The last KO's were fun, but a few bad bids on our side contributed to us getting knocked out in the second round against a team we should have beaten. Fortunately for our pride, the team we lost to had just beaten the "mini-Meck" team of juniors headed up by the son of big Meckstroth, so at least it doesn't look that bad. But we could have nailed them! So it goes.
Here are three bidding problems that had me intrigued - where would you end up? White against red, partner opens a weak 2H in the second seat. It goes pass, and you hold:
S AJxx
H AKJT
D Axx
C Ax
How do you proceed? Bid game right away? You have whatever tools available you normally use, but rather than tell you his hand, first think about what you want to know and I'll tell you the answers: he has a good hand, bad suit, or a feature in diamonds, no keycards (naturally), two kings, and if you really manage to get this out of him, the king and queen of spades too. Ok fine, now you know the hand, you're making 7, but how were you going to guess this or get the info you need out of partner?
This is a funny one... playing against some doofy old people partner opens a spade red against white, and righty overcalls 4H. You have
S KJxx
H void
C Kxxx
Q Qxxxx
You bid 4S, mostly likely, and then LHO bids 5H, it goes pass pass to you. Now what? Your choices are probably to whack it, pass, or bid 5S. All you 5S bidders out there, congratulations - you make me feel much better. I bid 5S, but I think in retrospect this is a clear pass. Remember, these are doofy old people - 4H showed a really good hand! It turns out they are preempting themselves out of slam, and when I bid 5S, and only when I bid 5S, does righty notice his hand is awesome and bid 6H, which partner dutifully whacks, and which makes easily. -13 IMPs.
Lastly, the most scientific auction of the entire week. Partner opens 1S and you are holding:
S KQTX
H Axx
D xx
C AKQJ
How do you bid this? I chose Jacoby 2NT, and Alex showed an outside 5-card diamond suit! At this point, I can count 12 tricks if we have all the keycards: 5 spades, 4 clubs, a diamond, a heart and a diamond ruff. If Alex has the king of diamonds, we have 7 for sure, and if he has the queen we have a 50% grand. I bid keycard, we have all of them, and I ask for kings - Alex shows 0. Science! We have at most an about 50% grand and a nearly 100% slam: 6S. As it happens, the diamond hook IS on, but any auction that lets you picture the whole hand after 3 bids is fun.
On the upside, losing means we get to leave early this morning and we probably get to NJ by tonight. I guess this is the end of our trip. Er, thanks for reading or something: I don't know what will happen to this webpage here, but check back in a week and you'll find out if we have anything else worth saying.
Sunday, July 29, 2007
Saturday, July 28, 2007
Penalty card finesse
The last two days of bridge have been "pretty joker." Our foray into an NABC+ event on Thursday (the fast pairs) was fun but unsuccessful, insofar as we stayed below 50% the whole time. We did have some spectacular boards: on one board, we bid to 6NT with 10 solid tricks outside spades and a a spade suit that is Jxxx in dummy across from KTx in my hand. They lead the Ace(!), which I figure can not possibly be from AQ, so I happily take my winners starting with diamonds, pitching clubs, when lefty renegs and gets a spade penalty card. The finesse is now 100% of course, since she must play the spade, but at the end I discover she lead A from AQxxx! 6NT making is of course worth all the match points, and the next hand against the same pair was 24 out of 25 too because we're in 1S+1 when they have several of a minor.
After losing that, we headed to a sweet mini-golf place with Mike, Owen, Eric Sieg, Zack, with lots of water traps, steep grades, and multi-level courses. We scored the golf with matchpoints, because hey - we're bridge players. In the Thursday midnights, we played the Phantom NT to good effect but didn't manage to win.
Friday we played a compact KO with Shane and Andy, who are two excellent junior players. We told them that we were pretty bad, which is true by their standard, and they decided to make it fun for them by joking around, psyching 1NT, et cetera. This was not good for business, so we lost the second match and ended up watching Eric and Mike in the mini-Spingold final on Vugraph. They eventually lost, and were not happy with the way they played, but most of their bad boards seemed reasonable to me. Then at night we played in a loser swiss with Andrew Dubay (sorry for previous spelling error) and his friend Peter, which was mediocre for all of us.
In the last match of the one-session swiss, we busted out the Phantom again, and our opponents got a big kick out of it. The only(?) problem with it is that it's almost too reasonable to be funny. It's sort of an unhappy medium: not quite insane enough to be a joke and not quite useful enough to be worth it. But it's still fun for us, because we invented it. We also made 2C opener show the majors and 2D show diamonds, and then created this 1C open with rebid 2C to show 6+ clubs and 11-16.
Life is good, we just got off a great game of creights with lots of fun juniors. Tomorrow, we play with Bob again and his partner Ellie(sp?) in a KO. Probably our last event... will this blog continue?
After losing that, we headed to a sweet mini-golf place with Mike, Owen, Eric Sieg, Zack, with lots of water traps, steep grades, and multi-level courses. We scored the golf with matchpoints, because hey - we're bridge players. In the Thursday midnights, we played the Phantom NT to good effect but didn't manage to win.
