Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Shawn Drenning
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I agree that flagging it is unlikely to get it removed, but nevertheless, I flagged the post re: vacating spingold titles, because it seems to me to very clearly be against the community guidelines. Maybe if others followed suit, they would address why this is ok despite the fact that they suspended posters (and was explicitly stated by Greg H. to be verboten) in another thread for making similar accusations.

Edited to add: Yes, I'm extremely biased against the whole “trust us they're cheating, but we won't tell you why and you're probably not expert enoug to get it anyway” attitude from a lot of the top pros
Aug. 27, 2015
Shawn Drenning edited this comment Aug. 27, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm willing to listen to their reasoning, but seemed like hypocrisy to make a show of suspending posters for making cheating allegations and then posting what amounts to one on the front page
Aug. 25, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Michael K.: is it correct to conclude from your statement regarding not being able to win a major event again in the future that you believe many of the teams that have recently won the Spin-gold/Vanderbilt have at least one cheating pair?

This doesn't seem like too unreasonable of a conclusion and would be a pretty shocking allegation given the pairs involved.

Edited to add:

My personal preference would be that unless you (or others) are prepared to provide some sort of evidence not to make statements like this
Aug. 17, 2015
Shawn Drenning edited this comment Aug. 17, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Well, penalizing masterpoints seems like a screwy penalty regardless of what he did or did not do. Masterpoints do not mean a whole lot at that level of play and my guess is the damage to his reputation and potentially not being able to play bridge (unclear to me what “probation” means) is far greater than any masterpoint loss.

I suppose he is the #2 masterpoint winner of all time so maybe they want to make sure he has no chance of ever being the #1 masterpoint holder (but is there a basis for such a penalty)?
Aug. 17, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I believe the number of replies in this thread give the claims made (way) more credence than is due
Aug. 15, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Something I don't understand is if the host hotels are overpriced and it is in the ACBL's best interest to have us book at one of their advertised hotels, why can't I ever get a room? The last two NABCs I have attended I have tried and failed to book a room through the ACBL despite attempting to book well in advance. In Providence all the hotels were booked and I ended up having to resort to air bnb and in Chicago I stayed in one of the advertised hotels, but paid more than the ACBl advertised rate (and would have paid significantly more than the advertised rate had I chosen to stay at the Hilton).

To clarify, I had no complaints about the Chicago tournament and thought everything was well done. There just seems to be a disconnect because every one seems to complain how expensive everything is, but I can never actually get a room at the (significantly) discounted rates the ACBL negotiates.

Edited to add:

This also is why I don't have much sympathy for those who book for the whole tournament and then try to cancel at the last minute (and sometimes get charged). It raises the cost to attend for me and costs the hotel money (when they end up having to offer their room for $84 at the last minute on Hotwire when I gladly would have laid $184 if you could have guaranteed me a room three months ago), which inevitably hurts the ACBL's negotiating power
Aug. 15, 2015
Shawn Drenning edited this comment Aug. 15, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Although upon further reflection I agree that $260 probably is low
June 18, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
David: I agree that the decision to purchase a Bridge World subscription in some form is not an investment decision. The decision to purchase a lifetime membership versus paying for yearly one does seem like a purely financial one to me.

Todd: Obviously the price of a yearly subscription in 1982 is important if you want to do a calculation like this. My guess was that it was less than $50 (seems reasonable if subscription numbers are dwindling to assume the cost was less than or equal in inflation adjusted dollars then than now, but obviously there is an actual number).
June 18, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't think making a diversified investment in US stocks using a buy and hold strategy is that cherry picked or unreasonable of an example of how one might have invested their money instead of purchasing a lifetime bridge world subscription. Obviously people can make all sorts of bad decisions (and personal taste for risk matters) and if the only alternative to investing in a lifetime subscription was leaving the money in a bank account or worse, participating in a ponzi scheme then that increases the attractiveness of a lifetime subscription to you. My point was just that a rather simple investment strategy may have given better returns with arguably less risk than investing in lifetime subscription to the bridge world.
June 18, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
So make me a two sided market on what you would buy/sell a lifetime subscription at in 1982. My point was just that it wasn't obvious $260 was a bad price and that if people want to pay for subscriptions now it should be because they support the magazine not because they think the magazine made a bad decision to sell lifetime subscriptions.

