Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Oleg Rubinchik
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“The TD returned to the table and I was told that if I continued, I would receive a Zero Tolerance Penalty.”
Who called the director that time? Or he returned because of noise from that table?

If Topic Starter called the director for the third time and got the threat of ZT penalty I agree with Donald; but if director had to return due to noise or Opponents called him with complaint about inappropriate comments from person who already got decision from director, ZT is not far from the correct thing.
July 10, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I believe idea was to divide by sections unrelating to hands, I mean, different people from the same section does not have to play the same hands. It will not introduce any issues … but I am failing to see any benefits of it.
July 10, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As it is already said by Serge above, X by Gib simply shows value, not distribution. Good to guess what it holds :)

With human partner double is penalty, unless another meaning is agreed.
July 7, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
To be honest to her word “screaming” is probably an overbid on my part. It was loud bot not on the level of scream.
July 7, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I doubt gold points by itself will make serious impact on participation in absence of stratification.
People who care about gold points have to compete for masterpoints with A players.
July 7, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Seems like gold idea.
June 30, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Well, I once played in a chess tournament where organizers forgot to bring chessboards :)
June 27, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Out of curiosity, what exactly is unfair in no stratification?
June 24, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I guess I missed an ice-cold grand slam but there is no intelligent way to check it after my 3NT bid.
June 23, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Difficult choice between: pass, 4 and 1

State of the match and who are opponents would be deciding factors.
June 23, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It is true. But increasing entry fee from 0 (free BBO daylong tournaments) to $0.25 decreasing participation 9 times (from ~9000 to ~1000). Increasing entry fees to 40$ could strongly affect participation. Or not :) Will see.
June 23, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
- I don't like cats!
- You just don't know how to cook them.
June 22, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“Oleg - Are you a bot? :):)”

Good question. When I tried to pay NABC entry fee here on Bridgewinners I managed to pass “Prove you are not a robot test,” but it took me more than 5 attempts. :)
Sorry for off-top
June 22, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Hi Sorina,
I believe you need to find that tournament in the list of tournaments and manually click “Play” button again. After it will resume playing for you.
June 22, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't think many way tie for the first place is very probable.
Here is a link to the result of free practicing BBO game by the same rules: http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDARD:316a81e5.563f.11e7.b134.0cc47a39aeb4-1498021507
9616 participants, only 8 boards but the first tie is for place 36.

Here are results of another practicing tournament. http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDARD:e139f056.563f.11e7.b134.0cc47a39aeb4-1498021801
That one was paid, 0.25USD, so only 1107 participants. The first tie is for place 33, but it was 3-way tie.
June 22, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Don't worry, Randy. If you win your title will be as gold as ACBL gold points and you will be able to use it the same way.
Sorry, just kidding.
June 22, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“There's nothing unusual about convicted villains being active in Italy”.
Have they ever been convicted?
If I am not mistaken, the first time they were amnestied before they appeal was processed; and the second time they were uninvited without accusations.
June 21, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“few of the commenters” seems like an overbid to me. I did not find a single poster in the old thread who had any information about the reason of withdrawal of the invitation to play in 2016.
Some people were trying to explain it by recalling the much older incident, but (as far as I understand) it was just unconfirmed guesswork.
June 21, 2017
Oleg Rubinchik edited this comment June 21, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Hi Yehudit,
Just to clarify. Complaints about “not real bridge" could have two faces. One (social) kind of complains are about weak level of game, randomness of results, distractions and any other circumstances that not referred by bridge law but decrease our enjoyment from the game. You covered it.

***

Unfortunately, there is another kind are complaints, (formal complaints) about conditions that may not even negatively affect our enjoyment and fairness of competition but directly contradict the written rules of the game. For people who get used to respect rules it cannot be mitigated by any logic and comparisons.

If rules of some competition contradict to any rule written in bridge law book that competition is not bridge competition. That is good game, funny game, fair game, I like to participate in it … but it is not bridge. Simple as is. Is it important? I guess not for majority of players. But it is really important for minority.

***

And it is exactly the source of the second complaint. Nothing to do with strength of the field or pointlessness of titles. All other ACBL titles for limited events were given for winning in bridge. As far as I know for winning in bridge related but non-bridge events, like par contest, separated awards were given.

***

There is another kind of complaint related to that tournament, but not to the quality of the tournament. Formal again, but important by my opinion. ACBL has a procedure how to establish new national tournaments. That procedure clearly was not followed in that case. Breaking own process is not a good think, even if it done from best intentions.

***

I agree with your other points. This tournament maybe not perfect in terms of format, but it is about as good as we can get now and I would be happy to play there.
June 21, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Very unlikely or not, but I can remember 2 cases I end up as a declarer in 3 contracts when I thought 2NT was Lebenzohl, but my different not-regular partners had another opinion. Both accidents happened during on-line games. (No benefits from alerts were possible). Both partners had between 5000 and 7500 masterpoints, so I would expect them to be peers of the player in question.
June 20, 2017
.

Bottom Home Top