Friday we played a compact KO with Shane and Andy, who are two excellent junior players. We told them that we were pretty bad, which is true by their standard, and they decided to make it fun for them by joking around, psyching 1NT, et cetera. This was not good for business, so we lost the second match and ended up watching Eric and Mike in the mini-Spingold final on Vugraph. They eventually lost, and were not happy with the way they played, but most of their bad boards seemed reasonable to me. Then at night we played in a loser swiss with Andrew Dubay (sorry for previous spelling error) and his friend Peter, which was mediocre for all of us.
In the last match of the one-session swiss, we busted out the Phantom again, and our opponents got a big kick out of it. The only(?) problem with it is that it's almost too reasonable to be funny. It's sort of an unhappy medium: not quite insane enough to be a joke and not quite useful enough to be worth it. But it's still fun for us, because we invented it. We also made 2C opener show the majors and 2D show diamonds, and then created this 1C open with rebid 2C to show 6+ clubs and 11-16.
Life is good, we just got off a great game of creights with lots of fun juniors. Tomorrow, we play with Bob again and his partner Ellie(sp?) in a KO. Probably our last event... will this blog continue?
Friday, July 27, 2007
Vugraph
If you have a second, you might want to log on BBO and watch Mike, Eric/Bob, and their team in the finals of the mini-Spingolds. They are on Vugraph now and tonight for the final session, and were down 12 at the first quarter. Their team name is Lein.
Thursday, July 26, 2007
The phantom of the midnights
Wednesday was a whirlwind of ridiculous results. It was also the playground for a new system Lovey and I call "The Phantom 1NT." Read on!
In the morning we played in a compact bracketed KO in the lowest bracket, and somehow managed to get knocked out in the 2nd round. There were a couple of mistakes, but the loss was completely within the margin of one sinister, hilarious, and memorable board.
What do you open in first seat, all red, with this hand?
South
S A5432
H Q8
D AKx
C QT8
I know this is a question of style. If you open a spade, ok. If you open 1NT, do you play a way to reveal 5 card majors? If partner opens 1NT, what do you respond holding this hand:
S KJT
H 65
D Q96
C AKJ65
Are you content to be in 3NT? Lovey chose Puppet Stayman, which more or less gives up on slam but should be fine. We find our excellent 4S game.
The point of the hand is that 4S is a vastly superior contract to 3NT, and makes a good case for puppet over 1NT openings or to have a style where you don't open 1NT when your other major is Qx. For 4S, all you need is a not 5-0 spade break, which is about a 96% game. 3NT is hopeless unless they don't lead hearts, or ON THE LIE OF THE CARDS:
West:
S void
H AJT9(!)
D J8742
C 9732
East:
S Q9876(!)
H K7432
D 4
C 73
So not only does the heart blockage and my Qx make 3NT undefeatable, taking away the system-win from Puppet, the spades are simultaneously breaking 5-0, giving 4S no play. What are the chances, people? This double vulnerable-game fix (we should be making and they shouldn't, and it was vice versa) cost us the match: a 24 IMP swing.
Perhaps because that session was the height of absurdity, and perhaps because I've been thinking about this joke system all week, Lovey and I agreed over dinner to play our new system "The Phantom 1NT" in the midnights. The idea is to that defense to 1NT bids are so fun, and we just don't get to bid them often enough, so why not open them at the one and two level? We worked hard to make the system general-chart - at least we hope it is. Here's the basic structure:
1D: minors, 11-16
1H: hearts and a minor, 11-16
1S: spades and a minor, 11-16
2C: clubs and 11-16
2D: majors and 11-16
2H: 6+ hearts, 11-16
2S: 6+ spades, 11-16
and the evil:
1C: 12-14 or 18-19 balanced, or 17+ unbalanced
1NT: 15-17
Defense against NT for maximum irony: natural
2/1 and forcing 1NT over majors
All doubles by responder are support or value showing
Lovey just can't wait to explain my 2C overcall of 1NT, with an incredulous expression, as: "Natural, of course!"
We play forcing NT and 2/1 over the weird major openings and some thrown together crap over the 1D and 2D bids. You may notice there is no way to bid diamonds... 3-1-6-3, you say? Shuddup.
This system is currently undefeated, as Lovey and made it to the semi-finals of the midnight Zip KO teams with this beast. We were on a six-bagger team, which means that we had to sit out every third round, and our team lost the first round we sat out. Obviously a massive system win.
We did actually get a good result every time we opened, and didn't give up an IMP during the time we were playing. The 2 suited bids worked well: 1D helped us find a good 3NT, and 2D kept us in a 4-4 heart fit at the two level without any interference. The one system loss was when the auction went 1H-pass-2H-pass and I passed with 14 points and a good 5-4 in hearts and clubs. I think it was worth an invite, but Lovey and I need to discuss major raises more if we ever want to make the joke more fleshed out.
Argenta, sadly, left today with her Mom. Otherwise, life is good. Today we play the NABC+ fast pairs, which is another we have of saying we lose faster than usual, by even more than usual. It should be great. Catch you later.
In the morning we played in a compact bracketed KO in the lowest bracket, and somehow managed to get knocked out in the 2nd round. There were a couple of mistakes, but the loss was completely within the margin of one sinister, hilarious, and memorable board.
