Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Mike Cassel
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 61 62 63 64
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
it's late and i've been up all night entertained by the match. so maybe i just am myopic but
your seven initial cases have boiled down to 2

98 QJ53
Q98 J53

You have a whiff of vacant space info that RHO started with one club and LHO with three. This is offset, however:

There's been no adverse bidding and with the high cards outstanding at both white the chances that LHO has 6 hearts is diminished.

The 6 opening lead is ostensibly third from even. if honest it's likely that the hearts are 4 on your left and 5 on your right.

If there is any restricted choice aspect isn't it that RHO might have won the first spade with the Q holding both honors.

It seems like a guess to me.
Aug. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It was never envisioned in our proposal that the event pay 4 overall places unless there was a playoff for 3/4th in an original field of 7 or 8 teams.

Original fields of 5 or 6 teams would not pay beyond 2nd overall.
Sol Weinstein told me at the NABC in Philadelphia that there was an outcry from semifinal losers at one of the early experiments, so they decided that even the small fields would pay 3/4 after the semifinal losers played off.

Purely from a promotional standpoint it is NOT unfortunate that so many small bracket KO participants may reach the overalls. This arrangement ought to be a big incentive to play in the event.

However, from a bridge logic masterpoint award perspective it's quite absurd.

My GNT team routinely reaches the 56-board final of the district finals only to lose. Without five teams in the field there is no award for second. I don't like ending up with just a tiny match award for the first day wins, but I accept that you don't get a second OA when there aren't 5 teams in the event.

Small bracket KO experiment players should “make hay while the sun shines”. I can't imagine the situation will continue indefinitely.
Aug. 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I see a number of comments that simply ignore the reality that Ben's pass of the double of 3 gave the opponents a chance to guess wrong after he competed to 4.

Does anyone have any doubt that NS will not be allowed to play 4 if North jumps there over the double, or if North tries to ‘walk the dog’ with a gentle 3 followed by a later 4?
Aug. 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If this was “just good bidding” who showed or implied heart control.

Axx
Ax
QJ
Kxxxxx
Aug. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Would 3N have asked for a 4 qbid?
Did 2 deny four hearts?
Would 3 show upper range of 1N rebid?
I would surmise that 5 is a phony cuebid holding good spades and hoping for a heart lead

Maybe 4 was the lead-inhibiting no control cuebid.
Aug. 13
Mike Cassel edited this comment Aug. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Russian hackers? :)
Aug. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The “3KO”, with 8 teams in a bracket, is not new.
We ran them regularly years ago but they were not popular then and, among our regional population, would be less so now.

The new KO formats tweaked the Bracket Size Adjustment Factor for fields with fewer than 9 teams. I do not believe there are hard rules for the first day format. We have a complete RR using a movement allowing for preduplicated boards. The top four VP teams move to the KO semifinal. Ties are broken by the result of the head to head match (We had two ties for 4/5th after day 1 during the week).

D14 was one of the districts who lobbied for the KO experiment because we did not want to go the way of eliminating 4 session KOs and replacing them with one-day bracketed events. A dramatic drop in KO table count in 2017 led to unsatisfactory one bracket, handicapped 4-session KOs.

In our May (Gopher) regional we held 3 4-session KOs. Each had two brackets. MP awards were quite healthy: 40ish in a top bracket.

The new format was a success for us. Our task is to woo the “too big for Gold Rush” “not wanting to compete against stronger player” teams to come back to our KOs. It's not a Field of Dreams “Build It and They Will Come” situation. Outreach, promotion, and cajoling might be required to recover.

An unanticipated benefit was the increase in KO table count when the field isn't cut by 1/3 or 1/2 after the first round. Teams are locked in to both sessions each day.

I could see a 3KO on the Saturday schedule because you can field 5-6 person teams that a CKO can't.
Aug. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
is it me is are the cross rank links/charts badly messed up on Monday in the U.S.
Aug. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would not count China out. They are the only team who have faced every team sitting above them.
Singapore has yet to meet any of the current top 3.
Aug. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
awesome
I played in a Swiss Pair event at a Reykjavik Bridge Festival years ago and loved the format.
Here in ACBL land you just don't see this form of competition.
I proposed a new Grass Roots National Swiss Pair event before the GNT/NAP Coordinator forum dissipated. No one knew what a Swiss Pair event was and the consensus was that this kind of event would be confusing.

the following descriptor on the league website was probably written before the availability of duplicating machines. I suspect the event could become popular if we gave it a shot.

SWISS PAIRS
The Swiss Pairs is run along the lines of a Swiss Teams. Pairs play against each other in short matches, with various methods of scoring determining the winner. As in Swiss Teams, pairs with approximately the same records are paired against each other for subsequent matches. This type of event has not proved popular and is seldom used at tournaments today.


I doubt we could get U.S. players to dress up. I also doubt that top tier players would be interested in forming teams with e.g. a pair of Gold Rush and mid-Flight pairs in a 1 day national event. But the concept seems more sound to me than the “Eight is Enough” format which has some degree of popularity and familiarity.

With adequate documentation I suspect a regional or sectional might be willing to experiment with Swiss Pairs.
Aug. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Why is it that there are no teams from Iceland in this competition? I was under the impression that, on a per capita basis, bridge is a popular pastime there.
Aug. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thank you for sharing these hands.
I'm waiting for my first entry shifting squeeze. How satisfying!
I wonder how many I've missed.
Aug. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
the perfect is the enemy of the good.
the current process is easy, timesaving, and uncomplicated.
Aug. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In a KO winning is the only thing that matters. A team that is significantly behind as they proceed deeper into the match is going to take risks which may, but are unlikely, to work. Moments? why does moment analysis matter?

The final margin of victory should have NO bearing on the allocation of masterpoints.

When 3/4 of the top 32 seeds in a NABC major KO have accomplished foreign or foreign-born players who may or may not have accumulated significant ACBL MPs seeding is going have distortions.

We aren't seeking perfect outcomes but fair contests. If bootstrap analysis can improve the brackets and there is sufficient outcry from participants that the current seeding methodology is flawed…

Otherwise, in the words of the Sioux warrior in Dances with Wolves:
Ten Bears: Quiet! You are all hurting my ears! Leave us!
Aug. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
keep these reports coming
thx
Aug. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
E.G.DirB
Aug. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I did not consider that opener might go low and risk missing a game opposite an ill-fitting 7-10hcp.

otoh, pd could have minimum values and the jump shift might lead to a minus score.

was able to add a 2 rebid
Aug. 9
Mike Cassel edited this comment Aug. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The 150% entry fee for six person squads is one of the reasons I tend no longer to stay for the last weekend at NABCs. I wonder if others vote with their feet in the same fashion.

It would be useful to see day by day table count histograms for NABCs over time.
Aug. 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The Max Double is a game try when there is no space for one.
e.g.

1 (2) 2 (3) ?
3 is competitive
X is a game try

I believe your characterization of bizarreness is an underbid and would make a wonderfully entertaining thread:
What is the most bizarre auction you've either watched or been a part of.
Aug. 6
Mike Cassel edited this comment Aug. 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This came up in an online ACBL imp game.

Don't think a straightforward bidding poll would yield the info we seek.

I think this might be a tougher problem at matchpoints. Extra credit if you address this wrinkle.
Aug. 6
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 61 62 63 64
.

Bottom Home Top