Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Mike Tanner
1 2 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks Jeff, very helpful.

Re ACBL Club Manager: what value do you get in separating this from your actual club manager? We just discovered that ACBL only allows one person to be tagged as “club manager” for their purposes, and we're considering who that should be.

We aren't big enough to have a full-time manager, so it will either be a part-time manager and/or multiple people with specific responsibilities.

Do you have much structure to the management/operations? i.e. do you have written procedures, checklists, weekly meetings, etc. With a team involved … we're considering how best to ensure consistent quality all the time, good communication of issues/problems, etc.
Oct. 4, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks Randy. I like this idea of a game report/notes from director, do you do it electronically or is it really on paper?
Oct. 4, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
When you decide to move to Eastern Canada let me know, we have a club that needs you. :) Summers are much better than Atlanta.

Appreciate the info, thanks. Why the outlay of time for the monthly calendar, is that just understanding the game options from ACBL? Or formatting?
Oct. 3, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks Morris. Your web site looks terrific! I will take a look at some of these tips. Unfortunately I have little appetite for custom IT solutions at this time, we're trying to simplify/minimize for now. Without negatively impacting our members or service levels.
Oct. 3, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks. We do post on ACBL already, as well as our own web site, and also on Pianola … so too many places actually. One of the things we need to simplify.

Interesting re upgrade of ACBL web site for clubs, any idea where I can learn more?
Oct. 3, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Conveniently the 2017 Financial Statements were in the latest Bulletin (pg 70).

Revenues:
-Membership dues:—-$5.6M
-Club sanction fees:-$3.0M
-NABCs:—————-$2.4M
-Tourn sanction fees:$2.2M
-Tourn director fees:$3.2M
-Other—————–$1.6M
-TOTAL——————–$18.0M

Expenses:
-Programs:
—NABCs:————–$2.9M
—Tournaments:——$4.8M
—Bulletin:———-$1.5M
—Education:——–$0.4M
—Club/member:——$0.9M
-TOTAL programs:——-$10.5M
-Support:
—Membership dev—-$0.3M
—Board exp———-$0.4M
—Mgt & general—–$6.2M
-TOTAL support:——–$6.9M
-TOTAL expenses:———$17.4M

So roughly… the NABCs/Tournaments are “self-funding” (~$8M/yr) except that they contribute nothing towards ACBL overhead. And all the ACBL overhead/support costs are paid by the member and club dues.
May 3, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Defense: counting declarers hand is critical, you won't advance beyond a certain point without this skill. Try this - after every hand you defend when you write the score on your sheet, write down declarer's shape in the margin (e.g. 5=3=3=2). Initially you will forget but keep at it. You can check them against hand records later if you want. Once this habit takes hold it will help you stay focused on the right thoughts during the hand - puzzling out declarer's shape (and therefore partner's). You also want to be thinking about counting HCP, and “what is declarer's plan” … but I think focus on shape first. The Countdown book mentioned above and the Lawrence book “How to Read …” are both good. Partner's carding, the auction, and declarer's line of play are all important clues to track. Make this a priority - instead of getting a good score - and your defense will improve quickly (though your scores may suffer initially).

Bidding: assuming your fundamentals are sound, as someone said above, focus on hand evaluation … fit, playing strength, ODR, etc. I also think it's important to aim for “steady and normal” … don't play unusual methods, don't be overly aggressive/conservative, don't play for swings. Those approaches will sometimes get you good scores but that doesn't make you a better bidder. And play with a partner who does the same. This steadiness/dependability will help with your hand evaluation and counting too. (And generally a good approach in MP fields anyway, let your cardplay make the difference.)

Good luck.
March 27, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If Zia was truly partnering me he likely wouldn't waste the brain cells, reasoning that all my other decisions had been wrong so passing it to me has to be in his favor.
March 15, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ignoring the Js, Zia can have three combos: AA, AAQ, AQQ. If he has AA then he will guess 14 since from his perspective there are more combos where the missing AAQQQQ can split 8-8 vs 10-6. If he guesses 14 he's either right or wrong (Mike says he will be wrong).

If Zia passes then he has AAQ or AQQ. From your seat you are missing AAAQQ. There are more combos of AAQ he can hold (6) vs AQQ (3). So you should guess that he has AAQ. So guess that Mike has 12.

