Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Eric Sieg
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Responding to “Money Bridge”:

Winning money is definitely something that motivates people to try. They also seem to remember the times they won money and forget the cost to play or all the times they competed and didn't win. I've certainly seen people rush to play Magic the Gathering or Poker even with a very negative EV for their skill level and it'd be great of Bridge could tap this same tendency. However, it seems like the key challenge is structuring it in a way that the average person feels like they could win “something”. Can it be structured as an amateur event in some way?

Most other events that have money awards have a MUCH easier learning curve then Bridge. I started playing MTG and won 800 bucks after playing 1-2x a week for 1.5 months. At that point in bridge I could barely follow suit. Poker is simple enough that people always feel like they have a shot. Throw the average newish bridge player into any sort of open money event and they are going to do nothing but lose for 2-3 years. Solving that challenge seems.. interesting.
Sept. 27, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Responding to the “Strength-Based Ratings” Idea:

Instead of reinventing the wheel, why not work with what's already been done and expand on it? It already exists in some form here: http://www.coloradospringsbridge.com/PR_FILES/PR.HTM

There are obviously some issues. However, a lot of work has already been done on this and bring ACBL resources to bear to improve the existing solution seems like a much better approach than trying to reinvent the wheel.
Sept. 27, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Responding specifically to the “Redistribute Tournament Activity” idea:

It seems like a big focus is doing away with sectionals and running more STACs. That seems unfortunate, local sectionals are one thing that IS popular with local players. Conversely, STACs are not. Of the 4 D19 STACs run in 2017, only 1 had any relevant participation from the bigger Seattle clubs and even that STAC was ignored by several other clubs due to player complaints about STACs and requests that the club not participate. Perhaps the first step to any tournament reorg should be a look at STACs and similar events on how to make it more appealing to players such that it is something that excites players rather than something they dread. Specific issues I've heard: the scoring system unfairly rewards small games (fixable by taking a common game approach and comparing by board) and the entry fees are too high for the reward.
Sept. 27, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Looking through KO results on ACBL Live, an unsurprising pattern results:

1) In all brackets except bracket 1, almost no team ever has more than 4. I didn't see a single example in the 20ish events I checked although its likely that some exist.

2) In bracket 1, the vast majority of the teams larger than 4 seem to be made up of people who are very good and are getting paid money to play with 1-2 people who are not as good.

People talk about declining KO attendance. Surely this must be a factor as well. A few years ago KOs paid so well that it didn't matter, but now its easy for your average “decent but not rockstar” player to feel like pairs might be a better use of their time. Now people who have a vested interest in seeing Swiss pay out in the same way are arguing here for this same rule change to Swiss events.

While Peg makes a good point, looking at names and events it seems like her example is a tiny minority.

Would love to see more interesting events that Gavin mentioned. A Swiss into a knockout or a 3 day knockout or just some “different” events would be great. I'm not even sure he's wrong on the Swiss attendance impact, but it does seem the two people arguing the hardest for it here would financially benefit if the rule was changed.
Sept. 27, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This is a pretty poor 15 count, bidding just because you technically have 15 HCP seems to skip the hand evaluation step. 4333 with poor spots, partner passed but LHO not, red, seems like an easy pass.
Sept. 26, 2017
Eric Sieg edited this comment Sept. 26, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Correct, East's opening was natural. The relevance for strong club was knowing that N is cannot have 11 HCP or a “good” 10.
Sept. 26, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Sure, but if multi is an option then 2 showing 3 suiter with short diamonds is a possibility. I haven't played it so no clue what shortcomings there are other than not being able to correct 2 to 2 if 4315 (which isn't always right)
Sept. 22, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
To Don's thought experiment: Heck yeah it would be nice to see multi even if I wasn't allowed to play it. It'd be nice if multi were legal so I could have more experience playing against it. While its fine to play Tuesday night as Brian mentioned, the reality is that no one does. I would assume most don't for the same reason that I haven't bothered: why practice something that we'll essentially never get to use?

