[BLML] Weighted Score adjustment. [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

Herman De Wael Hermandw at skynet.be
Wed Dec 2 11:55:14 CET 2009


Rob,

No, of course that is not the way we do it. But it was an easy way of 
saying what I intended.

Herman.

Rob Bosman wrote:
> Herman,
> 
> Is it Belgium still custom to create a weighted score by averaging +620 and
> +790? Even in a team-event this does not (always) produce the correct
> figure. If the result at the other table is 100, then 705 produces +11, if
> it is +120 705 becomes +12, whereas in both cases the score should be the
> average of +11 (620) and +12 (790), i.e. 11.5 imps. To Ton: I assume that we
> now will attribute half imps, as sometimes matches are decided on less than
> 1 VP as well?
> 
> Rob
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: blml-bounces at rtflb.org [mailto:blml-bounces at rtflb.org] On Behalf Of
> Herman De Wael
> Sent: 02 December 2009 10:59
> To: Bridge Laws Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [BLML] Weighted Score adjustment. [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]
> 
> I have some understanding for Ton's sentiment.
> David's suggestion seems quite sensible, not at all "stupid".
> However:
> When my LHO decides to think for a long while before (penalty-)doubling 
> me, and RHO does not have a clear-cut take out, then the expected value 
> of my score goes up from +620 to +790. Why should that same expected 
> score go down again (to +705) when RHO illegally takes it out?
> Was that what you were aiming for, David?
> 
> Herman.
> 
> ton wrote:
>> Now, all of this is entirely consistent with both L12B1 and Reveley
> rulings.
>> The notion is that cheats are no better off than they would have been
> under
>> the previous Laws, but non-offenders do not get a windfall just because
> they
>> happened to be playing against cheats - they get their expectation, or
>> "equity", on the board had they been playing against honest people.  It's
>> still stupid, but it's not illegal. 
>>
>> David Burn
>> London, England
>>
>> ton:
>>
>> Could you, David, tell what it is you consider to be 'still stupid'? 
>> You once in a while are worth listening to and I try to avoid stupid
> things
>> applying the laws. 
>>
>> ton
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Blml mailing list
>> Blml at rtflb.org
>> http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Blml mailing list
> Blml at rtflb.org
> http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Blml mailing list
> Blml at rtflb.org
> http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
> 


More information about the Blml mailing list