Vampyr Posted March 29, 2013 Report Share Posted March 29, 2013 It's hard to know when "similar judgement" crosses the line to alertable partnership understandings. Come back Rule of Coincidence. All is forgiven. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluejak Posted April 18, 2013 Report Share Posted April 18, 2013 Well, in the EBU we'd definitely be looking at this since we have a regulation that says if both players psych on the same board it's at least Amber. This won't immediately cause a score adjustment, but any other suspicious events could cause it to be upgraded and I would be talking very seriously with the players to ask them what was going on. The result of this could lead me to rule it as an implicit understanding and adjust accordingly.As someone else has pointed out, the regulation does not say it is at least Amber, just that it usually is, ie it is something worth looking at carefully. But don't confuse that with the idea that something unfair has happened: coincidences occur. Anyway, it seems to me that two sudden infant deaths in the same family are unlikely to be a chance coincidence.That is the whole problem: people ignore the word "unlikely" and read it as "impossible". If there are two SID deaths it could be because of genetic problems, but it could be a coincidence. And two complementary psyches on the same board are unlikely to have happened by chance.Yet again, I agree they are unlikely, but that does not mean they do not happen. Come back Rule of Coincidence. All is forgiven.The sad thing is that the RoC is quite a good idea if used correctly. But, of course, it wasn't. Similar to the EBU approach of normally Amber, the RoC should say that if two events happen in juxtaposition that seem pretty unlikely, a serious investigation should be made rather than just assume it is coincidence. But that does not mean that coincidences do not occur nor that the conclusion of such investigation should not be "no worries". :ph34r: Many years ago, in New York, a man got into a car, and was pretty speedily arrested by the police and charged with stealing it. He protested his innocence, claiming it was his car. The police investigated and found that it was not his car. However, they also found out that his car was parked a little further down the street, it was the same make and colour, the same key fitted both cars, and owing to an error on the part of the New York licensing authorities, it had the same registration number. Now that's what I call a coincidence: and most people would call it anything from wildly unlikely to impossible. But it happened. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.