[blml] European Youth Championships or have we really come tothis

[Grattan Endicott]

Grattan Endicott
grandeval at vejez.fsnet .co.uk
[also gesta at tiscali.co.uk]
****************************
"The trouble with referees is that they 
know the rules , but they don't know 
the game."         [Bill Shankly]
 vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jerry Fusselman" <jfusselman at gmail.com>
To: "Alain Gottcheiner" <agot at ulb.ac.be>
Cc: <blml at rtflb.org>; "Eric Landau" <ehaa at starpower.net>
Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2007 3:27 PM
Subject: Re: [blml] European Youth Championships or 
                                         have we really come to this


> 
> The appeal of L12C3 escapes me.  Did a proponent 
> of L12C3 ever attempt to refute the obvious bad incentive 
> effects (for NOS as well as OS) of their law?
> 
+=+ Jerry,
       I think you need to go back to the roots of the matter.
In Europe the practice was to assess the equity in the board 
of each side and award an adjusted score that reflected the 
assessment. Along came Edgar with his "most favourable 
result that was likely" and his "most unfavourable result that 
was at all probable", and the EBL said 'this man is trying to 
use score adjustment to punish and that is not the purpose 
of score adjustment - no way do we agree to that, if there 
are grounds for punishing (i.e. malfeasance) the recourse 
is to deduct penalty points from the adjusted score of the 
offending side'.  This reflected exactly the provisions in the 
1975 Law Book. The will of the EBL was to maintain the 
law as it was in the 1975 book, but the Gigante Kaplan was 
determined to reform it to his concept so that the 12C3 
option (initially a footnote) was negotiated to allow the EBL 
retention of its 1975 method. Calculation of the assessed 
equity by a weighted adjustment was a later development 
and may have tended to obscure partly the penalty points 
provision in the 1975 Law 12.     This reads: : 
     "The number of points assigned to the non-offending side
  should not exceed the number required to offset the
  irregularity. The number of points assigned to the offending 
  side may be reduced by penalty points. Penalty points and 
  indemnity points need not balance."
Frankly speaking, as a statement of principle of what score 
adjustment is all about, that reads as well for me as anything 
I have seen. 
                            ~ Grattan ~   +=+