Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Richard Willey
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
thanks
Sept. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Can you provide any addition information such as

1. Who is being replaced
2. What evidence, if any, do you have that said individual was denied a visa
Sept. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
(Hopefully this won't get flagged as political. There is a point to it)

There have been a lot of recent political studies done in the United States and Europe which have tried to identify whether different political groups view the world in a fundamentally different manner.

I've seen a lot claims that one of the biggest dividing lines has to do with the extent to which individuals embrace change. There are individuals who, by and large, like change. This can be something as simple as whether or not they enjoy going to new and different types of restaurants, where they like to go on vacation, and how they view demographic change. There are other individuals who place a high value on tradition/stability and who feel threatened when things are in flux.

Can't help but look at the debates that are occuring in this thread and/but wonder whether we're seeing the precise same dynamics in a microcosm. And, if so, whether any discussions about the technical merit of the multi 2 or how difficult it is to craft a defense actually matters. Its entirely possible that we have one group of individuals who view change (any kind of change) as fundamentally attractive. Another who don't want to shake things up. And nothing will change either of their minds.
Sept. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Not sure why anyone cares what “ACBL Members” want.

If you want to be deciding this via a poll, it would seem that “Players who compete in Open+ Events” or “Players who compete in Open Events” is the relevant set to be paying attention to.
Sept. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As I recall, the folks who actually run tournaments have ignored the ACBL Convention Charts in the past and amended them as they see fit.

I see no reason why they shouldn't continue to do so today…
Sept. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Who cares if they have? The key issue here is one of attitude.
Sept. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
> Robin Barker (EBU Deputy Chief TD) has given the answer
> above that it is indeed permitted in that jurisdiction, and it
> follows that it is not contrary to law.

And Italy bans psyches which is contrary to the law…

I'd be careful in concluding that some authority allows foo, therefore foo is legal…
Sept. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My understanding is that this is true in a teams type event. However, if you're playing pairs, you need to commit to a single set of systems for the entire session.
Sept. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I must admit, when I first saw the quote, I was wondering whether it was a Fawlty Towers reference
Sept. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Would you mind providing the name of the bridge club that you play at?

It will be interesting to see what things look like in 5 years time…
Sept. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I stopped playing any kind of serious bridge in ACBL Land because of Convention Chart idiocy…
Sept. 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Mike, you clearly don't understand the issue at hand…

It doesn't matter is multi is a great convention or a waste of a bid. Rather, a regulatory environment that bans people from experimenting with a multi or MOSCITO or whatever won't ever be able to attract younger players who want to discover for themselves whether the multi is good or not.

Not you might go around and so “What about all those geriatric ACBL members… Won't this drive them away from the game?” To which I say “Who cares. They're gonna be dead in five years anyway… Or, at the very least too old to continue playing.”

Honestly, its probably too late. The bulk of the ACBL membership is too old and too set in their ways to make the changes that the organization will need to survive. Your own attitude of “I don't care” is a perfect example of why the ACBL is circling the drain.
Sept. 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
almost certainly not
Sept. 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
> that algorithm can be translated into something that
> can be grasped by anyone who can grasp how to play bridge

Let me guess, you have discovered a truly marvelous proof of this, however, this margin is too narrow to contain it…
Sept. 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
FWIW, I have long wondered whether it would be possible to flip a lot of this on its head. (I doubt that this would be practical any time soon, but…)

Imaging a world in which disclosure consisted of providing the opponents with a corpus of hands that are consistent with bid foo. (Perhaps some metadata as well) In theory, this might be providing from either

1. A database of hands that this partnership had bid in the past
2. A dealer script or some such

Each pair would have their own “convention card”, however, rather than showing what they are playing, the convention card translate the set of hands that the opponents provide into something that this pair is comfortable understand. So, if I am a walrus and insist that he only think that I care about is HCPs, then the bi would be described using HCPs.
Sept. 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In most events, your opponent can simple note to the director that the regulations mandate that English is used for disclosure.

I suspect that you are well aware of this fact.
Sept. 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
FWIW, when I posted this specific example, I wasn't trying to claim that there is a need to disclose precise percentages or the like.

Rather, there seemed to be some disagreement about whether an entire range should be disclosed OR whether it is better to trim the tails of the distribution. I thought that providing a precise example might help people better frame the various trade offs that might be involved.
Sept. 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I actually play 2-3 ACBL tournaments a year, largely when folks from Akamai are desperate to fill out a team…

I play MOSCITO on BBO on Sundays with Atul versus BrianM
Sept. 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I very much agree that having some mechanism to collect data is critical.

I have my own preferences on how this might be done, however, in some ways I consider this to be secondary to collecting and collating data.

I find it extremely depressing that the power that be don't seem to understand the importance of this sort of issue.
Sept. 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
With respect to #2, it would only seem to be of interest either

A. Around the boundaries
B. If you are playing a mixed strategy
Sept. 4
.

Bottom Home Top