Continued from Part 1 <-- Click here and start reading from Part 1
[CH-3] ‘Weaker’ teams will still beat ‘stronger’ teams in the new rule set. Slightly less often when they open, yes, but definitely more often when they answer. The hole they are in on Turn 2 will be a lot shallower on average. The opening team will ‘blank’ on the open more often, and they will have the full 6, no kubbs in hand, and likely the preferable side. Throwing first isn’t as benefitting, throwing second isn’t as costly; on the whole, things balance out.
Tony Hansen I guess I am failing to see why this is being made such a big deal. It is a tiny rule tweak that happens only in the third game of a match if it goes that far. It isn't some super secret handshake that excludes teams from making it to the final rounds.
16 hours ago · Like
Tony Hansen Honestly, if a team doesn't understand the rule or follow kubb very much, do you honestly think they'll challenge for the finals at a national tournament. It would be great if that would happened, but this is a rule tweak designed to make things more even for teams, not less. If a team doesn't understand the rule (which is explained before every tournament), the other team should be able to help them.
16 hours ago · Like
Steve Feathers While DMK is experimenting with the 4 baton rule at the Iowa Games Kubb the week after Nationals. My post is mainly about Nationals [JF-20]since many if not most will follow their lead. The decision, as far as I know, has not been made whether to change the DMK Fall Klassic or not. However, I agree with your premise and that is one of the questions I asked today. What is the purpose for the rule change. If it is to cater to the elite and limit the Cinderella stories Kubb could be in trouble. I thought the idea was to grow the sport and bring more people into the game.
16 hours ago · Edited · Like
[JF-20] Yes, back to the debate at hand. Hooray!
Steve Feathers IN 2012 Kubb'd was the Cinderella story. We beat another DMK team to make it into the final 8. That's where the story ended. With this "small" rule change the odds of a similar run are diminished.[JF-21]
16 hours ago · Like · 1
[JF-21] No data to support this. If I remember correctly, Inkubbus had a horrible short game, and a 3rd match where a 4 baton open would not have made their short game any better. Secondly, you were hitting your targets just fine. You were outperforming them, regardless of 6 or 4 batons.
Tony Hansen I guess
I'm curious why you feel this rule could cater to the elite? From my
understanding, this prevents an elite team from gaining an edge in the third
game since they would have to decide whether to open with four or get all six
when throwing second.
How would have this rule affected Kubb'ds run in 2012? You can hypothesize all you want, but there is no way to tell if it would have made any difference or not. Maybe this rule would have propelled Kubb'd to being the 2012 National Champions if it would have been implemented then.
This whole ordeal is making me laugh because people are getting WAYYYY too wound up over a minor rule change. Boycotting tournaments because of a small rule tweak...really? This reminds me of a kid saying "I'm taking my ball and going home." Do you not realize this is a lawn game we are playing? I love the game and personally embrace new rule changes, but the level this has been taken to is ridiculous. This isn't the Olympics[JF-22]. A few hundred people in the US care about competitive kubb at all, are we really going to start whining like professional athletes when there is a tiny rule change? Take a step back and look at how silly this really is.
16 hours ago · Like
[JF-22] If it were the Olympics, how would the rules change? A great discussion for another day, perhaps.
Steve Feathers Now that seems to be getting a bit personal. I find nothing silly about this and spent over 4 hours in a car with Josh Feathers, Chris Hodges and Grant Scott discussing this after the Chaska singles tournament last year. The rule, as I understand it, IS to create an advantage for the "better performing team" and that just doesn't fit well with me. I love this game because a 57 year old, fat man, with two replaced knees and other ailments can compete with the younger crowd. Taking or lessening the power of one of the SKILLED elements of the game (the king toss) could affect the outcome. [JF-23] The rule IMO is NOT designed to level the playing field for everyone. AND this is the USA after all, I get to be opinionated and silly (your words) if I choose. I personally find a healthy open debate refreshing. I would love to hear from even one of the tournament directors on this subject.
15 hours ago · Like · 2
[JF-23] Again, the rule change is not to lessen the power of the king toss, but to even the power, with the king toss winner still having an advantage.
Grant Scott Tony Hansen, I don't think it is a big deal that people have questions and are concerned. I agree that this rule will make it more difficult for unknown teams/less experienced to make a run. If all tournaments use the meat grinder format which pits comparable teams it won't be a problem because it will simply add 1-3 more turns. Not sure your last statement gives you much credibility for arguments sake. Besides your one big finish at Rockford this change will work against you. I definitely don't feel the change is being made to help the elite or exclude people, but rotating drilling might be a good option to look at in the future as well. Steve Feathers, you've put in your time and efforts in helping Kubb grow. You ask as many questions as you want. And out of all the things Kubb gives us and we share, this is the one that is considered silly?
15 hours ago · Like · 1
Tony Hansen Maybe I'm
missing how this rule helps the better teams.
We are assuming the better team will generally win the king toss. In previous tournaments, this would mean they would likely choose to throw first (unless there is a lot of wind or other circumstance) in the first and third games. Assuming it went to the third game, the better team could would get the first throw automatically and likely take down a few baselines, therefore putting the weaker team at a pretty big disadvantage right off the bad.
With the new rule, each team would get a game to throw first as it has been so far, keeping things pretty even. Once you get to the third game, another king toss would happen and two things could happen:
1) The better team again wins the king toss, but would be put in the situation where they could choose to open with four batons (and likely knocking down less baselines) or opting to wait for all six and risking the weaker team getting a few bases and starting a bit behind.
