(very) Late Pair in County Teams of Eight Match

Peter

Using EBU Score Teams 1.2.5 to score a County League Match (3*Teams of Eight), 32 boards, add then IMP then VPs
A C-Team pair missed the first 8 boards so I needed to set the C Team score to -3 IMPS for each of these boards
I also wanted to include the scores obtained by the C-Team Pairs who did play the first stanza in the X-IMPs.
Giving the missing pair 40/60 adjusted the IMPs total on the board a little but did not set the team result for the board to -3
I thought I'd cracked it by giving the pair a weighted score that brought the score across the board to -3,
left the scores of the present pairs in place, but recorded 'Art Score' against the missing Pair
That worked for the first 5 boards but on board 6 I was told I could only have 5 artificial scores.
Has anyone else had this problem, or know how I can resolve it?
Many thanks Peter

495670

It might be worth inputting all the results as 40/60 as you did and then check what the correct result should be for each board under White Book 3.7.2, which details the ruling in the case of a missing score (both the calculation and then a subsequent 3 IMP penalty to whatever the result is). I'm afraid I haven't come across the exact problem you've mentioned though.

Peter

Thank you 495670
That was very helpful advice.... it appears that Teams of Eight is more complicated than we thought and it is not as simple as the side missing a pair gets -3 on the board and the non-offending side get +3.
I did suggest that the directors on the day check the White Book but I wasn't directing, didn't have my copy, and couldn't look it up quickly enough on my phone. I'll stick to my guns a little more firmly next time.
When I put 40/60 in for the missing pair the scoring program adjust each of the 32 boards by -2 IMPS which I odn't think can be right. I'm about to explore further (it works OK with 'imp then add' but that is not the way this league is scored

Robin_BarkerTD

Peter

The White Book 3.7.2 is an attempt to give weight to all the scores that can be used, so your attempt to do this by hand was well-intentioned.

Note the first paragraph of 3.7.2 suggests you first consider Law 86B1 - the rest of 3.7.2 predates the introduction of Law 86B1, and the interpretation of that law for teams of eight is untested. BUT - there were multiple boards s
to be adjusted, so Law 86B1 does not apply here.

EBUScore should implement the formulas in 3.7.2/3.7.3 when you score the boards as 40/60. It is worth checking that is has done what you expect.

Peter

Thanks Robin

Very useful exercise to work through.
EBUScore does what I (now) expect for boards 1 to 8 (and not quite what I expect for boards 9-32)

For board 1 WB 3.7.2.3 gives the formula 1/3 ( imp(A − X) + imp(B − X) + imp(A + B − 2 X) )
In this case score Y is missing. A & B are NFK's scores as N/S and X & Y are Suffolk's.

This works out to -7 Imps for Norfolk, adjusted by 2IMPS (WB 3.7.3.2) to give +5 to Suffolk
EBU Score duly gives +5 to Suffolk for Board 1 so all appears to be well.

For board 9-32 EBU Score shows that it carries on deducting 2 Imps per board for boards which seems wrong.
(see attached pic 'image' for boards 9-14).

If you look at image2 though you see it sums the adjusted Imps scores to give an (erroneous) total of -6 IMPS

However it then corrects itself as the VP score (15-5) has been calculated after adding back in 24*2 (the erroneous adjustments shown against boards 9 to 32).

Thanks very much everyone for your help. I've learnt about adjusting scores in teams of eight and about
a quirk of EBU TeamScore. I would have really struggled without this forum

Peter

Thanks ** [Name & original comment removed at contributor's request]**... only just seen your comment ... I was too busy working it through after Robin's advice