Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Sabrina Miles
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 27 28 29 30
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Are you positive, at trick 3, that the contract makes or breaks on a finesse? So many times I have seen someone take an unnecessary finesse when a squeeze or end play would work so much better….and without the downside of the finesse losing.
18 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm not sure what the X of 3 means. In any event, I've already told my p I have at least 5s. A 3nt bid will tell that we have game values in light of the 2nt opening. 3nt does not promise a stopper. Why not put us in game and let P decide whether 4 or 3nt is better?
Aug. 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Interesting idea! I'd suggest 6000 MP as the eligibility cut off only because it coincides with the MP limit in 3 different events already on the calendar (mini-blues, GNT and Bruce LM). I am not sure how the 6000 MP was selected, but since it has been, I see no reason to reduce the eligibility for this proposed event.
Aug. 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
One problem with designing a tournament for the B/C player for the Spring National is determining who is eligible and for what fight. Currently, eligibility for the NAP is determined by a member's master point holding as of the computer run in May of the previous year. Thus, e.g., although a member may be under 2500 as of May 2019 computer run to participate in the NAP, it is not difficult to imagine that the same person would not be under 2500 as of the March 2020 computer run when the event would likely be scheduled.

If the event is not limited to only those participating in the NAP, it has been the practice to establish eligibility for an event by the MP cycle just before the event. If the goal is to get those participating in the NAP to come early, one must design an event for which they are eligible. Further the event should also encourage those not participating in the NAP who might like a more limited event.
Aug. 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@Ray, you are correct in that I was not aware of my eating options because I did not pick up the registration pamphlet until day 10 of my stay. I note that I had checked on the eating options on the NABC website before my arrival … and nothing was available (I had also checked on yelp and trip advisor but did not seriously study the options) Since I have pulmonary hypertension, I do not often look for options that include too much walking. It is interesting to note that the close eating options are not too close. (Indeed, the close options are at the limit of my walking limit – I don't mind walking 30 minutes….but anything outside of the Cosmo was at LEAST a 30m minute walk for me –if I were going and to get back.

I do note that the rooms at the Cosmo were excellent. And had I obtained a roommate to split the expense with, it would have made the best choice. However, the ACBL does not provide an easy mechanism to find a roommate. As someone who has only been going to NABCs since late 2014, I have not found it easy to find someone to share a room with (as ONLY a roommate). Should this change, I am sure my view often cost of host hotels would too :).
July 31
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I agree with Shawn, while Vegas will not be on my avoid list, it will not be a tournament that I will actively seek out, especially if it remains at the Cosmopolitan. How I wish I had allocated only 5 days there and the whole 10+ days at the NABC in Memphis. (note to self: do not make the same mistake twice!) BTW, I did not stay at the Cosmo; I stayed at a casino about 1.8 miles away (@$10 Uber ride, including tip). Much to my regret, I did not eat outside of the Cosmo till day 10 of my stay; I just did not know that there were many options that were within walking distance. While I found the food quality good at the Cosmo, the value was non-existent. Quite frankly, I find it offensive to pay $5.00 for a non-refillable fountain drink. On the flip side, the best meal I had in Vegas was at Jaleo at the Cosmo. Excellent quality tapas, decently priced, but only good if eating with a group of 4+ folks to sample the varying tastes.

With 107 degrees outside, I found myself shivering during most of the play. What's with the 50 degree playing areas? The lighting in the various venues was hit or miss. I am someone who has difficulty seeing in dim lighting; a few sessions I played in were difficult for me to distinguish the cards because of the lighting. I did, however, like the light globes and am planning to suggest them in my district for tournament site with poor lighting.

I am chagrined to report that Las Vegas has excellent emergency care. A hematoma I received on my knee after falling up the escalator was diagnosed quickly and treated with equal dispatch.

In all, it was an okay location, but given that the ACBL holds only 3 NABC's a year, okay is not good enough. I don't mind paying more, if I am given value for my dollars. I don't feel that the Cosmo provided value for $$$ spent.
July 31
Sabrina Miles edited this comment July 31
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes to both! It seems intrusive. Hopefully such measures were utilized only to the men’s room. Perhaps there was notice of potential photography?
July 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Assuming I had a valid reason to bid 4 the last round, my cards have not changed. I told p I was not interested in slam with a 4 bid. If p wants to explore further, I'd suggest that he take the lead and do so. A bid of 5 is not taking over the captaincy and doing so – it is a weak nilly way of saying I don't know what to do.
July 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Isn't this hand made for the textbook definition of a mini-splinter?
July 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What is the 5 response? (3014)? I thought that an even number of keycards with an unspecified void would respond 5NT. In any event, if p is asking about keycards, N cannot sign off less than 6.
June 30
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The 8 board robot tourneys on BBO are NOT ACBL sanctioned.
June 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My initial thought was that dummy was putting the cards on the table and asked about the contract so as to put the trump suit on the far left. However, the question asked about “during the play of the hand.” Accordingly, dummy has already been placed on the table, trump suit has already been placed on the left, and dummy has no reason to inquire further.
June 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@Mike….I know…I know…that the sponsors of the open trials pay more…and money talks louder?
May 30
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@Shailesh really? You lost to the team and now you think you “deserve” to win? Boy, bye.
May 30
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@Mike since team A has already beaten team B, where would you prefer to send my winnings?
May 30
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Is there any dispute that one team won both matches, against both opponents? That the other teams had 1 win and 1 lost and 0 wins and 2 losses? Are we really arguing that the team who lost should be declared the winner because they beat the team who lost twice by a larger margin?

Sounds like Alice has gone down the rabbit holle, and the idea of fairness is a farce.
May 30
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks for the vugrahs. I find them very educational. If it is feasible, might voice commentary be added to each round? I think the voice commentary makes the vugraph experience much more enjoyable.
May 30
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Agreed Ken. Nonetheless, if fewer teams of relatively close experience levels do not show up to play, and others do not desire to fill the void….there is nothing to be done. The advertisement and schedule can only go so far to predict what will be held. (And make no mistake, it is a prediction) If nobody (or very few) want to play the KO, then it is a no go. Hopefully, the schedulers learn from it and select a schedule that more folks want to participate in. It seems, however, that some do not want to let go of the idea of a KO….even if the majority of folks are more interested in playing in a somewhat competitive event. The KO's, in my opinion, work only in large events, where there are sufficient brackets to support peer play.
May 28
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@Andy…I don't either. That's why I said it will lessen the enjoyment of all. The more experienced player, does, however, want to play in the event. And who could blame them?
May 28
Sabrina Miles edited this comment May 28
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't think the directors ignored the conditions of contest when they refused to require a team to be forced into a bracket which their MP indicated that they did not belong. Asking if there are volunteers for bracket 1 and requiring the next highest MP total to be forced into bracket 1 may have resulted in the other 31 teams requesting their monies returned and no KO being held at all. I know it is hard for some folks to believe, but there are people who do not like being forced to play in a bracket in which they clearly do not belong. I find it hard to believe that the TDs did not ask for volunteers. I find it quite easy to believe that none were forth coming – despite all the folks saying they would love to get a chance at the top bracket.

The bridge community seems awfully segmented. Requiring folks who, by their MP totals, do not have the experience to be competitive in an event – for the sheer pleasure of those who do have such experience, will lessen the enjoyment of all. If all those who wanted to play the best in the game stepped up and actually attended the regionals, there would not be these type of problems.
May 28
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 27 28 29 30
.

Bottom Home Top