Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Robb Gordon
1 2 3 4 ... 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 ... 34 35 36 37
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This is a highly complex issue. This thread is filled with value judgments but I think some facts are in order -

1. Structure - The WBF is an association of associations. Strictly speaking, there are no individual “members” of the WBF. The WBF divides the world into 8 zones, each with their own governance. Those zones then are generally comprised of NBO's - national bridge organizations. We Americans are in Zone 2, which is ACBL, and our NBO is the USBF. Zone 2 also includes (as part of the ACBL) Canada, Mexico, and Bermuda.

2. Regulation. Bridge is governed by 3 sets of regulations. The supreme regulation is the Laws of Duplicate Bridge. Historically the Laws have been a collaboration between the WBF and ACBL. Before WBF it was the British Bridge League and European Bridge Union and ACBL.

There came a point, (either 1975 or 1987) where the parties could not agree on some specifics and agreed to disagree. If you look at pages 136-137 you will see a list of “elections” by the ACBL Board. These are permitted to a Zone under WBF rules and the Laws. Actually the most famous election was made by the WBF. The Laws allow “no spades partner?” by revoker's partner. WBF elects not to allow this.

The next to sets are Conditions of Contest and the Convention Chart which is arguably part of the C of C. These vary substantially in different regions of the world and the WBF.

Next I will share my opinion about this issue which is worth about as little as everybody else's!

PS - I was just told that Bermuda was moved to Zone 5 - weird since the ACBL still has a Bermuda Regional!
April 30, 2015
Robb Gordon edited this comment April 30, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Of course I should have remembered this. It is scary to read this in light of the title to your original post. Perhaps COI needs to be revived. Thank you.
April 25, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What happened to the COI?
April 25, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The percentage thing is more like a traveling score. We have it turned off in Sedona because of DOG. (Delay of Game)
April 14, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
<comment deleted>
March 28, 2015
Robb Gordon edited this comment March 28, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
2 would be the same hand with 6 spades. It would be the same hand with 6 spades and no club queen. This is a clear 3S bid IMO.
March 28, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ed, it appears that you didn't get the whole story about the financials. There was an additional write-off of about $1.7MM in a pension restructure that they described as routine when it was anything but routine. The ACBL net assets at the end of 2013 were $7,773,273. At the end of 2014 they were $3,663,638. This is not a typo. Do you buy “desperately” now?
March 28, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We can agree that online ACBL events are different, perhaps inferior in skill to various open “live” games. So what? We can agree about that with many live events that pay masterpoints. Using ACBL masterpoints generates sanction fees which the ACBL desperately needs right now. But make no mistake - online bridge will do fine in any case. What will suffer if these masterpoints lose all “value” by being segregated is live bridge and ACBL membership in North America. Play in a BBO robot game or an ACBL robot game? 25 cents versus $1. If the latter has no more value than the former guess which games will lose.
March 28, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I actually voted against this in NO but there was a legitimate reason for making the motion. The proponents of the motion believe the BOD implemented it BUT either at the board level or at the management level (or both) it was not implemented in the way they desired and believed the motion directed.
March 26, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I have a “market” order.
March 23, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Henry when we were kids, we walked barefoot to our bridge tournaments in the snow - uphill both ways. There was generally only one National championship contested at a time (except for Men's and Women's). This is a brave (not so) new world where you get to pick your championship event. Like with regional events I expect the calendar to continue to expand until everybody can win their own NABC. But none of this takes away from Bobby and Stevie who must be without question the dominant entry in any pairs event.
March 21, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think those who believe the ACBL will reject this idea in the interest of maximizing revenue are mistaken. First of all, all one has to do is miss one deadline and it won't happen again. Second, if a pair is shut out will they go home? Or more likely will they buy a last minute entry to a secondary event where advance purchase isn't needed. No the main issues are implementation costs and chronic ineptitude in regards to any new technology development.
March 21, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I agree. 30 minutes should be fine. There should be terminals on site a la WBF so there are no lines. If that isn't feasible make it one hour.
March 21, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
First of all (as you know) you are ALWAYS allowed to appeal. Appeals generally won't be heard in matters of Law, but I can't find a “standard” system defined anywhere in the Laws. While I don't agree that it is standard, and I do think you might have gotten a fuller explanation, I would not be shocked by this lead. Lots of random players make leads like this because they don't know any better.
March 20, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
And if they did decide that that does not exonerate the offenders who deserve the worst of it no matter what.
March 19, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Your opponents have weird agreements which they fail to alert and mis-explain when asked. I am not sure what I would give your side but they would be down + a procedural penalty.
March 19, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“Kevin, Larry, Ed, Adam” - and Robb?
March 16, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Drifting off topic but Sathya Bettadapura raises an interesting point. Until 1987 (I think) there were no concurrent NABC+ events except open/men's and women's. In fact the IMP pairs in 1987 (starting the 3rd day of the Spingold) was the first. Now the schedule is full of NABC events conflicting. Should any of them (except the indisputably most prestigious) count as NABC+?

I think so but perhaps we should vary the schedule so the same events don't conflict every year.
March 16, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
yes
March 13, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I will be attending this meeting. I would speculate that many people who have interest will make a point to do so. Yes, Thursday wasn't ideal, but when would be>? There are various committee meetings every morning at least till the second weekend.
March 10, 2015
1 2 3 4 ... 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 ... 34 35 36 37
.

Bottom Home Top