What do you open in first seat, all red, with this hand?
South
S A5432
H Q8
D AKx
C QT8
I know this is a question of style. If you open a spade, ok. If you open 1NT, do you play a way to reveal 5 card majors? If partner opens 1NT, what do you respond holding this hand:
S KJT
H 65
D Q96
C AKJ65
Are you content to be in 3NT? Lovey chose Puppet Stayman, which more or less gives up on slam but should be fine. We find our excellent 4S game.
The point of the hand is that 4S is a vastly superior contract to 3NT, and makes a good case for puppet over 1NT openings or to have a style where you don't open 1NT when your other major is Qx. For 4S, all you need is a not 5-0 spade break, which is about a 96% game. 3NT is hopeless unless they don't lead hearts, or ON THE LIE OF THE CARDS:
West:
S void
H AJT9(!)
D J8742
C 9732
East:
S Q9876(!)
H K7432
D 4
C 73
So not only does the heart blockage and my Qx make 3NT undefeatable, taking away the system-win from Puppet, the spades are simultaneously breaking 5-0, giving 4S no play. What are the chances, people? This double vulnerable-game fix (we should be making and they shouldn't, and it was vice versa) cost us the match: a 24 IMP swing.
Perhaps because that session was the height of absurdity, and perhaps because I've been thinking about this joke system all week, Lovey and I agreed over dinner to play our new system "The Phantom 1NT" in the midnights. The idea is to that defense to 1NT bids are so fun, and we just don't get to bid them often enough, so why not open them at the one and two level? We worked hard to make the system general-chart - at least we hope it is. Here's the basic structure:
1D: minors, 11-16
1H: hearts and a minor, 11-16
1S: spades and a minor, 11-16
2C: clubs and 11-16
2D: majors and 11-16
2H: 6+ hearts, 11-16
2S: 6+ spades, 11-16
and the evil:
1C: 12-14 or 18-19 balanced, or 17+ unbalanced
1NT: 15-17
Defense against NT for maximum irony: natural
2/1 and forcing 1NT over majors
All doubles by responder are support or value showing
Lovey just can't wait to explain my 2C overcall of 1NT, with an incredulous expression, as: "Natural, of course!"
We play forcing NT and 2/1 over the weird major openings and some thrown together crap over the 1D and 2D bids. You may notice there is no way to bid diamonds... 3-1-6-3, you say? Shuddup.
This system is currently undefeated, as Lovey and made it to the semi-finals of the midnight Zip KO teams with this beast. We were on a six-bagger team, which means that we had to sit out every third round, and our team lost the first round we sat out. Obviously a massive system win.
We did actually get a good result every time we opened, and didn't give up an IMP during the time we were playing. The 2 suited bids worked well: 1D helped us find a good 3NT, and 2D kept us in a 4-4 heart fit at the two level without any interference. The one system loss was when the auction went 1H-pass-2H-pass and I passed with 14 points and a good 5-4 in hearts and clubs. I think it was worth an invite, but Lovey and I need to discuss major raises more if we ever want to make the joke more fleshed out.
Argenta, sadly, left today with her Mom. Otherwise, life is good. Today we play the NABC+ fast pairs, which is another we have of saying we lose faster than usual, by even more than usual. It should be great. Catch you later.
Wednesday, July 25, 2007
Newcomer swiss
I finished Harry Potter 7 a mere half hour ago. If you haven't read it yet, you should probably get on that before reading any more of my drivel. But if you have, or it's not your thing, read on.
Lovey and I slept through the fast pairs we had intended to play in at 10AM, so we played in a side game this afternoon. Things were going fine but not great in a bad field, and nothing seemed very blog-worthy. And then came board 13... we're in 3S, and dummy has:
S KQ82
H KQ42
D A8
C QT4
across from my hand:
S JT543
H 853
D 3
C KJ92
The lead a diamond, and I win it on the board and begin drawing trump. Lefty gets in with the ace and instantly plays a club back. I duck, righty wins the ace, and after a moment fires back a diamond. I ruff, draw trump, finesse the hearts and win my clubs: making.
After the hand, lefty chides her partner. "Partner, I had a singleton club, we could have gotten a ruff." I inwardly smile, having not noticed this and now realizing this could be a good board. Then she continues. "Why do you think I switched to clubs so quickly?" My stomach churns, my heart skips a beat. I mentally vomit a little. What did she just say? I playback the sound of the words again in my mind, confirm that I just heard this said, out loud and in front of me, with no guilt or remorse. I wish I had called the director, said something mean, at least told her nicely that it was the most sinister comment I had ever heard at the bridge table, but I didn't. We got a top, I moved on, we laughed about it later. But newbies be warned, it's a jungle out there.
Then tonight we played in the 299'er Swiss teams with Argenta and her Mom, for whom this nationals is her introduction to ACBL sanctioned bridge. However, given the reputation of these events, we knew it would be a unforgettable source of shame for Lovey and me if we didn't win. So the stakes were high. Let me give you the hilarious story of the event in bullet points:
1) We are given a C stratification entry, despite my 100+ masterpoint holdings, because they need to fill the strat to have it exist and we are the closest to 100.