That said, the new CC charts don't seem like an appropriate time to fight the multi battle. Why risk derailing a hugely positive change?
Sept. 22, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Interesting idea :) I'm in the crowd of preferring 1 to be negative, but blocking the 1 lead directing bids on good 4 card suits seems fun. 1 is already a transfer to spades in many systems, so you are basically just swapping 1 and 1. It seems like 1 is way more frequent and needs the follow up space more so it'd be hard to convince me to switch, but might be fun to try someday just to switch things up.
Sept. 21, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This seems like it should be an ATB for how EW isn't defending 2 X'd, which seems to pretty clearly lie with east.
Sept. 21, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Sounds great, eager to see this go live. My one comment at this point that leaps out at me is I wish it was organized to make it easier to tell the differences between Open and Open+. Perhaps mark things differently or include a separate summary table or something along those lines.
Sept. 19, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What is a jackpot game?
Sept. 19, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yeah, we run the extended team game as well. Its been pretty popular, although for whatever reason - the top bracket tends to go a lot smoother and people have more fun. We have a lot more trouble getting teams in the lower bracket(s) to continue to be interested and sign up and enjoy themselves and haven't completely cracked that nut yet.
Sept. 19, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
One thing I was curious about was something like the following:

1) Monthly unit game spread out to existing club games. Allow a club game to be run as a unit game which (I believe) is extra MP for limited extra costs? No clue on rules etc, this is just a brainstorm idea currently
2) Track Attendance and performance across all of these games, have awards (probably free play? maybe a tiny medallion?) for people who do well in various strats, attend all the games, etc.
3) Have a unit game “championship” type event 1-2 times a year that is run at a separate time from the clubs. Free entry to those who meet certain qualifications in the normal unit game part of things.
4) Maybe some sort of “home club” concept where people who do well in the championship earn a trophy or something else for their home club? Perhaps driven by body count rather than just winners? Not sure at this point what club owners would actually want, so would tailor it to feedback.

No clue if this is a good idea, just throwing it out for feedback. Some sort of “league” to encourage people to play across clubs seems like it might help drive attendance to the clubs. A big goal is to find ways to help the clubs and create a more collaborative relationship between the unit and the clubs.
Sept. 19, 2017
Eric Sieg edited this comment Sept. 19, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
X by E would be takeout, so either a penalty pass of diamonds or a hand that isn't eager to act opposite a hand that's shown 0-4 HCP
Sept. 13, 2017
Eric Sieg edited this comment Sept. 13, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Depends massively on club game, so I'll answer for the one I play at the most which is pretty strong and aggressive: I bid grand if it feels likely to be there. My usual bar is “good chance, and at worse its on a finesse” if I'm unable to count the tricks exactly. That club is unusual though, getting to 6 is no guarantee of a good board.

At other club games I might try be a bit more conservative just because a slam is already a good board so a grand has minimal upside with a huge downside.
Sept. 13, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@Jan - for me personally, failing to qualify and then spending 1 day doing regional events seems totally reasonable. Its the failing to qualify and looking at 2+ days that seems unnecessary.

The hole created by the Silver Ribbon seems especially unfortunate for those with jobs since it overlaps the weekend.
Sept. 12, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yeah, creating a bunch of new national events is the suggestion of one person in the comments - not the suggestion or point I'm personally trying to make here :)
Sept. 12, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm not sure its really the same set of players available when lots of people skip regional events. I don't typically see as many international players in regional events since they don't care about masterpoints. Likewise, many people seem to skip regional events to go see the city or relax etc to get ready for events they care about. That's fine for 1 day, but gets a bit more problematic when there are multiple days. There already are frequently AX pairs available on off days, but I think many see that as a poor substitute especially if you hit a stretch that involves multiple days of regional events.
Sept. 12, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks for the links Jan, I was looking for the schedule a few days ago and wasn't able to find it.
Sept. 11, 2017
.

Bottom Home Top