Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Jonathan Steinberg
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm playing here at the Richmond Memorial Day Regional. Great people, great hospitality. Awful KO tournament schedule.

A major part of the problem, IMHO, is lack of guidance from Horn Lake to Tournament Chairs. So the schedule becomes a free for all.

ACBL TD's are working every week at Regionals. They know what works and what doesn't. Do they work with management and Tournament Chairs. Hard to know.

Small Regionals (say less than 2000 tables) should NOT have new KO's starting every day… every second day. In between run some sort of team game be it Swiss, Bracketed Swiss or Compact KO (pros hate that one).

Soloway style two day KOs were designed for Bracket One ONLY when the numbers did not allow for a real KO. Having this format for all brackets IMHO is not what most players want.
May 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What happened to the Appeals from the Vanderbilt matches? did I miss them?
May 22
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That was the number one complaint… having to take a cab to get to restaurants. There were not enough to service the bridge crowd
May 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Birmingham should never have been approved for an NABC. Not because of the hotel but because of the lack of restaurants. That was the number one complaint.
May 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You have more room over 2H doubled. 2S is the weakest response. Relay and 3S is Invitational, direct jump to 3S is Forcing (5+). Jump to 4S would probably be a 6 bagger, no slam interest.
May 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Sorry, no! Leaping Michaels is a direct 2M-4x. No double. My mistake.
May 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Your exact agreements are not the issue. The issue is that you have agreements and know what they are. An expert highly paid professional pair should have agreements and system notes to back them up. That said, South, a high level expert player, has to “play bridge”. Trying to win in Committee after mis defending is far too prevalent in high level, high stakes bridge. Bad for the ACBL. Bad for the game. A pox on all of them ;)! Table result stands.

FWIW, my tournament partners and I play (after weak 2 doubled)
Direct jump to 3NT == To play No 4+ OM, stopper(s)
Direct jump to 4M == To play (5+M)
Relay and 3NT == 4 cards in OM and a stopper
Relay and cue bid == 4 cards in OM, no stopper
Direct cue bid == GF, no stopper, no 4 card M
Leaping Michaels at the 4 level
May 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I couldn't agree more. At the highest levels should it not be mandatory to have written system notes which must be made available if there is a dispute?

I have played against professional players who are in the Top 10 of the Barry Crane Top 500 on a regular basis (and are likely in the Top 10 among total sessions of tournament bridge played) and yet I frequently am told “we have no agreement”. Amazingly (or not) they defend and/or bid on these hands as if they know exactly what their partner has (“just bridge”).

No one is paying me (nor am I paying) $100,000+ to win National titles and World Championships but I do have 52 pages (more in larger type; less in smaller type) of basic system notes. Page 38 “Lebensohl in Non-NT Auctions” “Over their Weak Two Openings” covers this auction in depth. How often it does or does not arise is irrelevant; every professional pair has discussed it.

As for the “damaged” appealing side, I believe that players at the highest level have an obligation to ask the right questions and protect themselves. Far too many look for any opportunity (often only recognizable to the “expert” mind) to seek redress from Committees. See Blue Ribbon Pairs, Platinum Pairs, Vanderbilt matches, DONN vs FLEISHER 2019 USBF Team Trials. The high priced teams who are experts at lawyering have huge advantages.

So much money exchanging hands, full-time professional bridge players, yet “We have no agreement” and no system notes! WOW!
May 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Before the ACBL wisely changed the Appeals system at its NABCs (removing players from committees and replacing them with TDs), there were always FIVE players on a committee. What I found interesting was the the USBF Team Trials Appeals Committee was comprised of just THREE players. Is that normal for the USBF Trials? Just 3 person Appeals Committees?
May 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Far, far too many events are won in the committee room. Most recently there was the Joe Grue/Bobby Levin appeal that won the Blue Ribbon Pairs. Curtis Cheek & Zia appeal that won the Platinum Pairs. The Vanderbilt Coren VS Rosenthal appeals that decided the match.

It may well be the “nature of the beast” but I don't have to like it. Nor does it improve the image of bridge in the eyes of the world.
May 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Bonjour Patrick. The USBF web site is exceptionally good with accurate, timely results, easy to see who the team players are, a class act all around.

But nothing is perfect especially late at night with so much going on. I'm pretty sure that when people wake up this morning after a long night of appeals, the incorrect scores in the Kranyak VS Kriegel match will be corrected.

Kriegel is playing Fleisher in today's semi-final matches.
May 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
One thing is certain. Whatever the ruling(s) will be, there will be players who will be 100% adamant that it was CLEARLY wrong or CLEARLY correct.
May 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That's what happened in Hawaii. Not a winning formula.
May 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The ACBL web site has Planet Hollywood for $112 plus $37 resort fee = $149. Only a $4 difference.

The Cosmopolitan for $159 (includes Resort Fee) is better value. A 5 star luxury hotel. And it is now available on the ACBL web site for every night (as of May 15, 8 PM EDT). As is usually the case, there were multiple cancellations today – the last day to cancel and not lose your 1st night deposit.

Which is exactly why the ACBL instituted the non refundable deposit policy. Two months out, rooms can still be sold. One week out, the ACBL is left having to pay penalties for not filling its room block!
May 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes, in fact I think the last two SF NABCs were at this location
May 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As did I. The Las Vegas Cosmopolitan is under the Marriott Bonvoy brand – part of their Autograph Collection. This is a great opportunity for players who couldn't get the host hotel in Vegas. It is now available.

While many players have complained about the ACBL charging a non refundable first night deposit 60 days or so prior to the start of the NABC, this is a perfect example of why they do it.

Just prior to the Toronto NABC, there were 500+ room cancellations about a week before the NABC started. The ACBL had to pay thousands for not filling their room block!

That was the major reason then CEO Bahar Gidwani instituted the new policy. Two months prior, gives the ACBL lots of time to sell the rooms that were cancelled. One week does not.
May 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Very true and for the rich and wealthy (the only people who can afford to attend NABCs), it is a “great” deal. But going forward, all I see is declining attendance numbers.
May 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
4:20 PM EDT. The On Peak online rate has been corrected to $165 from $169. Showing availability from Nov 28 until the end. No availability on Nov. 26 or 27. But if you call On Peak, they probably do have rooms available (as they did this morning when I got the 27th even though online said sold out).

The ACBL and it's housing bureau are not a model of efficiency. The real question is: Why do we need On Peak? Why not speak directly to Marriott?
May 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I received a note from the ACBL Executive Director, Joe Jones thanking me for pointing this out. The correct rate IS $165. I also received a correction from On PEAK showing the $5 nightly reduction from $169 to $165.

It is probably best if the ACBL would proof read and confirm that both On Peak and the ACBL are on the same page before opening reservations online!
May 15
Jonathan Steinberg edited this comment May 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
.

Bottom Home Top