Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Ping Hu
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This pairing problem in Swiss team could happen any time when number of teams are less than twice of number of rounds. In chess pairing director needs to “look ahead” in anticipate future round of pairing problem. I don't know know if ACBL TD has similar training or not. However Swiss pairing in bridge has more ways to solve this problem. For example, it could make 3-way pairing in 2nd to the last round and make sure all teams with a shot to 1st place would play each other.
March 23, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This depends on seeding program. In general it takes time to enter player data into computer, but it is easy/quick to remove a player. Even early entry is not 100%, a rough estimate of size could help in determine number of sections and how to balance the players.
March 21, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Adam is correct. We need incentive for early entries. This is regularly done in chess tournament where early entry gets 20-30% discount than at the door entry fee.
March 21, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Seeding could be done with computers. It does not need two hours.
March 21, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The root cause is in ACBLscore. It only keeps information about who played against whom for pair game and BAM, not for Swiss team and KO.
March 19, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I also got a result that I played in a junior event with someone I don't know.
March 15, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Mike, there is a simple solution to your problem. ACBL just needs more senior only events where it allows limited conventions. Let the Open event really OPEN.
March 9, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Greg, could you share some of your “proposal going forward”? Maybe the readers here could help with “some unanswered questions”.
March 8, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
So we could allow some destructive bids like preempt, DONT and some other convention calls against NT and strong club, but not others.

By the way I like to play Precision and would be very happy if we could outlaw all destructive calls after 1 open, so I could make my bid without interference.
March 6, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Is preempt constructive or destructive?
March 6, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I saw ACBL posted a Technology Committee minutes for 2/27. Anyone know more details about the item on ACBLscore+?
http://www.acbl.org/acbl-content/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Technology-Minutes-02-27-2015.pdf
March 5, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I started to learn bridge in late 1970s, then absent from game for about 20 years before returning it in late 90s. When I first came back, I found there were a lot of new conventions. There were Bergen raise, jump shift were weak instead of strong. At that time it would be easy for me to say it was best to play like 20 years ago when there were not so many conventions. I had to learn and adapt.

The solution I think should not be restriction but full disclosure. The current convention card ACBL uses is inadequate to make a full disclosure of a system. Alert chart could only catch part of them. In a lot of cases, you need to know opponent's treatment of certain type of hands and what a bid denies. If you play on BBO, you could load a CC that has all details of every bid/sequence. Perhaps we need something like that in future tournament. Let's say we have an electronic “bidding box”. You could click on an opponent bid and find its meaning, or every player has a screen that automatically shows the meaning of opponent's bid.
March 5, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
One way is to have some simple agreement with your partner. For example double an artificial bid always show that suit. Against transfer bid, you used this principle and could add cuebid their suit is take out in other two suits. Then you could play the same agreement over suction. You might need some more complicated agreement against Polish 1 and multi but that's homework. You could also have some general agreement against bids that shows two suiters. There is no guarantee that every time you could get a right counter measure. Just like in chess “surprise move” could help to win some games. But this is what help to develop the game and make it more interesting. After all both chess and bridge are intellectual games.
March 5, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't see bridge is much different from chess in this aspect. In chess, time is more important. If you encounter an unfamiliar opening you have to spend time to think about best move. However this gives chess players the incentive to study opening and do their homework.

If a bridge partnership want to compete at highest level, they need to do their homework and have some basic understanding about their bidding as well. Blame opponent is not the right solution.
March 5, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Gary, I take a different point of view on this. The reason US players are not familiar with them is because they are banned here. If there is no restrictions, US players would have been exposed to these “different methods” early and not having a disadvantage to face them ONLY at NABC.

Bridge is a global game now. If you play on BBO you could face all kinds of system. HUM is not fool proof. Just like in chess playing an unusual opening does not guarantee a win. To counter an unusual open, player just have to play based on sound principles like control center and develop quickly. As long as you make sound bidding and play, strong players will come ahead eventually.
March 5, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Kevin,

In file NAP-A-B-entrants.ods Flight B tab seemed to have a lot of A players (maybe all).

Ping
March 1, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Kevin,

Could you provide me the data files you used to do your analysis/making your list?

Ping
March 1, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
New York is the state with the best chess program for kids. There is a very good video called Brooklyn Castle. It is about chess program in middle school. We need something like that for bridge.
Feb. 27, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Debbie, my son started to play chess from 2006 or 2007. We are in Chicago area. I think online entry just started around that time but pairing were still all in paper posted online. You live in west coast where it might adapt technologies faster. The experience about crowd was from one early Illinois state championship tournament. It got improved very quickly after iPhone came out. I think after 2009 most of the tournaments at national and state level all have pairing online at real time. By the way, chess is little different from bridge. The local organizer has more controls. So you probably could have online pairing if the local organizer adapted it early. However I think they did a good job in adapting new technologies and it spread out very quickly.
Feb. 27, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This is more about leadership's ability to adapt than culture. When my son started to play chess tournament 8 years ago, it was in the same state as bridge today. You have to buy entry at the door. It took a long time to get first round started because TD needs to do pairing by putting all information into computer. Then pairing was printed out and posted on the wall. In a state tournament where 200-300 kids in play, you have all the kids running around, trying to find their pairing and find the table. As internet developed and handheld device becomes popular, chess organizers started to make everything online. You could get an entry online, pay up front and get a discount on entry fee. They even post the pairing during the game so players could get their next round pairing using their handheld device in waiting room. No more problem with crowded waiting for next round assignment. We still have this problem in national Swiss team when it has hundred of teams in play. These changes also benefit the organizers and allowed them to know how many players would show up and better prepared. It is a win-win for every one.
Feb. 27, 2015
.

Bottom Home Top