So Mike has 12. Either Zia will guess 14 and be wrong, or he will pass to you and you can guess 12. Or … my math is wrong.

No idea on the note. Mike peeked at one of your hands?
March 15, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm also very interested in this and I've been watching for responses. Since there's none so far I will keep this alive by pointing you to this prior thread:

http://bridgewinners.com/article/view/a-few-questions-about-partnership-concentration-and-counting/

It's not exactly on topic, but close. There are responses (Ross D) with training exercise suggestion, and I made a response further down with links to other articles. Hope that helps.
May 5, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes. Fred commented informally on BBO forums, which is captured in this old BW post:

http://bridgewinners.com/article/view/fred-gitelman-advice-5-21-sequences/

There have been other posts on BW, like this series of posts:

http://bridgewinners.com/article/view/openers-rebid-after-1s-2m-2h-2s-part-4/
Nov. 20, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
A few people have implied that since the Windows version is no longer being developed there is “little cost” to BBO to allow it to continue. I don't have any direct knowledge of BBOs architecture, but two possible costs are:

1: Servers/hosting: different servers are likely used to support the connectivity for web vs Windows clients (a couple years ago one of the BBO admins posted on the forums “The back-end servers that the old client uses for most of its activity are on one ISP, while our web servers are hosted by a different ISP”). Supporting these servers is a cost - server upkeep, maintenance, refresh, hosting, backups, etc.

2: Constrained development: it's possible that having to support the Windows client prevents some new development. In other words, there could be future development they'd like to do to improve BBO (e.g. back end database rework) that can't be done because it would “break” the Windows client.
Nov. 7, 2016
Mike Tanner edited this comment Nov. 7, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We started doing preduped boards at our unit's sectional Swisses last year. We do the best we can – and dupe as many board sets as we can, and we only do it for the last 5 rounds (using sets of 36 boards - 7 boards per round). And we only do it for A/X for now.

For instance, last weekend our Swiss has 21 tables in A/X and 24 in B/C/D. First two rounds in A/X we shuffled. Starting in third round all matches played boards 1-7. Then 8-14 the second round, etc. It's worked well and people love the hand records and the improved fairness. We don't do any duping during the tournament, all done in advance.

Not sure exactly how many board sets we used. We haven't always had enough for all A/X matches, in that case only the “top” X number of matches will get the preduped boards. e.g. if we only had 8 sets last weekend then the lowest pairing and the 3-way would shuffle.
Sept. 29, 2016
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.
Last years results are here: http://cbf.ca/canadian-online-team-championships/

Click on the “Open” or “Womens” buttons to see the match details.
Aug. 26, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The Open and 0-2500 events are scheduled at the same default time 5:00pm Sundays (captains can negotiate other times). So playing in both would create a lot of scheduling hassle.
Aug. 25, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The Billy Miller column in the same Bulletin deals w the same auction, in this case 1-1NT-3. His comment is: “… 3 is just a preference with a wide range, usually showing a doubleton spade. … a jump to 4 on this auction should announce that you have a 3-card limit raise.”
Aug. 6, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This came up on BBO forums some years back: http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/11605-is-there-a-consensus-ii/

In brief …

Phil Clayton: “I think the modern treatment is to raise directly with a moderate 4=3=5=1 and make the delayed raise with roughly a King better than a minny.”

Fred Gitelman: “Agree with this at least as far as North America goes. I am sure there are experts in other parts of the world that would find your statement bizarre.

As far as I can tell it is universally accepted by the expert community in North America that 1D-1H-1S-1NT-2H promises extra values.

With a minimum 4351 hand, it is OK to bid 1S as long as you are prepared to Pass partner's 1NT or 2D rebid. Otherwise you should raise to 2H on the first round.”
April 26, 2016
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.
Good point on the hold-up technique, thanks. I expect on this hand declarer would take advantage of that hand entry to switch to a … but looks like he's still stuck as long as we duck the second eventually.

Don't think the switch is clear unless we're sure pard didn't start w stiff (the OP thought he did). If pard can't return a then declarer is making if he guessed right in . So a bit risky.
July 7, 2015
1 2 3
.

Bottom Home Top