Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Art Korth
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Mike: You are correct. If the field is less than 5 teams, there is a reduction in the maximum overall award even if the event is played over 4 or more sessions.
Aug. 12, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It is not how many teams. It is how many sessions are played in the qualifying. In my district, there were 7 teams in the Championship flight. The event was played as a 2-session Swiss qualifying 4 teams for KO. It paid 36 points because it was a 4 session event.
Aug. 11, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I voted “other” because the comparison is apples and oranges. They are not comparable events, so attempting to determine the “right” masterpoint award by comparing the two events is not practical. I would vote to preserve the status quo, as the LM Pairs is the premier pair event at the Summer NAC, so it should be treated as such in the masterpoint awards.
Aug. 11, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I am not sure you are comparing the right events. The GNT is the Grand National Teams. You may be thinking of the North American Pairs, which used to be called the Grand National Pairs.
Aug. 11, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I believe that the Championship Bracket awards 36 masterpoints for winning the District if the District event was 4 sessions. The number of teams at the District competition is not relevant.
Aug. 11, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Barry and Rusty - great job! I believe I have met John, but not the others on the team. Barry and Rusty and I go way back (Barry and I were in the same high school in Cherry Hill NJ).
Aug. 10, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I found the results on ACBL Live at about 1:00 am Eastern Time. They are on the third page of the event listings under Chicago NABC.

The Daily Bulletin is also available online.
Aug. 10, 2015
Art Korth edited this comment Aug. 10, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I have been playing a long time, and as far as I know South's pass always showed a balanced strong NT hand with nothing to say. There are no other restrictions.
Aug. 7, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I have to agree that South's 3NT call was very poor. But if West was willing to bid 4 over 3NT then he is certainly going to do so over a pass. If North bids 4 over 4, then NS will probably get to a slam. How to get to 7? That is going to be hard after EW get into the auction.

I can't see how North can overrule South on the actual auction. And introducing one of his suits unilaterally on this auction could be suicide.

So, the lion's share of the blame, if not all of the blame, to South.
Aug. 6, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This should be put under the heading of “Been there, done that.” Back in the 80's, when there was a brief period when pros were required to register with the ACBL, there was a National Championship event called the Amateur Pairs. Registered pros were not eligible. I am posting this entirely from my memory of the events of that time. If I recall correctly, the Amateur Pairs only ran for a year or two, and disappeared when the ACBL abandoned its attempt to regulate professionalism.
Aug. 4, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Deleted.
Aug. 4, 2015
Art Korth edited this comment Aug. 4, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What makes them wrong is how it effects other competitors in the event. Everyone has a right to expect that all competitors will be attempting to do their best. And those who have a chance to win would be very upset (and rightfully so) to find that their chance to win had been taken away from them by these “arranged results.”

If that is not a good enough explanation, the fact that such “arranged results” are against the rules should be sufficient.
July 30, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
A technical point: According to the U.S. Internal Revenue Code, organizations recognized under Section 501( c)(3) as exempt from income tax include “Corporations, and any community chest, fund, or foundation, organized and operated exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, testing for public safety, literary, or educational purposes, OR TO FOSTER NATIONAL OR INTERNATIONAL AMATEUR SPORTS COMPETITION (but only if no part of its activities involve the provision of athletic facilities or equipment)…” (emphasis mine).

So, while the WBF is not a charitable organization, it might qualify as a tax-exempt organization under the U.S. Internal Revenue Code.
July 30, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The idea of having members of the BOD who are ACBL representatives to the WBF recuse themselves on a vote relating to ACBL funding of the WBF is absurd.
July 29, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Is the force pining for the fiords?
June 29, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The college baseball world series is run as a double KO.
June 23, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Any hand that has a reasonable conversion of the double to penalties should be able to stand a trump lead, if not welcome it. I agree with Kit here - the conversion of the double traditionally calls for a trump lead. On this hand, I have sympathy for your lead of another suit, but only if you tried to lead one.
May 28, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Michael, the more I read your comments the more I find that we have in common (I may be insulting both of us here). I fully agree - the double may be poor, but it could have worked. But the conversion is just awful.

When will players learn that a conversion of a one level takeout double for penalties should be reserved for hands that have no choice, ideally like KQJTxx in the opponent's suit and out? In a recent team match (in which Michael was one of my teammates) my partner passed a one-level takeout double holding ATxxx of trumps and a couple of cards on the side. I held a very strong hand with long diamonds - too strong to overcall. We scored up +100 cold for +1370.

I remember seeing a different partner playing in 2x in a 4-1 fit with a 7-1 break and misreading the hand to go down one (don't ask how we arrived in our 4-1 fit). I don't know what choice my opponent could have to her pass of her partner's takeout double, but even the 7 card suit was not enough to insure a set.
May 26, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I can understand calling robot tournaments “not bridge.” But similar comments can be made about matchpoints and other forms of scoring.

What is “bridge?” Money bridge scored at total points or IMPs? 64 or more board matches scored at IMPs? 7 or 8 board swiss or round-robin matches scored at IMPs converted to VPs? Board-a-match? Matchpoints? Other forms of scoring?

Being able to take advantage of the conditions of contest in robot tournaments is just another skill. Is it bridge? Sure it is bridge. It is just another variant of the game.
May 26, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Just a random point of interest. In the Diamond - Mahaffey match, which was a close match, the team with seating rights lost 6 of the 8 segments, while in the Ganzer - Fireman match, the team with seating rights won 6 and tied 1 of the 8 segments. In the Cayne - Bramley match, which was more of a runaway, 5 of the 7 played segments were won by the team with seating rights. And in the Fleisher - Gordon match, the team with seating rights won 6 and tied 1 of the 8 segments.

So, it would seem that seating rights mattered in 3 of the 4 matches, but were a detriment in one. This assumes that the teams put any thought into the exercise of their seating rights.

Not clear that there is a cause and effect relationship here, but it is interesting since some people seem to care a lot about seating rights.
May 14, 2015
Art Korth edited this comment May 14, 2015
.

Bottom Home Top