What????

Without the women professionals, how strong an event would women's events be? Without male professionals, how strong would open events be? Integrity would be damned, unless you continue to keep the professionals happy.

It was nine to nothing for pass before I commented. 50/50 since. With the hand you're giving partner, who has enough to double?

What about Eastern Europe where many of our newer (younger too) pros have come from? And what about China??

Opposite:

KQTx
x
AKJxxx
xx

Three diamonds has an excellent chance to make. Can partner be expected to have anything less?
Even doubled down one would score better than letting them play in three clubs. Without that spade jack, I would lean towards passing.

Not even with that well placed club jack?

Alternate facts?

Not like, love.

Ellis, if there were a club organization of hundreds of clubs, then what? What leverage would we actually have?

From my discussions with several Italian pros, they put the average age at above 60, with little interest from anyone young.

Better or more marketable?
Marketable as in campaigns not being run by nonprofits?

I believe ABA membership median age is even higher than ours.

And it worked because it wasn't here in the US.

What I am happy about is that we are at least discussing the possibility of this happening.
In order to be considered for compensation, certain criteria would have to be met. The first would be that the club or independent teacher involved in the program would have to register with the overseeing body, ACBL. The question of who, if anyone, developed the players might not be clear in many cases. In some instances it might be important to parcel out the award. Clubs may even make arraignments with their teachers as to how the award should be shared. The best teachers would be able to negotiate terms with the clubs they attach themselves to, or more to the point, may go out and open their own clubs in the hopes of grabbing the pie in its entirety.
Two hundred students each playing fifty sessions a year at 20% of a $15 card fee comes to an award of $30,000 a year. A teacher that developed just ten member players a year over a twenty year career would have a steady source of income when the time came for them to retire. Teaching clubs that produced thirty member players a year for twenty years would have a valuable asset to sell whenever they wanted to retire. Right now few clubs are ever sold.
Think about a young profession player today. Someone with charisma and an ability to teach. Someone that could be a game changer when it comes to attracting tons of young players into bridge. Right now that person either plays pro or plays pro. I'm not saying that's a waste of talent. It's just that that's their only career option. Let's offer them another.

Something like that actually happens in some Units.
I'm looking to spur growth through teaching. Teaching requires a huge commitment of time and resources. Creating new players is the goal of the program. Offsetting losses due to tournaments is another area entirely that I would like to explore, but haven't gotten to first base with my Unit and I've been working on them for years.

Incredible.

Like I said, details.

Jeff,
Agreed.If the idea is sound, the devil will always be in the details. The first step, and it is a huge one, is to accept the concept of an income stream for developing players (tournament playing members, real members) for the League.

So Joel, you think club owners and teachers have all bought the cool-aid too?

But what if those new predator clubs had to pay a fee each time a player, that was created by the teaching club or by an independent teacher, played in one of their club games? (BTW: This idea was originally given to me by a former President of the Board of Directors). Let's put the compensation at say 20% of the card fee. This will actually be a win/win for the clubs involved. The predator clubs makes out great. For doing nothing they reap 80% of the benefits. The teaching club earns fees every time a player they created plays anywhere else in ACBL land, be that at any ACBL club, Sectional, Regional, or National. Losing a player to the tournament world would no longer be viewed with mixed emotions. Yes, you created a player. No, you will no longer completely lose that player's income stream.
Tell me this idea is not, at the very least, worth exploring? Think how this might effect the entire independent bridge teaching world out there. Boy, wouldn't I be delighted to pay someone $7 for bringing me a $35 paying customer as soon as they are ready to jump into one of my Novice games. Now this hardly ever happens. Can you blame the independents? Instead of warehousing their students for years on end, as is common practice, they can give them up, earn a residual, and move on to trying to develop new players to send off to the clubs. Perhaps bridge's ecosystem could be righted overnight with just this one dramatic change to how we compensate clubs and teachers for bringing new players into the fold.