[Stephen Tu]

Quote

How do you calculate the results for the extreme scores?

What you describe is Butler scoring.

No, it wasn't. With Butler, one takes the scores, throws out high/low, get a datum (typically by arithmetic mean), IMP your score vs. the datum. With cross-imps, one imps vs. every other score, then divide by # of comparisons to get an average. If one wanted to not compare vs. extremes, but still cross-imp, then you imp vs. every other score except the high/low of the other scores, & again divide by number of comparisons (2 fewer than a full cross-imp).

But I am with inquiry, don't throw out results, there's no basis to say they aren't perfectly valid data. Just increase # of results. Warn / toss people who do the random 7ntxx on 20 hcp. But just because one pair your direction randomly overbids is no reason to be upset about the fractional imp you lose. It's just the same as having teammates who randomly overbid 1/15 times (one doesn't get to choose teammates in pair games). This effect is random & will even out. The pair who bid the normal game against you did something good by avoiding the overbidding; why shouldn't they be rewarded some small amount? Your side did nothing wrong, but lost a little, but that's fairly common on boards where the other side has most of the points & controls the action. Not much you can do about that, that's just a perfectly normal part of pairs bridge. If you want total fairness, everything under your control, play teams.

[hotShot]

Ben your example has extreme scores of about the same amount at both ends. This is why removing them does not change much.
Even using Butler scoring does not make a real difference here.

Edit:No x missing, it's -5, stupid me....
Row 15 is missing an X at the contract and are you sure that the 8 in the last column is correct? -500 instead of -200 should make a difference.

This post has been edited by hotShot: 2006-November-03, 18:00

[paulg]

inquiry, on Nov 3 2006, 10:59 PM, said:

Cross Imps is the way to go and I vote it never be changed.

I agree.

Quote

As for "funny results", in tournaments, if someone intentionally does something wacky, the director can correct the score to protect the field by adjusting the result.

I hope DWS does not see this!

As he frequently points out on the bridgetalk forum, protecting the field has no support within the Laws, no support from the major sponsoring organisations and, nowadays, little support from TDs either. There is only the concept of restoring equity to the immediately damaged party when there is an infraction, and this does not include the field.

p

[inquiry]

cardsharp, on Nov 4 2006, 03:25 AM, said:

inquiry, on Nov 3 2006, 10:59 PM, said:

Cross Imps is the way to go and I vote it never be changed.

I agree.

Quote

As for "funny results", in tournaments, if someone intentionally does something wacky, the director can correct the score to protect the field by adjusting the result.

I hope DWS does not see this!

As he frequently points out on the bridgetalk forum, protecting the field has no support within the Laws, no support from the major sponsoring organisations and, nowadays, little support from TDs either. There is only the concept of restoring equity to the immediately damaged party when there is an infraction, and this does not include the field.

p

Well there are bad results and their are unsportsman results.

Let me give an example of each. A player opens 1H and his partner makes a 3H preemptive raise. But the first player uses that as strong forcing, so they bid to 7H, get doubled and redouble occurs. That result stands, tough luck for anyone sitting the same direction as the pair that bid 7H. That is just bridge, no correction.

On another hand, a player picks up a 3 hcp hand vul versus not, and opens 7NT. When his LHO doubles with two ACES, he redoubles, and goes down 7600 or so. That is 24 imps for the doubler. In an 8 board tournament, that will also probably determine the bidder.Here I use the rules of bridge, or at least the guidence from the rules to adjust the score.

What law/rule to apply? Howabout the one that disallows:

Unsportsmanlike Psychic Bidding: A psychic action apparently designed to give the opponents an abnormal opportunity to win a good score?

It surely falls into that category. An a penalty should be assessed. On penalty is a suspension or the player from the BBO or at least from tournament play (yellows will handle that), another is removal from the current event (TD can handle that), and finally, a score correction seems in order. I would not accuse the defenders of having an agreement that the declarer would throw boards to them (in which case both pairs would be in violation of etiquette and laws), and I would adjust the result to the best likely one for the defenders, but certainly not 7NTxx.

[adhoc3]

How about electronice judge? Deep finesse analysis each hand and give 'par score', or everyone 'team' with or opps with DIB... no comparison with field but only to computer....., so that a 'perfect score' could be given. All lucky/unlucky affairs, outraged psychic, or vicious players will be 'perfectly' banned. What a wonderful world!

------ But would Bridge be killed by perfect rules?

[1eyedjack]

adhoc3, on Nov 6 2006, 05:09 AM, said:

How about electronice judge? Deep finesse analysis each hand and give 'par score', or everyone 'team' with or opps with DIB... no comparison with field but only to computer....., so that a 'perfect score' could be given. All lucky/unlucky affairs, outraged psychic, or vicious players will be 'perfectly' banned. What a wonderful world!

------ But would Bridge be killed by perfect rules?

Comparison with par is of marginal interest. It would be of interest to me, but I fear that others would read too much meaning into the comparison. If a game contract makes because of six successful finesses then DF would still log the game contract as par, despite that it bidding it would be absurdly against the odds and poor bridge technique. A beginner might look at the par score and expect to have done badly if achieving below par and well if surpassing it.

It would of course be effective in eliminating the results from other tables from comparison with your own score. It would not of course ban outraged psychics, but it would render them irrelevant, which would be helpful.