2) We win our first 3 matches handily (our first two without losing a single IMP) to get into the lead position. We haven't won big more than once since there have been no swing boards. Argenta's mom plays smashingly.
3) We get matched against the 2nd ranked team. During the match, a director comes by and mentions that a ruling he made during the other teams last set will be overturned - whatever. Then Eric comes over to kibitz after whomping his Spingold opponents. We beat them modestly, seemingly securing our win. Eric begins mocking us, telling us he's going to put the victory picture on facebook, etc.
4) The third place team's results come in, a blitz; we are now in second by one VP, despite giving up 8 IMPs all day. Eric begins mocking the fact that we didn't even win the 299'er swiss but is sad he won't have the picture to immortalize our folly.
5) We realize that because we were artificially added to the C strat, we are now 1st C, and will still get our pictures taken and get a trophy. Eric thinks having us lose AND be in the paper is the best thing ever. Lovey regrets not listing Eric as non-playing captain so he has to be in the picture too. I try and convince the director that this was true all along, to no avail.
6) Lovey notices that we played the 3rd place team instead of the second place team. Apparently, the director ruling made during the final match meant that the matchings no longer reflect the Swiss scoring system. So we should have had a crack at the winners, but did not.
7) We get our picture taken, get a trophy for Argenta's mom, and drown our sorrows in Pizza and Boggle.
For all my sarcasm, it was really fun to play in the event and I'm really happy Argenta's Mom seemed to enjoy it a lot. Was it worth giving Bob a blackmail bulletin photo that he can save in his My Pictures folder until the end of time? Yes, definitely.
Lovey and I slept through the fast pairs we had intended to play in at 10AM, so we played in a side game this afternoon. Things were going fine but not great in a bad field, and nothing seemed very blog-worthy. And then came board 13... we're in 3S, and dummy has:
S KQ82
H KQ42
D A8
C QT4
across from my hand:
S JT543
H 853
D 3
C KJ92
The lead a diamond, and I win it on the board and begin drawing trump. Lefty gets in with the ace and instantly plays a club back. I duck, righty wins the ace, and after a moment fires back a diamond. I ruff, draw trump, finesse the hearts and win my clubs: making.
After the hand, lefty chides her partner. "Partner, I had a singleton club, we could have gotten a ruff." I inwardly smile, having not noticed this and now realizing this could be a good board. Then she continues. "Why do you think I switched to clubs so quickly?" My stomach churns, my heart skips a beat. I mentally vomit a little. What did she just say? I playback the sound of the words again in my mind, confirm that I just heard this said, out loud and in front of me, with no guilt or remorse. I wish I had called the director, said something mean, at least told her nicely that it was the most sinister comment I had ever heard at the bridge table, but I didn't. We got a top, I moved on, we laughed about it later. But newbies be warned, it's a jungle out there.
Then tonight we played in the 299'er Swiss teams with Argenta and her Mom, for whom this nationals is her introduction to ACBL sanctioned bridge. However, given the reputation of these events, we knew it would be a unforgettable source of shame for Lovey and me if we didn't win. So the stakes were high. Let me give you the hilarious story of the event in bullet points:
1) We are given a C stratification entry, despite my 100+ masterpoint holdings, because they need to fill the strat to have it exist and we are the closest to 100.
2) We win our first 3 matches handily (our first two without losing a single IMP) to get into the lead position. We haven't won big more than once since there have been no swing boards. Argenta's mom plays smashingly.
3) We get matched against the 2nd ranked team. During the match, a director comes by and mentions that a ruling he made during the other teams last set will be overturned - whatever. Then Eric comes over to kibitz after whomping his Spingold opponents. We beat them modestly, seemingly securing our win. Eric begins mocking us, telling us he's going to put the victory picture on facebook, etc.
4) The third place team's results come in, a blitz; we are now in second by one VP, despite giving up 8 IMPs all day. Eric begins mocking the fact that we didn't even win the 299'er swiss but is sad he won't have the picture to immortalize our folly.
5) We realize that because we were artificially added to the C strat, we are now 1st C, and will still get our pictures taken and get a trophy. Eric thinks having us lose AND be in the paper is the best thing ever. Lovey regrets not listing Eric as non-playing captain so he has to be in the picture too. I try and convince the director that this was true all along, to no avail.
6) Lovey notices that we played the 3rd place team instead of the second place team. Apparently, the director ruling made during the final match meant that the matchings no longer reflect the Swiss scoring system. So we should have had a crack at the winners, but did not.
7) We get our picture taken, get a trophy for Argenta's mom, and drown our sorrows in Pizza and Boggle.
For all my sarcasm, it was really fun to play in the event and I'm really happy Argenta's Mom seemed to enjoy it a lot. Was it worth giving Bob a blackmail bulletin photo that he can save in his My Pictures folder until the end of time? Yes, definitely.
Monday, July 23, 2007
The meeting, leagues, collegiates, BAM, spins
These past two days have been too much fun to sit down and blog about, mostly because it seemed silly to spend time writing when there were matches to watch, games to play, and people to see. Now that the collegiate team match is over and we got knocked out of the Spingolds, it's time to write an entry.
