[pilowsky]

I prefer the scoring method that gives me the best result: obviously.
Since we are in the computer age, is it possible, at the end of a tournament for the results to be reported in both IMP's and MP's - just for interest sake.

Clearly not a top priority but if it's not a huge hassle to implement it might be fun.

[Capt_Ravi]

pilowsky, on 2020-September-19, 01:04, said:

I prefer the scoring method that gives me the best result: obviously.
Since we are in the computer age, is it possible, at the end of a tournament for the results to be reported in both IMP's and MP's - just for interest sake.

Clearly not a top priority but if it's not a huge hassle to implement it might be fun.

ACBL Scoring software has it in built. At my local club, I have, on occasions, after a tournament, published results in both MP and IMP format.

[pilowsky]

Capt_Ravi, on 2020-September-19, 01:32, said:

ACBL Scoring software has it in built. At my local club, I have, on occasions, after a tournament, published results in both MP and IMP format.

Interesting, I have been playing in online ACBL tourneys so this is exactly what I was after.

[StevenG]

This is silly. You bid and play differently depending on whether it's MPs or IMPs. Comparing scores as if you were playing a different game is meaningless.

[pilowsky]

StevenG, on 2020-September-19, 05:02, said:

This is silly. You bid and play differently depending on whether it's MPs or IMPs. Comparing scores as if you were playing a different game is meaningless.

Well, thank you. Don't look then. I would like to know. I think it would be interesting, informative and helpful.

[dsLawsd]

It might be useful in designing your system. And if your IMP score is much better than MPs perhaps you can make adjustments in the later. I find that the best way to improve these days is to play some with 3 robots and use random or specific Vu-graph hands to compare against the top players. At events where you know many contestants it can help find future compatible partners or teammates.

Fun suggestion!!

[Huibertus]

That would make no sense at all.

IMPs and MP's require different tactics. At MP's it is good tactics to bid game that have 50% + chance, at IMP you'd require less. At MP's you'd frequently risk going down for an overtrick, at IMPs you'd almost never do that.

These are just two different games.

[pilowsky]

Huibertus, on 2020-September-20, 01:47, said:

That would make no sense at all.

IMPs and MP's require different tactics. At MP's it is good tactics to bid game that have 50% + chance, at IMP you'd require less. At MP's you'd frequently risk going down for an overtrick, at IMPs you'd almost never do that.

These are just two different games.

That's why it makes sense.
When people are starting out at duplicate Bridge they do not understand the difference between the two scoring methods. Expert players like yourself may have forgotten this. But it is a problem for many people.
This idea would help people to see that there is a radical difference in the scoring between IMP's and MP's
Obviously not a problem for world experts.

[Joe_Old]

pilowsky, on 2020-September-20, 01:54, said:

That's why it makes sense.
When people are starting out at duplicate Bridge they do not understand the difference between the two scoring methods. Expert players like yourself may have forgotten this. But it is a problem for many people.
This idea would help people to see that there is a radical difference in the scoring between IMP's and MP's
Obviously not a problem for world experts.

You're focused on the wrong point. The scoring difference between an IMP tournament and Match Point tournament is irrelevant, because IMPs is real bridge and match points is a bastardized version. As the (modern) version of bridge was conceived, the point was to reach the best contract and make it. A 95% 5♦ contract is the correct place to be, as opposed to 3NT off the first five ♠ tricks, even though the NT contract might score +660 for a top if the opponents fail to find the right lead

Match points was created as a way of making duplicate possible, as total points (I don't believe IMPs had yet been created) was simply too unwieldy to score up across a large field before the age of computers. Everybody quickly learned that the transition was not smooth, because match points created "angles" to be exploited that simply did not exist in real bridge, and once that was acknowledged nobody ever tried to compare the two games.

Just because a computer can easily make the comparison doesn't mean that there is any sane reason to do so. The comparison would not be enlightening to new players; it will just give them more bad information.

