Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Sabrina Miles
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
From the common game, on Tuesday, April 10, 2018 – Board 9. Note, those who passed 3 and left it to partner, who is equally constrained, scored a whooping 25% of the MP.
April 11, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't think my p really has s. I would guess that the 2 bid was forcing and required me to further describe my hand. 2NT does so. Leaving p in opponents opening suit, when I have 3 pieces and opponent opened in 3rd seat opposite my p's passed hand does not bode well for partnership harmony.
April 10, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@sathya….isn’t that why we have commentators? Not defending Bird here, but when I watch Vugraph, I like it that the commentators have opinions and views —right or wrong — the spoken commentary has added so much to the game that one must give them a pass every once in a while. For goodness sake they cannnot all be be Roland Wald!
March 18, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Fantastic!
March 15, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
On the other hand, it bothers me that some folks hold their cards so lackadaisically that opponents cannot help but see the cards. To my chagrin, I am so focused on picking up my cards, and determining my next bid that I rarely notice opponents flashing their cards. My p, on the other hand, has repeated asked folks to please hold their cards back; and more than a few times to the same players, in the same session! Unfortunately, not everyone asks others to hold back their cards. Thus, those who are ethical and attempt not to see the flashers' hand, may well be handicapped not because others try to peek into the flashers' hand, but because the flasher is unaware/unconcerned they are repeatedly showing their cards – even when told they are. IMHO, a player memo should be filed on both – those who peek AND those who repeatedly refuse to hold their cards in a manner to shield them from their opponents.
March 12, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Congrats!
March 9, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
After following the link…and inputting my ACBL number, I found the results were the courtesy of four (4) sources: 1) fast results; 2) bridge winners; 3) bridge base on-line; and 4) the common game.

Is this post to suggest that the addition of the common game is somehow sinister?
March 8, 2018
Sabrina Miles edited this comment March 8, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would have liked to play in the IMP pair event in Philly this year. However, I decided against it because if I failed to qualify for day 2, it would mean 3 consecutive days of only regional events. While regional events can be fun, they are not fun for 3 consecutive days at the NABCs. Moreover, even if I qualified for day 2, it would mean there would still be 2 days in which I could only play in regional events! I am playing in more regionals this year; there is little reason for me to go to a National to play in a regional event. Thus my Tuesday arrival, where I can play in National events all week…unless my game is weak, in which case, I would only have to play 1 day of regional events before the next National one.

In all, the schedule saved me 5 nights of hotel because I was unwilling to spend 3 days at a National with only regional events. As an alternative to missing the first 5 days of the Nationals, I decided to spend 5 days after the nationals at the regional event in Pine Mountain, GA. I can go to a regional to play in regional events and not feel short changed.
March 6, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Watson, Play of the hand at bridge. It's a classic (and perhaps outdated), but like most, I often reflect most smilingly on a first love (bridge book) The book is a moderately easy read, it covers offense and defense; almost anyone can follow along and learn. What I really liked, initially, was that it was not a beginners book…but a bridge book. I've found that as I have increased my bridge knowledge, I still find myself learning new stuff in this classic book with each re-read. Watson, in my opinion played it marvelously in this book.
Feb. 20, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I agree! Indeed, buy the CD (and additional deals)….less expensive in the long run…and great for pushing past plateaus.

The downside, unfortunately for me, after repeated plays of the hands, I remember the deals and play it correctly but don't really remember and/or understand the concept. The work around that I have found to address this problem is to write a concise paragraph or two (or 4-5) about the lesson learned in each hand. A bit of work, but it pays of in spades.
Feb. 20, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@Steve, why don’t we have a mechanism for pruning “unproductive” regionals? I fully understand the “not in my backyard” crowd. At the same time, it seems, to me, that “everybody” acknowledges that there are too many tournaments…and EVERYBODY refuses to do anything about it. Leadership is about leading. Refusing and/or foresaking any big ideas to acknowledge and deal with the problem directly only adds to the problem. Yes, let’s seek work around, but only in addition to and not as a substitute for addressing the real problem.
Jan. 25, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
When does the platinum at the regionals start?

