Comparing butler scores to score against minimax

[hotShot]

Of cause you need to score NS and EW separately as you do in an Mitchell-Movement anyway.

I don't see why.

In the discussed case, the averages of NS and EW have been separated by 34 IMPs as jerome71 mentioned. Each board will alter the averages and although it would average out, if enough boards are considered, in a tourney with a limited number of boards this will not happen.

So the approach to compare NS and EW separately seems fair.

Edited January 15, 2010 by hotShot

[helene_t]

Well I just disagree.

 

Suppose the DD score is 3NT making by NS but most of the NS suckers managed not to bid it, or to go down. This suggests that the NS pairs are worse than the EW pairs and it is only fair that the score reflects that.

 

Of course it could also be that the 3NT DD result is unrealistic because it requires a lucky split and an anti-percentage line, but the decision to use DD results for the datum score must be motivated by a belief that the DD score is a better datum score than one based on table results would be.

[hotShot]

Well I just disagree.

 

Suppose the DD score is 3NT making by NS but most of the NS suckers managed not to bid it, or to go down. This suggests that the NS pairs are worse than the EW pairs and it is only fair that the score reflects that.

The DD-solver "plays" better than both NS and EW. So the causality you give is distorted. Additionally the DD-solver does not bid, so the optimum playable contract found using the DD-solver is not necessarily biddable. Often the biddable and makable contract will be the same, but if it's not this should not gain to much weight in the players ranking.

 

Of course it could also be that the 3NT DD result is unrealistic because it requires a lucky split and an anti-percentage line, but the decision to use DD results for the datum score must be motivated by a belief that the DD score is a better datum score than one based on table results would be.

As usually there are advantages and disadvantages to this approach. One advantage is that the DD-solver is equally strong, not depending of field size or strength, preferred bidding system and pairing. Disadvantages are that that the DD-solver always finds the perfect lead, never misguesses a finesse ...

[pooltuna]

*****

synonyms can do that :lol: