Scoring against an average
I need to solve the following problem: we are a small bridge club, we typically play on two or three tables. Having only two or three tables and pairs of various levels leads to results which are not quite representative. We use IMP scoring, so some nonsense on one table can spoil the evening.
The obvious solution is to replay hands that had been played in some big tournaments and compare ourselves to the average / median result (whatever is actually available) achieved in them. We have been lucky having recently acquired a second-hand dealing machine, Duplimate Mk4.3 by Jannersten, Sweden, which would allow this.
We have been using PairScorer for many years and have been very happy, as we could even define our own custom movements. However, the app is almost too good - it checks the entered scores and does not allow a number that cannot be a valid result of a bridge hand. That presents a problem because using an average of some tournament for the comparisons, I would need to enter the differences between the real results and the average - at least that is the solution I came up with - into the scoring programme and these would naturally not meet the check criterion.
So I decided to ask here in the forum if there's a way how to achieve my goal in PairScorer which I like before starting to look for some other scoring SW.
I would also appreciate a pointer to a source of publicly available tournament results and hand records in a format that the Duplimate can read (Duplimate for Windows .dlm; Portable Bridge Notation .pbn; Vugraph .lin). The files should obviously include average / median result for each board. We typically play 30 boards.
Any suggestions most welcome.
Comments
You can use Butler scoring with preset Datums set on the Event Details > Scoring > Set Butler Datums.
It does mean entering the presets and obviously it must be done by someone who isnt playing the hands!
However, it seems to me playing duplicate pairs with only 2 or 3 tables is never going to be very fair. You would be better playing head to head teams assuming you have 4 pairs or 6 pairs each week with this number. Unfortunately, with 5 pairs that isnt practicable.
Thank you Jeff, good tip, will try it.
We cannot play a clean teams match on two tables as we cannot find a fair teams composition, so we do what we think is the next best thing, full Howell, three rounds of 10 boards, effectively 3 short team matches with all possible pair combinations.