[blml] Thai braking [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

[Herman De Wael]

The problem Richard describes has many solutions, but one of the main 
drawbacks I see is this one:

Why stop there? Why not also create a difference between 0 points and 
10 points difference (currently both 0IMP). And then, why not create a 
difference between 2S+1 and 3S= (currently both 140)? And why not give 
an extra point if you can make the 9th trick on an endplay rather than 
having it received through a favorable lead?

One of the advantages of rounding is that some decisions do not matter 
all that much. An overtrick may not cost a championship. And 
specifically, ruling becomes less of a problem. If you award 4S+1, the 
players will not necessarily appeal and ask for 4S+2 if they know it 
won't bring them an extra VP.

At some point rounding must be acceptable and accepted.

richard.hills at immi.gov.au wrote:
> An problem with the standard WBF Victory Point
> scale is the issue of "breakage".  That is, the
> majority of imps scored are worth nothing, but
> a minority of particular imps are worth a full
> victory point.
> 
> For example, if to gain 17-13 VP win you need
> 6-8 imps, your sixth imp is worth a victory
> point, but your seventh imp or eighth imp are
> arbitrarily deemed to be irrelevant.
> 
> Another problem with the standard WBF Victory
> Point is that the scale is too compressed.
> 
> With only 26 possible VP scores for a team (and
> the majority of VP results in teams matches
> resulting in more bunched possibilities), it is
> quite likely for two or more teams to have an
> exact tie for a critical place.
> 
> One solution is to convert imps to VPs on the
> basis of 1 imp = 1 VP.  This is also less than
> satisfactory, since it excessively rewards
> those expert teams who regularly narrowly lose
> to other expert teams, but also regularly bunny
> bash weaker teams by huge margins.
> 
> My local Bridge Federation of the ACT is
> experimenting with fractional VPs, retaining the
> logarithmic nature of the WBF Victory Point
> scale, but ensuring that each individual imp is
> worth something.  Here is the BFACT modification
> of the WBF Victory Point scale for 9-board
> matches:
> 
> Imp difference    Winning VPs       Losing VPs
> 0                 15.00             15.00
> 1                 15.30             14.70
> 2                 15.65             14.35
> 3                 15.95             14.05
> 4                 16.15             13.85
> 5                 16.40             13.60
> 6                 16.65             13.35
> 7                 16.90             13.10
> 8                 17.20             12.80
> 9                 17.55             12.45
> 10                17.90             12.10
> 11                18.25             11.75
> 12                18.60             11.40
> 13                18.95             11.05
> 14                19.30             10.70
> 15                19.65             10.35
> 16                20.00             10.00
> 17                20.35             09.65
> 18                20.70             09.30
> 19                21.05             08.95
> 20                21.40             08.60
> 21                21.75             08.25
> 22                22.10             07.90
> 23                22.45             07.55
> 24                22.80             07.20
> 25                23.15             06.85
> 26                23.50             06.50
> 27                23.80             06.20
> 28                24.10             05.90
> 29                24.40             05.60
> 30                24.70             05.30
> 31                25.00             05.00
> 32                25.00             04.75
> 33                25.00             04.50
> 34                25.00             04.25
> 35                25.00             04.00
> 36                25.00             03.75
> 37                25.00             03.50
> 38                25.00             03.25
> 39                25.00             03.00
> 40                25.00             02.75
> 41                25.00             02.50
> 42                25.00             02.25
> 43                25.00             02.00
> 44                25.00             01.80
> 45                25.00             01.60
> 46                25.00             01.40
> 47                25.00             01.20
> 48                25.00             01.00
> 49                25.00             00.80
> 50                25.00             00.60
> 51                25.00             00.40
> 52                25.00             00.20
> 53                25.00             00.00
> 
> 
> Best wishes
> 
> Richard James Hills, amicus curiae
> National Training Branch, DIAC
> 02 6223 9052
> 
> Important Notice: If you have received this email by mistake, please advise
> the sender and delete the message and attachments immediately.  This email,
> including attachments, may contain confidential, sensitive, legally
> privileged and/or copyright information.  Any review, retransmission,
> dissemination or other use of this information by persons or entities other
> than the intended recipient is prohibited. DIAC respects your privacy and
> has obligations under the Privacy Act 1988. The official departmental
> privacy policy can be viewed on the department's website at www.immi.gov.au
> See: http://www.immi.gov.au/functional/privacy.htm
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> blml mailing list
> blml at amsterdamned.org
> http://www.amsterdamned.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
> 
> 


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