Join Bridge Winners
All comments by John Moschella
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Actual think this would be a valid solution. When I first started playing in Boston area. Regional had flighted pairs and either 0-99 or 199. If all of gold rush moved into open pairs then I expect would not be an issue. Local club had a 0-1000 pt game and an open and was looking at increasing to 0-1500 since those players did not want to play in open, 2 separate directors and 0-100 had approx. 15 tables and open 3-4. When 0-1000 point director went on vacation we ran single game for a month with no issues. Bringing multiple players from lower level game into higher works. 1 or 2 pairs may be difficult
May 31, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes but I expect that pair was an exception. Yes pairs are paying more since “gold rush” adds to them significantly. I actually believe that teams are reducing not so much based on masterpoint shifts but in smaller tournaments the bottom of the top bracket is moving to teams bringing in a new bottom of the top bracket that can't necessarily compete
May 31, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
http://live.acbl.org/masterpoint-winners/1805018

was path on live I used. Probably did not pull in last day swiss for some reason. I agree top team in Raleigh but your suggestion implies that team awards should pay more than they do now to be more in line with what pairs pay since.

What I was trying to get at was it is very difficult to be most masterpoint winner at a regional by just playing pairs. Several teams typically lead the field. More points are given out per player in a team event compared to a pairs event when similar number of players in both events.

I do think the pair masterpoint system is broken, It used to count all the gold rush pairs and when there were 12 open and 90 gold rush it seemed to big so they set a fixed multiplier when there was a gold rush. I believe the multiplier makes sense but should not allow you to add more tables than what is actually in the gold rush.

So 15 tables open with a gold rush I believe gets credit for 45 but if 15 open and less than 30 gold rush does not make sense.

Teams used to get all the lower brackets and then they changed it to Strength of field.
May 31, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Response to Jeff #2. A bracketed Swiss concept is to play all the other teams which is why it is limited to 9. We have run open Swiss and bracketed B/C/D and the bottom of the open usually is not very happy. Less overall awards than a bracketed swiss format.
May 31, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Jeff those teams were already in the 2 bracket. Extra teasm either fill the top bracket or the bottom bracket in a bracketed swiss. They filled the bottom here. Actually n the event we were talking about the 8th and 9th seed actually came in 1st and 2nd of the event when David's team was in bracket 2.

In Florida sectionals started running bracketed swiss on Sunday and basically the bottom of the top bracket stated they would not play in that event.
May 31, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Peg,

I looked at the 6 Regional tournaments over the Memorial Day Weekend.

Raleigh, NC the top 15 master point winners for the week mostly played teams.
Denver the top 11 were teams. Next 2 were a combo.
Illinois the top 5 were teams then started pairs players.
New York was mostly pairs near the top. No KO just bracketed swiss.
Gopher top 2 were pairs (they did win 3 events) and then your team was next 4.
Saguenay top players were teams but very small tournament.

Seems like team players win the most points at tournaments. The larger the tournament the more this is true.

How many times did you play in a swiss teams event and not win any masterpoints for the day. I expect close to 0 if not 0. I actually don't think I ever lost all matches. THis is not tru in pairs.
May 31, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
David, my understanding in junior players can play up when space is available as in the top bracket of a knockout that does not have 16 teams. This event however was a bracketed swiss limited to 9 teams. Which of the 9 teams do you think should have been removed from the event so that your team could play in it. I know that a few years back we used to add extra teams to the top bracket and it has gravitated to adding to the bottom since their were many complaints when added to the top. I expect if top bracket was increased to 15 teams your team would have been happy and 5 others would be complaining that they were forced to play in the top bracket.
May 31, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Peg, I know that the pairs games pay more to first place. I looked at the Gopher Regional. Open pairs on Saturday and Open Swiss on Sunday and found the following. Assuming each Swiss team award was paid to 4 players. I know some had 5 and 6 but they split the total as if they had 4.

The 2 games were similar in size.

Pair games 25 1/2 tables.
Swiss 23 Tables.

1st in pairs 31.42
1st in teams 21.7

Take the top 12 winners. 1-6 in pairs and 1-3 in teams and average
Pairs 17.56 average per top 12
Teams 16.73

Take all players and average points given out in event per player.
Pairs 4.019
Teams 4.799

More points were given out in a 23 table team game than in a 25 1/2 table pair game.

