Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Robb Gordon
1 2 3 4 ... 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 ... 42 43 44 45
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I did see this. I didn't see one that referred to any motion or definitive action (including Reno) nor did I see any comment carrying beyond the GNT/LM. Not saying they didn't happen. You are a member of C&C and presumably you were there, but I can only see what the league chooses to publish.
Dec. 10, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I kept looking through C&C minutes and couldn't find this. Please point me to the right document.

If I am mistaken, I stand corrected as far as the management portion of the discussion goes. But I do think for something like this that C&C needs “enhancement” as I pointed out.
Dec. 10, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I have had the opportunity to follow the controversy surrounding the Player of the Year (and possibly Player of the Decade) awards.

My first reaction was that it was unfair to award 0 points for the “lesser” win but then I learned that this was clearly disclosed to the participants.

Another issue that arose is a policy that teams that lose in the round of 32 in the major KO events receive a smaller masterpoint award for 17/32 if they had a first round bye.

The latter issue was decided by a Board of Directors vote at their summer meeting in 2014. The rule states that a bye shall not count as part of the “two win” requirement for overall awards. On the face of it, this makes sense – how can you get an award for something you never did? But looking more deeply it is clearly unfair to the affected team. They didn’t ask for a bye. Had there been no bye there was probably less than a 1% chance that they would lose their first round match. Yet they are second-class citizens for masterpoint award purposes. I would hope that the BOD reconsiders this policy.

Drop-ins have been allowed for some time in the WBF. Two things that make this work for the WBF – there is NO carryover from day to day and there is a fixed number of pairs qualifying for a pairs event, therefore drop-ins displace pairs that would otherwise qualify.

The disadvantages of these two conditions are obvious.

Fortunately the ACBL has more flexibility as far as displacement goes. But how do you assign carryover to a drop-in? The current policy is that the drop-in pair is placed in the 67th percentile for carryover purposes. There is no reason to think that this is fair. I would submit that if there was such a drop-in allowed it should be with 0 carryover (or equal to the last qualifier).

The Board of Directors has wisely acted to suspend the drop-in policy but this fiasco has once again demonstrated that when the process governing these events is guided by management those ugly unintended consequences come gushing forth.

We need to have a committee study this issue and make recommendations. This committee should be populated by a board member, several members of C&C, a National TD or two, and a couple of players who participate in events such as the Blue Ribbon Pairs, but are not active in committees normally.

Unfortunately this is not how ACBL operates, particularly under the current management regime, but perhaps this will be a wake-up call to the BOD to take back control of bridge issues from management.

Finally, I am sure there are some who wonder why pros that have 6 figure incomes from the game and a million masterpoints care about this stuff, which will neither affect their livelihood nor will have a significant impact on their overall masterpoints.

I am far from this echelon myself, but I am fortunate to count many of these people as friends. Above all they are competitors. There are very few things that these people have to prove to themselves or others. Among the few things that are meaningful to them, POTY and POTD stand out as a way of measuring themselves against their peers, also great players and great competitors.

I am delighted that our top professionals are not so jaded as to not care about such things, and I would want to do everything to encourage them to continue in these competitions by making them as fair and equitable as possible.
Dec. 10, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I am a bit confused by the benefit of holding BOD meetings in Horn Lake. Most of the employees that attend these meetings would be at the NABC anyway (maybe a few extra hotel nights) and the BOD members have to be transported somewhere and stay somewhere.
Nov. 16, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I really prefer a PAYING client lol.
Nov. 8, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My brother, my friend, my (former) roommate - live long and prosper. Belated (Oct. 31) Happy Birthday!
Nov. 3, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I voted for the 5D plus PP but what I REALLY wanted to vote for was a final contract of 5C - what west would have bid had everything been explained.
Oct. 8, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I thought jokes were supposed to be funny, not just annoying and offensive.
Oct. 4, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I recently wrote a post “The New McCarthyism” where I complained about certain kinds of accusations. In that article I mentioned that Roy and Sabine are friends. Well, they still are my friends but in fairness, this is the sort of post I would prefer not to see in a public forum. First of all, I absolutely refuse to believe that the entire Polish delegation conspired to make R+S miserable in the final session. If one single pair did not do so then this allegation is unfair to them. In the second place, there are ways to challenge such behavior without a public accusation. As I understand, the reason Boye made his accusation public is that it seemed to be the only way to get a response.

Let's all settle down and play bridge.
Sept. 26, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“Robb, by your own admission you have a stake in this”
Actually I don't. I deliberately didn't express any opinion about the specific incident because I was biased.

But the problem I cite has nothing to do with the particular subjects of THIS thread, it is a general objection to vilifying a pair for something that was not intentional and was handled consistent with the COCs such as they are. I want us to step back from the atmosphere where people feel that it is ok to accuse somebody of actions that do NOT rise to the appropriate level.
Sept. 19, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks for your comments. They are frequently incisive and I value them. However, I don't see the OP the way you do. I don't know what the motives are, but it is clear to me that this was a passive-aggressive attempt to force an acknowledgement of “ill-gotten gains (true - by no means was cheating part of the discussion). Worse, it provoked responses on both sides that were not particularly respectful.

This reporting was about as ”fair and balanced" as the news network that carries that slogan.
Sept. 19, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thank you for this question. I am NOT proposing that the post should be flag, nor am I suggesting that a new rule be made up. I am simply asking (not telling) people to use a little more discretion before they publicly imply (whether here or on other fora) breaches of ethics.
Sept. 19, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You named them Gene, I didn't! @Danny - I suppose you are right but if the NO passed, it is hard to see how much UI could have passed.
Sept. 10, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
No. But it is UI to the stopper's partner until (if) stopper actually makes a legal skip bid.

It does remind me of an incident when I was still a fairly new player (a LONG time ago). Some of the tournament directors in my area, while never short of alcoholic beverages, were a few plates short of a full set of china so to speak.

One day at a sectional one of these directors is called to the table. The complaint was “My LHO announced a skip bid (before bidding boxes) and it is my turn to bid.”

The ruling: Offender must make a skip bid when it is his turn.

So of course the non-offender made a skip bid of his own - 6 Spades! Needless to say, this ruling was revisited.
Sept. 9, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
7C. Asks for 3rd round D control. Accept Grand Slam tries with 7C.
Sept. 8, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It would be nice if people would use their energy to volunteer rather than write silly comments here.
Aug. 16, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There is no reason under the new rules that ways of showing the singleton honor would not be allowed. In fact I encourage my opponents to develop such a system. The more complicated and space-wasting, the better.
Aug. 14, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I may be repeating something already said (sorry if this is the case) but why, in the 21st Century, do women's events get held at all?
Aug. 11, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Bravo!
Aug. 10, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
2S = natural and slammish.
Aug. 7, 2016
1 2 3 4 ... 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 ... 42 43 44 45
.

Bottom Home Top