Assigned Adjusted Scores

by David Stevenson

Suppose a player bids after partner's hesitation, or confuses an opponent and he goes wrong. Then a Tournament Director or Appeals Committee will adjust the score. However, one Committee decided to award a score of 40% to N/S, 50% to E/W, which surprised me, since this would be considered illegal in most of the rest of the world.

When a Director or Committee adjusts a score on a board which was played out, the Law requires them to look at what might have happened if the problem had not occurred. They look at all reasonable results and then pick the one that benefits the non-offending side. While this procedure is not difficult, for some reason Directors and Committees have sometimes given scores like 60% - 40% instead. This is neither legal nor fair. If the non-offending side would have got 80% without the infraction, they will feel cheated: if the best they could possibly do was 30% their offending opponents will feel cheated. Quite often 60% - 40% will turn out to be about right but it is unnecessary: if a score is "assigned" it is fairer, and can be seen to be fair.

Sometimes this method seems too harsh. Consider the case where a side plays in 4 doubled because of misinformation. A Committee decides that if correctly informed their opponents would bid spades, and would reach the making slam about one time in three. If they assign a score of 4 making twelve then the other pair will not like it since they might have got to slam. So a score of 6 making is assigned but while legal this seems harsh. However, there is a solution: a Committee can give a "weighted" score, say 40% of 6, and 60% of 4. Note that the non-offending side gets the benefit of the doubt in the weighting: this is called "sympathetic" weighting (some countries use slightly different methods). I believe that the Committee might have given a weighted score in the quoted case.

In Sweden only Committees can give weighted scores not Directors. However, the World Bridge Federation has decided it is legal for Directors to do so, and the European Bridge League is urging its member countries to allow Directors to do so, and many countries have adopted this. I strongly suggest Sweden should consider following this approach.

The European Bridge League is having a training weekend for Directors at the start of September in Tabiano, near Milan, Italy, and Sweden have been invited to send two Directors. I shall be giving a talk on adjusted scores at that course, including the desirability of giving weighted adjustments, and the need to avoid 60% - 40% type scores. You can also find more discussion of this subject on my Lawspage.

Editor's note:

• This article first appeared in a Daily Bulletin from the Swedish National week at Skövde in Sweden in 2001
• When it first appeared the Bulletin editor added a headline "Illegala svenska metoder" [= "Illegal Swedish methods"] which had the effect of upsetting various people, and making several of them assume what I had written without reading it.
• If you want to comment on this article, why not write direct to David Stevenson?
• I shall be pleased to hear from you!

Last article	Laws menu	Main index	Top of article	Local menu