Home › Contents › The Dead Boundary

The Dead Boundary

The following explanation of this is from the "Complete Croquet Player." "When the great improvement in play, consequent upon the introduction of the heavy mallet, began to show itself, it was found that the 'attack' was a great dead too strong for the 'defence'--in other words, that the player who was 'in' and had the command of the balls had it all his own way; so much so, that if an average player, he was almost certain of winning the game; while his adversary who was 'out' had very little chance, having nothing to bring him in but long shots, and very few even of them, for the player who was 'in' made two or three long breaks and won, not staying to be shot at. It was perceived that this undue superiority of the attack would, if unchecked, eventually be the ruin of the game; for the play being all on one side, half of the players would have no hope of victory, and the other half would be almost certain to get it, but it would not be worth having. The attention, therefore, of those interested in the future of the game was directed towards the discovery of means for checking the winning player's career. It was observed that the power of making long breaks was the principal advantage in his hands; that they were not sufficiently difficult to make; and that the over-facility with which they could be made arose chiefly from the large size of the hoops, the easiness of the settings, and the ease and safety with which all the balls could be picked up and made use of in the break--for it is very much easier to make a break with several balls to play upon than with only one or two. The first two of these objectionable facilities were easily obviated by reducing the width of the hoops, and by the adoption of more difficult settings, such as the Six-hoop. But the third required much more consideration before a remedy was found. In the old game, when, as was almost always the case after the 'out' player's unsuccessful long shot, the ball which the 'in' player wanted lay at the boundary, he could get near to it with the greatest case, for all he had to do, when going down to a ball so placed, was to hit his own ball in the take-off, or other croquet-stroke, as hard as he could, and it was certain to go off the ground somewhere near the ball he wished to go to, often going a tremendous distance past the boundary, quite out of the game. It was then brought back for him, and placed three feet within the boundary line, close to the ball he had played for, which he then proceeded to roquet and make use of. It will be observed that no judgment of strength whatever was required; all he had to do was to hit hard somewhere in the right direction--he was then certain of being able to roquet the ball. This was manifestly an incongruity, for if the ball had been in the middle of the ground, instead of at the boundary, the player would have had to judge the strength to get near it. In all other croquet-strokes the player must judge the strength in order to reap any advantage from the stroke. Why should a special facility for attack be given to the winning player, when the defending side has played away to the boundary to escape him? . . . . By this ease with which balls at the boundary could be picked up and made use of immense facilities were given to the attacking player for making long breaks. To remedy this glaring defect in the game, the Dead Boundary Law was adopted; it enacts that if in taking croquet, either the striker's own ball or the ball croqueted goes off the ground, the striker loses the remainder of his turn. The striker is thus made to judge the strength when going to the boundary even more accurately than in other croquet-strokes, or else pay the penalty, not only by losing his turn, but by frequently giving great help to the adversary whom he has pursued. Thus not only is the 'attack' limited, but the 'defence' is directly strengthened; and from the removal of one of the greatest defects of the game has arisen one of the best and most interesting features of modern croquet, namely, the necessity for good judgment of strength. . . . With the introduction of the Dead Boundary came Finessing, or playing away to the boundary out of the adversary's way, trusting to his failing to judge the strength correctly; for, by either going too far and losing his turn, or not far enough and missing the roquet, he would be checked in his progress, and probably lose the break. The Dead Boundary has had great influence on the tactics of the game, and is especially suited to small grounds. I recommend all players who have not already done so, to try it."