Andy’s New Age Kubb: Tweaks

I had every intention of mowing the yard today, honestly, but as it is snowing… again, I figured it might be just as well to get this part going. As previously stated, I don’t believe any of these changes to the game are direly needed, but rather a collection of little things we can do to improve gameplay. Some are mine, while others were learned from other great kubb minds in our community. I may end up having to break this one up, as I decided to self-impose a two-page limit on my articles in this series. Please give me feedback and send me your ideas that I may not even be aware of. If I were to try and write a book, this would probably be the topic. I can be reached at bigtrucker1192@yahoo.com.

The Neighbor Rule

Most everyone in the worldwide kubb community is likely aware of this addendum by now. In fact, when I finally got to a tournament that didn’t use it (U.S. National Kubb Tournament in 2022), I had to have it explained to me how the “stack” situation would be handled without the neighbor rule in effect. I feel that the neighbor rule is much simpler than how it is handled without, however, I won’t dwell on this one.

Alternating drillers

My first encounter with this rule (designed to create more parity between experience levels was my own scrambler tournament in 2022. Later that summer, it was employed at the Illinois State Tournament in Batavia, Illinois. Reactions were mixed. It really seems to me that this may contribute to even more separation between the “haves” and “have-nots.” Ideally, it is designed to prevent a team with a world-class driller from running away from the field, as well as getting more players improving acumen in more phases of the game. In Batavia, this rule is accompanied by “driller throws at least the first baton,” which also contributes to players engaging in different tasks than they may normally be used to. The separation comes when a team with two good/decent drillers goes up against a team with two less-skilled drillers. Under normal circumstances, if one player gets into a groove, it becomes possible for the novice teams to be more competitive with the advanced teams. In a perfect world, teams would be classified in such a manner as the higher ranked ones may be forced to alternate drillers, while the lower teams would be able to play normally, as a sort of “handicapping” system. It is my opinion that this rule has solid merit in scrambler formats, while the jury is still out for me on traditional team tournaments.

Using center stakes for boundary measurements

I’m a fan. When drilling, you are usually aiming for the corner near the center stake. When determining whether a kubb is in play or short, the Center stakes are the sole factor. So, what, if anything, is the real argument against using them for their side boundary assets? As we’ve all seen, there are occasions where a direct line between the geometric center of two end stakes may not pass perfectly through the same point on the center stake. Center stakes can also be accidentally moved during play, by being knocked out or just tilted. If they aren’t replaced exactly correctly, then they can become false targets if using the traditional end-to-end method. If we use them as the target for measurement on every turn, then it is no longer necessary to worry about them being a bit out of range. I fail to see a downside. 

Play out every place, especially T5

It doesn’t even have to be for hardware, but maybe just bragging rights. I, personally, have been T5 so many times, I can’t sit and recollect them all anymore. Out of my 45 plus tournaments, I’d say no less than half ended in the unenviable position of being done playing long before I’m ready, while those in the lower brackets (some of whom I had throttled earlier) got to play on. While anyone can withdraw from playing after being eliminated from hardware competition, I would like to live in a world where the option is open to keep playing, if only to get that bad taste out of your mouth. And let’s face it, T5 tastes disgusting. So, I encourage all tournament hosts to consider having a special option for this reason. I’m still coming even if you don’t, but in the words of Wooderson, “it’d be a lot cooler if you did.” 

Eliminating the accidental helicopter rule

Okay, admittedly, this one is somewhat bold. I’ve heard that this is gaining steam in Europe. I used it for the Moose tournament in November and I will use it again this June for my Scrambler. It’s simple; if there is no clear intent to throw flat, a “wobbler” that dips below 45 degrees won’t be disallowed. I believe it is important for newer players, while developing their love for the game, to not be discouraged by being called on imperfect throws when it seems clear that they are trying to do it right. Sure, it’s probably possible for more experienced players to develop a throw that would seem to fit the “intent” description, while actually being intended to go flat. However, I don’t see where this will be a tremendously useful tool except in comparatively rare cases. I would like additional input on this, as I haven’t seen it in practice enough yet to formulate a well-informed opinion.

1-2-4-6 Start

I also employed this at the Scrambler last year. It is the most balanced possible start, as a team can’t jump out to an instant 2-0 (2-4-6) or 3-0 (3-6) lead just by winning the lag toss and starting hot. It’s most practical when the teams are mismatched, but in all cases lowers the importance of the lag toss. It gives the winner of the lag toss this simple choice: choose side and throw one first or throw two (second). If the first team starts one-for-one, then the opposing team only has two throws to knock the field kubb down. Now there is more pressure on throwing the opening round, and less on the lag toss. I’ve used it twice now (Moose tournament as well) and I like the concept. I have a mathematical treatise on the “balance” superiority of “1-2-4-6” vs “2-4-6” and “3-6”, and would be happy to provide such upon request, but it is inconsequential for this point. One other accomplishment of using this system is that sometimes, a more experienced team will win a lag toss and defer first throws to the less experienced team, counting on the probability that they will go 0-(2,3). So far, I haven’t encountered any real drawbacks (outside of some mild grumblings from “old dogs” reluctant to learn “new tricks”). Still planning to continue field testing this in my upcoming tournaments.

I just looked outside to see if I could get out and mow, and it was sleeting. However, I am out of space for this article. I just need to scan the annals of kubb history for a good quote, which if I find, I will leave you with