Join Bridge Winners
All comments by JoAnn Sprung
1 2 3 4 ... 19 20 21 22
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Kevin I disagree with your assumptions. Sadly I think the fault on the “cheap” rooms lies with the organizers. They assume that is what the players want and try to arrange for tournaments accordingly. A perfect contrast to this theory is the wildly successful Victoria regional this year which was moved from the burbs to a more expensive (but nicer) downtown location.

The Orlando NABC certainly wasn't any bargain for the rooms or meals. The League really should and could focus more on an all around pleasant experience. See my article on bridge down under for ideas of how to attract and keep players.
http://bridgewinners.com/article/view/the-wonder-of-bridge-down-under
May 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@Robb - no intent to diss KC specifically just was making a point that one (or many) awful NABCs can cause players to reassess their travel choices.
May 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
At some point I suspect they could have. Evidently there was a lot of back room maneuvering by some to push through the Swan and Dolphin at the time.

It is probably too late to get a prime location for November '22 in Florida. After the Orlando disaster it would be a huge mistake to pick a less than optimal site.

One of the reasons we skipped KC was Orlando. We have decided to be more selective in our NABC choices.
May 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It was a dreadful choice. Added to Hendrik's points were the environmental concerns. A lot of people (myself included) got very sick. There was a lot of mold. We left early
May 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There are some of us old timers who still like the idea of holding cards.
May 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Simon we played with that system in Lille during the world mixed teams. It was wonky and annoying. If you didn't place the card in exactly the right spot it wouldn't be read.

IMO any vugraph service shouldn't substantially detract from or interfere with playing the game. Players have enough to think about additional mechanics to worry about.
May 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
David no need to lobby. The USBF mixed teams were shown on vugraph last July.
May 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Dale have you figured out a way to predict that in advance?
May 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Oren you may feel that way but it's not the same as the point made by many on this board that only the best be shown given the option. I still content that to choose three quarterfinal matches rather than two quarterfinal and one women's final is an injustice.

There are lots of reasons people watch and some are because they have an interest in a particular event. We've had 10 days of watching these great players duke it out on vugraph. Is it so unreasonable to request that a few days of the women's final to be shown?

There is no reason for some to use this thread as an excuse to denigrate women's bridge. I agree that more women should play in the open. I would have been there except for the extreme length of the event. Perhaps next year. But none if this is an excuse for the trashing of women's bridge that we have seen here.
May 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@ David “Seems rather unlikely that there would be a USBC Open final and quarterfinal on the same day,”

You would be incorrect in that David. That's exactly what happened. Guess you weren't watching that day. Check the schedule for May 7.

Assuming that just because one team beats another they must be a similar level of ability is not valid and also not the same as insisting that only the “best” be shown given a choice.
May 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The issue I raised was why when there were plenty of vugraph operators did the USBF choose to show only two of the four segments of the women's finals when they could have easily dropped one of the QF matches.

Some are proposing that when there is a choice, only the best bridge be shown regardless of the type of event. Lets surmise that there were only enough operators for one table.

The choices are;

1. USBC Open final between - Harris and a comparable team.
2. USBC Quarterfinal between Nickel and Diamond.

Does anyone really believe that the USBF would choose to show the Quarterfinal match rather than then final? I doubt it unless number one was a complete blow out.

This should not be a debate about whether women's bridge is “worthy” or they are willing to open 2Nt with a six card major.

There are plenty of vugraph options on BBO. When there is a final to represent a country and there are choices the final IMO should be given priority. David no one will force you to watch I promise.
May 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks for checking Oren. However my point is that there were plenty of vugraphs up yesterday yet they still chose to show many QF matches rather than the Women's final.

Regarding the comments on the number of kibitzers - would all of them just sign off if there was one open semi instead of two? How many additional would be on to watch the women's final? The snobby elitist attitudes expressed on this thread astound me. (This is not directed at you)

I guess I shouldn't be surprised because I recall when the League only provided bidding boxes and screens for the “mens” events. I just didn't expect this from the USBF.
May 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't think it's less worthy of coverage but when we are talking about a final vs a quarterfinal then I think the final is more worthy. Why have 10 QF matches but only 2 women's final matches?
May 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Meyer you have options:

1. Ask the directors to keep an eye out for this type of behavior and request that they are liberal with procedural penalties. Make zero tolerance announcements and put them in the bulletins with PP warnings

2. Send an email from the Unit/District to the player involved putting them on notice.

3. You can submit recorder forms on behalf of the complainants.

4. Put the ball in their court. Tell them they are not welcome at your tournaments unless they commit to clean up their act.

I am troubled by the frequent reference to them being well liked or a nice guy.

Sorry, the rules apply to everyone even the popular people. If the person ignores or dismisses your feedback get them in front of a committee.
April 26
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ron - Couldn't agree more. We have a process. When I have heard complaints of this type I always suggest filling out a recorder form. The Recorder will keep a paper trail which is essential for determining patterns of behavior. Usually a call from the recorder is all that is required to manage the situation.
April 26
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Tim I wasn't clear enough with that statement. What I meant to convey is that there is some consideration to eliminate the obligation for providing mid chart defenses at the table. Players might still be allowed to bring their own defenses if they choose. It's something under review.
April 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Meyer - You are a really nice guy. Those on the board who don't know you can't appreciate how nice you are.

I know that you would rather handle these things quietly. However, after speaking with the pairs in question if there is no improvement then these matters should be referred to a committee to handle.

It's amazing how much of an impact appearing before a committee can have. In the case of the person who snaps, glares and displays emotion the committee might choose a warning or probation. If the person doesn't modify their behavior the bridge community can get along just fine without their presence for a few months or years. At some point they will comply or be told they cannot play.
April 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Robert tournaments can choose to restrict their events to general chart eliminating mid chart conventions al together. Most tournaments allow mid chart in Flight A and top brackets of KOs.

They cannot to my knowledge eliminate certain aspects of general chart. Clubs are more independent in that regard.

However isn't the approach of restricting systems because of a few bad apples throwing the baby out with the bath water? Why not deal with the pairs causing the problems directly rather than attempt to legislate around them?
April 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Meyer I don't really understand the issue here.

It doesn't matter whether you believe the player is unintentionally transmitting information through tempo or gestures. Their actions are inappropriate. The downside risk is all on them. The issue should be referred to the recorder for action and possibly to a committee.

Players are required to know their system. Of course we all have an occasional oops. If a pair playing a complex system routinely forget, mis-alerts and misleads the opponents the directors can impose procedural penalties. if there have been a number of complaints it's an issue for the recorder and possibly a committee.

Pairs are allowed to play a complex system as long as it is legal and they properly alert and explain. In some cases courtesy pre-alerts are recommended. For example we pre alert non standard leads even though we are not required to do so.

The answer is not to restrict entire charts or systems because of a few problem children. Deal with them as issues arise.
April 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ed, Jim, Michael etc - Danny is a member of the C&C committee.

It never occurred to us that this confusion existed before reading the comments on this thread.

The requirement in the Mid-Chart to have approved defenses is in order for the convention to be approved for use in mid chart events. For example you want to play 2NT for any two suit preempt you have to submit the request with a defense for approval.

You must have approved defenses available for the opponents but that doesn't mean that the opponents have to use that defense.

In practice only half of the opponents play the League approved defenses. For example, It would be ludicrous for foreign pairs used to multi to be forced to play one of the two options.
April 25
1 2 3 4 ... 19 20 21 22
.

Bottom Home Top