Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Jan Martel
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 63 64 65 66
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Although the finals had only 2 operators at a time, we actually had 4 operators who had the pleasure of “working” the finals: me (it's my reward for organizing the early days of an event to be an operator in the Semi Finals and sometimes the Finals), Phillip and John Schwartz, who had been my “rocks” during the entire USBC, and Joan Paradeis, our wonderful logistics person, who also got rewarded for days of hard work by getting to watch some of the Final up close and personal. All three of them are excellent operators and I was glad to have so many available for the exciting Final.
8 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@ Nic - that almost certainly means that the Vugraph operator or players made a mistake in the claim so it had to be corrected in the movie, which wipes out the bidding and play, and then after the event Al Hollander, who does an amazing job of cleaning up LIN files so we have a more accurate report of what happened, put the bidding and play back into the LIN file but didn't change the stated declarer in the results place in the LIN. For anyone who's ever tried to work with LIN files, they're not easy to edit.
And I agree with Gary that the chance you're going to get the 4 players in a match to go over the BBO files after it's over and verify every card is somewhere between slim and none. By the way, personally I'm impressed at that 5% figure, but in the opposite way that you apparently are - being a Vugraph operator is tough - making mistakes on only 5% of the hands is impressive.
May 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Definitely! The one thing I never leave out, no matter how quickly I am trying to train someone, is that the ONLY times you can talk to the players are if they put the wrong board on the table or put a board on the table backwards and no one has removed their cards and after they claim. We never ask about a bid or play.
May 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Many thanks to Georgiana and the other Houston-ites who helped us with hospitality and Vugraph for this year's USBC. The Vugraph operators were great under sometimes trying circumstances - the hotel internet seemed to be fine and then all at once it would drop someone. We think it had a time out of some sort that thought you weren't using the internet if you weren't actively browsing websites, but we never really confirmed that.
Almost all of our operators were doing it for the first time, which is not only really hard for them but meant that I couldn't be as helpful to them as I might have been if there was only one “newbie” each session. Like Georgiana, they encountered problems I hadn't thoroughly explained in the training session and mostly dealt well with them.
I know that all of our spectators will want to join me in saying “thanks”!
May 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That's really tough, with teams dropping into USA2 all the way to the Semi-Finals. I can't think of any way to include USA2 in a Fantasy Bracket (except maybe as a tie-break). But I know that the collective minds of BridgeWinners are much smarter than I am, so maybe one of you can come up with something that would work! We have 2 years to think about it.
May 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Tie break on rr result should be in General COC. I’ll see what’s wrong with posted version tomorrow.
May 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We’ll figure something out if there is a tie.
May 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Don't feel discriminated against, Max - I didn't ask anyone. I'm just planning to tell the winners that to earn their subsidy for the Bermuda Bowl they have to do this :-).
May 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We often hear that the additional seeding points from the Round Robin don't make any difference but this year, Robinson moved up a position as a result of the extra seeding points from the Round Robin, and so did Juster.
May 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In addition to the possibility of dumping by a team that knows they have qualified, the sequestering is designed to reduce swinging by teams that are close to qualifying but know that they need a big score in the final match. Obviously, that can still happen, but our hope is that it as well as dumping will be minimized if the teams don't know their scores for the 15th and 16th matches before they play the 17th.
And here I thought you were going to ask about the “random draw - blind lineup” provisions :-)
May 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
And no one has ever paid me a penny, but I'll bet that Marty's “rule” will classify me as a pro, which is one of the reasons I agree with Christopher that the right term is something other than “pro”
May 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks, Paul - although I'm not sure why I wanted a Fantasy Bracket considering how completely hopeless I am at doing them! I did get the Vanderbilt winner of course, but still did terribly!
May 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't think the Fantasy Bracket software allows for NPCs - at least I wasn't allowed to include them in the list of players on real teams, although 3 of the teams have NPCs. But I like this idea :-).
May 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
:-). I forgot to say that the winner of the Fantasy Bracket will have their choice of an online match against the USBC winner or dinner with the USBC winner at a NABC.
May 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
They have to have both a first and last name :-)
May 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think it is clear that the pair opposing the HUM submit the defense, which becomes part of the pair playing the HUM's convention card. Only the defenders can look at the defense (although of course they have to tell the proponents what their bids mean).

I am fairly confident, although not 100%, that the intent of the ACBL rule is also to make the written defense part of the convention card of the pair playing the bid, and thus something that the defenders can consult during the bidding.
April 29
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Just to provide some insight into the numbers involved with pre-duplicated boards (I am strongly in favor of having them but do know the issues), we have 18 teams in the USBC Round Robin next week. We are having 84 board pre-duplicated and shipped before the tournament - that will get us through the first 2 and a half days. We have a dealing machine and logistics person on site to re-duplicate as the boards are used for the rest of the tournament. And that's only 18 tables, imagine the numbers for those huge Gatlinburg KOs
April 28
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Whatever you do, this will no longer be the team event you planned on - after all, you didn't play the right people for this session. But David is right that if you cross-IMP the event (I.e. do IMP pairs score) and then each team gets the sum of its N/S pair's IMPs and it's E/W pair's IMPs, that will at least be something that is reasonable, and will give everyone a score for the session, so you can move on to the rest of the event.

I have to admit that your post had me laughing out loud, and also wondering why it seems to be so easy to mess up a BAM movement and why the Bridgemates didn't catch the mistake.
April 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Vugraph operators are sort of kibitzers, plus they get input from 100s of online kibitzers. A few years ago I asked the DIC what we should do when there was an erroneous claim. I was told that in almost all situations, we should just enter the claim and then tell the director after the session.
The only exception I was given is the one posed here - if one side claims a trick that the other side has already taken, the Vugraph operator can tell the table that the claim is impossible.
April 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The thing that has most interested me about this whole discussion has been that only David B and I seem to care about bidding after auctions like 1-P-1. No one has even asked for the meaning of the 1 bid, let alone suggested what bids over it should be.
The other thing that has interested me is that everyone is responding on the assumption that this is a memorized defense and therefore simplicity is paramount. That's true when you're developing a defense to MOSCITO for WBF events, and although my defense there does include discussion of continuations and of bids after (1X)-P/DBL-(P/1X+1), it's as simple and easy to remember as I can make it. But a written defense (which ACBL recommended defenses are) is one that can be referred to at the table, so accuracy, clarity and completeness become much more important.
Obviously, David and I are vastly underpaid for developing written defenses!
April 9
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 63 64 65 66
.

Bottom Home Top