Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Peter Hasenson
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Without wishing to appear harsh, I vote for Guadeloupe - to finish last!
Sept. 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
More, please
Sept. 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Robb: we will have no wrist cutting, thank you. Unless you are a member of the collusive cheating club - in which case you have my blessing!
Aug. 30
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Assistant to whom?
Aug. 29
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Because I am addicted!
Aug. 29
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Congratulations to Alex on winning, to Gitte on being the leading lady and to Jason et al for organising.
Aug. 29
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This is just one more example of poorly drafted regulations.

It seems to me that only those people who sit on such committees really understand all the regulations
Aug. 27
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Tom: H&IOW converted into a charity so that they could accept the c. £500k from the sale of the club premises. They got the money from the sale a few years ago and want to build a new club somewhere but have so far failed to find a suitable site but I understand they haven't given up!
Aug. 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I believe WG gave like $1mm to us jnr bridge a while ago. Good for him but I rather agree with JL that it becomes boring each and every time money is needed for this or that bridge endeavour then WG is pronounced the potential saviour when there are many, many others who are more into bridge and could also easily afford the necessary cash but do not splash it.
Aug. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Small table events, most particularly ones with mixed ability and/or a small number of boards, are rather random no matter the scoring method!
Aug. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@Richard. Of course the Trials were a major event. They were also by invitation only, lasted four days and had the highest ave NGS rating of any EBU event ever!

PS Probably best I don't mention the composition of the 10 pairs and the ones left out!

The Ranked Masters is open to all but very few compete these days. I also am not a fan of IMPing such a short and small event as one or two wild swings can have too great an influence on the result in what is quite a random field.

The Lady Milne final trial was indeed four tables but as the name suggests it was the final trial and had a qualifying event so not like for like.

My main point was that an open to all event that attracts so few entrants can hardly be called major and I am sure you will agree with me. Oh for the days when the RM was sold out weeks in advance :)
Aug. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't call a 5 or 10 table event a major one but if you do, then so be it
Aug. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
And sold for a song. And only ‘friends’ of the powers that be were allowed a look in. Quite a distasteful episode all round IMO
Aug. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I wonder if it is any coincidence that both the ACBL and WBF have some 25 people on their EXCO!?
Aug. 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Indeed it does
Aug. 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@Ed: There is a TV quiz show in UK called ‘University Challenge’ and the presenter asks a question to the two teams stating, “your starter for ten” followed by the question. Teams may not consult at this point. Once they get a question right, they get three follow up questions, sometimes related to the starter, sometimes not, where they can confer and each is worth five points.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b006t6l0
Aug. 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As a starter for ten, the L&E should be split into two committees - one dealing with regulations and one with violations. The skill sets are vastly different and should be treated as such. I did suggest this to the EBU Chairman a number of months ago and he broadly agreed but stated he would not be dealing with such a change in this his last year as chairman but suggested it was something for his successor to implement.

The regulations committee should meet once a year in person and pass as many emails between themselves as they wish the rest of the time.

The violations committee should be wholely independent of the regulations committee and the BoD and should meet only as necessary and strive to deal with matters by email wherever possible.

Failing that, the L&E should, as Keith Stanley once so memorably remarked, “Meet once a year. And if that doesn't work, once every two years.”
Aug. 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
All WBF events use screens and self alerts. A far better system IMO
Aug. 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Nevermind altering, I fail to understand why there isn't an automatic fine of some sort when a partnership gives different explanations of a particular call.
Aug. 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
And the Chinese regime is one that several bridge players would rather not support with their presence. Just saying…
Aug. 15
Peter Hasenson edited this comment Aug. 15
.

Bottom Home Top