Sometimes a board is fouled, and played in the differing composition only
a very limited number of times.
When it has been played only once, only an artificial adjusted score (usually
60%-60%) can solve the problem.
When it has been played two or three times, one could use the solutions provided
in the previous chapter, but this puts too much importance on a piece of
luck.
Suppose you have played a board that only two other tables have played. Although
you play normally, you have the worst result of three. The Ascherman system
is the kindest to you : it gives you a 17% result. Perhaps one extra trick
would give you an equal top and 67%. It is generally considered that this
is too harsh and normal comparisons within a small group should not be
done.
There are two main solutions to the problem. One is a recommendation to tournament directors : whenever a fouled board is discovered after having been played more than once, it should continue to be played as long as possible. One should try to get as many as possible ‘comparable results’ in any group.
But sometimes this is not possible. For two and three results within a group, the WBF has put forward an alternative solution. These tables get artificial adjusted scores, but not of the 60-60 variety. In stead, the comparison is made between the scores, and the artificial scores shall be : 65-55 in the case of two results and 70-60-50 in the case of three. Of course, equal scores produce equal results, so for example :
NS EW artNS artEW 620 65% 55% 620 65% 55% 100 50% 70%
This solution should be limited to groups of two and three tables, for practical
reasons.
Starting with four tables, the problem is no longer so acute. Also, when
applying the first rule set out above, the problem shall not easily occur
with four results. Three results is quite possible though, particularly when
playing a barometer tournament. (When playing four boards per round, it is
possible for a misduplicated board to be played at three tables)
In fact, the only time I have had to use the 70-60-50 rule was not as TD but as player. I myself found it hard to believe that a 6D which we had missed was made all around the room, with two outstanding aces. As this was in a barometer, the fouled board was easily discovered to have been played at just three tables. I had to ask the TD for a 65% artificial score and duly got it.
Of course, these artificial scores are treated just as any others, see the next chapter.
Last Modified : 1996-09-12