Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Mike Cassel
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 56 57 58 59
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There's no question in my mind that minimizing the number of boards in play and maximizing the number of pairs you play against is best.

The issue of playbacks, however, is one that has been mentioned as imdediments to running webs at regional pair events at NABCs. I've never seen any study re. the number of playbacks and how detrimental that is to a fair movement.

Seems like you have done some analysis on this. I'd like to know more on how the number of playbacks is generated and strategies to reduce the number
May 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I believe my favorite hand of the last two sets was Lall's Leap to 6.
There was no way Meckwell could know it was right to save.

At the other table I believe the auction was PERFECT…until Pepsi decided to double 6 instead of saving against this double-double fit.

Bd 12 http://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?bbo=y&linurl=http://www.bridgebase.com/tools/vugraph_linfetch.php?id=57220
May 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
More than worth the price of admission!
Wait… there was no price of admission.

Zounds!!
May 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
knowing about a fourth trump when you are short in hearts, as is likely to have already been inferred, may prove valuable as the auction proceeds.
May 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Always? Never
Playing in the club against more timid social players your double may end up buying the contract cheaply.
The better the vulnerability the more likely to fight for declaring. They won't double and don't like to go minus.
Against experienced more aggressive opponents you may just be asking for trouble as the opps may have competitive tools to put you at a disadvantage.
It also helps if you and partner are on the same page. What purpose is served by competing when you are outgunned and vulnerable.
May 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
How many would double at matchpoints?
May 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I guess venturing a club overcall was less adventuresome than leaping michaels? You do have 11 black cards. If your ace was in spades?

http://thecommongame.com/NitePDF/180511NiteHandRecord.pdf bd 4
May 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I was watching the 4th Q of Fireman vs. Robinson. How did Wooldridge go down in 4 on bd. 24. Was there an operator error?
May 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Georgiana
Why do you think the GNTs should be preserved?
btw I said going on 50. Do you see the Open Flight viable in 10 years? Are you aware that only a handful of districts have enough Open Flight entries in their district finals to award 4 places overall?

I think if we keep holding onto the past we might lose the future. It USED to be a prestigious event. Didn't winning the GNTs used to award seeding points?

Why can't we do a vehicle conversion and realignment to the ACBL mission?
May 11
Mike Cassel edited this comment May 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Would your choice of rebid change if the CoC was imps, not matchpoints
May 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Q98643 J A2 KQ43
K98643 J A2 KQ43
A65432 J A2 KQT3

does your bid change?
May 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
25 votes and not one opinion on what would it take to change your vote?
May 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I am not looking for a fix for D14. If you were paying attention to the OP I opined:

I believe that the OUR NATIONAL GRASS ROOTS EVENTS, THE NAPs AND GNTs, SHOULD BE AMATEUR COMPETITIONS appealing to club players.
(I have no idea how you would begin to define who is a Flight A,B, or C pro)

I don't care about viable options for D14. I care about not taking advantage of the league's SPECIAL EVENTS to take full advantage of the ACBL's mission. Your comments betray the exact myopia I've been hoping to challenge.

I never intended to get bogged down in minutiae on internet play.
I didn't bring it up. Strong club players who are not world class are disenfranchised by the reality of the Open Flight, but that, as Mamula cited, is only one of a number of difficult to tweak topics. Maybe you think that anyone who has been around long enough to accrue 6,000MPs should be forced to compete against the best… but many of them don't and won't.

He is on point below: “What is the purpose of the event? To what end is the desired outcome? How will we measure the success/failure of such a proposal? ”

Therefore, in the interest of so many who are anti-tweakers I would suggest we say sayonara to the Grand National Teams in its totality. Let's begin a new Special Event: the Grass Roots National Teams with a particular goal and focus to award and reward club players with trips to the NABCs.

There is nothing particularly sacred about the GNTs. It no longer identifies the fourth team that competes against spingold, vanderbilt, and reisinger, for the right to be a Bermuda Bowl contender. It's going on 50 years since the 25 districts sent teams to a zonal final. The league cut the event loose of financial support nearly 30 years ago.

Well over $500,000 is raised from NAP club qualifying and Grass Roots Fund games. Are we deploying these dollars to build participation in Special Events?
May 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Make all the justifications you'd like.
If the software cannot hold intervening bids until RHO has called then I have a problem. Some folks are skittish about the internet anyway and long tempo breaks are easily resolved if all bids show up at once.

I'm not talking about disconnects I'm talking about a pause that could be a tank, a break in tempo, or who knows what. Seeing all bids at once eliminates any suspicions.

Locking out access to your convention card should not be a problem.

access to an opponent's detailed convention card and notes via a text file should be accessible so you can refer to it right on your screen.

I think there were other concerns but I haven't been able to find the email correspondence with Jacki?
If it works for you that's great.
I'm surprised after 6 years they still can't program a round robin.
May 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
ty Chris

re. 1 When it take a while for someone to make a call you don't know if it is a tempo break or a bad internet. If you don't see the preceding calls until your RHO has… there can be no inferences taken or wondered about.

re. 2 Can BBO disable the link to your own convention card for a district final? A proctor for every player is quite impractical

re. 3 Long byes in a district final … ugh

re. 4 a real plus. partner doesn't know about your queries.

re. 5 If only one member of a pair is designated to respond to questions, no problem. If each opponent can be queried than all kinds of mistaken explanation/misinformation issues can arise.

