Grow the membership? How about nurturing the members we already have who are at the bottom of the MP totem pole. Find out how we can help them better appreciate the game, attend local, regional, and national tournaments. Let's recast the special events, particularly the GNTs so that newer players learn to play imps and enjoy the difference between imps and matchpoints. Reward districts who hold club qualifying events for Flight C players.
Our special events could be driving participation to a much greater extent than they are doing. Live tournament bridge will sputter if we don't engage new club players to enjoy play in a larger venue. It's time for a new grass roots approach: North American Swiss Pairs. Qualify during the Grass Roots Fund month in May and earn the right to play at the fall NABC. The grass roots events, NAP and GNT, should be designed to excite newer players, not just reward those who are already coming to the NABCs
Start the 6K Spingold on Day 2 of the regular Spingold. Structure the NABC+ events in a way that encourages folks to play up.
Lobby your ACBL Board rep to move the 10K event at the start of the Spring NABC to Sat-Sun rather than starting on Day1 of both the Platinum and the IMP Pairs. Bueller? Bueller? Hello? Strive to schedule the start 10K events on day 2 of 3 day NABC+ events whenever possible.
Scheduling a 10K event final that falls on day 1 of a new NABC+ event is WRONG
The ACBL doesn't need a one size fits all policy for team entry fees. If you want 100% of the masterpoints then you pay your 100%. A 6 person team willing to receive proportional overall awards, as we do in Swiss team events, can pay the 4 person team entry fee. We already track the sitouts. This is not rocket science
Read more »on pg. 14 of Friday's USBC bulletin
https://usbf.org/docs/Bulletins/USBC2019news8.pdf
there is a discussion of the second appeal
Woodridge Ginossar Hurd Willenken
2H X P
2N P 3C P
3H P 3N AP
"The committee inquired of E/W about their written methods after Lebensohl and were told there were none."
"E W are a long term partnership, but both claim to not have an agreement on or experience with this auction as a pair"
REALLY?
If I play with an experienced pickup partner and we get to the section of the card "Our doubles over opponent preempts"
and we are playing lebensohl, I assume that the above sequence is stayman with a stopper.
This is the defacto agreement if partner opens 1N and they interfere with 2S and I have 4 hearts and a spade stopper.
Isn't this "just bridge"?
The whole discussion was a bit bizarre. South had the opportunity to shift. Wouldn't, from his long experience, suspect
that LHO is 4=4 in the majors? How would he seek a major suit fit if not via a cuebid? Two way to cuebid, directly or
indirectly after 2N.
What was marked on the front of the card? Slow shows stopper?
And couldn't South have surmised that LHO could be 4=4 in the majors?
Can the committee's lack of mention of front of card methods over interference over 1N be attributed to "it was late at night? or am I missing something?
Joel and John have never had this auction? You must be kidding....