For all my pent up anger about the way the ACBL should listen more to juniors, the meeting with Rick Beye, the Chief tournament director, couldn't have gone better. There were only two juniors not from our road-trip there (Jeff from UCLA and Andrew Dubai), but Rick was totally cool, upfront and willing to listen at the meeting. Future collegiate events will probably either have 8 teams qualify again, and/or have some sort of playoff between bracket runners-up, or just be an unbracketed Swiss. If he acts on what the people there said, it will be a much more fun and legitimate event down the road.
Another thing that came up in the meeting was an idea I had pitched to Alex and Eric months ago but was independently brought up by Jeff: a year-round internet ladder for colleges that is sanctioned by the ACBL. Eric and I are supposed to draft up a "Conditions of Contest" for Rick sometime in the next few weeks. If it's successful perhaps even open it up to juniors who are not students. This could be a great thing next year, and you heard it here first!
The collegiate finals between UCLA and Stanford were close until the very last quarter, where UCLA got a couple of big swings to edge Stanford out. They qualified for the all-day final by being in a round robin in which they each tied with about 46, while Princeton and Queens college each had about 18. I was playing during the finals, so I didn't get to see the match, but by all accounts my friends played well and it was a tough loss. Princeton obliterated Queens in the consolation match for 3rd, and I watched some of that - you could tell that Queens was a little shaky. Seeing any mediocre team of course made me wish Yale had been there to show our stuff, but at least Stanford made us look like a good team by finishing so far ahead of two other qualifiers.
We celebrated merrily Saturday and Sunday nights with various groups of juniors. There was plenty eating, barring, and still more gaming: no bridge of course, lots of Mafia and Taboo and creights. It's just such a blast to hang out with nice people who play bridge when there's no schoolwork to go back to or to put off. I'm know there are some readers of the blog who would be making it even more fun if you were here: you know who you are.
What's actually happened at the bridge table? Well, on Friday night, we played in a one session Swiss with Jon Ullman (from Princeton) and Lovey and Argenta, and got third C, which was just fine. Sunday afternoon we played in a B/C/D Swiss with Mike and Lovey, Niel and Helen, and Argenta and I as a 6 person team... and we played awfully. Let's not talk about it, we just thought to compress all our bad results into one match. So far, a bit whatever.
Then Sunday night came the one-session BAM(!). It was the first BAM(!) for all us, and we had no idea what to expect. Now, one session night events usually draw losers from the morning session, so they are often easy to do well in, but we were some of the only B or C pairs there, so we thought we were going to get creamed. Playing with Lovey, and our new friends Niel and Helen, we racked up a 60% and a C section top and good overall B award, which was really fun.
For those who don't know, BAM is a format where you play 2 boards against each other team, and whoever does better (no matter by how much) on a board gets 1 point. If you lose, you get 0, and if you tie, you get .5. So it encourages you to take ridiculous risks, since losing by 1000 is the same as losing by 10. We did take this too far in the beginning though, including doubling a couple making contracts for zeros and overbidding for a slam with no play. Then we got the message and started playing for plus scores and overtricks, which worked out great. It's such a trip: like matchpoints, but more so.
Today we got knocked out in the Itsy-bitsy-Spingolds in a three-way match where only one team survives, playing with Ullman and his partner David. The scores were 67-48 and 69-66 against us. Our opponents were really pleasant, so it was fun, but I think we could have beaten both of them on a better day. In the closer match, we bid a 6NT that was 75% but going down on the lie of the cards for a 26 IMP swing, and in the other match we made plenty of errors and quasi-unlucky calls. On the first board of the day, I overcalled 3C over 1S holding
x
QTx
KQT9xxx
xx
and they cuebid 4C, Lovey bid 5C, and righty bid 6C. Now what do you do? I doubled, showing extra length, and when it went around to righty he bid 6S. I couldn't help myself, I bid 7C, which I should probably let Lovey decide to do. But he was holding:
xxx
9x
Jxxxx
Axx
and promises he'd have bid 7C anyhow (what a good partner). Down 5 for 1100 appeared to be a good result, but since their diamonds are 4-4 and the heart jack in is righty's hand, 6S would go down. Our teammates bid 7S - unlucky, but irrelevant for minus 16 IMPS. By my reckoning, from my hand 6S is on about 70% of the time if pard has an ace (winning 8 imps for 5.6 in expectation) and is off 30% (-4.8 in expectation), for a slightly positive action not counting that it might cause them to bid 7S and go down no matter what. If we have no aces it's obviously always right. I think my only mistake is not to bid 7C immediately to confuse whether or not to bid 7S, but on this day, we started out down 16.
Tomorrow, we try some fast pairs, and maybe a little nuplicate with Argenta and her Mom, which should be hilarious. Nationals rocks, I'll write again soon.
For all my pent up anger about the way the ACBL should listen more to juniors, the meeting with Rick Beye, the Chief tournament director, couldn't have gone better. There were only two juniors not from our road-trip there (Jeff from UCLA and Andrew Dubai), but Rick was totally cool, upfront and willing to listen at the meeting. Future collegiate events will probably either have 8 teams qualify again, and/or have some sort of playoff between bracket runners-up, or just be an unbracketed Swiss. If he acts on what the people there said, it will be a much more fun and legitimate event down the road.
