the applause afterwards. And I did sense the vultures parked at a 3 table distance waiting.

I would say both Dave and Terry were very friendly in explaining their positions and letting me parse the text mutliple times. I intentionally decided to take a careful amount of time to make the ruling as there were competing sections of the rules that did not obviously overlap. So I was going to be certain of my call when i made it and still am. It took time, but it was important time.

hammy wrote:
My current take on these words is that the evaders make their move, their move can include a turn at the edge of the table and if that move is far enough to completely clear all the obstructing BGs then it is fine and appears on the edge of the table. If its move is not far enough to clear then it has to be placed 'beyond' the BGs it is bursting through. I think that as to the side of is not beyond that if the move is not long enough to fully clear obstructions down the table edge it has to go off table but if the move is long enough to clear then it is OK.

I can't see anything in the evade rules that prevents a turn when 'inside' an enemy BG but it would IMO be very hard to argue that ending up above or below as per the original diagram is 'beyond' and if you don't have enough move to clear then you must be placed 'beyond'

I still do not believe the rules ANYWHERE allow you to turn 90 degrees while entirely in another friendly BG. Hammy I think you have a typo in your 2nd paragraph as I don't think the rules allow you to be inside an enemy BG either.

To be clear on the table at the time. Because of the piled up BGs at the board edge there was NO ROOM for a base anywhere other than in the BGs being burst through. Had there been room then the whole turning would come into play.

In fact in the forced passing through section it is clear that BGs can't turn when interpentrated. So why would an exception suddenly come up?

hazelbark wrote:I still do not believe the rules ANYWHERE allow you to turn 90 degrees while entirely in another friendly BG. Hammy I think you have a typo in your 2nd paragraph as I don't think the rules allow you to be inside an enemy BG either.

I was looking at things the other way. I can't find anything that prevents it.

I think the two relevant sections are top of P49 (how to move evaders or routers when bursting through) and bottom of P67 (what happens when you hit the edge of the table).

Where is the bit that you see as preventing a turn when in a friendly BG? There is a bit refering to what you can do if you start your move partially interpenetrating but that is regarding movement, not evading or routing IMO.

hammy wrote:

hazelbark wrote:I still do not believe the rules ANYWHERE allow you to turn 90 degrees while entirely in another friendly BG. Hammy I think you have a typo in your 2nd paragraph as I don't think the rules allow you to be inside an enemy BG either.

I was looking at things the other way. I can't find anything that prevents it.

Nothing in the rules prevents....insert many silly examples.

So anything not expressly provided for in the rules is permitted?

Thats what umpires are for. Are we back were we started?

hazelbark wrote:I did hear the applause afterwards. And I did sense the vultures parked at a 3 table distance waiting.

I would say both Dave and Terry were very friendly in explaining their positions and letting me parse the text mutliple times. I intentionally decided to take a careful amount of time to make the ruling as there were competing sections of the rules that did not obviously overlap. So I was going to be certain of my call when i made it and still am. It took time, but it was important time.

The boy done good

And, yes, both players behaved very well. In fact were there any players who did not take kindly to an umpire ruling in the FoG games?

hazelbark wrote:

hammy wrote:

hazelbark wrote:I still do not believe the rules ANYWHERE allow you to turn 90 degrees while entirely in another friendly BG. Hammy I think you have a typo in your 2nd paragraph as I don't think the rules allow you to be inside an enemy BG either.

I was looking at things the other way. I can't find anything that prevents it.

Nothing in the rules prevents....insert many silly examples.

So anything not expressly provided for in the rules is permitted?

Oh, I fully realise that nothing in the rules prevents it not a good argument. It is just you said that you had found somwhere that prevented turns during interpenetration. I countered that the only place I could think of that applied to movement not evades/routs which use different rules.

If you have found something that prevents evaders/routers from making a turn (to avoid impassible or table edge) while in a friendly BG I would like to know where you found it.

The thing I like most about these rules is the simple way they have been put down. They try to represent the situations as in "real life".

Imagine the state of things when a unit is trying to force its way through another front to rear, I presume the unit being passed through would all turn sideways to creat a gap for the other to move through, then halfway through someone shouts "Look chaps, there is the end of the world, turn 90degrees" what would the poor chaps being passed through do to accomadate this?

I like to have rules that represent what happened, or at least our understanding of what happened, and are fun. While a debate is always good crack common sense should prevail.

Just because the rules do not say you cannot do it doesn't mean you can, smacks of the debates when playing 6th edition WRG. (they are still going on to this day.)

My two pence worth on this enjoyable topic.

hammy wrote:I think the two relevant sections are top of P49 (how to move evaders or routers when bursting through) and bottom of P67 (what happens when you hit the edge of the table).

Where is the bit that you see as preventing a turn when in a friendly BG? There is a bit refering to what you can do if you start your move partially interpenetrating but that is regarding movement, not evading or routing IMO.

As the rule writers have said they tried to avoid to much writing. Look at P48. Legal interpenetrations. That IMHO should be used as the guide. No turns during partial interpenetrations, BG placed on FAR side

nikgaukroger wrote:
And, yes, both players behaved very well. In fact were there any players who did not take kindly to an umpire ruling in the FoG games?

None.

Well Hilton and Scott prefered i not try and have them stop cussing at each other.

philqw78 wrote: As the rule writers have said they tried to avoid to much writing. Look at P48. Legal interpenetrations. That IMHO should be used as the guide. No turns during partial interpenetrations, BG placed on FAR side

That was exactly what clinched it for me.

hazelbark wrote:

philqw78 wrote: As the rule writers have said they tried to avoid to much writing. Look at P48. Legal interpenetrations. That IMHO should be used as the guide. No turns during partial interpenetrations, BG placed on FAR side

That was exactly what clinched it for me.

I am confident you got the right answer but P48 has nothing to do with evaders or routers bursting through. That is covered at the top of P49 in a separate section which I have quoted at least twice before in this thread.

hammy wrote: I am confident you got the right answer but P48 has nothing to do with evaders or routers bursting through. That is covered at the top of P49 in a separate section which I have quoted at least twice before in this thread.

We don't read your answers 'cos you don't fully read ours Hammy.

philqw78 wrote:

hammy wrote: I am confident you got the right answer but P48 has nothing to do with evaders or routers bursting through. That is covered at the top of P49 in a separate section which I have quoted at least twice before in this thread.

We don't read your answers 'cos you don't fully read ours Hammy.

Err, I did read your post Phil.

The rule precluding wheels and turns when interpenetrating is for just that interpenetrating, the rules on bursting through are different and in the next section of the moving through friends rules.

IMO it shows intent. Of course you could just DBx rules-lawyer it like we used to but the rest of us are trying to put that behind us I feel - which to be fair Hammy also does in actual play.

hammy wrote:Err, I did read your post Phil.

The rule precluding wheels and turns when interpenetrating is for just that interpenetrating, the rules on bursting through are different and in the next section of the moving through friends rules.

Which is why in my post I said IMO they should be a guide, since there are no explicit rules

One for the FAQ's?

No.

Where do you put something for where there are no specific rules then?