[blml] 60% session in IMPs

[Konrad Ciborowski]

> Konrad Ciborowski a écrit :
> >> Since 60% is equalled to +3 IMPs, I'd say 60% on a 20-board match is
> +60 
> >> IMPs, and 40% is -60 IMPs.
> >>     
> >
> >
> > Good. So if I am about to award average plus to a contestant
> > whose final score for the 20-deal session is 
> > 62 IMPs then he will get...?
> >
> > For the rest of the 19 deals he averaged 
> > 3.2631578947368421052631578947368 IMPs per deal.
> > If you think that giving him
> > 3.2631578947368421052631578947368 IMPs for the 20th deal
> > as average plus which will make the contestant's final 
> > score for the sesson 
> > 65.263157894736842105263157894737 IMPs
> > is the right answer then please tell me what happens if 
> > the final score is supposed to be converted to VPs. 
> > Say it is a team match.
> >
> >   
> Easy ! Fractional IMPs are rounded to the nearest integer (.5 usually 
> rounded high).
> 
> This happens rather frequently.
> For example, if you award an adjusted score of [70% of + 460] and [30% 
> of -50]  vs +50 at the other table, it is
> (0.7 * 9) + (0.3 * -3) =  +5.4 IMPs, rounded to +5.
> 
> Of course it means that, in this particular case, it will just be +3 
> IMPs, but make their score on 19 deals +70 and they will get +4 for the 
> final deal.

Makes perfect sense to me but it is written where exactly in the laws?

For instance when you calculate carry-over you don't round it
to the nearest integer.

In an IMP tournament why would you round it? 5.4 makes sense.

It looks that this one of those "we all know how to do it" laws.
Much like scoring a passed-out hand in the previous version
of the laws.




-- 
Konrad Ciborowski
Kraków, Poland


----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wejdz do swiata wojny wampirow!
http://link.interia.pl/f1cb4