[NeilDT]

At our club last evening a Point-a-Board competition was played with 9 teams playing 8 x 3 board matches. One table did not play the third board of the round, what would need to be entered for this result in order to achieve a score for the board?

Thanks

Neil

[gordontd]

 NeilDT, on 2014-February-01, 03:42, said:

At our club last evening a Point-a-Board competition was played with 9 teams playing 8 x 3 board matches. One table did not play the third board of the round, what would need to be entered for this result in order to achieve a score for the board?

Thanks

Neil

It does rather depend on what regulations you have (if any) for this sort of eventuality. We've just had our first major Point-a-Board competition in the EBU, and our regulations for it are in the final two pages of the programme. I think the ACBL do something similar, but they don't allow final scores of fractional points, so they have (I think) a regulation that 0.8 to 1.2 is a draw, and lesser/greater scores are losses/wins.

[gordontd]

Here are the ACBL regulations. I was not exactly right in my earlier email - 0.8 is a loss & 1.2 is a win, with in-between scores being awarded a draw.

[mycroft]

I bet this isn't ACBL, because in the ACBL, it isn't Point-a-Board, it's Board-a-Match.

But if it is, I like the way it scores: matchpoint the other table against the room (only time we do that!) and then add 40% to that matchpoint score (assuming both sides were at fault for not being able to play it). Then, 40%|80%|120% we go, independently for each side.

[gordontd]

 mycroft, on 2014-February-03, 11:42, said:

I bet this isn't ACBL, because in the ACBL, it isn't Point-a-Board, it's Board-a-Match.

The link I gave to the ACBL regs talks of Board-a-Match (and scores 1, 0.5, 0) and the link I gave to the EBU regs talks of Point-a-Board (and scores 2, 1, 0). I bet you're right that the original post didn't come from the ACBL, but I thought someone might be interested in the ACBL regs too.

[WellSpyder]

 gordontd, on 2014-February-04, 03:32, said:

The link I gave to the ACBL regs talks of Board-a-Match (and scores 1, 0.5, 0) and the link I gave to the EBU regs talks of Point-a-Board (and scores 2, 1, 0).

Anyone else find it curious that board-a-match scoring awards one point per board, while point-a-board scoring actually awards two points per board?

[Trinidad]

 WellSpyder, on 2014-February-04, 08:06, said:

Anyone else find it curious that board-a-match scoring awards one point per board, while point-a-board scoring actually awards two points per board?

It's the well known difference between the USA and Europe (the rest of the world?). When you play MP pairs in Europe, you will get 2 MPs for each pair you beat and 1 MP for each pair you tie. When you play MP pairs in the USA, you will get 1 MP for each pair you beat and 1/2 MP for each pair you tie.

Different strokes. In the end, it doesn't matter. (We could also divide all the bridge scores by 10 and drop the last 0. This would lead to 62 points for making a vulnerable 4♠.)

Rik

[barmar]

I think WellSpyder was just remarking on how the points awarded in England specifically do NOT match the name they use for the event. It should be called "2 Points-a-Board".

[WellSpyder]

 barmar, on 2014-February-04, 11:15, said:

I think WellSpyder was just remarking on how the points awarded in England specifically do NOT match the name they use for the event. It should be called "2 Points-a-Board".

Exactly. I do realise that it doesn't matter at all, and that it corresponds to the historical different calculation of match points. I just thought it was a bit ironic that in England we happen to use a name that corresponds very well to the US system of match-pointing even though that isn't actually what we do.....

[gnasher]

 WellSpyder, on 2014-February-04, 11:43, said:

I just thought it was a bit ironic that in England we happen to use a name that corresponds very well to the US system of match-pointing even though that isn't actually what we do.....

Whereas in America they use a name that doesn't correspond to anything that anyone does.

[Trinidad]

 barmar, on 2014-February-04, 11:15, said:

I think WellSpyder was just remarking on how the points awarded in England specifically do NOT match the name they use for the event. It should be called "2 Points-a-Board".

I think I was sleeping when I read Wellspyder's post.

Rik

[barmar]

 gnasher, on 2014-February-04, 13:17, said:

Whereas in America they use a name that doesn't correspond to anything that anyone does.

But it makes a nice acronym: BAM!