2) If the weaker team would happen to win the toss, they would get the opportunity to throw first two games in a row. If they have momentum on their side and choose to throw first, they could get a bit of an advantage over the better team. If they opted to wait for six, they would be at less of a detriment should the better team go 100% on their baselines (only knocking four down instead of the maximum of five).
Either way I look at it, it appears this rule tweak helps the weaker team, not the stronger. This means it would be more likely for "Cinderella Stories" to occur. Maybe you could explain how this scenario helps the better teams.
15 hours ago · Like
Grant Scott Or,
"weaker team" takes batons, does excellent with 50% taking down two
"Better team" returns and takes down 2 FK w/ one baton and goes 3/5 on baseline.
Now "weaker team" w/out good/great driller scatters 5 kubbs. Use 4 batons to clear and go 1/2 on baseline.
"Better team" with driller plant 6 FK and take me down with 2 batons. Now they have 4 batons to clear 2 baselines and kill the king.
"Better team start with 4 batons, take down 2.
"WT" takes two batons to clear and go 3/4 on baseline.
"BT" group 5 and clear with 2 batons then take down 2 baselines(2/4).
Now "WT" have to group 7 and clear the field along with 2 baselines remaining and a king. Will it happen? If not "BT" is licking their chips waiting to attack a penalty line or a good group and 1 base Kubb. See where this is headed...
It helps better teams against less experienced teams or teams w/out a good/great driller. In meat grinder format it doesn't matter. But in the nationals group play it definitely limits the opportunity for an upset. Not to mention, do we really need an extra king toss? [JF-24]One king toss seems sufficient. You win it, you have favor over the other team if it goes a third game. Otherwise, what is the point of the first king toss?
15 hours ago · Like · 2
[JF-24] It is my understanding that the rule at US Nats 2014 will be the team that won the king toss before the game will choose 4 batons or side in the 3rd game. There will be no second king toss. To Grant’s point, if you rethrow at the beginning of the 3rd game, there is not much point to a king toss to start the match. Both teams start with 6 in Games 1 and 2, and both teams throw first from the same side.
Nate Olson Great debate! Mr Tony Hansen has actually swayed me a bit and has made a couple valid points. I do however think we could have had a test run of 5 rather than the full jump to 4...but it is what it is! To be the best you have to beat the best regardless of the rules! I certainly hope I didn't offend Chris Hodges, I know he puts a lot of thought into any decision! As for being silly...eh, we all put a lot of time and effort into this lawn game, not to mention money and road time! Sh*t, this silly game cost me more than one friendship, over a wooden trophy so it's hard for me to think it's just a silly game!
[JF-25] I actually thought about opening with 5. I thought about how it kind of works logically on the field as well. You throw for the king; closest can leave their baton on next to the king and take the remainder of the batons. “I’ll leave my baton, what side you want?” might be a vernacular. I feel good with 4 batons; it’s what we felt was right (as inexperienced new teams) back in 2008 when we learned this game. So, I have experience with 4 baton openings playing with and against many new and experienced teams….and guess what? It was a hell of a time and we loved it.
15 hours ago · Like · 3
Ryan Wayne Kolden Unity - peace – kubb
15 hours ago · Like · 4
Steve Feathers How about rather than four batons to open with you get six but are limited to knocking down only four kubbs on the open thus surrendering two batons rather than just one, if you are rock solid. If my only options are to throw four batons (new rule) or get six batons and am limited to only knocking down four kubbs I choose the second to be my "equalizer" rule. This would also be just a little tweak. Although, honestly I still prefer no changes. Chris Hodges, would your program be able to analyze that scenario and compare it to the four baton rule?[JF-26][CH-4]
14 hours ago · Edited · Like · 2
[JF-26] So now it’s okay if Professor Junk Science analyzes data and forms conclusions all of the sudden. What gives? And is a tweak different than a tinker? Regardless, this was an idea I had proposed simply to get a gauge on how much the 4 baton rule was hated by Steve. And since it is my idea, I like it!
[CH-4] Well it’s not my idea so I hate it! Kidding! In all seriousness though, this wouldn’t address the underlying issue – all it would accomplish would be to remove the FAR outlier of a clear baseline on turn one. 5’s aren’t really the issue – 3’s & 4’s are the issue. In my simulations, the most ‘unfair’ game I came across had A open with 3, B returns with triple, base, base, base, base, base, A closes 8 with 3, base, base, king. B threw 6 PHENOMENAL batons; A played worse (played well for sure, but worse) and won anyway. Removing a 5 base kubb start wouldn’t affect this in the slightest. Could essentially the same game happen if A started with only 4 batons? Absolutely! The difference would be that the opening turn efficiency of starting 3 of 4 is WAY better than starting 3 of 6. As I see it, it’s the difference between ‘earning’ the win and ‘stealing’ it.
Nate Olson That's an amazing idea Steve Feathers!
13 hours ago · Like
Steve Feathers Stolen idea Nate Olson. Wish I would have thought of it first. I do think the idea is worthy of further exploration.
13 hours ago · Like · 1
Garrick van Buren In the same way A Perfect Game is illegal, so could be a Near Perfect Game.
13 hours ago · Like
In : Theory
Tags: theory variants discussion
blog comments powered by Disqus