[pilowsky]

Joe_Old, on 2020-September-20, 08:09, said:

You're focused on the wrong point. The scoring difference between an IMP tournament and Match Point tournament is irrelevant, because IMPs is real bridge and match points is a bastardized version. As the (modern) version of bridge was conceived, the point was to reach the best contract and make it. A 95% 5♦ contract is the correct place to be, as opposed to 3NT off the first five ♠ tricks, even though the NT contract might score +660 for a top if the opponents fail to find the right lead

Match points was created as a way of making duplicate possible, as total points (I don't believe IMPs had yet been created) was simply too unwieldy to score up across a large field before the age of computers. Everybody quickly learned that the transition was not smooth, because match points created "angles" to be exploited that simply did not exist in real bridge, and once that was acknowledged nobody ever tried to compare the two games.

Just because a computer can easily make the comparison doesn't mean that there is any sane reason to do so. The comparison would not be enlightening to new players; it will just give them more bad information.

You will not get any argument from me - I only play MP's when there's nothing else going. Who wants to get attacked by lunatics in cheap motel rooms anyway? Your response misses the point completely. The information is there. Some people would find it interesting and helpful. Why not let them have it?
What's the problem? It's silly not to? It's just data. It has absolutely nothing to do with Bridge at all. People can do whatever they want with the information.
Who are you to be the arbiter of what information people can or cannot have. Especially if the software has already calculated it. That's just being obdurate.

[Joe_Old]

pilowsky, on 2020-September-20, 15:48, said:

You will not get any argument from me - I only play MP's when there's nothing else going. Who wants to get attacked lunatics in cheap motel rooms anyway? Your response misses the point completely. The information is there. Some people would find it interesting and helpful. Why not let them have it?
What's the problem? It's silly not to? It's just data. It has absolutely nothing to do with Bridge at all. People can do whatever they want with the information.
Who are you to be the arbiter of what information people can or cannot have. Especially if the software has already calculated it. That's just being obdurate.

Given the number of players I've mentored, and am currently mentoring: yeah, I have a legitimate point of view based on experience. The worst thing you can do to an advancing player is to throw bad advice at him.

You seem incapable of understanding the difference between unrelated events and data. Start with the concept of "garbage in, garbage out". Matchpointing an IMP event does not produce data, it produces garbage. For observations, conclusions, measurements, etc. to form a reliable data set they must be founded upon a justifiable inference that each datum is related. Otherwise you have two or more independent sets. It's a pity that you never took (or passed) a course in Statistics or Logic, where this concept is foundational.

You want results posted both ways? Fine. Just stop pretending that it has even the faintest value. And accept the fact that misleading information is damaging.

[pilowsky]

Joe_Old, on 2020-September-20, 17:54, said:

Given the number of players I've mentored, and am currently mentoring: yeah, I have a legitimate point of view based on experience. The worst thing you can do to an advancing player is to throw bad advice at him.

You seem incapable of understanding the difference between unrelated events and data. Start with the concept of "garbage in, garbage out". Matchpointing an IMP event does not produce data, it produces garbage. For observations, conclusions, measurements, etc. to form a reliable data set they must be founded upon a justifiable inference that each datum is related. Otherwise you have two or more independent sets. It's a pity that you never took (or passed) a course in Statistics or Logic, where this concept is foundational.

You want results posted both ways? Fine. Just stop pretending that it has even the faintest value. And accept the fact that misleading information is damaging.

I am not arguing. You have created a 'straw man' and you keep hitting it. talk to the wall I'm not interested.

[nige1]

Joe_Old, on 2020-September-20, 08:09, said:

You're focused on the wrong point. The scoring difference between an IMP tournament and Match Point tournament is irrelevant, because IMPs is real bridge and match points is a bastardized version. As the (modern) version of bridge was conceived, the point was to reach the best contract and make it. A 95% 5♦ contract is the correct place to be, as opposed to 3NT off the first five ♠ tricks, even though the NT contract might score +660 for a top if the opponents fail to find the right lead.

Match points was created as a way of making duplicate possible, as total points (I don't believe IMPs had yet been created) was simply too unwieldy to score up across a large field before the age of computers. Everybody quickly learned that the transition was not smooth, because match points created "angles" to be exploited that simply did not exist in real bridge, and once that was acknowledged nobody ever tried to compare the two games.

