Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Richard Willey
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
> But, with the right authority and governance, I could
> certainly guide the building of such an app for a
> very low cost

I am quite sure that you could, however, you are assuming away the actual problem.

The ACBL is unable to exercise this type of function.

It lacks the ability to know who to trust with this type of authority.
It is unable to evaluate whether this type of project can be executed successfully.
It doesn't have the legal savy to be able to set up the appropriate processes.

Look at the utter and complete debacle that was ACBLScore+ (There's a series of good threads available here at Bridgewinners dating back to the RFP process and extending through the arguments over the contract, the termination of the contract, and the fingerpointing). Admittedly, this was a more complicated project than the one that you envision, but it should give you a good idea of the minefields into which one might tread.
Aug. 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The multi 2 was dreamed up 50+ years ago… And it's still too much to ask ACBL members to cope with this.

If you look at systems regulations, they pretty much focus on openings and direct over calls. I am guessing that the library of stuff that people want to play here isn't that much larger than the set of chess openings / gambits / defenses that chess players are expected to know.

FWIW, I used to do pretty well in High School chess, in part because I liked an old style of play called “Hyper modern” and invested a lot of time and effort learning this. No one ever accused me of playing unfairly because I trotted out “unsound” openings like the Danish gambit.
Aug. 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
> I do technology for a living

Well, isn't that special…

Look at the disaster that was ACBLScore Plus. The ACBL managed to piss away close to two million dollars on that one.

Look at the attempts to put a new CRM system in place… That's run into the hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Look at the attempts to move off the AS400… Thats been going on for decades…

Look at the legal geniuses who are handling issues surrounding Intellectual Property rights for the ACBL… That's good for a real laugh
Aug. 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Bharat, I very much agree that this SHOULDN'T be anything in the vicinity of a hundred thousand dollars to build. However, this presumes a level of competence that the ACBL simply doesn't possess.

The organization couldn't find its ass with both hands…
Aug. 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
While it is certainly possible to nit pick the chess / bridge analogy, the reason that people make it is that in chess, a competitor needs to invest time and effort in preparing to face various obscure, sometimes unsound, opening strategies. This is viewed as part and parcel of the game.

Somehow, in bridge, people don't believe that partnerships should need to invest time / effort to face various bidding systems.

I don't find the fact that one type of competitor is an individual whilst another type of competitor is a partnership is salient to this analogy.
Aug. 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
> First, how hard would it be to create an app that has
> a guide for all the events, starting times, floors and
> room locations for the tournaments

Judging the ACBL's past history with similar tech initiatives, I expect that the organization would end up spending hundreds of thousands of dollars and end up with unusable piece of crap

One of the problems with having an aged membership / management structure that you end up with an organization that is completely incapable of dealing with modern tech.

Look at any of the ACBL's attempts to deal with technology in recents

The never ending attempt to migrate off the AS400
The ACBLScore debacle
The CRM system
Live Score for major tournaments
The attempts to convince the ACBL that their hand generator was insecure
“Learn to Play Bridge”
“Bridge is Cool”
The ACBL's attempts to create its own online site
Aug. 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If only the internet had guides that suggested places for folks to eat there'd be no requirement for the ACBL to take on this thankless task…
Aug. 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think that you are projecting

First: In assuming that a posting that discusses systems policies in India has anything to do with the ACBL

Second: In creating a straw man around disclosure when the original posting focuses on systems regulations

Third: In presuming that individual who play unusual systems practice worse disclosure
Aug. 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
> So your opponent noticed you had made a mistake
> and instead of allowing it to be corrected they got
> you kicked out of the tournament. And you
> enjoy playing this way?

I lost a match in a single elimination tournament.
I got booted. What else is supposed to happen?

As I recall, I went and entered a D+D game that started up an hour later.

I was certainly upset, but I was mad at myself because I screwed up.
And, when you screw up and the other person doesn't, they end up winning…

If we go back to the original example, I'm not suggesting that the pair get thrown out of the event. However, they no longer have the opportunity to be the winner…

I can't fathom why you would expect that some can break the rules, either knowingly or unknowingly, and still expect that they can be declared the winner…
Aug. 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
> Big stretch to take the performance of banks to the ACBL

Perhaps, however I doubt anyone would stupid enough to waste time studying the behaviour of idiosyncratic little non profits.

And, while this survey article does not that there is evidence on both sides, it also cites a number of studies that do find a that large BoD sizes have an significant negative effect.

Wasn't your original challenge to show an example there of?
Aug. 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I appreciate that the pair in question probably wasn't trying to cheat. (If this was a case where there was evidence to suggest that they were knowingly violating the regulations I'd advocate something much more draconian).

However, if you violate the rules in a substantive fashion, you shouldn't have any expectation that you're still allowed to win the event…

Moreover, I would hope that a policy like this might encourage people to be more careful in studying the rules.

As an analogy, years back I used to compete in Starfleet Battles Tournaments at various war gaming conventions. If someone violated the rules, they forfeited the match… There was one occasion where I screwed up the Orion engine doubling rules. My opponent noticed. I was knocked of the tournament. I felt bad about this, but I was also MUCH more careful next time I used an Orion raider…
Aug. 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I believe that the 3 bid would be permissible under the Open+ Chart.

It would not be allowed at the level of the Open Chart because of

7. An Artificial opening Preempt below 3NT; except, 2NT may be used to show two known suits.
Aug. 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I am a very firm believer that the ACBL should liberalize the set of conventions that it allows to be played.

At the same time, I have absolutely no sympathy for players who are using illegal conventions. From my own perspective, the pair in question

1. Should have been removed from contention for both this session and the over alls for the event

2. The score for this board should be adjusted (As well as any other board where this convention came up)

3. The offending pair should be required to change the definition of their 2 opening to something that is legal as the level of the basic chart for the remainder of the session
Aug. 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Any thoughts?
Aug. 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Nice to see that the Director's get things right on occasion…
July 31
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
> I'm not sure it is totally mad to have a system where
> you can make more than one bid with the same hand.

Anyone who has ever psyched has a system where you can make more than one bid with the same hand
July 30
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What does it mean when you say that a hand qualifies for more than one bid?

In particular, are you randomizing in some way?
July 30
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
> our NABC's are now completely dominated by foreign
> nationals whose vastly different bidding systems and
> treatments gives them a huge advantage.

The advantage does not arise from their bidding systems, but rather from the unwillingness of US teams to prepare….
July 29
Richard Willey edited this comment July 29
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Have fun with whatever.

I've hard that the Aussie Gold Coast runs some of the best tournaments in the world. I'd also recommend the Icelandaire open (assuming that you don't need much in the way of sun)
July 29
.

Bottom Home Top