Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Nick Krnjevic
1 2 3 4 ... 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 ... 54 55 56 57
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Schwartz-Zimmermann: the English and Russian pairs will have plenty to chat about.
March 14, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The EBL and WBF championship events are “by invitation”. When a player qualifies they are extended an invitation to play.

The Credentials Committee has discretion to withdraw that invitation, without having to specify why.

B-Z were unable to play for Poland in the 2015 Bermuda Bowl in Chennai when the Credentials Committee, chaired by the same Yves Aubry, withdrew their invitation.
March 12, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
No - the IOC.

When the CAS reversed the doping conviction of 28 Russian athletes, the IOC noted that the Olympics are a “by invitation” event and declined to extend an invitation to the aforementioned Russians.

Yves Aubry pointedly notes that EBL events are also “by invitation”.
March 11, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The last paragraph of Yves Aubry's article strongly implies that the EBL will simply follow the IOC lead and decline to invite FanTunes to any EBL events.
March 11, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Congratulations Michal!
March 8, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Drury was developed by Doug Drury, who partnered Eric Murray prior to Sami Kehela's arrival on the Canadian bridge scene.

Murray played 4 card majors, and the Drury convention was invented to minimize the self-inflicted carnage that was a not infrequent consequence of his fondness for very light third-seat openings.

As Murray put it “the convention was a terrific improvement. The bidding used to go P-(P)-1S-(P)-3S-(P)-P-(X) and we would go for 1100. Now the bidding goes P-(P)-1S-(P)-2C-(P)-2S-(P)-P-(X)and we only go for -800.”
March 7, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
David - the most surprising decision was that made by your merciful better half, who left you in condition to tell the tale.
Feb. 27, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ummm….citing Reese as an authority for attacking the proposition that Reese was a cheater is akin to citing Speer as an authority for attacking the proposition that Speer was well aware of the appalling conditions that the slave-laborers who worked in his factories were exposed to.
Feb. 27, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Eric Kokish wrote/edited a number of excellent World Championship texts that combined first-rate analysis and suspense(the 1983 BB was a stand out).
Feb. 22, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
John - the deflatable dome regional occurred at Smuggler's Notch at the end of the 80s. A loud ‘bang’ came from the large fan unit at the top of the dome, and air began to leak out of the structure which gradually began to sag.

There was only one air-lock exit, so the players were a bit nervous (and then some) waiting to get out while the membrane deflated.

My partner brought a carving knife to the next day's Swiss, “just in case…”.
Feb. 6, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Gonzalo - did the lawyer's letter issued by Mr. Trape's attorneys also demand that your original post be modified or removed?

If so, I suspect Bridgewinners has received its own letter…..
Feb. 6, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Don….c'mon…you know better than that.

The German attempt to impose a stiff penalty on the Throat Specialists got crushed in the Courts.

3 years was probably the most the Italians could reasonably get without fear of procedural reversal.
Jan. 30, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ed - you hit the nail on the head.

There is a certain type of mid-round/post-mortem offender who will be quick to a) be aggrieved when reminded of the need to play the next board, and b) be accusatory if you then take time to play a difficult hand.

I'd like to think that education will improve their ability to differentiate between the two scenarios, but my personal data-set, generated from 35 years of play, suggests that this particular form of assholicism is incurable.

If you are looking for a more optimistic view, then perhaps the CAS' stats expert could be retained to present an alternative interpretation of my data-set.
Jan. 27, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Tomislav - the difficulty is that I don't think the CAS panel has the relevant experience necessary to substitute its findings of fact for those made by the NBO Panel.

The CAS clearly has its place.

Ensuring timely, uniform justice on issues that are common to national sporting federations,and in respect of which the CAS' limited pool of arbitrators have experience, ensures equal treatment of competitors from national sports federations.

Doping is an obvious example,and,thanks to WADA, the science is relatively uncontroversial.

But F-N's case shows that the CAS clearly lacks the experience necessary to sit as the court of last resort, with fact-finding powers, in respect of bridge matters.

Which is why I think the NBOs should extricate themselves from the CAS process.
Jan. 18, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
IIRC, Peter Pender was unable to secure entry visas to a number of countries in the late 8o's.
Jan. 18, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The bidding is consistent with West, who meant to bid 2S on his previous turn, having mistakenly bid 2H.
Jan. 18, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Melanie- I am saying that the contribution to legal fees awarded by the panel is a small fraction of the legal fees F-N incurred.
Jan. 18, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Melanie - the arbitration cost award is separate from the legal fee award. As the CAS notes, it has great discretion in awarding the latter:

“126. Article 864.5 of the CAS Code provides:

In the arbitral award, the Panel shall determine which party shall bear the arbitration costs or in which proportion the parties shall share them. As a general ride, the Panel has discretion to grant the prevailing party a contribution towards its legal fees and other expenses incurred in connection with the proceedings and, in particular, the costs of witnesses and interpreters. When granting such contribution, the Panel shall take into account the outcome of the proceedings, as well as the conduct and the financial resources of the parties.”

F-N were awarded a trivial sum for legal fees (considered in the context of what they spent).


The arbitration cost allocation also contains comments that are critical of F-N:

“127. In the case at hand, in view of the outcome of the arbitration and the circumstances of the case, in particular the fact that the unusual behaviour of the Players justified both the inquiry and the disciplinary procedure led by the EBL, the Panel determines that the costs of the arbitration, to be calculated by the CAS Court Office and communicated separately to the parties, shall be paid as follows: 20% of the costs by the Appellants and 80% by the Respondent.”
Jan. 18, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Barry - the Scots offer this option in criminal cases. Juries can render a verdict of “not proven” if they think the accused probably committed the crime, but the Crown didn't quite meet it's burden of proof.

The CAS panel's decision to award F-N only 2000 CHFr. in legal fees may be seen as an indication that the majority have few illusions about F-N.

Per the ruling, the CAS has great discretion when it comes to awarding legal fees. So I view the award of an amount that represents a very small fraction of the legal fees that F-N incurred as an implicit rebuke.
Jan. 18, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Agreed.
Jan. 18, 2018
1 2 3 4 ... 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 ... 54 55 56 57
.

Bottom Home Top