Note: Talking for myself, not BBO. No, it wouldn't. In MP it clearly makes no sense, because how MPs get calculated (you compare against each other result, get a 1/0.5/0 if your score is better/equal/worse than the other, then (usually) your final result is converted to a percentage, so 10 MPs comparing against 15 other tables gets a 66.6% Now, BBO uses CrossIMPs, which are calculated exactly the same way as MPs do, but you get the IMPed difference in each comparison instead of 1/0.5/0. Then (and NOT before), the sum of all your comparisons is (optionally*) divided by the number of comparisons. IMO, this is the best method. I also happen to think Butler is an artifice coming from doing the calculations by hand, as it involves substantially less calculations. These days, computers can do that. In short: there is no average to toss calculations from. Extreme (and every) results weight are controlled by the size of the sample, which I think was kept at 16 in non-tourney tables to keep the Movie fully contained in a single view (I think next good number would be the next power of 2, 32, which wouldn't enter in a single view, without scrolling). Tourneys are managed different, the scores you get initially are from your own section (small sample), but just a guide, as the scoresare recalculated against all sections at the end. * The Cavendish uses the same method, without dividing, so their numbers appear bigger (and very different than Butler). BBO divides, so numbers appear similar to Butler.