The difference between IMPs versus MPs can be summed up as amount of gain versus frequency of game. If you play a match against another side in an 18-board match and you make 1 Imp gains on 15 boards and lose 3 game swings of 10 imps on the last 3 boards, you have lost your 18-board match 15-30. Now suppose you are playing in an 18 board pairs event and manage to find extra trick on 15 boards and blown the last 3 boards with speculative slam bids that have failed where the rest of the room has stayed safely in game making an over trick. You are a clear winner with 15 * 100% scores and 3*0% scores.

Those that find the tactics of Match Points pairs difficult consider it a warped form of the game, and far prefer the comfort zone of team scoring or rubber bridge where the over trick counts for little. On the other hand, you could argue that Match pointed pairs rewards the skill of the card player in the part score zone.

Does this change your tactics in bidding, style of bidding and play of the cards. Indeed, it does. Simply put Match pointed pairs is won in the part score zone and weak no-trump systems have an advantage here, mainly because of the pre-emptive nature of a 1NT opening, and as a 12-14 point hand is going to occur more often than a 15-17 point hand you want to get your 1NT openings in as often as possible.

On the flip side in IMP scoring games where games and slams are the battlefield the extra space gained by a minor suit opening and a two over one forcing style the additional space created with this style of bidding explains why the Acol bidder in the tournament world a rare beast is indeed.