[Vampyr]

When a board is played at one table in a teams match and cannot be played at the other, hoe is it determined that onesie had a "favourable result"?

1. In Swiss or Multiple Teams, is a comparison made with the results other teams obtained on the board? If so, is any consideration given to the "class of player" of both teams?

2. What about for events such as knockout teams, where the board is not played by any other teams?

[blackshoe]

Quote

Law 86D, in part: … the Director may assign an adjusted score in IMPs or total points (and should do so when that result appears favorable to the non-offending side).

I haven't run across this situation in practice, but just reading the law, it looks to me like it instructs the director to apply Law 12C1 rather than Law 12C2 when the assigned score looks to be more favorable to the NOS than a 12C2 score, which would presumably be +3 IMPs. Note that when you award an artificial adjusted score, the scores will balance unless one side (only) is considered partly at fault, while the score assigned under this law need not balance.

[Vampyr]

blackshoe, on 2015-January-25, 14:16, said:

I haven't run across this situation in practice, but just reading the law, it looks to me like it instructs the director to apply Law 12C1 rather than Law 12C2 when the assigned score looks to be more favorable to the NOS than a 12C2 score, which would presumably be +3 IMPs. Note that when you award an artificial adjusted score, the scores will balance unless one side (only) is considered partly at fault, while the score assigned under this law need not balance.

Yes, my question concerns how you determine that the result was favourable. Also I am interested in how this is handled when no side is at fault (eg people from another team were talking about the board within earshot).

[blackshoe]

I don't know. Hopefully somebody who does know will weigh in. :-)

[Vampyr]

blackshoe, on 2015-January-25, 18:17, said:

I don't know. Hopefully somebody who does know will weigh in. :-)

Or maybe a lot of people will post that they don't know.

[Trinidad]

Let me start by saying that I don't know.

But to me it doesn't seem very difficult. Invariably somebody will complain that their good result will vanish. Then you will just check how likely it would be that this result will be matched at the other table.

Examples:

• A TD ruling may lead to a particular favorable result.
  
• Declarer made an impossible contract because of what we would consider a SEWoG by the opponents.
  
• A pair bids the unbeatable grand in the 4-3 fit, due to their PQR relay system, where mere mortals would end up in the small slam in the 5-3 fit. (And we establish that at the other table mere mortals are playing.)
  
• A pair has success with an action that is unikely to be repeated at the other table. (The action could be a psych, "Wild or Gambling", or systemic: If they play 2♥ as showing weak with both majors and they bid 2♥-Pass-4♠, making, where you expect most pairs to pass and hear the opponents bid and make 3NT.)

Rik

[gordontd]

Vampyr, on 2015-January-25, 14:29, said:

Yes, my question concerns how you determine that the result was favourable. Also I am interested in how this is handled when no side is at fault (eg people from another team were talking about the board within earshot).

Here's the White Book on the subject:

Quote

Law 86D: Unusual result
The law gives some latitude as to when and how a team should be assigned the benefit for a
favourable result when no result can be obtained at the other table. It is recommended to
award adjusted scores as follows.
For a team not at fault, they should get an assigned adjusted score based on their favourable
result obtained at the table and a normal result in lieu of the result not obtained; or AVE+.
For a team partially at fault, they should receive AVE.
For a team at fault, they should get an assigned adjusted score based on their unfavourable
result obtained at the table and a normal result in lieu of the result not obtained; or AVE-.
The normal result (in lieu of the result not obtained) should normally be a weighted score and
can include a proportion of the favourable result, if the favourable result is possible. For this
purpose, it is appropriate to look at the results from other tables if other teams are playing the
same boards.
For the purposes of applying this law, a favourable score is a result that leads to an adjustment
of more than AVE+.
Examples
(a) A non-offending side bid 4♠ that might not be bid and might not make. They
should get the result of 4♠ = scored against a normal result of 25% 3♠ =, 25%
3♠ +1, 25% 4♠ -1, 25% 4♠ =.
(b) A non-offending side bid 6♠ off two aces, after an ace-asking response mix-up,
and make when the defence revokes. The normal result is 100% game making 11
tricks.

[Vampyr]

Thanks Gordon. LOL I could have looked in the White Book myself, but I didn't think of it!

[RMB1]

Vampyr, on 2015-January-26, 09:23, said:

Thanks Gordon. LOL I could have looked in the White Book myself, but I didn't think of it!