Unfinished match

[Vampyr]

There are times when very unfortunate things happen to people.  It is quite normal for other people, even bridge opponents, to give them leeway.

 

I understand that, but as you know, leagues are starting up around now, plus the early rounds of several knockout competitions must be played. Finding dates that 8 people can all manage is difficult.

 

As for the question of 2 imps a board, you might re-read all of this thread.  There is certainly a well-held view that 3 imps is a lot, especially when more than one or two boards are concerned..

 

I did read all of the posts, including yours, expressing the opinion that 3 IMPs is harsh, but if there is nothing in the CoC, I don't think that there is a good reason to use anything but the default.

 

In Ton Kooijman's Commentary [i think it is there: I have read it somewhere anyway ] he says that Average Plus and Minus is only suitable for one or two boards, and regulations should be made to avoid too many Average Pluses or Minuses.

Maybe so, but the past cannot be undone.

[pran]

There are times when very unfortunate things happen to people.  It is quite normal for other people, even bridge opponents, to give them leeway.

That is precisely why I voted for having the 17 played boards (alone) decide the result of the match without any request for the last 7 boards to be played or be assigned any kind of an adjusted score. (An IMPs penalty had been in order if the "offending side" had really been to blame.)

 

You didn't answer my question: What rights does a team enjoy in your league when present and ready to play a match according to schedule if their opponents for whatever reason do not show up or cannot play the complete match?

 

Sven

[jeremy69]

If the match is not to be completed then i don't think it should be scored on 17 boards alone. One side stopped playing albeit for unhappy and unavoidable reasons. In the absence of any regulations in the league covering this I think the organisers can impose whatever adjustment they like although they may want to cover it for the future. It seems to me as if 21 imps is too much so 2 per board is perhaps more equitable.

If, however, both teams actually want to play the rest of the boards then I see no reason to stop them.

[bluejak]

There are times when very unfortunate things happen to people.  It is quite normal for other people, even bridge opponents, to give them leeway.

I understand that, but as you know, leagues are starting up around now, plus the early rounds of several knockout competitions must be played. Finding dates that 8 people can all manage is difficult.

Not true. Our league is not like other leagues: we do not have the arranging problems of every other league I have ever played in [except one other local league]. Ours is a Thursday league, with four clubs providing regular venues. Between now and the end of the season there are 31 Thursdays. There are 16 matches arranged for those, plus at least two and at most five knockout matches. That leaves between 10 and 13 open dates. It is extremely easy to rearrange any problem match at this time of the season.

 

As for the knockout rounds of other competitions I am sure one of the two teams never plays in them. Yes, members of the other team play, but we are out of Crockfords: none of them are playing in the Nicko or the Gold Cup: so that leaves th Cambria Cup - two matches before April and the Welsh Cup - ditto. Since the members who play in the Cambria/Welsh are spread across three league teams they will never be organised for a Thursday.

 

It is jolly easy to play in and organise teams in a Thursday league. After suffering in the West Essex League, the South East Essex league, the West London league, the Manchester league and probably a few more I have forgotten it is just heaven! B)

[Lobowolf]

The late Irv Kostal is on record as one of three players to win a National pairs event back in the sixties.

Did I miss one? I hadn't heard anything about Irv passing away. Sorry to hear if this is true.