A Conversation for Tiddlywinks
Researcher 46541 Started conversation Oct 5, 1999
Tiddlywinks isn't given the coverage it requires. Tiddlywinks is more competitive than football, more tough than boxing and more strategical than chess. There should be at least a channel dedicated to it
Jan^ Posted Oct 5, 1999
Global Village Idiot Posted Oct 19, 1999
I do believe I can detect a note of sarcasm in your reply, Mr(s) 46541.
Tiddlywinks is, of course ridiculous - but I'd contend that there should be more room in our lives for the ridiculous.
It's pointless, but it's no more (or not much more) pointless than snooker or darts, which seem to get plenty of TV time. It's surely better TV than chess - Garry Kasparov's nerves never made him miss a bishop-takes-knight-check for the world championship. I'd have to admit it's not the greatest radio ever, after an experimental broadcast produced lines such as:
"And now he's going to squop the red with the green.....and he's done it."
The only reason that it's not as widespread as (for instance) pool, is historical accident - plus perhaps that it requires a bit more strategy and therefore intelligence. It doesn't need a whole channel, but would fill up time on Eurosport just as well as monster truck racing or tenpin bowling.
As indeed would croquet, on which I support jan^ completely: fine game, shame it needs half an acre of carefully manicured lawn which you then gouge great big holes out of when you miss-hit a shot.
Jan^ Posted Oct 19, 1999
All I can say is that you must be a dreadful croquet player GV Idiot!
I appeared on TV playing croquet once, back in 198? when the first inter-university match was played at Durham, in front of the cathedral. Cambridge v Durham v Bristol (Oxford wimped out). I captained Bristol - we got the bronze medal.
Key: Complain about this post