Another thing that came up in the meeting was an idea I had pitched to Alex and Eric months ago but was independently brought up by Jeff: a year-round internet ladder for colleges that is sanctioned by the ACBL. Eric and I are supposed to draft up a "Conditions of Contest" for Rick sometime in the next few weeks. If it's successful perhaps even open it up to juniors who are not students. This could be a great thing next year, and you heard it here first!
The collegiate finals between UCLA and Stanford were close until the very last quarter, where UCLA got a couple of big swings to edge Stanford out. They qualified for the all-day final by being in a round robin in which they each tied with about 46, while Princeton and Queens college each had about 18. I was playing during the finals, so I didn't get to see the match, but by all accounts my friends played well and it was a tough loss. Princeton obliterated Queens in the consolation match for 3rd, and I watched some of that - you could tell that Queens was a little shaky. Seeing any mediocre team of course made me wish Yale had been there to show our stuff, but at least Stanford made us look like a good team by finishing so far ahead of two other qualifiers.
We celebrated merrily Saturday and Sunday nights with various groups of juniors. There was plenty eating, barring, and still more gaming: no bridge of course, lots of Mafia and Taboo and creights. It's just such a blast to hang out with nice people who play bridge when there's no schoolwork to go back to or to put off. I'm know there are some readers of the blog who would be making it even more fun if you were here: you know who you are.
What's actually happened at the bridge table? Well, on Friday night, we played in a one session Swiss with Jon Ullman (from Princeton) and Lovey and Argenta, and got third C, which was just fine. Sunday afternoon we played in a B/C/D Swiss with Mike and Lovey, Niel and Helen, and Argenta and I as a 6 person team... and we played awfully. Let's not talk about it, we just thought to compress all our bad results into one match. So far, a bit whatever.
Then Sunday night came the one-session BAM(!). It was the first BAM(!) for all us, and we had no idea what to expect. Now, one session night events usually draw losers from the morning session, so they are often easy to do well in, but we were some of the only B or C pairs there, so we thought we were going to get creamed. Playing with Lovey, and our new friends Niel and Helen, we racked up a 60% and a C section top and good overall B award, which was really fun.
For those who don't know, BAM is a format where you play 2 boards against each other team, and whoever does better (no matter by how much) on a board gets 1 point. If you lose, you get 0, and if you tie, you get .5. So it encourages you to take ridiculous risks, since losing by 1000 is the same as losing by 10. We did take this too far in the beginning though, including doubling a couple making contracts for zeros and overbidding for a slam with no play. Then we got the message and started playing for plus scores and overtricks, which worked out great. It's such a trip: like matchpoints, but more so.
Today we got knocked out in the Itsy-bitsy-Spingolds in a three-way match where only one team survives, playing with Ullman and his partner David. The scores were 67-48 and 69-66 against us. Our opponents were really pleasant, so it was fun, but I think we could have beaten both of them on a better day. In the closer match, we bid a 6NT that was 75% but going down on the lie of the cards for a 26 IMP swing, and in the other match we made plenty of errors and quasi-unlucky calls. On the first board of the day, I overcalled 3C over 1S holding
x
QTx
KQT9xxx
xx
and they cuebid 4C, Lovey bid 5C, and righty bid 6C. Now what do you do? I doubled, showing extra length, and when it went around to righty he bid 6S. I couldn't help myself, I bid 7C, which I should probably let Lovey decide to do. But he was holding:
xxx
9x
Jxxxx
Axx
and promises he'd have bid 7C anyhow (what a good partner). Down 5 for 1100 appeared to be a good result, but since their diamonds are 4-4 and the heart jack in is righty's hand, 6S would go down. Our teammates bid 7S - unlucky, but irrelevant for minus 16 IMPS. By my reckoning, from my hand 6S is on about 70% of the time if pard has an ace (winning 8 imps for 5.6 in expectation) and is off 30% (-4.8 in expectation), for a slightly positive action not counting that it might cause them to bid 7S and go down no matter what. If we have no aces it's obviously always right. I think my only mistake is not to bid 7C immediately to confuse whether or not to bid 7S, but on this day, we started out down 16.
Tomorrow, we try some fast pairs, and maybe a little nuplicate with Argenta and her Mom, which should be hilarious. Nationals rocks, I'll write again soon.
Saturday, July 21, 2007
The Infamous Junior Bridge Reception
The beautiful weather here in Nashville promised that today would be great, and it was with only one exception. We won our final in the 9AM special by about 50IMPs, and got our copies of Harry Potter 7 no hastle this afternoon. We've been reading them pretty much non stop, with the exception of some hilarious duplicate pass-left teams with some juniors between sessions (which, for the uninitiated, is a ridiculous bridge variant where you bid while looking at your lefty handed opponent's cards and then pass that hand and get your actual hand from RHO). Stanford with Zombie-Eric seems to be surviving in the collegiates, which is good for our guilt, and we got a free dinner.
