[blml] Multiple Teams : Fouled Board

[Herman De Wael]

Hello Steve,

this is something that the CoC should address.

I have often suggested that standard CoC should contain a paragraph 
about what to do if on one of the tables of a match no score can be 
obtained, or if the two scores obtained are not on comparable deals.

It is my opinion that one should resolve this in the following manner:

-for every board played, at both tables, a par score is determined, 
and this score is deducted from the table score. The two differences 
are then added and the sum translated into IMPs.
On every normal board, the exact value of the par score is 
unimportant, since it will cancel out with the same par score at the 
other table.
On a fouled board, the 2 par scores can be determined only by 
difference - thus, if aboard is fouled by the vulnerability only, 
scores of +650 and +420 can be compared and the difference be given as 
1IMP.
If one table gets an ArtAS, that table could be given a difference of 
+100 (Av+) or -100 (Av-), while at the other the table score (+1400) 
is compared to a par score (say +400), to yield 1100 or 900 and 15 or 
14 IMPs.
The par score can of course be determined by some butler average if 
the boards are played in more than one match, or by the TD on his own. 
In many cases, the TD will conclude that nothing particular happened 
and that the par score equals the table score (rendering only the +100 
from the other table into the classical 3IMPs)

Steve Wright wrote:

> Playing in a multiple teams event, North and East between them managed 
> to foul a board to as to make it unplayable at that table.
> 
> The TD ruled that board would be void for that match.
> 
> When the board was played on the other table, one of the pairs got into 
> a stupid contract and scored -1400. The team that got the good score was 
> not amused to have the board voided. But they accepted the TD's ruling 
> and at the end of the session they end up as the winners.
> 
> In the pub afterwards, one of the winning team wondered if the ruling 
> should have been something different. He felt that it seemed wrong to be 
> deprived of a good score.
> 
> He said that if it had been a straight match between the two teams there 
> would have been no choice but to void the board. There would have been 
> an option to redeal it; but the "good score" would have to be lost.
> 
> However, as it was multiple teams, he felt that there was a case for 
> giving an assigned score based for the fouled table based on the average 
> of the other seven tables.
> 
> I wasn't sure, so I'm asking here.

-- 
Herman DE WAEL
Antwerpen Belgium
http://www.hdw.be