Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Tom Moore
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 23 24 25 26
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Jeff, if it is for marketing maybe to have a valid rating requires something like the following:

In the prior year to be considered a valid rating requires participation in the following

1 National Open events.
—-Or
6 Regional Open events. (includes GNT and NAP and District level.
—-Or
If not having 6 Regional events require 2 Regional Open events plus 4 Sectional session of events as a Regional event.
So if I have 2 Regional and 16 Sectional events I met the requirement.
Sectional events should include Unit GNT and NAP qualifiers.
—-And
any of the above plus at least One club/tournament held ACBL wide event with a combined across the field matchpointing*.

This should help get tournament attendance up and more clubs participating in ACBL wide events. And a larger attendance in NAPs and GNTs. Plus since it was noted in a response, getting players to play in Open games.

* Note only the World Wide Pairs meets this requirement today. Instant Match Point Games might be considered. With a large collection of gamefiles in the ACBL Club Live across the field scoring could be possible for ACBL wide games, such is done now in “The Common Game”
Oct. 9
Tom Moore edited this comment Oct. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm sure it all depends on your clubs preferences.

Being in acbl land and a smaller club we regularly use Howell movements with arrow switches being made at stationary tables throughout the play. This is common so - We have table mats for the 5 table 7 round movement in both three and four boards per round. 3 boards per round for novice games of 21 boards and 4 boards per round for our open games.
Oct. 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Our club officially has the BAM approach to resolve ties. The only thing that it matters for jackpot money awards. But most players prefer splitting the jackpots and that is now our custom.

We give the top pair a free play, use to give them to both pairs that tied. Now have half free plays or so on splitting the award (Game is 8$ so 2 pairs tied each get 4$).

However, I still believe in the case of your game next year it should be decided by the round where the tied teams played each other. 1st by Matchpoints; then by Board a Match; if still tied let them each have the trophy for six months.
Aug. 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
A comment here.
Our approach to new students are to get duplicate players in our club. So we are EZ! bridge oriented. That is we have the students playing duplicate bridge games after a short lesson, assuming we have enough students to make a game. Yes EZ! bridge gives masterpoints, the concept is if you win some you'll come back.

Our last couple of lessons have been smaller, less than 12 players to the first class. Of the last set of 14 students a year ago we have essentially 8-10 still coming to a weekly 2 hr. supervised play class, it include playing 1 and a half hours random hands with a couple of hands related to the lesson. This weekly bridge event does NOT award masterpoints.

However, essentially all of these remaining students, currently participate in ACBL sanction club events throughout the week.
Aug. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks for the thread. When I saw the sectional advertising in the District 16 Scorecard for hand records, I was wondering how you planned on doing the movement woke up this morning and had my concern answered.

For those that haven't looked the bracketed event did well 5 or more brackets each day. A big change from those people complaining that no one plays IMP team events any more. Remember this was a sectional not a Regional
————–

@mikeG Sunday in an NLM we ran a 4 table single session RR and used the same approach relayed (barometer) boards. In our case we had the four teams spread out and as director I caddied the boards. My question to you - is since you have done this for several years, do you feel this has trained your players to follow the correct procedure?
Aug. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Assumptions can be made but does not seem to always be true.

This past week we had the only REACH games in the Unit.
On the week-end one of our REACH IN players went out of state for a regional; and two went to a nearby sectional.
Aug. 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Good Luck.

Since you made your post I too have been trying to create an Excel interface.

First for 4 to 7 tables use the proven movements like discussed at the MIT site http://web.mit.edu/mitdlbc/www/contrib.html#Manager

These essentially match the ones we use for our Round Robin Events that I discussed above. Actually I use movements from Jeff Smith's team Team Scorer, which I know you are aware since you discussed it in a previous post.

In the case of your comment my effort agrees -
6 tables fails occasionally but this is true using preduplicated boards or not You did not note but besides 24 tables I have problems with 16 tables. But that may be my code problem.
June 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Can you edit your sentence please. One of the directors in the sentence needs to be player.

But to the real question in point. I created this OP because we are having real problems in getting directors for our club. Our 4 main directors live 35 - 45 minutes away without the traffic; 45 to 65 with traffic. This is not good since if we have a morning game and night game the director is forced to stay at the club.

Our local players seem to not be interested in becoming a director.

In general the excuses are:
- I would rather play then direct.
- I am scared of the computer
- I am over 65 and you can't teach an old dog new tricks.
That is they don't want to take the time to study or are afraid they will fail the test.

We do have a couple of emergency directors that run the game for about 3.5 hours. Occasionally we spend some time correcting their game content.

Jeff of Honors discusses small town club closures I feel the problem is as much a lost of the director as the players.
May 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
While you are waiting for other answers let me discuss how we handle this at our club for most IMP games.

First this is not Swiss but Round Robin approach, however we do awards for wins as well as overalls.

We essentially bracket the game. To meet ACBL club rules the brackets must be based on the highest team member masterpoint holding, it does not support team averaging.

