[barmar]

 pigpenz, on 2013-January-04, 11:03, said:

interesting thread but I am still wondering what the fuss is about what is par only because what is its relevance to
matchpoints or imp results unless you are being compared to what the par result should be?

As with double dummy analysis, it's an objective standard that you can compare your results to. And like DD analysis, you have to take it with a grain of salt, since double dummy "cheats".

[pigpenz]

 barmar, on 2013-January-04, 11:17, said:

As with double dummy analysis, it's an objective standard that you can compare your results to. And like DD analysis, you have to take it with a grain of salt, since double dummy "cheats".

yes I fully understand that
but sometimes I dont think some players who are newer or less experienced fully understand that.
DD is done by the Rabbi
if there are 4 stiff Kings off side that you should drop for 7NT then thats par, I guess

I just wonder if anyone has done a detailed analysis or the par results versus the actual results

[PeterAlan]

 Zelandakh, on 2013-January-02, 08:51, said:

Another error on this week's results. This one seems to be caused by not looking for a higher level contract. NS can make 10 tricks in hearts (420) or 11 tricks in diamonds (400). EW can make 10 tricks in spades (620). The par score is given as 100EW, presumably for 5♥X-1(N). Obviously the correct result is 200NS. Despite these mistakes, I find the DD analysis very helpful in going through the boards quickly and it generally takes very little time to find the errors.

Zel, is there any possibility you could e-mail me the hand or, if the print-out's online, post a link to it please? I'd like to put together a collection of these failing hands, to which I'll add some constructions of mine, to act as a test suite for the current and future releases of the software.

I'd be very grateful if anyone who notices another example would do similarly. Please ensure that the vulnerability and dealer are specified - the easiest way is just to quote the board number.

Many thanks.

[barmar]

My club just started putting par score on the hand record this week. When going over my results this week, I counted the number of times above- and below-average scores corresponded to beating or not beating par. They matched up on 15 out of 24 boards, or about 2/3 of the time.

[Zelandakh]

 PeterAlan, on 2013-January-12, 15:06, said:

Zel, is there any possibility you could e-mail me the hand or, if the print-out's online, post a link to it please?

It is Hand 19. The interesting follow-up is this. On the website results the correct par score (+200) is given. However, the printout gave the par score as -100. Presumably this means that either different programs were used or different versions of the same program. Unfortunately I cannot tell you what software the club uses - perhaps Gerben knows though as he is sometimes the TD there.

[PeterAlan]

 Zelandakh, on 2013-January-14, 07:01, said:

It is Hand 19. The interesting follow-up is this. On the website results the correct par score (+200) is given. However, the printout gave the par score as -100. Presumably this means that either different programs were used or different versions of the same program. Unfortunately I cannot tell you what software the club uses - perhaps Gerben knows though as he is sometimes the TD there.

Thanks, Zel. The error seems to be the one you've highlighted in your later post, where you've corrected what you said in your first (the print-out seems to me to be showing the "par" score as +100 to N/S, ie the same sign as, but different score from, that shown on the traveller (+200)).

The format of the printout isn't one I'm familiar with, and I guess that the problem lies in the software used to produce the web-page print-out, whatever that may be. It doesn't seem to have the same origin as the other cases discussed in this thread.

Peter

[barmar]

Found one in a club game I played in last night. Hand 5. Par should be 100 for EW 6♣x-1, but it's given as 300 for EW 5♠x-2.

[PeterAlan]

 barmar, on 2013-February-14, 06:29, said:

Found one in a club game I played in last night. Hand 5. Par should be 100 for EW 6♣x-1, but it's given as 300 for EW 5♠x-2.

Interesting - do you know what dealing / hand analysis & print software was used, and what versions? From the hand records sheet, it looks like it was the [BOS /] DupSoft stuff that goes with Duplimate machines, but I've run the hands through the latest release (DupSoft v5.44) and that gets it right. As noted above, this has had various bug fixes, and your club's release may be a version or two back.

It's still not perfect however - we had a case the other day where the optimum contract was (correctly) identified as 4♣ for +130; however, it was printed as 4CX for 130. That one's still with them.

By the way, if you do decide to upgrade note that the latest BOS release (package v7.01) has a rather different front-end from the previous version - I'd try it out on a test rig first to see what it's like. It's possible, by selective file copying, to update just the DupSoft executable, if you want to do that.

[barmar]

I sent email to the club director as well, he said he needs to download the latest Duplimate software.