> ----------
> From: Arnold G. Reinhold[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> I am still not clear as to what the hard issues are.
>
>
Nor am I. In fact, I can't help but wonder
if this is a case where computers (which are
effectively black boxes which users are asked
to trust) are the wrong approach.
How difficult would it be to build a mechanical
shuffling machine, with enough randomness to
produce a good shuffle? Even the best card
magicians in the world have difficulty in
performing more than a few perfect shuffles in
a row. In the absence of a machine, let several
neutral judges take turns shuffling the deck a
few times.
I realize that one of the goals is to give
all the players in a tournament the same pack,
but once again, non-computer procedures which
are easily understandable, and which can be
seen to be fair, are possible. After the initial
shuffle, a set of decks can be collated to match
a master deck pretty quickly, given pre-existing
stacks of each card.
(For example - let the master deck be used by
a neutral judge or judges to arrange 52 stacks
of cards down the length of a table - face down.
Then let other neutral observers walk down the
length of the table, picking one card from each
stack, to build a deck.)
All of this could be done well before the start
of the match. Does this take any longer than what
is currently done?
After the decks are collated, let the teams select
'their' deck at random from the supply of pre-collated
decks.
If one is willing to stipulate no collusion between
those who prepare the decks, and those who use them,
a lot of procedures are fair and feasible.
Computers are not always the appropriate solution.
Peter Trei
