Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Rubber Points vs Victory Points scales
28 views
Skip to first unread message
Bertil
May 24, 2012, 3:01:41 PM5/24/12
to
ACBL has established a table for "Convrsion of Rubber Points
into Victory Points".
A graph would show four linear sections, viz.
0-40, 50-340, 350-940 and 950-1540+.
Is there a specific rationale for these
or could a scale with ten short sections be equally fair?
Consider 0-25, 30-75, 80-150, 160-250, 260-375,380-525,
530-700, 710-900, 910-1125, 1130-1375 and 1380-1650+.
This scale is based on a simple mathematical formula with units of 25.
Would it make any practical difference in bidding?
Bertil
into Victory Points".
A graph would show four linear sections, viz.
0-40, 50-340, 350-940 and 950-1540+.
Is there a specific rationale for these
or could a scale with ten short sections be equally fair?
Consider 0-25, 30-75, 80-150, 160-250, 260-375,380-525,
530-700, 710-900, 910-1125, 1130-1375 and 1380-1650+.
This scale is based on a simple mathematical formula with units of 25.
Would it make any practical difference in bidding?
Bertil
Bertil
May 26, 2012, 9:02:58 PM5/26/12
to
specific merits and lacks a sound mathematical basis.
He suggests to change to 0-40-80-160-280-440-640-880-1160-1480.
He will revise his own website accordingly.
My proposed set was based on the triangular series N(N+1)/2,
viz. 1-3-6-10-15-21-28-36-45-55-66-----.
Bertil
Jürgen R.
May 27, 2012, 1:58:21 AM5/27/12
to
"Bertil" <stigf...@hotmail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:d9da6b96-540f-41d0...@googlegroups.com...
> On Thursday, May 24, 2012 3:01:41 PM UTC-4, Bertil wrote:
>> ACBL has established a table for "Convrsion of Rubber Points
>> into Victory Points".
>>
>> A graph would show four linear sections, viz.
>> 0-40, 50-340, 350-940 and 950-1540+.
>> Is there a specific rationale for these
>> or could a scale with ten short sections be equally fair?
>> Consider 0-25, 30-75, 80-150, 160-250, 260-375,380-525,
>> 530-700, 710-900, 910-1125, 1130-1375 and 1380-1650+.
>> This scale is based on a simple mathematical formula with units of 25.
>>
>> Would it make any practical difference in bidding?
>>
>> Bertil
>
> Marvin French has just informed me that the ACBL set has no
> specific merits and lacks a sound mathematical basis.
> He suggests to change to 0-40-80-160-280-440-640-880-1160-1480.
And what are the "specific merits" of this?
>> ACBL has established a table for "Convrsion of Rubber Points
>> into Victory Points".
>>
>> A graph would show four linear sections, viz.
>> 0-40, 50-340, 350-940 and 950-1540+.
>> Is there a specific rationale for these
>> or could a scale with ten short sections be equally fair?
>> Consider 0-25, 30-75, 80-150, 160-250, 260-375,380-525,
>> 530-700, 710-900, 910-1125, 1130-1375 and 1380-1650+.
>> This scale is based on a simple mathematical formula with units of 25.
>>
>> Would it make any practical difference in bidding?
>>
>> Bertil
>
> Marvin French has just informed me that the ACBL set has no
> specific merits and lacks a sound mathematical basis.
> He suggests to change to 0-40-80-160-280-440-640-880-1160-1480.
> He will revise his own website accordingly.
> My proposed set was based on the triangular series N(N+1)/2,
> viz. 1-3-6-10-15-21-28-36-45-55-66-----.
And I suggest a change to 0-27-99-166-388-411-666-888-1066-1488.
What do you think of them bananas?
>
> Bertil
Bertil
May 27, 2012, 7:08:33 AM5/27/12
to
On Thursday, May 24, 2012 3:01:41 PM UTC-4, Bertil wrote:
and are unrelated to the scoring in bridge. In short, you
came up with gibberish with no merits.
Bertil
0 new messages