I agree with what Bill said.
Additionally I would add this - we do have judges that stick to a strict 200 or 2 rule. Meaning you score the 200 points needed for a 3 pt win, or you get a 2 pt win.
Now the exception to the above method is when the judge has been called over earlier and a slow play warning or stalling warning has been given. IF this has already happened, then there is precedence to award the three pointer.
It is KEY to tell the players that if they think the other player is playing slowly or stalling, to call a judge right away. That way the judge is aware. It's so much harder to determine the situation accurately after the fact.
And then the tricky part of "where do you draw the line" comes into play. Someone with only mas ammeda in the back left? How about Mas + 1 uggie? How about Mas + 2 uggies? It starts to get muddy at some point. 2 or 200 is clear and clean cut. No room for interpretation (beyond a judgement call on stalling or slow play), and everyone is on a level playing field.
I suggest you go 2 or 200, as it is clear and east to explain. There may be more 2 pt victories. That's OK in my mind, separating the cream from the milk. It's really hard to tell one guy why you gave him a 2 pt win to him and gave a 3 pt win to another guy who didn't score 200, unless you have - "his opponent was warned for slow play" to back it up.
The bottom line is this - YOU are the judge, and whatever YOU say goes. I would just make it clear to everyone in the beginning before the tournament starts, whatever method you are using.
|