[blml] adjudication

[Alain Gottcheiner]

At 14:07 26/06/2007 +0100, Nigel wrote:


>They can easily work out, *using their own evaluation methods*...
>(A) the hand with the *least Milton Work HCP*, with which they would
>open 1N.
>(B) the hand with the *most Milton Work HCP*, with which they would
>open 1N.
>
>The pair can now declare their 1N HCP range is A-B.
>
>They should *also* attempt to explain how their judgement and special
>evaluation methods might affect this


AG : and my point (and Wayne's) is that this way of explaining is clearly 
inferior, in terms of usefulness, to the following method :

1) work out a fiability interval for your 1NT opening, i.e. a HCP range 
where most (say 90% or 95%) of your 1NT openings will lie.
2) Declare this as your range.
3) Explain how your judgement and methods will affect this.

And your method of declaring would lose touch with bridge reality when 
dealing with more unbalanced hands, as said before.

Old Belgian CCs demand that you write a range for all your 1- and 2-level 
openings.
For 2D (Multi = weak 2H/S or any GF), we had to write 4-37. Very helpful !


Best regards

     Alain