22 of 23 teams won masterpoints 95.65%
36 of 51 pairs won masterpoints 70.5%

Not sure why you think teams are “unfair” in their masterpoint awards when they give out more points per entry than a comparable pair game.
May 29, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would not dream of bidding 3H with East hand with several partners when KQxxx KQxx xx xx could potentially bid here.
May 14, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I have 2 boys 28 and 19 who I introduced to bridge. My older one tried when he was teenager did not work. When my youngest was about 15 sent the 2 of them to lessons at club. They played a little together a little with me. My youngest went to summer Youth Nationals in Washington a couple of years ago. He know when and where the summer Nationals are before I do and is playing with Georgie Tech as a freshman planning on going to Atlanta this summer for collegiate. I think seeing players of same age has a huge impact though small sample size.
May 7, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Sounds like we should just make the GNT open event “open” to everyone who was not won an open national event. I expect attendance would increase since all players trying to get 1st national win would probably play.
May 7, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
KILL THE OPEN FLIGHT OF THE GNTS. District travel awards jump 33%. District champs then may WIN A TRIP instead of often winning the right to pay for one.

I'm confused if we pay 3 teams instead of 4 we would have more money available so make trip affordable but above suggestion is to increase the amount of teams that may qualify.
May 7, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
KILL THE OPEN FLIGHT OF THE GNTS. District travel awards jump 33%. District champs then may WIN A TRIP instead of often winning the right to pay for one. Keep the flights equivalent in the NAPs and GNTs.

Why do you believe this. I believe District 9 stopped funding the top flight many years ago (heard this from a player who was over 10K when I asked why they didn't play in GNT. Low chance to win and no “prize”. Believe District did this since they did not want to fund “pro” teams.)

I have seen constant decrease in the flight A, B and C flights since approx. 20001. I won the flight A back in 2002 at the national level and represented District probably 10 of last 17 years, My only issue is I can't play in both open and flight A although next year will cross 6K so won't have choice. Most top players I know do not play in event because typically 2 blockbuster teams difficult to beat both in long match with no "reward.
May 7, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think the question is you are playing with an expert partner and did not discuss this specific sequence which would default to “standard”. What would you think that is?
April 20, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I actually do not know the rule here but it would never occur to me not to tell declarer what the contract was.
April 20, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
so when it goes 4H on my right I bid 4S and my left hand opponent who never doubles now doubles me since partner has not bid and I am marginal I get to say oops I meant to Pass. Would I be allowed. Obviously answer should be no but why the way rules are written.

Almost anytime I jump and get doubled before my partner has bid I can claim I accidently pulled the wrong card and wanted to bid 1 level lower.
April 20, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The world series of poker has cameras that are used to see the cards. Most players did not want this and is only used on a televised main table. They had to change entrance wording where players are required to show their cards to camera if at televised table. Most would prefer not to alter the way they may look at the cards and allow others to see how they may play in certain situations.
April 17, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would think that as a kibitzer I should not impact the result at the table. The fact that I helped by turning dummy should not now allow me to do this.
April 17, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I answered other even though I would expect Law 27 to apply depending on when and how bid was determined not acceptable. I typically think longer when someone makes an insufficient bid determining the extra calls I may now be allowed to make. 2H should be a limit in spades keeping a level lower or I can bid 1N or even 1 spade if I choose.

If opponent “immediately” noticed then I would expect law 25 really would depend on table presence.

I would expect most insufficient bids would be unintended or if not then obvious UI exists since plan was not to bid 2H in this situation.
April 17, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
So I would assume you would want to open the 2nd hand 1 als and when partner makes limit raise with you example hand
Axxxx
x
xx
JTxxx

I would think that I may have been entitled to some additional information at table.

I think the big thing with all this is you are allowed to do it is just what/how you tell opponents. Over Berger limit we play double as lead directing and over the constructive raise we play double for takeout. We do not expect to make game when 1 opponent opens and the other makes a limit raise. However if I was to play a long knockout against you I might choose to play double is takeout against both of your Bergen raises giving up the lead directing for the times we may have game.
April 1, 2018
.

Bottom Home Top