[paulg]

Understandably BBO has always been influenced by the ACBL and the initial VP scales for Swiss events were the ACBL discrete scales.

But even the ACBL occasionally uses the WBF continuous scales these days, as does the USBF and many other countries, and it would be appropriate to offer this option. It would also make sense as there are scales for short matches, even if the EBU (and perhaps others) recommend using net imp scoring for these.

This would also reduce the number of re-matches in Swiss events, which is a constant pain for organisers.

Paul

[hrothgar]

paulg, on 2020-December-27, 16:57, said:

Understandably BBO has always been influenced by the ACBL and the initial VP scales for Swiss events were the ACBL discrete scales.

But even the ACBL occasionally uses the WBF continuous scales these days, as does the USBF and many other countries, and it would be appropriate to offer this option. It would also make sense as there are scales for short matches, even if the EBU (and perhaps others) recommend using net imp scoring for these.

This would also reduce the number of re-matches in Swiss events, which is a constant pain for organisers.

Paul

You don't need BBO to do this.

its really not that hard to look at the scores and assign however many VPs you want

[paulg]

hrothgar, on 2020-December-27, 17:12, said:

You don't need BBO to do this.

Of course BBO has to do this as BBO does the round assignments.

hrothgar, on 2020-December-27, 17:12, said:

its really not that hard to look at the scores and assign however many VPs you want

If BBO published the individual match scores then it would be fairly easy, but it does not. BBO just publishes the total VP score for the team and doesn't even publish the imps for every board/match. Of course it is possible to scrape all the travellers and compute the scores, at least for both of us, but it is way beyond the skills of most tournament organisers especially as they'll get confused by the display of cross imps in the results.

This is a sample results file:

https://webutil.brid...A%2C-1609095633

[gordontd]

hrothgar, on 2020-December-27, 17:12, said:

You don't need BBO to do this.

its really not that hard to look at the scores and assign however many VPs you want

And how would you do the assignments?

[hrothgar]

gordontd, on 2020-December-28, 03:06, said:

And how would you do the assignments?

Me? If I seriously cared, I'd click on the link labels score, grab the raw IMPS scores, and then convert them over to VPs

Quote

Of course it is possible to scrape all the travellers and compute the scores, at least for both of us, but it is way beyond the skills of most tournament organisers especially as they'll get confused by the display of cross imps in the results.

All well and good.

However, if they're not competent to do this type of basic work then I'm not particularly interested in their feedback with respect to feature set development.

[paulg]

hrothgar, on 2020-December-28, 04:38, said:

However, if they're not competent to do this type of basic work then I'm not particularly interested in their feedback with respect to feature set development.

My feeling is that you may not have seen, or played in, the new BBO Swiss Teams tournaments.

The point is that the director of a BBO Swiss Teams should not have to do anything of this ilk. My request is just to add a third option to the scoring of BBO Swiss Teams, adding to the current ACBL VP20 and ACBL VP30 options.

When I did BBO Swiss Teams testing in 2015 I did ask for this change, but I suspect it's fallen off the list.

[mycroft]

I would have suggested a real VP scale over win-loss, with director tie-breaks ACBL 30-point, but I can see the draw of catering to the ACBL first.

There are places (I'm looking at you, Ontario) who actually think this scale is worth playing, and they're willing to pay, I guess.

I'm sure others will get added in time; but matching based on win-loss even is probably fine, frankly, unless the event is small.