Anything the magazine could have done (e.g. Buy treasury bonds) a potential purchaser of a lifetime subscription could also do and use proceeds to purchase yearly subscription (also if you want to get into details, tax implications of buying treasuries seems different than of buying an index fund)

I support the magazine, have a subscription, and hope it stays afloat
June 17, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If you would have instead invested that $260 in (say) an index fund tracking the S & P 500, my back of envelope calculation says you would have ~$4500 excluding dividends and at a certain point could have used your dividends to pay for your subscription. Someone could attempt to do a more detailed calculation (but why?), but point is that it isn't obvious (to me) that buying a lifetime subscription was such a great deal for those who got one.

Not sure how much a yearly subscription cost then and obviously paying upfront for a lifetime subscription is a nice way to support the magazine if it helps them raise funds (as is agreeing to pay for your subscription now) ect.

http://dqydj.net/sp-500-return-calculator/
June 17, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Only on weekends, it is $27 at honors weekday afternoons, although not really relevant if you have a job.

http://www.honorsbridgeclub.org/duplicate.html
June 10, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
For one, I do not think it is effective. No one is going to start a thread (or read a thread) if I start opening 1NT with a singleton at my local sectional. Don't we have a recorder system for stuff like this?

I also think it seems too much like a witch hunt and not really the direction I would like to see things go. I guess I do not have an inherent problem with it being discussed (especially since in the world of top level bridge things Fantunes do are interesting solely because they are a top pair), but even in this thread I think it is unlikely to anyone would come away with a more favorable impression of Fantoni/Nunes and it is unclear from the information presented they knowingly did anything wrong. I agree that players consistently and/or egregiously flaunting the rules should be dealt with, but I do not personally want to have to defend myself every time I have a director call and do not want to see starting a thread on bridgewinner (or the equivalent) in response to things that happen at the table become the norm.
March 24, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
To be brief, I do not think calling players out in a public forum is the way things like this should be policed (and certainly not very effective against all but the very best pairs). If this is the best approach we have in the ACBL, then maybe something else needs fixing.
March 24, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Curious what your point goal in making this thread is? It seems you are basically accusing them of something nefarious in a forum where they are unlikely to defend themselves without really actually coming out and saying it. Do you believe they have received this ruling in the past and are knowingly playing an illegal system (and were lying to you)?

It seems to me everyone knows what they play, they are forthcoming with information about their system and even adjust it for acbl land. You called the director and got a favorable ruling; making a thread with a sarcastic title seems unnecessary.
March 23, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It would be nice if advertising (including this thread) was clearly marked as advertising and was less obtrusive.

They seemed to have circumvented ad block (not really sure how it works, but this and the regional advertisement at the top seems like something that the program intends to block).
March 18, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Depends on how much your time is worth to you I suppose. On ok bridge you presumably don't have to play (and be good at) a lot of robot races to play the acbl games
Jan. 24, 2015
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.
Maybe the alternative was to raise card fees in all events?
Dec. 7, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Rather than a passive aggressive attack in the bulletin, it would be nice if someone would actually respond/refute the “trolls” of bridgewinners on the website. I understand that “feeding the trolls” is typically viewed as a bad thing, but BridgeWinners is pretty mainstream in ACBL world (for instance, I was surprised/impressed at how many pairs I encountered in Providence had used BridgeWinners to print their convention cards) and the criticisms of the ACBL aren't really all that trollish (imo).
Dec. 6, 2014
.

Bottom Home Top