[blml] Fwd: Decimal HCP ranges.

[Nigel]

[Eric Landau]
I like the notation, but I would read the fraction as probabilistic
rather than evaluative.

[Tim West-Meades]
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.

[nige1]

IMO, if Tim upgrades 40% of otherwise eligible 11 HCP hands and 
downgrades say 20% of 15 HCP hands into the range, he should declare 
the decimal range as 11.6-15.2

IMO, down-grades and up-grades that *take hands out of the range*
(for example a downgrade of 10% of 12 HCP hands) should not be 
included as part of the range.

In spite numerous libels by BLMLers, we walrus know well that just 
because a hand lies within a declared range for a bid does not mean we 
must open it with that bid. For example, if we play 12-14 no-trump,
we are under no obligation to open 1N when we hold xx Axx AKQJx xxx