Join Bridge Winners
All comments by John Moschella
1 2 3 4 ... 18 19 20 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Just played 3 days in a sectional. All of the 4 single session pair games paid more to win then the 2 session swiss. I always thought the 2 session swiss should have paid more in comparison to team game. However I started looking at points per player per event.

For the weekend there were 166 Tables paying 673.26 master points.
4.055 per table.
Team game 40 tables 178.12 points 4.445 per table.
Pair games(all) 126 Tables 495.14 points 3.92 points per table.

Although one would think winning the 2 session swiss should pay more than winning a 1 session pairs game the event itself gives out more points per table entered.

So even though all the pair games were around 30 tables and the team event was 20 tables the team event paid out more points per table.
July 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The bigger the handicap the handicap the more the top team is actually favored.
At a recent Florida regional there were 4 total blockbuster teams. Very large number of masterpoints giving sometimes 30+ in handicaps. Other than when they played each other head to head they were 37-1 for the week. 1 of them lost an early round match to one of the teams with large handicap.

Yes sometimes the handicap helps but I expect it would be better than above but significantly below 50% when as the handicap grows.

Knockouts I believe will continue to dwindle since the bottom of the top bracket is moving to pairs.
July 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Peg I took the total points won by all players in the event and divided by the number of players in the event. The team game gave out more points per player even though 1st place was quite a bit less than what was won in the pairs event. However since everyone player won at least one match the number of points given out in the event is higher. I would expect the better the event the more average points given out per player would be.

Local club 8 tables average about 0.25 points per player in a recent event.

Peg in teams it was not they the teams got less points since they had 4 players .

Teams event 45 teams 180 players all 4 person teams.594.88 points given out. 1st place team was calculated as 4 * 20.62 and so forth for all teams.

Pairs 121 pairs 242 players 618.08 points given out. 2 * 31.96 for first and so forth for all pairs.

The team event gave out more points per player in the event even though first place was lower since all players received some award.
July 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Linda,

Did you request a room prior to the deadline date. If yes you have a complaint. If not then they can't hold rooms forever. Although 5 months seems like that would not be unreasonable.

From ACBL website:
Benefits for Patron Members participating in NABCs:
Guaranteed reservations at the host hotel when reserved by the deadline provided with patron reservation materials
July 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I did some analysis from the fairfield regional from the results on Weds. 7/12. There were 5 brackets in the bracketed Swiss and then I took the Open and gold rush pairs.

The open pair winners won 31.96 points. The bracket 1 winners received 20.62.

However I looked at a different way.
45 teams played the Swiss 45 tables.

17/45 teams won some portion of gold points. 37.77%.
100% of players won some points.
3.33 points per player were given out in event.

Open Pairs and gold rush 121 pairs 60.5 tables.

52/121 pairs won some portion of gold 42.97%
72.8% of players won some points,
2.55 points were player were given out in event

So an event that had 75% of the tables Swiss 45 tables versus pairs 60.5 tables gave out more points per player.

I'm not sure that teams not giving out enough is the issue. Although I expect typically the team events have tougher competition I'm not sure that there is actually a bias against teams. Yes the first place award is smaller but there are more points given out per player and I believe that at the next event if all the same people played in the exact same event(teams pairs) the team awards would increase slightly since they take the average points of field into equation and pairs do not.
July 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Barry, there was a stratified pairs going on at same time. I looked since it would surprise me if there was only a single event available. Has not been this way for a long time. I see nothing wrong in playing in bracket that you were assigned to play in. Actually I believe back in early 90's NE had a bracketed knockout. I remember Paul Kinney was not happy when his team returned as previous years open winner but was regulated to 2nd bracket in I remember correctly.
July 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I answered pass but may double depending on what seat I am also. If partner is a passed hand I am more tempted to double.
July 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Barry: At the last NE Regional you played bracket 4. Why would you play in this event when I expect there may have been some better players that you could have played against in another concurrent game going on.
July 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Peg, I have always want to play top bracket.

