Swiss Team Scoring

[shintaro]

:rolleyes:

 

 

Just say for arguments sake that some bozo doubles you in a Rock contract which you re-double and it brings in a Shedload of imps.

 

Because of this abonimation should you win the overall event ???? ;)

[qwery_hi]

(move on) and play KOs and pairs.

 

Aaron you have provided a lot of evidence that the 20VP scale is capable of selecting a winning team which did not play the best bridge. If this is your only point, then I think we can all agree with you and move on.

[Phil]

In Louisville in the final Sunday Swiss, they used a 30 point scale which put a lot weight into winning and de-emphasized the short blow-out matches you'll have against a weak team.

 

I enjoyed this format. If you give me the other teams match results ill tell you if you would have beat them in a 30 point format.

[JLOGIC]

In Texas they still use VP 30. I hate it and always tried to lobby against it (obv unsuccessfully).

[han]

I don't know the VP scales very well, but capping the VP's at 25 as they do in international tournaments has always seemed like a good idea to me.

[CSGibson]

They won, you finished 2nd. Rather than revamp the whole scoring system because you managed a 2 imp victory over them in your 6 board head to head, which is not conclusive proof that you would have beaten them in a 24 board heads up match, why don't you just deal with it & move on to the next one.

[JLOGIC]

They won, you finished 2nd. Rather than revamp the whole scoring system because you managed a 2 imp victory over them in your 6 board head to head, which is not conclusive proof that you would have beaten them in a 24 board heads up match, why don't you just focus on learning to play better so that you win more frequently

 

FYP

[Vampyr]

The counter to that is that no matter what the disparity in ability, the nature of the boards in a 6-board match could be the determining factor in how wide the victory margin is.

 

At one table, you have 5 cold games, and one partscore. So you make a good decision to buy the contract on the partscore hand and pick up 5 imps lets say winning the match by 9 (overtricks in the other hands)

 

At the other table, a team has 3 hands where game can be made by either side, and a slam out which only one side bids. They similarly outplay their opponents, but because of the nature of the hands, blitz and eclipse the other winning team's results.

 

I similarly dont think its close, and that a premium should be put on doing the best with the hands you are dealt, not taking advantage of mismatches when the boards invite more excitement.

 

Well, I wouldn't wish to play in an event where Swiss Team hands are not duplicated. I would avoid them if I were you.

[aguahombre]

Well, I wouldn't wish to play in an event where Swiss Team hands are not duplicated. I would avoid them if I were you.

Not easy to do the the U.S.

 

Edit: I lied..all you would have to do is not play swiss teams at all, except in NA+ events.

Edited May 29, 2011 by aguahombre

[rogerclee]

Not easy to do the the U.S.

 

Edit: I lied..all you would have to do is not play swiss teams at all, except in NA+ events.

The 3-day North American swiss only has preduped boards on the last day.

 

The top teams on the second day of the 2-day swisses get preduped boards, but not everyone does.

[Bbradley62]

Well, I wouldn't wish to play in an event where Swiss Team hands are not duplicated.

Been on the right side of The Pond for a while, huh? Sorry, couldn't resist...

[aguahombre]

Exactly, Roger. So someone advising rduran to avoid events without predupes seems to be saying, "don't play Swiss." Which I don't think is helpful. Even Gibson's advice seems more useful, even though a bit personal ---Duran frequently posts some items which less experienced people might gain from upon viewing the responses.

[shintaro]

Been on the right side of The Pond for a while, huh? Sorry, couldn't resist...

 

 

 

 

:D

 

At least some of us are :lol:

[mgoetze]

Exactly, Roger. So someone advising rduran to avoid events without predupes seems to be saying, "don't play Swiss."

 

No, we're saying "move to Europe".

[campboy]

Exactly, Roger. So someone advising rduran to avoid events without predupes seems to be saying, "don't play Swiss." Which I don't think is helpful. Even Gibson's advice seems more useful, even though a bit personal ---Duran frequently posts some items which less experienced people might gain from upon viewing the responses.

Well, look at it this way. The OP doesn't like Swiss scored by VPs without pre-duped boards, because of the randomness of some teams getting swingier boards than others. There are two solutions to this (other than just ignoring the issue): try to play in Swisses with pre-duped boards or try to play in Swisses scored by pure win-loss. Even in the US I'd bet it's easier to find the former than the latter, so I think it is worthwhile advice.

[JLOGIC]

How is it easier to find swisses scored by win-loss? Those don't exist here lol.

 

A 1 session swiss is a non serious event played sometimes in clubs or as a side game if you get knocked out of something at a small tournament. I'm sorry we aren't as rich as every European country but it is costly and time consuming to pre dupe for a stupid small event like that.

