[blml] Expectation [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

[David Burn]

[RH]

The new Law 12C1(c):

"In order to do equity, and unless the Regulating Authority forbids it, an
assigned adjusted score may be weighted to reflect the probabilities of a
number of potential results."

I would expectantly expect "expectation" to have the intended meaning of
"the weighted probabilities of a number of potential results".

[DALB]

And what does it mean in places where the Regulating Authority forbids
assigning adjusted scores on the basis of a sum of probabilities? Or did it
not have any "intended meaning" there?

[RH]

Note that the weightings are of "a posteriori" **results**.  Not being
weighed in the balance are any "a priori" game theoretical single-dummy
analyses.

[DALB]

In the scenario you gave, North-South have stopped in 3NT because of (and I
use this phrase in full awareness of the difference between "subsequent" and
"consequent") an infraction committed by North. This result was a top for
North-South, because the field reached 6NT and failed due to a very
unfortunate lie of cards.

You have said that they should keep their top. But given what you have said
above and elsewhere, it is impossible to understand why you think this.
Would you please explain, pretending for one moment that you have not been
assisting the WBF DSC and are therefore still capable (a) of speaking plain
English and (b) of giving a straightforward answer to a straightforward
question?

David Burn
London, England