However this is not true for most players. I expect there are many players who would not have a chance against a typically team you are on and then what chance would they have against the team you think you have no chance to win.
July 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I meant winning in terms of winning a match against a particular opponent.
July 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I believe most do not want to play in an event where they have no chance of winning. I also prefer not to play a team that I believe I have no chance of losing to.

What I see happening in bracketed knockouts is the bottom of the top bracket stop playing KO's and go to another event. Now a new level of the bottom of the top bracket moves in and starts to move out.

At a recent regional when it was handicapped and a team gave up 38 in handicap but won first half 66-0 not sure that either team enjoyed match.

I understand bracketing of knockouts since long matches with 2 teams of very different ability is not always enjoyable. Not sure I agree with Bracketing swiss events(although they are very popular) since in a short match weaker teams do have a chance.
July 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Sorry partner took 1 trick. Down 8 doubled. Lefty had 9 solid clubs.

Yes I sat their with my 6-6. I have often joked that I should have spoken up and taken 3 imp penalty (believe what occurs when board is thrown out) but would never do it. Take my punishment and move on. Just this one board turned out to be huge in the event.
July 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Once at my first nationals playing on the National IMP Pairs my partner opened 2N out of turn in fourth seat. Boards came to our table very late and were placed out of order so partner assumed he was in first seat which he would have been if boards were placed correctly. We were cold for 6 of major and aggressive enough to bid it. Partner bid 3N which was doubled down 12. Opponents went on to win event with the +24 on this board. I've been waiting 25 years for it to come up again so may answer to director when he says I am barred for auction I will say “How will partner know I am 6-6 in majors” and take a 3 imp penalty.
July 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Poker got smart when they started very small entry fee tournaments giving entry to main event. I believe Party Poker at peak may have had a 1000 entries one year Although if players won more than 1 they could get cash additional entries. Have day long tournaments instead of charging $1 charge $2 with prize of free entries for one NABC over next 2 years. Guess at $50 per day for 10 days about 500 and see how many more players they could get to go to an NABC.
June 30
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
1 or 4
June 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If event is actually seeded correctly than this seems correct if the 4 top players are far and above the rest of the club. I am frequently asked to sit against a certain pair in the first round to make sure the top pairs play each other and not sit in the same direction.
June 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Robot but instead of best hand guarantee the player some minimum like 10 points as opposed to best hand so therefore since player has some points will always be involved in final table result and not have all the information when they have 12 points that no one else has more or when they have 15 and partner opens 1N they know partner has 15.
June 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The reason I believe best hand is played is so that the “player” is not taken out of the equation. If you have a Yarborough and the robot opponents all bid to the same game or slam with the robot on lead then there may potentially be a lot of flat boards. This I believe evolved to best hand since players enjoyed the format more. I think a reasonable compromise for this type of event could be the player is always dealt at least 10 points. Eliminates a lot of the issues brought up where when you have a balanced 15 and partner opens 1N you know there is no slam or when you have 11 and partner opens you know it is a shapely 11. Giving the player some nominal value of points keeps the player involved in the decision making on what happens on the board and takes away a lot of the reasons some claim it is not real bridge.
June 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Actually auction at table was
1 1
2N 3
3 3
3N 4
4N 5
5 Passed out 5C showed 1 or 4. Different hand than given in example. I was defending and partner led face down. I asked 3H showed 3, 3 spades was unsure. I asked if 3N denied 4 spades and answer was yes which implied to me that 3 spades showed 4. After hand was played out I found out that although 3N denied 4 spades he had denied 4 spades when he bid 3H. Partner led a spade and I held Axxxxx with dummy KQx. I tried to give partner ruff instead of switching to my singleton and I could have gotten ruff. I stated if 3H denied 4 spades when I asked if 3N denied 4spades maybe I should have been given that explanation especially since partner could not explain what 3S showed.
If declarer was 4513 my defense was correct but not against 1543.
June 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As stated above no issue in changing card. Again I believe he was intending as joke.
May 19
1 2 3 4 ... 18 19 20 21
.

Bottom Home Top