Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Sabrina Miles
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'd like to see more of Kit's Korner type articles by more expert level players. I really enjoy that Kit takes us through the thought process for selecting a particular action – or avoiding that action. I also like that he starts with the bidding and proceeds all the way through the play. A thorough bidding analysis, and play of the hand in one article.
July 21, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I also find joy in what others might consider mundane. Isn't it great the we are all individuals with our own idiosyncrasies?
July 19, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@Randy, candidly I didn’t ask. I assumed it was an across the board policy decision.
July 19, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Follow-up. I've just been notified that I am eligible to participate in the under 2500 events! Yeah. I anticipate that the wording will become much clearer in subsequent years. (I really dont care much about it then….LOL )
July 18, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I hope this doesn't sound condescending Debbie….but you sound just like my Mom, making excuses for why I should be the bigger/better player. I so often wanted to say: darn it mom, cant we just have justice…why must I be bigger or better? In the long run, however, I admit that her admonishments have served me more than my feelings. Thank you Debbie!
July 18, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
And that date is the month preceding the start date of the qualification for the separate qualifications. Applied here, the date would be the June 7th cut off.
July 18, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
that is exactly what the COC says! And thus my confusion. I expect an organization this large to at least know common contract construction!
July 18, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It says just what I wrote: as of the ACBL computer run of the month preceding the event. If there had been ambiguity I would have contacted the ACBL headquarters before I entered some events. There was no ambiguity in the written text.
July 18, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Because I can! At least because I thought I could. I started playing F2F bridge in 2004. Believe me, there is much difference in F2F bridge than in on-line bridge. The learning curve is steep….and really I just didn't know enough playing on-line only! I'd say it take 3 years of on-line only play to equal 1 year of F2F play. This year I have played in 12 regionals…and 11 sectionals. I figured it was my last chance at the under 2500 category. I think there is a big chasm between under 2500 and under 6000. Thus my decision to go all ou

I am disappointed that the ACBL does not state what it means in the COC. BTW…I am over all of 25 MP for qualification for the 2500 tourney. I could have(and would have) easily skipped 1 tourney if I knew it made a difference.
July 18, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My thoughts were: my p is crazy but not stupid. He meant his bid as strong and simply misbid. In the post-mortem, he said he knew he misbid immediately. He didnt think that I would take a 2nt as invitational after the initial misbid, thus he just bid 3nt directly – hoping that i would take it as systems on. I did take it as such, and passed the 3nt. We had never discussed the sequence. We had discussed how we would handle known misbids– when RKC applied…I thought our discussion of known misbids applied here too.
July 18, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think the focus in the questioning is misplaced. It's not the small regional, per se, that is the problem, but the larger regionals…and how they manage to attract the numbers that they do that should be the focus (perhaps small regionals serve a purpose of a rather contained marketplace). I decided to attend more tournaments this year, and regionals in particular. I wanted to attend somewhat larger regionals. The first stumbling block into my decision-making? There was no central data base to tell me which regionals have (historically) larger than average entries (albeit I know that past performance is no indicator of future results :) ) I think the ACBL would be well served in showing the total tables and # of folks in a tourney in a central easily accessible data base.

In any event, as the dutiful student, i went month by month, tourney by tourney to see which tourneys produced larger than average entries. I did not know that some tourneys ran every other year….my calculations started all over again! I choose to fill in my schedule with tourneys in my immediate area first, i.e., <300 miles and filled in the rest later (big mistake!) While I would always pick my district tourneys over others, proximity of other tourneys was neither an expense saver or necessarily a more desirable venue for me.

As a newbie, I don't know the history of the regionals. I don't know why some are larger than others; I don't know why others think one is preferable than others. I do know that I have preferred attending larger regionals – albeit my master point total garnered at the larger regional does not reflect my enjoyment at such regionals. I think if the data was easily accessible, the smaller regionals might remain smaller regionals for the local folks….the larger regionals might become larger regionals for those seeking such and the intermediate regionals, i.e., those 750 - 1250 tables might just fall by the wayside.
July 18, 2018
Sabrina Miles edited this comment July 18, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Interesting topic. I had similar question regarding hand played this past week in regional open event, Bidding went: 1 - p- p- 1NT - 2- p - p - 3NT- at this point in the auction the opponent asked me, what did p's 1NT mean. I said: our agreement says 10 to bad 14, but given his 3nt bid, it is strong with stoppers in both the bid suits. 3nt made. But I still wonder whether I am obligated to notify opponents of p's misbid.
July 16, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@Tim, and what would lead you to that conclusion….whether antidotal or otherwise (at 2380…I did not agree with your blanket assertion)?
May 3, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Condolences
May 3, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@Steve, who are you identifying when you suggest that MP are completely meaningless to those who play for many years? My cursory review of the MP races, particularly for those with 500 - 3500 MP (several categories) seems to reveal that such folks are VERY interested in MP awards. Indeed, except for the top MP category (10,000+) the 1500 - 2500 and 2500 -3500 McKinney category seem to be very interested in racking up those MP awards; whether through pro partners or otherwise, MP seem to matter.

For me personally, I decided that I would travel more, learn more, and play more to “rack up” the master points in my category (1500-2500) this year. On my journey, I have met some folks who also had the same thoughts as me! I've also discovered that the journey to the top of my category is rather futile unless I want to hire a pro at each stop along the way. Nonetheless, I solider on. I have had (and am having) the time of my life! I am meeting new folks (i.e., potential partners), sharing insights (i.e., reading more from suggestions); deciding wisely where I'd like to return (i.e., Hilton Head, SC, Gatlinburg, TN) and continuing on my journey. While I do not think I will repeat the journey, I will return to the places that I find most enjoyable…and those who provide me with the hospitality which suggests that a lone participant or partnership will find compatible partner/teammates at their events.

To suggest that such participation along the ACBL journey is dead is to do a disservice to all of us….and there are many….who solider on each day.
May 3, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@bill…I read those columns while in grad school in ‘81-84. Indeed, it was the columns that got me interested in bridge….never heard about it growing up….never heard about it in college. I don’t think your suggestion is that far off. While the sunday column might be different than it was back in the day….the same proposed means to attract an audience is not that far off….in my opinion.
May 3, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@Randy, as a proponent of on-line play, I, for one, do not wish to go to tablets. I think it is inevitable but not desirable. To me, tablets are just too easy to misclick on. I prefer my 27" iMac…or playing cards )
May 3, 2018
Sabrina Miles edited this comment May 3, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@Kevin, if you and your p are so far ahead of the “rookies” you should amass many MP and quickly ascend the ranks to where you belong. It has been my experience that when a pair shows their ability to stand out in a crowd, they quickly receive multiple offers from potential teammates.
May 3, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The need for gold rush is diminished when you have an event with 22 brackets … with so many brackets folks are really playing against their peers and no separate “gold rush” designation is necessary. What a great idea and marvelous event(s)
April 23, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would not disagree with any of the above-mentioned suggestions, but for me, looking back at my beginning days, I would not change a thing: BBO is the place to go. That included playing many free games on BBO (mostly all types of tournament games) to get a sense of what others were doing and what was going on bidding wise, people wise and style wise; joining the BIL (beginning/ intermediate lounge they provided free mentor programs when I just started (and my mentor is now my regular partner) there was formerly (not sure now) a lecture put on by BBO at noon every day for newcomers with great support and learning opportunities and by all means, enjoy the vugraphs – especially those with commentary that give a bit of insight into the game – even when you have no idea what the bids mean – you will pick up on the play of the hand.

Unfortunately, bridge is not a game to be picked up quickly. A slow approach works best.
April 15, 2018
.

Bottom Home Top