One of the most important ideas in bridge is also one of the least obvious: the correct strategy depends on how the hand is scored.

IMPs and matchpoints use the same rules, the same cards, and the same contracts—but they reward very different choices.

What IMP scoring rewards

IMPs (International Match Points) compare scores in terms of difference, not rank. Big gains matter. Small differences don’t.

As a result, IMP scoring rewards:

  • reaching sound games and slams

  • avoiding disasters

  • minimizing losses when things go wrong

Overtricks matter very little. Going down one instead of making one extra trick usually doesn’t change much.

This encourages conservative, percentage-based decisions.

What matchpoint scoring rewards

Matchpoints rank results against other tables. Every trick, overtrick, and small edge can matter.

Matchpoints reward:

  • pushing for overtricks

  • competing aggressively in partscore battles

  • choosing lines that beat the field, not just the book

A result that’s perfectly acceptable at IMPs may be poor at matchpoints.

This comparison-based structure is explained here: Duplicate Bridge Explained Simply

How bidding changes

At IMPs, bidding is about safety. If game is likely, you bid it. If slam is risky, you usually stop.

At matchpoints, bidding becomes sharper. Thin games, competitive partscores, and precise contract selection matter much more.

This is why players sometimes argue about whether a bid was “right”—they may be thinking in different scoring terms.

How declarer play changes

Declarer play shifts as well.

At IMPs:

  • safety plays are often correct

  • securing the contract matters more than extra tricks

At matchpoints:

  • taking calculated risks for overtricks is often right

  • equal-score lines aren’t good enough

This ties directly into broader judgment questions: Safety Play vs Greed: Choosing the Right Line

How defense changes

Defense follows the same logic.

At IMPs, defenders focus on beating the contract or limiting losses. At matchpoints, defenders often fight for every trick, because one trick can swing a board from average to bottom.

Why confusion is common

Many players mix strategies without realizing it. They play matchpoints with IMP instincts—or vice versa.

The result is frustration: “that should have been fine” turns into a poor score.

Understanding scoring context resolves this confusion.

This idea connects to another common misconception: Why “Making Your Contract” Isn’t Always Enough

Bringing this clarity home

At home, scoring context is often unclear or inconsistent. Players may unknowingly apply the wrong instincts.

Tools like Bridge@Home make the scoring method explicit and show how results compare, helping players align strategy with what’s actually being rewarded.

The takeaway

IMPs and matchpoints don’t just score differently—they think differently.

Once players internalize how scoring shapes strategy, bridge decisions become clearer, more consistent, and far less frustrating.