Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Kyle Rockoff
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Not a fan of the changes to 1NT openings in general with the new chart, though i know they’re trying to make it reasonable for the average player. RIP 3rd seat 8-15 1NT.
March 24, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It's 100% general chart and a fairly common conventional treatment of 2: http://www.bridgeguys.com/MGlossary/MexicanTwoDiamonds.html.

Any ACBL club director (including myself) can verify.
March 18, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
http://web2.acbl.org/documentLibrary/play/Convention-Chart.pdf

Strong is loosely defined as 15+ HCPs.
March 18, 2018
Kyle Rockoff edited this comment March 18, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Update:

We're still looking! Now potentially looking for teammates for a 1-2 day KO Mon-Weds as well. We're driving down to the tournament, and may just arrive for only the evening session Monday, so if you're interested in the 10K KO please PM us no later than afternoon-ish/early evening Sunday.
March 10, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm thinking big ideas that have a focus on young people are:

-Promote online bridge, not only for the sake of “young people like things online” but really try to reach the level of quality popular in similar online video gaming communities (e.g. League of Legends, Steam communities, etc)

-Money Bridge, more prize money in general–(I understand the desire to protect the intellectual integrity bridge, and the culture of the game. But this is standard in Chess, Bowling, online video game communities, and other competitive physical and mind sports.)

-Promote a afterschool K12 base, like many chess programs across country. I think is most important. As great as the focus is on College bridge this year, I believe the area to build a strong base community should probably be in middle and high schools. By college it's too late. Many people have already found the activities they enjoy. The earlier we can get people into bridge, the better. I think studying the difference in ACBL membership retention rate of people who started before college and after college is an important question to study, that may help bring insight on “where” the <30 focus should be.

-Innovate the rating system, create something on par with ELO for bridge. Masterpoints just aren't interesting to young players who have a lifetime of playing. Is a serious young player supposed to become a life master in 3-8 years and then stop? There is also the serious problem that many bridge-young players face, of feeling their skill level is not adequately assessed by their masterpoints. An ELO-similar system provides a more active means for younger players (as well as all other players) of measuring their personal growth, to push themselves, and to be recognized by others for their ability.

-Develop a task force in order to improve teaching methods for younger players. Teaching at the college level, I have found there is certainly a need to approach teaching younger players differently than the retiree crowd. The ACBL Bridge Series books are great at teaching rules, but not as great at teaching bridge thinking. While I think rules and cheat sheets and things of that nature are great for teaching retirees getting into bridge, I think younger people could benefit from a program that focus less on that and more on developing their bridge intuition. I think young people enjoy bridge more when they see bridge as less “a game of endless rules”, but more as a “game of endless puzzles”.

These are some of the things I'd like to be seeing more of. Sorry if this is off-topic (I think I may also post this in the Board of Governor and/or Youth Education form, where it probably belongs). I know you've been a great advocate of education topics like this on the Educational Foundation board in the past. Looking forward to continued progress by the ACBL!
March 1, 2018
Kyle Rockoff edited this comment March 1, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Hi Jay,

1) As mentioned above, lots of great work is being done by the Education foundation this year to promote college bridge (thanks to Stephanie Threlkald and others working on the college program for all the work that's been done so far). What do you think are the three biggest things the ACBL could be working on, that currently isn't being worked on, to promote bridge to the <30 demographic?

2) As someone deeply involved with bridge on the college level, I can say there is always continuous frustration on how to reach out to my peers. Some complain learning the basics is too complicated. Others complain they don't have the time to go and play regular live bridge. But the biggest problem is the majority of people <30 don't even have an idea what bridge is! What aspects of bridge are the best pitch to the college-aged student?

(Live clubs and tournaments? Online play like on BBO? Declarer play puzzles? Learning Bidding? System development? Learning Defense?)


I just want to point out how important it is to promote the continued recruitment of young people. This recent December I had the great experience of playing at the JUSBCs (thanks also to the way-to-long-list-of-amazing-people who help put together that event). But one big issue was that the tournament's attendance was <90 people (that's less than one pair of young-players per state). The past two youth NABCs haven't had more than 250. For this weekend's College online bridge qualifier, there aren't more than 20 teams, 80ish players, registered (And it's only that high because a few colleges with good programs have done great work in getting more than one team to sign up).

Where are all the young players?

