Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Jan Martel
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Maybe. But do you want to deal with the fact that it's easier to be 3-4 if you have a R8 bye. And VERY easy if you have a SF bye? And much as I hate to ask this, has anyone volunteered to keep track of these points? As the person who will end up doing it, I'd like to be sure it's worth it in terms of better seeding.
Oct. 12, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We only give seeding points from prior year Senior USBCs for first & second, so there would be few if any players who would get them from the current year's Open.
Oct. 12, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I've moved this discussion to a new thread, but I do want to point out that awarding Senior seeding points for current year USBC performance has a fatal flaw - players on the winner (and sometimes second place team as well) in the Open USBC aren't eligible to enter the Senior USBC.
Oct. 12, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There aren't Special Conditions of Contest for next year yet, because this needs to be resolved first. You can get them from prior years from https://www.usbf.org/past-tournaments/past-usbf-tournaments/index.php.
The Senior Round Robin is 2 days long.
Remember that there's going to be an additional event (Soloway) for ACBL seeding points, so raising the cap to 70 is catering both to that event and to the new Platinum points contingent.
I think the WBF performance is going to be limited to 22 seeding points, but that's just what's currently being proposed.
I'm not sure what you mean by mirroring what the ACBL does. We now use ACBL seeding points as the main contingent of seeding, adding to them for performance in the current cycle, based on Positioning Points earned by players on teams that don't get byes (IPPs). My concern about the Platinum Point contingent to ACBL seeding points is that it means masterpoints are a larger part of seeding points than they were before.
Oct. 12, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thank you to those who have voted. Reading through the comments, and looking at the current votes, it seems clear to me that we should continue to seed based on some combination of VSR seeding points, Round Robin finish and recent USBC finishes (whether that means Open & Senior or just one of them).
I'd like to have reasonably complete Conditions of Contest done before San Francisco, so I'm going to move on to how to combine VSR, Round Robin finish & USBC finishes in a new post.
Oct. 12, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think Michael's point is that we haven't counted previous results in the OPEN USBC for seeding the SENIOR USBC, although we have counted the last 2 year's SENIOR USBC results.
Oct. 12, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Although we have discussed wanting to make the USBCs more attractive, I think we all agree that the primary goal is to select the best teams to represent the USBF in the World Championships.
Oct. 11, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My sense has been that applying a multiplier to rank, and not to seeding point total has caused some of the issues, so I like Mike Becker’s suggestion above, that we give the RR finishers additional seeding points and the n re-rank the teams.
Oct. 11, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@David - why don’t you think seeding points work well for seniors? The biggest argument we hear. Against seeding points is that younger players can’t acquire them as fast as older players who already have some. Tha doesn’t apply to the Seniors, if we use the open seeding points, so all of the seniors have been able to earn them for some time.
Oct. 11, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
ACBL seeding points are based on performance over the last 10 years and decay at a rate of 10% per year. For instance, a player who won the Vanderbilt in 2019 will have 10 seeding points added to his or her seeding point total for 2020; a player who won the Vanderbilt in 2018, will have 9 seeding points included in the total.
For the Open USBC, we add something called Individual Performance Points (IPPs) to ACBL seeding points - those are based on performance in the most recent USBC, Spingold, Soloway, Reisinger & Vanderbilt; that means we weight the most recent performance even more heavily than it is already weighted in calculating ACBL seeding points, and we include the USBC.
If we choose to use ACBL VSR seeding points for the Seniors, we can also add points for the most recent Senior USBC performance, as we have been doing when using ACBL Senior seeding points. We aren't going to reinvent any wheels involved in calculating ACBL seeding points - it's hard enough making certain that the seeding points are accurate is is.
Oct. 10, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The current method also includes some seeding points for performance in the most recent Senior USBC - 20 seeding points for each player on the team that finished 1st, 14 for each player on the team that finished second. I didn't include that “tweak” in the statement of the current method, because I think it's one of the issues that should wait until we make an overall decision.
We don't use performance in WC events because only the teams that qualify in the various USBCs get a chance to play in the WC, so I think our concept is that to count WC performance would give a double reward to doing well in the USBCs. Obviously, that doesn't apply to the Rosenblum year, but there's still the issue of people who choose to play in the Open, Mixed or Women's but are eligible for the Seniors, as well as the issue of people who are just becoming eligible for Seniors.
Oct. 9, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Funny - I saw the China Eastern through Wuhan from SFO, but didn't find any non-stops (I looked at the October dates this year - maybe those flights were all sold out. I guess we'll all have to wait to find out where and when the tournament really is before figuring things like this out. I still have my fingers crossed for Turkey instead of China.
Oct. 1, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I couldn't find any direct flights from San Francisco. I didn't look at the other cities you mention.
Oct. 1, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Another thing that would be nice in the lobby would be what board each table is on.
Sept. 30, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I had also heard “maybe Cracow” but nothing had been settled. Anyplace in Poland will be better than anyplace in China.
Sept. 30, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Every time I think I know all of the possible auctions the Ghestem players can come up with, something else appears, someone comes up with something new. The “only one cue-bid below 3NT” rule would also apply to 1-(3) showing diamonds and a specific major and maybe other auctions I haven't thought of.

The regular 1M-(2M) Michaels auctions are different because there is only one cue available, so we have completely different rules there.
Sept. 29, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I like Andy's way of stating the general rule (I had been using “the cheaper cue bid shows the 4th suit, with an exception that if the cheaper cue is the only one below 3 of our suit, it shows our suit, your way eliminates the exception. But I would add 2 other exceptions:
1. when we have opened 1 of a minor, if there is only one cue bid below 3NT, it shows the raise and the cue bid above 3NT shows the 4th suit. For example 1-(3) showing spades and clubs - there we think it's more important to show the raise below 3NT.
2: if 2NT is available after a 1M opening, it is a limit raise and the cue that shows our suit is a mixed raise. I think this only happens with 1M-(2M) Ghestem-ish. If 2NT is available after a 1m opening, it is natural, invitational.
There is one other question to resolve on these auctions - what is DBL? Our rule is that if they have bid one of ”their“ suits, DBL is negative; if they have bid one of ”our" suits or we have an unbid Major, defensively oriented otherwise.
Sept. 29, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It's important not to phrase this rule the way you and the earlier person espousing it did. I'm sure you know what you mean, but sometimes a new partner might misinterpret. What you mean (I think) is the cheaper cue bid shows the lower suit and the more expensive cue shows the higher suit. So, for example, 1-(3) showing hearts and clubs, 3, the higher ranking cue bid is cheaper than 4, the lower-ranking, and would show diamonds for you.

That auction (which is common among people who play Ghestem) is also a good example of how Andy's rule works; the more expensive cue is 4 but 3 is below 3 of our suit & 4 is not, so 3 would be a raise.
Sept. 29, 2019
Jan Martel edited this comment Sept. 29, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks, David. Any specific dates announced?
Sept. 27, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I know I’ve told this story before, but once upon a time I was hypnotized in a Reno show. The hypnotist at some point said “all the girls stand up.“ I remained seated. She then tried “all the ladies stand up.“ I remained seated. Finally she said “all the women stand up“ and I stood up. I haven’t changed my opinion since then, and refer to what the WBF calls “girls” as the Rona.

Edited to fix my silly typo/thinko.
Sept. 21, 2019
Jan Martel edited this comment Sept. 21, 2019
.

Bottom Home Top