Just because a computer can easily make the comparison doesn't mean that there is any sane reason to do so. The comparison would not be enlightening to new players; it will just give them more bad information.

Effectively, Aggregate, IMPs, VPs, and Match-points are different pairs games.
IMO: each a better test of skill than its predecessor

There are teams analogies e.g. Match=points ~ BAM.
Some club players have never played Rubber Bridge or Aggregate

[mycroft]

You hold ♠98654 ♥KJT6 ♦5 ♣J85. All white, RHO opens a strong NT. You play DONT. Your call? If the answer is the same at MPs and IMPs for all hands, you're playing IMPs at MPs. If they're not different on this hand, push the hand up or down enough that it does hit the gap. The difference is that it might get hit for 800 or 1100, and it might get hit for 500 into no game. But at MPs, it's a 15, 20% chance, and it's 40, 50% that you'll get a better score than if you didn't overcall. Therefore, you win. At IMPs, the numbers are about the same, but the bad result is -10 and the good result is +1, so you lose (-1.5 to -2 vs +0.4 to 0.5). In a short match, this could be the match right there, no matter how brilliant your teammates are.

There's a thing called the "Matchpoint double". Basically, especially when the opponents are vulnerable, if they compete to the 3 level over your call, and you expected to make +110, but you're not sure about the next trick, you double trying for +200. If you manage to set it, you beat *everybody*. If you let it make, you lose to everybody. But if +100 is below average, and if -100 is well below average, your loss is less than your gain, so this tactic works if you can succeed half the time. At IMPs, the first rule everybody learns is "don't double a partscore into game without a trump stack". Try a matchpoint double and you're gambling +3 against -10.

We're in a 3NT contract that is going to be bid 1NT-3NT across the field (except at my table, where we don't play that range of NT). You can make 9 tricks playing safe, but you have a play for 10 tricks if the suit breaks 3-3 or 4-2. But if it's 5-1, you're going down. At MPs, this is an autoplay; at IMPs, it's an auto-play-safe.

These are just three of the things where it just doesn't play the same at all. And it makes a huge difference. And it's fun to score a MP game as IMPs just to see, but it's a great joke for the bar after. Now most of the time, it's pretty close, for most of the people. But when it isn't close, it's crazy.

And if you want a great example of this, Friday second session at our sectionals is the A/X IMP pairs. Almost all of the 0-1250 MP players are shuffled off to their own room to play matchpoints. This one time, there were 17 tables, and at the end of the session, our Bridgemate said "49%". We won the event.

[barmar]

Back when we used to have f2f tournaments, my ACBL unit would occasionally hold hybrid Matchpoint/BAM games at a Sectional. Every pair would be automatically teamed up with a pair sitting the opposite direction. The event would then be scored normally as matchpoints, and also the BAM results with your teammates would be calculated. Both rankings would be determined, and you'd get masterpoints based on your better showing.

This makes a little sense because matchpoint and BAM strategy are not too different. But IMPs and matchpoints are significantly different that it makes less sense to combine them. Matchpoint scoring encourages taking risks, while IMPs encourages playing safe when the contract is assured and going all out when you're in a precarious contract.

[pilowsky]

barmar, on 2020-September-22, 08:54, said:

Back when we used to have f2f tournaments, my ACBL unit would occasionally hold hybrid Matchpoint/BAM games at a Sectional. Every pair would be automatically teamed up with a pair sitting the opposite direction. The event would then be scored normally as matchpoints, and also the BAM results with your teammates would be calculated. Both rankings would be determined, and you'd get masterpoints based on your better showing.

This makes a little sense because matchpoint and BAM strategy are not too different. But IMPs and matchpoints are significantly different that it makes less sense to combine them. Matchpoint scoring encourages taking risks, while IMPs encourages playing safe when the contract is assured and going all out when you're in a precarious contract.

Correct! Not "combine" Just Display - for interest. It's completely different.