Bridge is a great game, and I don't want to discount power of Baby Boomers in also promoting the game (as you replied to Dave Caprera), but I also don't want to be the only player left in 40 years when I retire. Let's keep the game going!
March 1, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
fixed
Feb. 26, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Did West hesitate before playing the Ace at trick 1 (even if it wasn't a long hesitation), or just once before trick 2? If west hesitated twice (once to decide what diamond to play at trick one, once to decide what to switch two at trick 2), I think it might be reasonable to rule East's partner had UI (though I'm certainly not enough of an expert to rule either way). If east played the Ace of diamonds quickly at trick one, I think it's hard to say UI was given, as East could clearly be just thinking about a plan for the whole hand. If west hesitated twice, west already has some UI from the first hesitation that east potentially already had a choice at trick 1 for what card to play, therefore might infer from the long hesitation at trick 2 that East potentially had a suit switch for trick 2, but thought against it upon seeing the continuation.
Feb. 26, 2018
Kyle Rockoff edited this comment Feb. 26, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Currently reading Woosley's Matchpoints and finding it amazing! I also like Mel Colchimiro's book, How you can play like an Expert, rather a lot– he has a lot of “rules” but it's really more about how to think about hand evaluation during bidding. Watson is a must read (if rather dry). The few Lawrence stuff I've read (Reading opps cards, Card combinations) I also enjoy. Still need to finish Clyde Love's Bridge Squeeze Complete, but I think I like it just as much as Matchpoints and Colchimiro's book so far.

But, as I said in a comment above, the book that introduced me to bridge, Louis Sachar's “The Card Turner”, probably belongs at the top of the list!
Feb. 21, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The Cardturner is how I found bridge. If we're considering that a bridge book, I don't think I can rate anything else higher!
Feb. 21, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Good catch, can't edit the problem anymore (After 3, should be abstain 7). I think the consensus is opening 2 is a distortion, and the hand is worth a slam try, so guess it's not that big a deal.
Feb. 16, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I like ideas 1) and 2) a lot actually. Also think some sort of Elo or recognized/improved version of the power-ratings (http://www.coloradospringsbridge.com/PR_FILES/PR.HTM) would be good too. Honestly any one of these would be a good start to improving the system.
Feb. 16, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm for 4. Has to be a cuebid– with a real suit and a misfit you'd bid 3NT at this point. Partner with a useful Ace and not that much wastage in s should be able to bypass 4s.
Feb. 6, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
15-17
Feb. 5, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yeah. 2 may be an appropriate underbid if your points were actually in the heart suit, but it's not. Your tricks could easily be coming from a 5+ card minor in partner's hand. Don't want to end up in a yucky 5-2 heart split with no spots when 3m might easily be a stronger contract.

I think X's an interesting choice– is the plan to pass a non-heart rebid by partner and hope partner has a 5 card minor and isn't 4-3-3-3 or 4-4-3-2 or 4-4-4-1 (singleton heart)?
Feb. 5, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
After bidding 1NT, and a 2 transfer, I'd jump to 4. Highly likely the K of s is onside so game feels better than 38% across most minimums (anything from Axxxx of hearts and a bust, any hand with a singleton spade, any hand with a King 5 small hearts could make game– heck even Qxx of a minor and nothing else has play to pitch a loser in the other minor, presuming you can limit trump losers to 1).

If EW wasn't vul I think just accepting the transfer (or super accepting) would be fine too.
Feb. 4, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It doesn't particularly matter (I was playing this with GIB bots– I think they tend to conserve room and either cuebid or bid 3 with a serious slam try, and just jump to 4 with a mild?)

Was more interested when I posted this about early hand evaluation, than continuing methods later in the auction (if there is a later).
Feb. 1, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
South only has a 17 count. Partner limits his hand by giving weak preference to diamonds over 2 at his second bid. South makes a NF game INVITE (reasonable-ish, but a lie with only 3 spades instead of the usual 4, but south has a good hand). North accepts and cuebids for cooperation, with a 5th spade, and a control (not necessary but I can't see anything wrong with it since north has already limited his hand so much).



South bids slam? 1) you could be in a 7 card fit. 2) partner's limited to about 10 HCPs. 3) Whatever cross ruff you see for slam, clearly you already got to a difficult game that everyone may not reach. How much more equity are you really gaining but plunging off the cliff here?
Jan. 30, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
No Alert, so presumably natural unless there is mis-information occuring.
Jan. 29, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In one of my regular partnerships I play a 4NT opening as a specific Ace ask— I think I finally found a time to use it :) (lol it’s never come up ever).

In standard though there are basically zero methods here. I mean you’re two tricks off game and basically just need to bid exclusion backwood for diamonds. Opening 1 can’t particularly hurt I guess— you can always jump to 6s at anytime when you’ve heard enough.
Jan. 29, 2018
.

Bottom Home Top