> There have been a few comments lately about the effect
> of counting Red7's as +1 instead of counting all
> Sevens as +.5. Clearly there must be some difference
> in accuracy. But the comments have characterized the
> difference from insignificant to large. So, I though
> I'd run some sims. I ran two sims each for three sets
> of circumstances as follows:

> 6D, S17, DAS, 1-15, 4.5/6, Accurate catch 20 indexes
> 6D, S17, DAS, 1-15, 4.5/6, Compromise indexes from
> BiB second edition
> SD, H17, nDAS, 1-4, 58% pen, Accurate catch 20
> indexes Below are the resulting SCOREs:

> Red7 Level II (counting all Sevens as +0.5) won
> in all three case; which is hardly a surprise. The
> damage caused by using the Red Sevens only for the
> three cases was:

> 6D accurate: 2.6%
> 6D compromise: 3.2%
> SD accurate: 1.7%

> I'm a bit surprised that the compromise indexes were
> more impacted than the accurate indexes. I really
> didn't know how the SD vs. 6D numbers would come out.

> As to the question of whether these are significant
> differences; that's up to the reader. My own personal
> opinion is that these are not big differences.

I thought the differences would be larger but I think it depends on other factors like pen, spread and # of indices.
May I bother you with a couple of sims? Pen = 5/6 and C22 for example. Also, it would be good to check 1-20 and see what the difference is. Maybe you can just post the raw data.
We should don't forget what the correlations parameters are in both cases:

DRED-7
BC = 0.9800
IC = 0.7852
RED-7
BC = 0.9683
IC = 0.7757

These differences should be best seen with a 1-20 spread.

Thanks again for the interesting sims.

Sincerely,
Cac