Join Bridge Winners

Bridge Winners Profile for Jeff Lehman

Jeff Lehman
Jeff Lehman
  • 1
    Following
  • 31
    Followers
  • 153
    Posts
  • 110
    Favorites

Basic Information

Member Since
Aug. 3, 2010
Last Seen
19 hours ago
Member Type
Bridge Player
about me

Bridge musings:

  • An attribute I value (for bridge and otherwise) is recognizing what you do not know: ask more questions, state fewer conclusions.  Only sometimes do I act as I say one should act.
  • Wish that master points award system would motivate players to continue to challenge themselves to improve: need to better align awards with the achievements producing the awards.
  • Wish that club directors would (politely) instruct players about Unauthorized Information
Website
http://jeff.bridgeblogging.com/

Bridge Information

ACBL Ranking
Gold Life Master
Sorry, this user has no cards yet.
A tough hand from a club night
Keep it simple. You are in the field contract at matchpoints. By attacking spades, you increase your top spade tricks from one to either three or four, a net gain of 2-3. By attacking clubs, you increase your top club tricks from 0 to probably one, a gain of 1 ...
Improving the Seeding Process
Brian, While I agree with your general view that seeding should primarily be based upon objective, actual results of the entrants*, I urge you and the committee to strongly consider two revsions in calculating seeding: (1) consider seeding points for high finishes in the results of more events than you ...
Improving the Seeding Process
My apologies to both Meike Wortel (who was the commenter on the thread I mentioned above) and Marion Michielsen (to whom I incorrectly attributed the comment).
Improving the Seeding Process
I have read all the comments favoring a "selection seeding" system that is based upon, in general terms, top teams deciding who they would most or least like to oppose. I understand the basis of such a seeding, because to its supporters it is based upon an assumption that each ...
Improving the Seeding Process
Appending to my support for David's idea, I would submit that the round of the upset should not matter. Instead, all that should matter is the "spread" between the seeding points of the upset loser and the upset winner. Let's assume that the draw for the Spinderbilt is ...
Improving the Seeding Process
Great idea, David.
Improving the Seeding Process
Brian, who is on the committee? I can envisage several different constituencies whose views should be considered: foreign players, members of teams that are likely to be seeded in each quartile of the event, teams comprised of members whose success is recent and not long-term, etc. Are each of these ...
Improving the Seeding Process
I wonder if those teams that are seeded below the very top tier would share the committee's (voted) belief that accounting for upsets (both positively for the team winning the upset and negatively for the team losing the upset) does only a "slightly better job".
Improving the Seeding Process
Marion Michielsen made a comment in a thread on this subject, that I would like to pass along here (with hopes that I correctly recall what she said). Her comment dealt with how past successes at, say, Spinderbilt, affects future seeding points. In particular, what happens when, say, a 63 ...
Yiting Wins Women's Swiss
Yes, based upon reviewing the brackets on ACBL Live. The order of which team one plays next might have been influenced by the current standings, but, in the end, each of the eight teams played one match against each of the seven opposing teams.
.

Bottom Home Top