Laird Posted February 10, 2006 Report Share Posted February 10, 2006 Hello All I play at small clubs ..usually 8 - 12 tables and it seems to me that aggregate scoring is an unfair means of deciding success at the table. If you are fortunate to gain a slam ( say luckily against weakest team ) then you gain a high aggregate score against the rest of the field... However if you have that score against you there seems to be a double whammy in that not only are you penalised once but twice in that that high score is then subtracted from the rest of your scores ...they may have been good but are now swamped because of the slam against you.In a Mitchel movement would it not be reasonable to have say an east/ west total without then subtracting the north/ south totals from it...that way you have a score for east/ west and a separate score for north/south..... not sure about the Howell movement?Is there a better/ fairer way of scoring ? Thanks ....John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandal Posted February 10, 2006 Report Share Posted February 10, 2006 (edited) Hello All I play at small clubs ..usually 8 - 12 tables and it seems to me that aggregate scoring is an unfair means of deciding success at the table. If you are fortunate to gain a slam ( say luckily against weakest team ) then you gain a high aggregate score against the rest of the field... However if you have that score against you there seems to be a double whammy in that not only are you penalised once but twice in that that high score is then subtracted from the rest of your scores ...they may have been good but are now swamped because of the slam against you.In a Mitchel movement would it not be reasonable to have say an east/ west total without then subtracting the north/ south totals from it...that way you have a score for east/ west and a separate score for north/south..... not sure about the Howell movement?Is there a better/ fairer way of scoring ? Thanks ....John If by aggregate you mean adding all the + scores and subtracting the - scores,that is not a good way to score. Where I play (usually Howell) we score a board like this: NS EW Contract/Tricks NS EW NS Score EW score 1 2 6S N 12 1430 10 0 3 4 4S N 12 680 8 2 5 6 4S N 11 650 4 4 7 8 4S N 11 650 4 4 9 10 6S N 11 100 1 9 11 12 6S N 11 100 1 9 Edit: This came out real bad....sorry [i put your table inside "code" box which uses both fixed space font and allows spaces.. outside of code and quotes, two or more spaces show up as just one.. so use code boxes for tables (quotes do not use the fixed space font) - inquiry] Edited February 10, 2006 by inquiry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badderzboy Posted February 10, 2006 Report Share Posted February 10, 2006 Hi John, I agree totally that aggregate is not the best way of finding who the best pair is as yes if u bid / miss the slam and others do/don't your night is over. The same is true if your opps don't bid the 94% slam everyone else does and it goes off lol... For example I played a session last week that was aggregate scored and we finished 13/25 NS and behind the leaders by something like 2000pts! We didn't miss any games or slams that were biddable or on (some made 12 tricks on a board where basic defence takes 3 tricks!) opps bid 1 tight game that was rarely bid but the other EWs were making aggresive game tries that were not paying off! just not against us :). For Fun I matchpointed it in Excel in a few mins and we scored 59.5% as we regularly won an extra trick or took an extra trick in defence! Also playing aggregate u should have a N/S winner and E/W winner... It is fun and allows anyone potentially to have a good night and win and therefore attract people back so there is a place for it at Clubs just don't take a good / bad score to heart! Steve Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barmar Posted February 10, 2006 Report Share Posted February 10, 2006 Brandal, your scoring is Matchpoint -- 1 point for ever pair you tied, 2 points for every pair you beat (actually, in the US we use 1 and 1/2, respectively, but they're isomorphic). If you want a pair scoring method that gives larger weight to bigger score differences (like rubber bridge does), you may want to use IMP Pair scoring. The IMP table scales things down so a single bad board is less likely to totally overwhelm everything else. There are two common ways this is done: 1. Datum -- Find the average of all the scores for a board, compute each pair's difference from the average, and then look this up on the IMP scale. 2. Cross-IMPs -- Calculate the difference between a pair's score on a board and each of the other pairs' scores, look these up on the IMP scale, and add them up (optionally dividing by the number of pairs to get an average IMP difference, to avoid huge numbers that bear little relationship to the IMP scores players are used to seeing in team games). The final score is the sum of these for each board. Datum scoring was popular in the days of hand scoring, cross-IMPs is now pretty standard with computer scoring. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts