[chrism]

barmar, on 2018-April-25, 09:14, said:

I haven't tried it, but I'm not sure that "NP" can be given as one of the special scores. How can a board be not played by only one of the pairs?

I have tried it, and NP can indeed be given as one of the special scores.

A frequent use for the asymmetric "Special" scores in ACBLscore is when a table has played the wrong board. Rather than editing the entire movement, what happens is often as follows:

Pair A played board 99 against B, but should have played it against C, while D should have played it against B

In ACBLscore, special-score A versus C as "{A's table result} / Ave+" and special-score D versus B as "Ave+ / {B's table result}"

(If circumstances permit scheduling the board to be played between D and C in compensation, the Ave+ scores can be replaced by that table result)

I can imagine that some directors might prefer to consider the board as "not played" by D and C, though I cannot immediately think of circumstances that would legally justify doing so. ACBLscore provides the means to do that.

[blackshoe]

ACBLScore provides the means to do a lot of things. People are using it to do those things without regard to their legality. The most common response I've seen from directors who do this is "I don't care". :-(

[ddrankin]

barmar, on 2018-April-25, 09:14, said:

I haven't tried it, but I'm not sure that "NP" can be given as one of the special scores. How can a board be not played by only one of the pairs?

It can. As to why or how it happens, well, I have never used No Play other than in a novice 3-table Howell, when I curtail the movement to 23 boards by not playing boards 24 and 25 in the last round. I was merely pointing out how it can be done.

[barmar]

ddrankin, on 2018-April-26, 12:27, said:

It can. As to why or how it happens, well, I have never used No Play other than in a novice 3-table Howell, when I curtail the movement to 23 boards by not playing boards 24 and 25 in the last round. I was merely pointing out how it can be done.

Why would you give a split score in that case? You should give NP to both pairs that don't play the board. My question was about something like NP/Avg-Minus.

But I just thought of a possible case. In our club we usually schedule a late play if a table isn't able to start the last board of a round in time. But we won't allow a pair to have two late plays. If a pair is late twice, we'll let them play one of them. For the other board that they don't play, we could give NP to their opponents and Avg-Minus to the slow pair.

[blackshoe]

If you do that, then likely you're depriving the slow pair's opponents of their just due: average plus.

[ddrankin]

barmar, on 2018-April-27, 09:30, said:

Why would you give a split score in that case? You should give NP to both pairs that don't play the board. My question was about something like NP/Avg-Minus.

But I just thought of a possible case. In our club we usually schedule a late play if a table isn't able to start the last board of a round in time. But we won't allow a pair to have two late plays. If a pair is late twice, we'll let them play one of them. For the other board that they don't play, we could give NP to their opponents and Avg-Minus to the slow pair.

I don't give slpit scores in that case. I was merely pointing out, in response to a question by Ed, that it can be done. The circumstance I mentioned is the only time I use "NP", so I have no idea why someone would want to give a split score, with one being "NP". I have no idea why some people enter "NP" in most cases where I have seen it used.

[blackshoe]

Because they're lazy.