The pie is only so big. Is the idea here to increase the size of the pie or to alter the way it is divided? If it is the former, what metrics are in place to determine whether it succeeds?
Jan. 23, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
deleted
Jan. 9, 2018
Sabrina Miles edited this comment Jan. 9, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Read more. Listen more. Watch more. Play more. Enjoy the journey.
Jan. 1, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Rules are made to be broken ;) But few would respond to an invitation without the proper tickets.
Dec. 29, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
After reviewing the schedule for the NABC for the last few years I don't agree that the existence of mixed events decreases the size of ‘otherwise equivalent’ non-mixed events.

First, it seems that most mixed events are categorized as NABC+ events (is there a reason, some history for this?). Thus, the only “equivalent” event when comparing events would be another NABC+ event. Since no one is prohibited from entering these events (except for the Senior mixed events) I find it hard to understand why one would take it from a “Tier 1” event classification.

Second, the only mixed event that starts when another non-mixed event starts would be in the Summer schedule when the Freeman Mixed Board A Match Team event starts on the same day that the Wernher Open Pairs starts. To me, it seems that folks have their preference and those preferences have more to do with whether they would prefer to play teams events or play pairs. To those who would prefer to play a team event, but cannot muster up at least 2 persons of the opposite gender to compete, there is an equivalently-rated pairs event for them to enter. Perhaps more significantly, such folks who do find additional teammates of the opposite gender, might expand their sights on which folks might make acceptable teammates in other non-mixed events. Encouraging participation and expanding the view of the participants to include others can only prove beneficial to NABC attendance.

Finally, why haven't other events been considered? Yes, there are only teams and pair events available. It seems that the only difference is in the length of the event. Why not a new event that limits the teams to 4 players – whether open, mixed and/or senior or BAM, Swiss or Knockout. I've heard all the reasons why we allow 6 players to a team match, is there a reason why we don't have ANY team events limited to 4 players?
Dec. 20, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Are support doubles really that far off the charts now?
Dec. 15, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ok, I am willing to show my naivete here: why did no W sit for 1X with singleton A? Especially when 1 opening promised 4+? So we only have 6 trump….aren't my as good on defense as offense?

BTW, loved this summary…wish there were more!
Dec. 12, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I agree that the new policy, based on limited antidotal offerings, appears to be a success.

BTW, I have never had a problem getting a hotel at the Regional level even at the last minute (i.e., the book before date listed in the Regional advertisement.) Perhaps I am choosing the wrong regionals. Is there any evidence, even antidotal, that there is a problem booking hotel accommodations at regionals?

On a similar note, is there any comprehensive list, somewhere on-line, that lists the table count, number of people, at past regionals? I have recently gone through an exercise to determine the largest regionals, based on past performance. To do so, I had to go through each past regional and look at their individual table count and # of people attending and then chart each; for the list to be somewhat worthwhile, I thought I should check for at least 3 years. The exercise was exhausting, and should be easily produced into a form that most ACBL members might access to determine where to spend their $$$ (assuming many would prefer to play at larger venues – if not in their home district). I might add that I did not perform the exercise for every regional. There are simply too many. I did do so for areas that I would like to visit….and those within easy driving distance (for me, 6 hours). But I'd much prefer a generated list of those gathering the most folks and table counts – in case I missed some that really drew substantial participation – those I would be interested in.
Oct. 26, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think the fact that one can still reserve a room for Philadelphia, more than one month after the reservation period opened speaks to the success of the program – or perhaps the misunderstanding of many in the bridge community that rooms could be reserved and cancelled (before January 8, 2018) without cost in Philadelphia.
Oct. 25, 2017
.

Bottom Home Top