The free dinner, which was at the Junior reception, unfortunately came with a junior bridge speech. I'm not writing about this to make fun of it - the comedy of it speaks for itself - but to make a point about the ACBL. But first the facts: the CEO of the ACBL said a few feel good words and said we could talk to him about things that were on our mind. Then the director of goodwill (juniors now fall under goodwill?) basically embarrassed herself to the point of complete absurdity as she tried to recognize people who were there. She once gave up how to pronounce Eric's Mayefsky's name, and later forgot he wasn't there and called him Mathusky; she reintroduced herself to people she already knew; read off Ross from Queen's college name as "Rose;" she told Elena, as best as I can remember it, "A-LAY-na Gre-WALL, son, get married soon as you can and change your name." To boot, none of the new members of the "junior bridge corps" were there, so that was just one awkward pause among many. Basically, except for seeing my friends and meeting a couple new people, it was a disaster.
Now this is all very excusable: she was a nice old lady, and she was trying very hard. But what put me on tilt, what worries me deeply about the future were the few things she and the CEO actually said in their speeches. At one point, she commented on the "diversity" of junior bridge, that we have college students and pre-teens together in one room. She optimistically spoke us as the "future of the game," and thanked the many ACBL officials involved in putting this event together, and was happy how good the attendance (about 35) was at the event. On the whole, it was neutral, self-congratulatory, and general.
Problem 1: The ACBL's complete lumping of what it means to be a bridge junior. Obviously, if you hold a reception for any bridge player under 28 (goodbye, 26), there will be the exact range of ages you defined will be in attendance! I'm not dying to meet fellow 10 years olds, no matter how excellent at bridge they may be. Yes, I do believe we're all in this together, and having a reception for all ages is fine, but this is why bridgeiscool.com is designed like an MTV commercial. The ACBL needs a major wakeup call to understand what sort of events and program should be targeted to which ages. I was never at junior camp, but I was lead to believe it was shut down so that the ACBL didn't have to deal with liability of high schoolers partying. Well, what do you think college students are going to do?
Problem 2: 35 people in attendance is terrible, considering at least 18 (college teams + GNT) of them are being paid by the ACBL to be there, and at least 4 or 5 are already pros. The game is in trouble, let's talk like it's in trouble. I'm very optimistic about bridge in the future, because it's a sweet game and so many of my non-game playing friends got into it, but if the ACBL is going to survive it needs people who understand why people born after 1970 play bridge. It's not that complicated: they played because everyone else played, and we play in part because everyone else doesn't. Ok ok, I play bridge for a million other reasons, but the ACBL needs to stop assuming every middle schooler who learns about the game is going to play it.
Problem 3: We know we're the future of the game, already, so actually make us in charge of junior events and ask us how to use the money. Maybe this is already happening at some level, but if so, not enough. I admit this is actually very hard for them, since junior bridge players are usually looking for full-time jobs and the ACBL management is mostly retired. But when someone who is told to keep us straight gets up there and makes some vaguely optimistic speech about what will happen to bridge in the future, we both know they don't *really* have any stake in who is playing bridge in 30 years, and we do.
What's the solution? There's obviously no quick fix, but we need to start by moving away from having a fleet of 60-year olds micromanage us. Only the truly obsessed are willing to put up with it, and even they aren't really happy with how things are run. So I'm crossing my fingers that tomorrow, at the 11AM meeting in the board of governers meeting, we actually get something done. I'm going to the 10AM also - Please come!
The free dinner, which was at the Junior reception, unfortunately came with a junior bridge speech. I'm not writing about this to make fun of it - the comedy of it speaks for itself - but to make a point about the ACBL. But first the facts: the CEO of the ACBL said a few feel good words and said we could talk to him about things that were on our mind. Then the director of goodwill (juniors now fall under goodwill?) basically embarrassed herself to the point of complete absurdity as she tried to recognize people who were there. She once gave up how to pronounce Eric's Mayefsky's name, and later forgot he wasn't there and called him Mathusky; she reintroduced herself to people she already knew; read off Ross from Queen's college name as "Rose;" she told Elena, as best as I can remember it, "A-LAY-na Gre-WALL, son, get married soon as you can and change your name." To boot, none of the new members of the "junior bridge corps" were there, so that was just one awkward pause among many. Basically, except for seeing my friends and meeting a couple new people, it was a disaster.
Now this is all very excusable: she was a nice old lady, and she was trying very hard. But what put me on tilt, what worries me deeply about the future were the few things she and the CEO actually said in their speeches. At one point, she commented on the "diversity" of junior bridge, that we have college students and pre-teens together in one room. She optimistically spoke us as the "future of the game," and thanked the many ACBL officials involved in putting this event together, and was happy how good the attendance (about 35) was at the event. On the whole, it was neutral, self-congratulatory, and general.
Problem 1: The ACBL's complete lumping of what it means to be a bridge junior. Obviously, if you hold a reception for any bridge player under 28 (goodbye, 26), there will be the exact range of ages you defined will be in attendance! I'm not dying to meet fellow 10 years olds, no matter how excellent at bridge they may be. Yes, I do believe we're all in this together, and having a reception for all ages is fine, but this is why bridgeiscool.com is designed like an MTV commercial. The ACBL needs a major wakeup call to understand what sort of events and program should be targeted to which ages. I was never at junior camp, but I was lead to believe it was shut down so that the ACBL didn't have to deal with liability of high schoolers partying. Well, what do you think college students are going to do?
