Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Richard Willey
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 173 174 175 176
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
John's figures suggest that ACBL members play comprise approximately

3 million tables of bridge at ACBL sanctioned clubs each year
1 million tables of bridge on BBO each year

If those players who play online “only” play two boards of free, unsanctioned bridge on BBO for every board they play in a sanctioned ACBL tournament than we have already hit a tipping point in which online play is more significant than the sum of all sanctioned F2F play in ACBL affiliated clubs
an hour ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@John: Thanks very much for posting these figures

@Jeff: It don't think that it is “clear” that ACBL players are not turning to online play.

I very much suspect that the number that John is reporting is “The number of tables of played in online ACBL tournaments”. This is very different than “the number of boards that ACBL members played on BBO”.

(Note that BBO has been sharply increasing the cost of ACBL tournaments. They've increased from $1.00 to $1.35 which could have a significant impact in participation in sanction tournaments, however, as I recall this increase happened this calendar year and might not be visible in these figures)

It's also possible that players are shifting to online play, but they're dying at a fast enough rate that the numbers exiting the system outweigh numbers entering the system.

BBO has access to MUCH better data than the ACBL does. It should be possible to tease apart these sorts of effects and see what going on.
2 hours ago
Richard Willey edited this comment an hour ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“Them”
13 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think that Nikos nails it. I have always seen / heard this as advancing an overcall
22 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My own take on things:

I am far more disappointed that the WBF is failing to protect the events that are going on today than that they are unwilling to re-open issues from 50 years ago.

I doubt that Avon's crusade is going to lead anywhere definitive, however, its his time and he can and should allocate it how he sees fit.
23 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I originally talked to Barry Margolin (barmar) who is a BBO employee.
June 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Forcing yourself to the three level after a 1NT overcall seems really dubious even opposite a solid opener
June 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
They are red, we are white. I'd much rather go with a penalty double of the 1NT overcall than make any kind of heart raise. I admit that I originally considered a 3 bid as a fit jump, but even here, it feels right to go for blood.
June 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Much easier just to place Ray on ignore. I did so back around the turn of the year and have never looked back…
June 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
> "If a player describes partner’s bid as showing a
> particular hand type, and then acts as if partner
> had a different hand type, that player is usually
> attempting to field a misbid (or a psyche).

But that isn't true in this case
June 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
With respect to the hand that you posted:

If we have a double fit then they have a double fit. I can see an argument for suppressing the heart fit and selling out at the three level under the presumption that 4 is going to roll home.
June 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The original on my desktop is 315K

I tested the download link and the file that I downloaded was the same as the one that I put up there.

Not sure why the web site is claiming that for a download size
June 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Travel expenses and lunches aren't normally calculated as part of an honorarium and “free plays” are a rounding error.
June 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
315K
June 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Given how few ACBL members have > 2,000 MP, I had assumed that this was a deliberate gross exaggeration…
June 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Announcements are not the same as the “set of information that one provides if asked to explain an alert”.

Announcements are codified

AND the folks playing this ARE providing too much information.
June 13
Richard Willey edited this comment June 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Even if this were true, fat lot of good that does the person sitting directly over the 1 opener.
June 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As I understand this bid, the entire purpose of the 1 opening is to clarify whether or not the partnership holds a 5 card major.

This is central to the definitely and, of course, needs to be disclosed.
June 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Under what circumstances would you open 1 with longer clubs or 1 with longer diamonds?

If the answer is that 1 and 1 convery range information if balanced, I think that you should point this out.
June 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Comment 1: This might make for a better poll than article. (It will be easier to collate the information)

Comment 2: I think that a happy medium is possible.

From my own perspective, I think the following would be a good explanation

“Artificial, says nothing about clubs, denies a 5 card major.”

Other information might be appropriate depending on what a 1 opening shows. Please note: I don't think that it is appropriate to explain the response structure as part of the initial explanation.

Comment 3: Even if the response structure is described, the responses should be alerted. (However, note my initial comments that I don't think this information should be provided)
June 13
Richard Willey edited this comment June 13
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 173 174 175 176
.

Bottom Home Top