Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Daniel Jackson
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't. I reverse the hand diagram and make South declarer. ;)
June 29, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Robots routinely do that with 2=4 or (in this case) 3=5 in the minors.
June 26, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Was this matchpoints? That seems the only reason to block the clubs.
June 26, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Freaking awesome! Thanks Carl!
June 25, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yep, depending on location I pay from $12.40 to $24 for a club game, counting tolls plus a dime per mile of car cost. Buddy's even farther away than I am.
June 19, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
$250K? That unit is not serving its members. Which unit is it?

Even $100K is completely ridiculous. It's just not needed.

We've got like $75K and that is plenty of reserve in case of an ice storm or whatever ruining our regional for a year.
June 14, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We've had games in community centers for years in Houston.

The only job worse than running a full-service bridge club for little money is running a bridge club in a community center for no money.

But Jeff Bayone is right, IMO. Just getting a piece of the first year's membership fees would be chump change.

It might be more productive to give clubs that sign up members a piece of all sanction fees paid by the new member for the first year. Say 50/50. Then after the first year, ACBL would get the sanction fees. This would encourage the clubs to keep members playing (at least for a year).

If the sanction fee for a game is a buck, if someone plays 100 sessions in a year, that would be $50 per new member. Still not much money, but an improvement.
June 13, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Mine was the same as Randy's. I was very angry about what the directors did. I spent a great deal of effort promoting the event only to have my efforts undermined.
June 7, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes, it is experimental.
June 5, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Cincinnati (see AJ Stephani's comment) is trying a hybrid KO where the first two sessions are a round robin to qualify the top four teams to a KO. This would eliminate some of the schedule uncertainty as there would be no first-round losers to worry about. Third round losers would be able to play a 3/4 match. I would not be opposed to trying this format in Houston.
June 5, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I had a fairly large role in designing the schedule for Houston. The non-pro players loved it. Most of the pro players tolerated it. Some pros boycotted it, but that is their choice.

I am not sure about 4-session KOs being “revered”. As far as I am concerned they can die in a fire. They are super inconvenient from a logistical point of view. I tried to have the three-session KOs removed as well, but we will still have one next year.

Members of this site sometimes lose track of the fact that the majority of bridge players are not life masters. In order to generate the necessary table count, we have to have a schedule that caters to the lower players.

We had a prestige event on the schedule this year and it was all but ignored by the top players. We will not make that mistake again.
June 4, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Agreed. This thread might be more accurately called “The Death of Knockouts”. The Bracketed RRs are thriving.
May 30, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't recall us allowing teams to play up in that tournament.

Timo's team had about 35K points and I believe that would have made the top bracket anyway. The top bracket was super strong, there were tons of great players stuck in the second bracket.
May 30, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That looks like a stepping-stone squeeze, but also like an endplay.
May 22, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This is pretty cool, I thought that the diamond shift broke up any squeeze.

Thanks for posting!
May 21, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Who's to say we have a heart loser? It might go on the diamonds.
May 16, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Go to MyACBL, then click Races, then Pigmented Masterpoint Races, then select your district.

Direct link may not work, but here it is:
https://web3.acbl.org/mpracescolors/?year=2018&district=9&race=CAD

I see 252 players over 6K in this list.
May 8, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The companion hand was Kxx AQJx KQJx Qx. I was not happy with the call at the table which was 5.
May 8, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You could make flight A a 10K event. There are a lot more 10K events than there are 6K events at the nationals.

Are you sure about the “hundreds of club players with more than 6K points”. I see 252 players in D9 with more than 6000 points but almost a hundred of them have more than 10K and a lot of them are pros, not club players.
May 7, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That is just the knockout phase. There were 4 Super and 5 A teams, I don't recall the exact number of B or C teams.
May 7, 2018
.

Bottom Home Top