We rank the teams by the mastepoint holding and break them into brackets of 4, 5, 6 or 7 teams. Each bracket is playing a BAM team movement.

Five teams is our sweet spot and is the common bracket sized - four rounds of six boards. If the number of teams entered is not a multiple of 5 let's say we have 17 teams we have two brackets of 5 and 1 of seven teams (4 boards 6 rounds). The largest number of rounds bracket is normally given to the top players, but this is not required

Thus we know for 6 to 20 teams we need 4 sets of duplicated boards 30 boards each (our 6 team movement requires 30 boards.

The pros:
1. All teams play the same boards.
2. Like most bracketed events peer play peer.
3. You can use a standard convention card inside rather than a teams event, since you never play the same board twice.
4. Most player and occasionally all players get ACBL masterpoints.

Cons:
1. We have to arrange the sections so that adjacent teams playing the same hands are minimized.
2. If we have 4 or 6 team brackets they are adjusting their moves at a different time.
3. A small lag time to assign the brackets.
4. Stratification is not supported.
May 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In my ACBL training the following was discussed for defender cards.

Take a pass card from the bidding box have the dropper (and the declarer agreeing to the location) place the pass card at the point of the original dropped card. Then determine if it could be seen by the dropper's partner.
May 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Jeff
Why consider this group?
or
Why does the ACBL give Jack a cold shoulder?
May 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Don there has been a second shift.
KO to Gold Rush pairs.

My last time in Gatlinburg several years ago GR was being first introduced. Attendance was low. Now in the Gatlinburg the GRs are show large numbers.

Not sure if GR help or hurt attendance but it is a big shift.
April 30
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Jim good questions let me try a different twist.

1. Is solitaire on a computer cards?

2. Are people wanting to play with real people an opportunity? Is BBO their answer?

In our club it appears 50+ years of age and previous pinochle players get into bridge the fastest and stay the longest.
April 30
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Mike in general your thinking is right but I've found my club players in I/N games in Memphis, Nashville, and Atlanta. I live outside of Dallas, Tx.

Took my sister in law and her new to bridge at the time to Washington D.C. They played KOs mostly after a big lost they played a session in the I/N room, typically won and then went back to the bracketed events. - This was before Gold Rush.
April 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Greg I think I'm in basic agreement with you.

When I go to a NABC and see one of my club players over 199 masterpoints playing in the I/N room - I ask them why they are not playing in the Gold Rush or a bracketed event to try and get gold.

In the cases I have and that they moved up they have all come back to thank me during their life master parties.
April 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Once out of Gold Rush they can go to a bracketed event like KO or Bracketed Round Robin (a.k.a. as Bracketed Swiss).

Just a reminder - before GR the bracketed KO were the place to get gold.

Some larger Regionals have separate B/C events too.
April 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Steve you are correct and I edited my original content. The only way ACBL could force some club Swiss is to required a certain amount of black points being required from team play to make life master.

The biggest problem for new players is if they are unaware of team games then they have no reason to ask for them or get that sanction so they can compete.

I have no plans to start a “Get Swiss back in the Clubs” campaign.

I an feeling the problem may not be so bleak with the number of KOs brackets and Compact KOs that were held in Memphis. Not as large a number as about 25 years ago, but not a disaster.
April 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Since my name is mentioned let me add some to this discussion.

Before the BOD meeting I sent my DD a statement on non-approval for this item. The response from him made it obvious that the proposal was going to pass without much discussion.

I did state to him that the bigger loser on this decision may be the October scheduled Instant Match Point Game since now clubs can run a second JJ at essentially the same match points (vs the NS and / or EW) 1 point Gold.

That said, -
the motion passage will not have high impact on my personal club. Our lower level games will now have two chances for some gold slivers in October and we most likely will create some 8 is enough or some other teams games in the month to award lower players some gold.

In other months -
we take advantage of GNTs assuming are district continues allowing GNT district qualifiers. Continue to have at least one Swiss game within our S.T.a.C games. Have our annual Bracketed Swiss like event on the longest day. And in our Limited in club sectionals hold our Swiss as single session events to allow possibility of greater participation.

But I still feel the small incentive to clubs currently not running team games is significantly reduced.
(Edited after Steve Moses comment)
April 1
Tom Moore edited this comment April 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Mike thanks for the comments, they are so right on. I have students that are similar, but to them a 2NT is always a two minor suit (unusual notrump) hand.

Likewise, opponent opens 1 heart and they overcall 1 spade (think they are responding to their partner) with a 4 card spade suit topped by the six. Then they wonder why no one wants to partner with them.

I'll modify your last two sentences,
Just groups that are getting together to play the GAME, not getting together just to socialize playing a game. That's the dividing point.
March 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Randy - first time players at our club get a free play for future play, as well.
Finds this works great. Glad you mentioned it since I think it works to get players back to your club.
March 17
Tom Moore edited this comment March 17
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 23 24 25 26
.

Bottom Home Top