We almost had a combo live & virtual district final in the open flight 6 years ago but the offsite team decided not to register.
I'm open to exploring how to do it again as our district has serious geographic challenges.

Steve,

I'd be more inclined to create a new event where Flight C pairs could be nominated/chosen on the base of interest/performance to attend a new Swiss Pair event. C players are not particularly adept at forming teams, are reluctant to face the disapproval of three teammates rather than one partner, etc.

A district's GRFds could award/reward the attendees. If qualification is deemed important then maybe use the May fund month as a selection month. Even better would be IMP scoring. Expose newer players not to team games, but pair games scored with imps. Learn the differences in the scoring. Get interested in team events.

Having a unit or district board nominate and compensate a less experienced pair to go to a NABC would be a big deal, I think, to our NLMs.
May 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The last time we had a weekend GNT final in the Twin Cities we had 11 Flight C teams. This year only 6 and three came from outstate or out of state.

This weekend's U178 Board meeting will get an earful from me re. the abandonment of Swiss Team events in local sectionals.

D14 has some unique challenges and we need some help/soul searching on structuring the district finals.
May 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Steve
the one win and done was proposed. You can imagine that cutting off GLMs from the event was not popular among the usual suspects.

There were, however, a few world class players who were approached who appreciated the idea and quietly supported it.

A few posts have mentioned online play. When I last communicated with BBO we had issues with
1. delaying presentation of bids until all three other calls have been completed
2. personal access to convention card
3. Round Robin play
4. access to detailed opponent agreements
5. misinformation issues when your opponents' responses to q's are inconsistent

some of these things may have been solved.

Even if the Open Flight was opened and more welcoming to the 2,000+ players with 6K MPs, I don't see this group contributing a lot of annual table count bumps.

Our future will be better served by more effective outreach to the bottom of those in the masterpoint pyramid.
May 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Believe it or not, Chris, this is not about me.
My team did win the trip last year in the Open Flight and we nearly beat Myers, Dunitz, et. al on Thursday

I've spent hundreds of hours thinking about and advocating for the establishment of the Grass Roots Fund, the Special Events Task Force, and new approaches to the GNTs. I certainly acknowledge a role in getting 10K events instituted and structured so that there is an incentive to play up in the NABC+ events on day 1 with a 10K to start day 2 for those who don't Q/

My decade of experience as a GNT coordinator and my study of the state of the GNTs have informed my strong opinions.
1. Flight C players who win the trip become regular NABC attendees and valued regular tournament players. That is definitely D14 history. We have Flight C winners who became Flight B winners and Flight B winners who have become Flight A winners.
2. the carve out of Flight A in 2001 messed up the top flight in the smaller populated districts.
3. the GNTs are the bastard stepchild of Special Events. The league treats the NAP club qualifying revenues as a cash cow, but does not support the GNTs at all leaving it to the districts to create their own contest conditions and travel subsidies.
4. the league chopped masterpoint awards for districts whose flight sizes are fewer than five. You can understand the logic without agreeing on the fairness/unfairness.
5. The original proposal for the Grass Roots Fund was to aggregate GNT table fees, NAP profit, and new GRFds to be used to reward districts who were doing the best to market the event and build attendance, particularly in Flight C. A best practices analysis would assist districts to employ successful strategies around the league to build the team event as a potential gateway to NABC participation.
the ACBL BOD approved the GRFd but wanted no part in the administration of Grass Roots funds and would not designate NAP club qualifying revenues in excess of the award structure and logistic costs to be designated for the promotion of Special Events.

I continue to believe that the ACBL's Special Events could be a springboard for less experienced members to become NABC regular attendees but that would require structural changes in current policy.

The stubborn resistance to changing the structure is yet one more example of how the league panders to the few at the apex of the pyramid. The Board does not want to take away a pay day from it's valuable experts.

Who gets paid when you lose a personal bet?
May 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Lack of participation in the Open Flight across the ACBL is a problem that is not isolated to Florida.

We don't need to assume facts in evidence. Many of those 2,000 players won't be attending NABCs in 10, surely 20 years. Tweaking the top bracket to encourage more attendance is only worthwhile for very few. A two-tiered top flight might breath life into the Open Flight. And if the GNTs were less broken at the top it might encourage more participation in the lower flights. That's not the point.

More players might be interested in winning a trip if the award structure in districts was split 3 ways instead of 4. I don't think it matters whether it's Queen for a Day, Wheel of Fortune, the lottery, or WSOP satellites… the allure of winning something meaningful IS a draw.

Why are we committing resources to a cohort of players who are coming to the NABCs anyway? If you scroll further down the Member masterpoint holdings you'll note that fully half of the ACBL membership has less than 200MPs. We should be finding strategies that energize this block of members into participating in grass roots events.

Maybe the next Special Event should be a 299r Swiss Pairs run horizontally as this crowd may get overwhelmed with two sessions a day.
May 8
Mike Cassel edited this comment May 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As E I doubled the 1 call?
RHO's XX of partner's 5… did that promise first round control? any control? another question?

Why am I not taking a look at the dummy with the K K=kount at the 5or 6 level
May 8
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 56 57 58 59
.

Bottom Home Top