I was thinking a bit more about the endgame strategies, and I had a thought that I don’t recall having heard before. Instead of timed games, has anyone ever considered going to a turn-count governed game? I’m thinking it would be like baseball, in that it would be a certain number of “innings” max, (or hopefully we could find a more unique-to kubb term). I would be willing to try this out in a tournament. This would alleviate a team’s ability to meaningfully slow play on the setup phase in order to keep their opponents from getting a chance to finish a game with a full win. I would use the 1-2-4-6 or 3-6 start for this method, as the choice now after the lag toss would be “visitors” or “home”, and in both scenarios, the home team would be the first to throw six batons. I would think, typically, a game could be five to seven innings and still fall within the 30 minutes per round typical time frame. If a game would get to 30 minutes, with innings left, the tournament director could call “last inning” with the home team getting a chance to finish the current inning. Okay I have a few more details to work out, but I think this one may have merit. I had mentioned in part two that I would dedicate this article to how we can end games in a more exciting fashion. I’m not sure now that I am prepared to write two pages on this, since I left some open ends in part four as well. So, I will move on to a few other points, and leave open the possibility of a part six.
Two batons in a row
The idea of the infamous “two batons in a row” rule came up in Stoughton. It’s become clear to many in the kubb community, ad nauseam, that I am not a fan of this concept. In order to try and illustrate how this inevitably slows the pace of the games, and consequently leads to an uptick of unfinished games, I give you these logical points:
- On a two-player team, with the rule, they will change throwers a minimum of three times to comply. If neither player ever misses, and they can stand in two different spots to be ready to throw as soon as their teammate finishes, then this doesn’t affect the game flow. Occasionally, however most teams miss a throw or two each round, or at least have to throw from the same general area where they can’t be standing ready as soon as their partner throws. Those extra line changes will add up to less time at the end of the game.
- By contrast, a three-player team only needs to change throwers a minimum of twice. That equals less total time between throws in a typical game.
- A better equalizer, in my opinion, would be for no player to throw more than one baton in a row. Now, no matter how many are on the team, there will be exactly five thrower changes. I could see implementing this rule in a previously described turn-based game, but in a timed game, I think the did not finish rate would skyrocket.
Painted lines
While I have always liked paint better than stakes, it has its imperfections. I used strings in my tournaments last year (with paint guide-lines under the center corners for visibility during inkasting) and they worked great, but setup and removal have become quite tedious and I don’t plan to use them this year. What I have developed, however, is a new appreciation for the simplicity of stakes. This has been made possible from using the center stakes as one end of the 4 meter boundaries on each side of the pitch (as described in part four of this series). In my opinion, it is easier to make a judgement on a 4 meter line, than on an 8 meter line with a meaningless obstruction in the line of vision. The only decision to make is whether to use the outside, center, or middle of the stakes for judgement. I prefer the outside of 4 inch tall stakes. If you look across the top of the baseline stake and can see any portion of the stake (where it contacts the ground) outside of the kubb, the kubb is in. If you can’t, it’s on the line and out. In this system, stakes would not be able to be pulled during the blasting phase of the game, as 2 inches of baton would be exposed above the stakes. Until someone invents an applicable GPS/LASER system for the boundary lines, we must plod along with the normal methods.
Luck
I enjoy tinkering. In its basic form, kubb is equal parts sport and science. Skill plays a huge part, but luck cannot be discounted as a factor. In my opinion, the art of kubb is 80 to 90 percent in the head of the thrower. When I am playing, I know my most daunting opponent is myself. I’ve gone eight for eight from 8 meters in a row to win a tournament, and I’ve also thrown 12 to 13 straight unsuccessful tries to take out a particular base kubb. I’ve beaten national champions, and I’ve lost to rookie players. Every round, game, and tournament is different. Matt Green (DePere, Wisconsin) told me that kubb is a game that is best played by a person that can instantly forget the last turn. While this is not always the easiest task to perform, I agree with the sentiment. Being able to let go of the previous turn is my eternal struggle. Two days ago, I just participated in my forty-fifth tournament (Stoughton). I still get butterflies when walking out to the pitch for round one. I hope I never lose that feeling.
Shot clock
Going out on the edge of realistic possibilities, Cody Glorioso and I had discussed the idea of a “shot clock” for the setup phase of the game. Something along the lines of a “chess clock”, where each team was given a maximum amount of time for this phase, say 6 to 8 minutes per 25 minute game. When a team’s 6 to 8 minutes are up, the inkasting team gets to stand up their own kubbs for the rest of the game, to their liking. I like this, however, managing this clock would take an extra person on each pitch simply for the performance of this task. It might be an achievable goal if a tournament director can recruit enough non-playing help. To illustrate how slowly the writing is going on this part, an hour ago I just returned from my 1000 mile round trip to Alanson, Michigan, where I was one of 30 participants at the Great Lakes 1 v 1 tournament (my forty-sixth tournament). I brought up this shot clock idea to a couple of people, who offered a little feedback but in general seemed intrigued by the possibility. Another idea for this would be for something like a regular chess clock, where the 25 minutes are divided between the two teams equally. Once a team uses up all 12 and a half minutes of their allotted time, the team with remaining time would get to take all remaining time for themselves by repeating turns on offense, plus setting up their own inkasted kubbs until the 25 minute timer runs out. At that point, batons would be dropped, as both teams would have received the same time on attack. Probably easier to manage, as a regular chess clock could be set at 12 and a half minutes on each side and punched as soon as the last baton leaves the thrower’s hand.
Conclusion
I have just realized that I’m not going to complete this series in five parts. There are at least a couple more ideas I wanted to get in to, but I am nearly out of space for this issue. I am also up against the deadline, as part four came out two days ago, and I am on the stretch run into my scrambler this weekend. If the good folks at Kubb On are kind enough to grant me an extension into part six, you can read it soon. Otherwise I’d like to thank, in particular, Christopher Jones for giving me this opportunity to speak to you. I know he has some great content coming up soon for you, and I am excited to read what he has to say about this sport we love. Until we meet again, may your 8s fly right and your piles be tight. Kubb On!
