Bridge Winners Profile for Mike Becker
Basic Information
- Member Since
- Oct. 24, 2010
- Last Seen
- July 11
- Member Type
- Bridge Player
- Country
- United States of America
Bridge Information
- Favorite Bridge Memory
- Listening to Star Spangled Banner on podium after Bermuda Bowl win in 1983
- Bridge Accomplishments
- ACBL Hall of Fame and all that goes with it
- Regular Bridge Partners
- Mike Kamil, Allan Graves, Aubrey Strul, Warren Spector
- Favorite Tournaments
- Vanderbilt and Spingold
- Favorite Conventions
- X of STR NT shows S+another; 2C=C+H, 2D=D+H
- BBO Username
- Ultimike
- ACBL Ranking
- Grand Life Master
Sorry, this user has no cards yet.
- VOTE on scoring a Round Robin that has more than 1 segment between teams
- There were 8 comments in the discussion article, with, I think, 5 clearly in favor of scoring the 2 matches separately and 0 opposed. I wish more had commented. That said I will follow the commentors. A review of matters discussed by the Tournament Policy Committee suggests that this matter ...
- Frivolous Appeal Penalty VOTE
- When there is an appeal I presume the entire team is appealing. Is that right? I would probably approve the change but would need to first consider what the parameters of the penalty could be. It might be that, after discussion, we cannot come up with an agreed upon penalty ...
- How to Score a Round Robin Played in two Separate Segments
- There are good reasons to do it either way. I have no strong opinion, yet. Sorry.
- VOTE on Whether an IMP penalty can be awarded for slow play if there is a video recording of the segment
- I approved of the change [by voting the top line] on the basis that the old wording was previously approved of by the TAC and the Tournament Policy Committee.
- Easiest GCOC change (I hope)
- Main issue is a no brainer. Mike R's issue needs brains.
- SENIORITIS
- In this case, had BROD won the USA 1, all would have been well. Apparently this team had no intention of finishing the event after they lost in the USA 1 bracket. I don't think there is anything in the current rules that forbids a team from withdrawing at ...
- How the matches are set in the senior trials
- The ITTC (when writing the CoCs for the Open USBC), decided to base seeding on objective criteria (rather than, say, have all the teams vote on the seeding order). The ITTC debated the mix of present (RR) performance and past performance. A lot. The ITTC came up with a scale ...
- Outraged by the USBF
- Marty says above "The USBF made this decision after the rule change was requested by a member. It was debated at the technical committee level, then by the board on several occasions. There was a forum on bridge winners where everyone could weigh in and vote. If you were going ...
- Outraged by the USBF
- More input: The USBF BoD narrowly favored the principle of the CoC change and asked the Technical committee (TAC) for input on how to write the new rules. It did not initially ask the TAC for its opinion on whether to make the change. Then was there a brouhaha because ...
- Outraged by the USBF
- In November of last year, the USBF Technical Advisory Committee of the USBF took up discussion of being able to play in a subsequent USBC after winning an earlier USBC, after being asked to do so by the USBF BoD, which favored this making this change in the CoCs. It ...
See all comments
