[blml] Fwd: Decimal HCP ranges.

[Sven Pran]

> On Behalf Of Tim West-Meads
> Eric wrote:
> 
> > I like the notation, but I would read the fraction as probabilistic
> > rather than evaluative.
> 
> Not unreasonable, but not ideal either.  I upgrade about 40% of 11
> counts and downgrade about 10% of twelve counts  - is that a
> probabilistic value of 11.6 or 11.9 (or c11.7)?
> 
> I don't think there is a perfect method of disclosure which will suit
> everyone but I'm pretty sure that even the most hard-bitten
> walrus/greenest novice will realise he might need to ask a question if
> the CC uses decimal points, or brackets, or %ages, or mini-graphs of
> probability curves.

Why not use what I believe has become the "standard" way of noting possible
up- or down-grading?

1NT: (14)15 - 17(18)

regards Sven