Scotland White 34:62 Wales Red
Scotland Blue 41:33 Wales Green
Scotland-England 29:61 Ireland
Like most of these matches excitement came early, this time on the second hand:
Scotland White vs Wales Red
Alex's five hearts bid really tested Mike and John and Phil had an easy decision to punish them. Unfortunately eleven tricks are cold.
At the other table the Welsh Alex did not push so hard and gained six imps when Julian did not double.
Scotland Blue vs Wales Green
In the second match Trevor (Wales) made a well-judged raise to five hearts and Adrian took the money. Harry and Adrian defended accurately for +500. This was worth four imps to Wales when four spades was passed out at the other table.
In the third match, four spades was played by Ireland but this cost them five imps when their team mates doubled four spades - luckily for them the Scottish declarer did not make the overtrick.
There is always a lot of heated debate about the best way to run trials. Firstly whether they should be pairs or teams, and when that has been decided (notice I did not say agreed) then the scoring method that should be used. Personally I prefer teams but if you are going to use pairs then perhaps butler or cross-imping is not the best and the results from last night endorse this.
For all of the matches I've used boards from a European Teams Championship. As the WBF and EBL publish results databases, I was easily able to calculate the par score from the Open Series. Given the prestige of the event and the number of tables in play, this should be the 'expert' datum for the board. This means that we can compare the various types of pairs scoring available for these matches:
| Pair | Match Butler | Match XIMPs | Expert Butler |
|---|---|---|---|
Steve & Mike
|
-39
|
-39
|
-39
|
Phil & Alex
|
11
|
9
|
15
|
Harry & Adrian
|
-14
|
-4
|
-15
|
David & Catherine
|
22
|
15
|
23
|
John & Mike
|
12
|
13
|
5
|
Pair A
|
-46
|
-54
|
-40
|
Clearly Pair A did not have a good day, and their opponents did, and this performance affected both the butler and ximps at every table. There is reasonable consistency between the butler and ximps (meaning it probably does not matter particularly which is used). And there is good consistency with the Expert Butler, so these sets of results look fine. No reason to use one method over another.
However there was a fourth match played, between two Welsh teams. So let's see how the table changes if I replace Pair A with Laura and Susie, who had a good game.
Look at how much the match butler (and ximps) have changed. Phil and Alex, who won the first round of Scottish trials, have moved from a 18-12 VP win to a 13-17 VP loss, just because of what happened at another table. But all the pairs are affected enormously by affairs that are not under their control.
Is this fair?
Of course this would be just one match out of fifteen in the (SBU) final trial: there would be two additional tables and, over a long contest, you'd hope that things will even out. But with only the two winners guaranteed a Camrose place there is quite a lot of luck especially in a Scottish field where lack of consistency, rather than lack of talent, tends to randomise most pairs' results.
If you want pairs trials then I think scoring against an external datum, such as the 'Expert Butler', is ideal. Unfortunately it is very difficult to do this as there are few events that could provide a sensible datum, especially for the number of boards needed in a trial. Even in this series of matches some of the Wales pairs played the hands when they were originally played: Julian and I ensured that they sat in a different direction so that they probably would not remember them, but it would be very unfair to do this in a trial. There is also security, so hands from the Internet are best avoided.
There is no simple solution. Interestingly, England and Ireland currently use team trials with Wales and Scotland using pairs.
However there was a fourth match played, between two Welsh teams. So let's see how the table changes if I replace Pair A with Laura and Susie, who had a good game.
| Pair | Match Butler | Match XIMPs | Expert Butler |
|---|---|---|---|
Steve & Mike
|
-25
|
-24
|
-39
|
Phil & Alex
|
-8
|
-8
|
15
|
Harry & Adrian
|
2
|
11
|
-15
|
David & Catherine
|
1
|
-3
|
23
|
John & Mike
|
25
|
28
|
5
|
Laura & Susie
|
30
|
26
|
44
|
Look at how much the match butler (and ximps) have changed. Phil and Alex, who won the first round of Scottish trials, have moved from a 18-12 VP win to a 13-17 VP loss, just because of what happened at another table. But all the pairs are affected enormously by affairs that are not under their control.
Is this fair?
Of course this would be just one match out of fifteen in the (SBU) final trial: there would be two additional tables and, over a long contest, you'd hope that things will even out. But with only the two winners guaranteed a Camrose place there is quite a lot of luck especially in a Scottish field where lack of consistency, rather than lack of talent, tends to randomise most pairs' results.
If you want pairs trials then I think scoring against an external datum, such as the 'Expert Butler', is ideal. Unfortunately it is very difficult to do this as there are few events that could provide a sensible datum, especially for the number of boards needed in a trial. Even in this series of matches some of the Wales pairs played the hands when they were originally played: Julian and I ensured that they sat in a different direction so that they probably would not remember them, but it would be very unfair to do this in a trial. There is also security, so hands from the Internet are best avoided.
There is no simple solution. Interestingly, England and Ireland currently use team trials with Wales and Scotland using pairs.
