Re: Equity - some questions
Matthias Berghaus <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.games.bridge.laws |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
One comment: Am 03.08.2016 um 06:53 schrieb Timothy N. Hill: > Three comments: > > 1. I think you misspelled the name of this type of movement on the dubious theory that it’s named after the guy who invented it. The proper spelling is “Howl,” after the sound the NS players make when they realize most of them aren’t stationary. > > 2. The director can minimize the chance of boards going astray by telling the players to move boards down a table and carefully supervising at least the first couple changes. This is true, and the way to go with duplicated boards, but at a club with no duplicating machine you would shuffle and deal for several rounds, which holds up the game no end, even if you can protocol the distributions by Bridgemate, and not every club has them. > > 3. The fairest way to handle the situation in question (moving pairs X and Y play a board that X already played against W and Y is scheduled to play later against Z) is to score the board as not played by Y and average-plus for Z and give X and Y a procedural penalty of 10% of a top or 3 IMPs (the difference between average and average-minus). If you’re looking for legal justification for a score of “not played,” try 82B2. > > Tim > _______________________________________________ > Blml mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml _______________________________________________ Blml mailing list [email protected] http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml