Regarding out-of-game considerations?

Hi! Where can I find definitions and examples of illegal OOG considerations. Searched the tournament rules for "out of game", "out-of-game", "out-of" and "out of" and found nothing. So where can I find it? Regards Alex Ek VEKN Prince of Gothenburg

Alex Ek wrote: > Hi! > > Where can I find definitions and examples of illegal OOG considerations. > Searched the tournament rules for "out of game", "out-of-game", "out-of" > and "out of" and found nothing. > > So where can I find it? Illegal OOG considerations: Anything that's not part of the game. For example: Tournament standing V:EKN rating points standing Nationality Eye color

LSJ skrev: > Alex Ek wrote: >> Hi! >> >> Where can I find definitions and examples of illegal OOG >> considerations. Searched the tournament rules for "out of game", >> "out-of-game", "out-of" and "out of" and found nothing. >> >> So where can I find it? > > Illegal OOG considerations: > Anything that's not part of the game. > > For example: > Tournament standing Isn't this one kinda strange? When I play a tournament my highest priority is to win the tournament. Why aren't you allowed to play for the hypothetical tournament win from round 1. What is the motivation for this? > V:EKN rating points standing Fair enough. > Nationality What, I'm not allowed to try to x-table oust the Swiss guys. Dammit, I need to rethink my strategy. One example though: I play an 11 player tourney. So there will be a maximum of 5 GW distributed in the tourney. I want to get into the finals. In round 1 I have 2 VP's and no "reasonable" chance to get another VP. My prey will oust my pred. If I self-oust that will still happend but I will thus void the GW since I get 2, my prey 2 and my pred 1. If I void the GW there will be atleast 1 player going in to the finals with no GW. Having 2 VPs gives me a good chance of being that 5th player. Question: Am I allowed to self-oust to void the GW? [ quoted text not captured ]

Alex Ek wrote: > LSJ skrev: >> Alex Ek wrote: >>> Hi! >>> >>> Where can I find definitions and examples of illegal OOG >>> considerations. Searched the tournament rules for "out of game", >>> "out-of-game", "out-of" and "out of" and found nothing. >>> >>> So where can I find it? >> >> Illegal OOG considerations: >> Anything that's not part of the game. >> >> For example: >> Tournament standing > > Isn't this one kinda strange? When I play a tournament my highest > priority is to win the tournament. Why aren't you allowed to play for > the hypothetical tournament win from round 1. What is the motivation for > this? Having each game played well, without the players with previous GWs taking a dive to manipulate the standings.

[ quoted text not captured ] Exellent. could you just take a look at the example and give me a yes or no too :) [ quoted text not captured ]

Alex Ek wrote: > Exellent. could you just take a look at the example and give me a yes or > no too :) Sorry. Didn't even see that example when responding earlier. > I play an 11 player tourney. So there will be a maximum of 5 GW > distributed in the tourney. I want to get into the finals. In round 1 I > have 2 VP's and no "reasonable" chance to get another VP. My prey will > oust my pred. If I self-oust that will still happend but I will thus > void the GW since I get 2, my prey 2 and my pred 1. > If I void the GW there will be atleast 1 player going in to the finals > with no GW. Having 2 VPs gives me a good chance of being that 5th player. > > Question: Am I allowed to self-oust to void the GW? Restating without the OOG considerations is helpful: In some table, I have 2 VPs and no reasonable chance for more VPs. Can I do some activity? Answer: yes. With no reasonable chance for more VPs, you are still free to choose from among the activities open to you. Note that every such choice leads to 0 additional VPs (reasonably).