 

Even a 2 session swiss at a regional which is a more serious event would not have predupes. In Gatlinburg there were 102 tables in the 2 session swiss (these are generally only held on the last day of the tournament). It seems like pre dupiing 8 matches for 102 tables would still be time consuming and costly, for not much gain, it is fine if the best teams are not always winning these events and there's some more randomness, otherwise it would not be much fun for the weaker teams to just have no shot at all. I'm sure in Europe these tournaments are of equal size and frequency, and every country would make sure they were pre duped, but America sucks!!! People just have to make due playing against Meckstroth, Rodwell, Hampson, Passell, Pepsi, Grue, etc etc at their local tournaments on a regular occurence without predupes. In Europe it is much better.

[gwnn]

Bridge is a statistical game. If you bid a 50% game red and they don't, there's a 50% chance you win 10 imps and 50% that you lose 6. If you win a match by 1 imp, there's a large probability (almost 50%) that you were lucky and your bridge decisions were in fact worse than your opponents. So it makes sense to give both teams almost the same number of victory points for a match that was decided by only 1 imp. It wouldn't make sense to give 1 point to the winner and 0 points for the loser.

 

In basketball, football, archery, chess, bowling, etc, you know that if you do the absolute correct thing, you win (in some of these examples it is easy to say what the absolute correct thing is, in some it's not so easy). In bridge you don't know that, except that there is a good chance of winning. It doesn't make sense to disregard this fundamental distinction.

[JLOGIC]

Bridge is a statistical game. If you bid a 50% game red and they don't, there's a 50% chance you win 10 imps and 50% that you lose 6. If you win a match by 1 imp, there's a large probability (almost 50%) that you were lucky and your bridge decisions were in fact worse than your opponents. So it makes sense to give both teams almost the same number of victory points for a match that was decided by only 1 imp. It wouldn't make sense to give 1 point to the winner and 0 points for the loser.

 

Very well said

[campboy]

How is it easier to find swisses scored by win-loss? Those don't exist here lol.

Eh? My point was that it's easier to find pre-duped swisses than win-loss, even if it's still not very easy.

 

As to being costly for little gain, I don't think many events would be duplimated if this was the main reason to do it. The reason almost all events in England are duplimated is that the players like getting hand records at the end of a session.

[han]

If you look at baseball's regular season for an example (or the NBA), you might notice that the same pairs of teams are playing each other multiple times. At the end of the season, you don't add things up and say, well the Yankees won ten out of eighteen games with the Red Sox so we give the Yankees a "WIN" for that series... and the Yankees won two out of eighteen games with the Rays so that's a "LOSS" and they are 1-1. No, you count every single game separately even if it's against the same team. If you look at a bridge event in this way, and say that every single board should count in the standings rather than somehow combining into a "total result against that team"... well, you get BAM scoring... but it's a lot closer.

[shintaro]

B-)

 

The main problem running Swiss Teams where you do not have Pre-Duplicated Boards is what I will term the 'Lottery Act'

 

If you always go to a Table and Deal the Boards and those boards are then only played between your 2 teams Then it totally depends on what hands are dealt as to what you get to play with.

 

So not a very level playing field when other tables are playing either a worst boring set of hands or indeed a fine set of possible meaty Slam hands.

 

;)

[rduran1216]

Aaron you have provided a lot of evidence that the 20VP scale is capable of selecting a winning team which did not play the best bridge. If this is your only point, then I think we can all agree with you and move on.

 

That was my only point. Added on is that 20pt. vp scale is prone to this kind of crap, since apparently everyone has a story about winning all matches and still losing.

[Bbradley62]

That was my only point. Added on is that 20pt. vp scale is prone to this kind of crap, since apparently everyone has a story about winning all matches and still losing.

This makes it sound like you still think W/L is more likely than VP to reward the team that "plays the best" with a championship; no one here has agreed with you. Most do agree that neither approach is perfect; each is capable of failing to reward the team that plays the best.

[gnasher]

In the days when English Swiss teams events were hand-dealt, I used to try to get to the table before the opponents so that I could make sure all the packs were properly shuffled.

[rduran1216]

This makes it sound like you still think W/L is more likely than VP to reward the team that "plays the best" with a championship; no one here has agreed with you. Most do agree that neither approach is perfect; each is capable of failing to reward the team that plays the best.

 

none of my points about hand shuffled short matches where all teams play each other have been addressed. For people who are supposedly quite logical, you all seem to be overlooking that this is the only consideration here. Since all teams aren't playing the same boards, the nature of the boards will dictate the possible margins of victory with any amount of skill disparity. So its foolish to use margin's to ultimately decide the winner. Pre-duped, and larger matches where not all teams play against each other are a different story. But I can't believe people disagree with w/l in a hand shuffled, round robin style is inferior to VPs.