I have a card game, but I haven't used it in competition. I wonder if the scoring could be relied upon. This game is solitaire, but the same deal can be dealt to two players, and they can each play and get their own score. This is one point per card played to its final destination, and goes up to 52. This game is half-luck, half-skill. So, I think if there are enough rounds between two players, each playing the same deals as they go, then the one with the highest "wins" (games won) should get the match win, because averages made it so that luck would happen equally for each of the two, leaving only skill as the cause of any variation at the end. Here is the part I do not understand. I can play the same deal five times, for example, and get scores ranging sometimes quite far, such as from 24 to 52. When this is a characteristic of the game, does the above scoring method still find a skill-based result? I did not recall previous games when playing them again. TIA, Mark Re: boardwalk.pagat.com
[Edit-add: Sorry, I was not aware of a boardgames stack exchange Measuring luck vs skill is discussed at the link, and it appears score data is used to find what the luck and skill components turn out to be.
If a person plays the same deal 30 times, then they will get a 30-game average. If they play 30 different deals once each, then they will get a 30-game average. This is recognizing the caveat that the player does not remember the cards from previous play. What may be lost is to score the player against a variety of deals.