Problem 2: 35 people in attendance is terrible, considering at least 18 (college teams + GNT) of them are being paid by the ACBL to be there, and at least 4 or 5 are already pros. The game is in trouble, let's talk like it's in trouble. I'm very optimistic about bridge in the future, because it's a sweet game and so many of my non-game playing friends got into it, but if the ACBL is going to survive it needs people who understand why people born after 1970 play bridge. It's not that complicated: they played because everyone else played, and we play in part because everyone else doesn't. Ok ok, I play bridge for a million other reasons, but the ACBL needs to stop assuming every middle schooler who learns about the game is going to play it.
Problem 3: We know we're the future of the game, already, so actually make us in charge of junior events and ask us how to use the money. Maybe this is already happening at some level, but if so, not enough. I admit this is actually very hard for them, since junior bridge players are usually looking for full-time jobs and the ACBL management is mostly retired. But when someone who is told to keep us straight gets up there and makes some vaguely optimistic speech about what will happen to bridge in the future, we both know they don't *really* have any stake in who is playing bridge in 30 years, and we do.
What's the solution? There's obviously no quick fix, but we need to start by moving away from having a fleet of 60-year olds micromanage us. Only the truly obsessed are willing to put up with it, and even they aren't really happy with how things are run. So I'm crossing my fingers that tomorrow, at the 11AM meeting in the board of governers meeting, we actually get something done. I'm going to the 10AM also - Please come!
Friday, July 20, 2007
The platypus
Note: written this morning - we just got internet. Failed to get HP7, line too long. We'll write about this afternoon later... or never.
------
When Argenta graduated from Yale, at her senior bridge club dinner, she was given the special award of “The Platypus.” She earned this dubious designation in recognition of her particular propensity to hold stiff kings offside, most frequently in trump or dummy's running suit.
As her teammate in the match this morning, I was playing in an aggressively bid 4H. Dummy held:
S QTxx
H AQxx
D xx
C AJx
and I held:
S A9x
H Jxxx
D AQxx
C xx
They led a club, and I played low, hoping righty would misplay and give me a finesse on a possible Kxxx in lefty's hand. She obliged, playing the Q, and I played low. She switched to a diamond, and I lost my Q to righty's king, who played a diamond again to my ace. I thought for a moment, remembering Argenta was playing righty's hand in the replay, but I decided to go with the non-superstitious line to make it, and I played a small heart to my Q in dummy, losing to the, you guessed it, stiff king of hearts. Righty leads back a spade, I play low, and righty wins the king for down one, but of course, because the hearts were 4-1 with king, I'm off two, hoping they bid it too (any 3-2 break in H, or the diamond finesse at worst – and vulnerable, I don't want to risk an invite.)
This was before I understood what we were up against – they were in 3NT, off three (even catching the K offside!) so we still won three IMPs on this Platypus hand. The final score was 94-43, and hand after hand they gave us gifts. They also fixed us a fair bit, including one where south opens 1S vulnerable vs. not, I overcall 2D, and north holds AKQxx in spades AND an outside K. He bids 3S, described as invitational, and she passes. When dummy comes down I'm sure we're winning 10 on this, but to my horror not only is 4S down, 3S was only making on my lead. What would you lead from: void Qxx KJ9xxx KT9x? Any club lets it make, for minus 8 IMPS. North's explanation for his bid? “Well, I've learned to be cautious in my old age, I don't bid close games when we're vulnerable.”
Our luckiest board was probably one where I hold:
S AKx
H Q9x
D Qxx
C AJ9x
I fail to open 1NT, missing the fact that I have the Q of diamonds, and Lovey has
Lovey holds:
S xxx
H K10xx
D AKx
C Txx
I open 1C, Lovey responds 1H, and I bid 1NT, all pass. They lead a diamond, and I finesse clubs, they cover with the queen, and when they win the king, they lead hearts, sorting everything out for me: I make 5, but this seems terrible because even without the H switch I have 9 tricks all day long. In the replay, 3NT is down two, because even with the same lead, they switch to a heart, guess it wrong, lose the jack, and Eric leads another diamond. Then they cash the A and K of spades(?), dropping the Q, but then when they try the hearts again Argenta gets in and cashes the 10 and 9, leads another diamond, and they must lose a club to Eric, who cashes a diamond for down two. It's not often you miss a cold vulnerable game your opponents find for +9 IMPs.
Anyway, winning the 9AM special means that Eric will be doing serious overtime tomorrow when he plays in our finals, bless his heart. Good luck Stanford!
Thursday, July 19, 2007
grand ol' knockout
Blogging from the phone tonight... the drive to Nashville was interspersed with incredible storms that would come and go in a matter of minutes. This somewhat ominous weather proved to be no sign of how our bridge went this evening. In the words of Bob, "we kept trying to lose, but they just didn't let us."
Why might we want to lose, you ask? Winning this first KO event means we have to play @ 9AM tomorrow for the second round. So it goes, at least we can get 8 hours.
Our opponents and teammates made nearly the same judgement calls (and occasional errors) on every hand, which gave us a low scoring match. One of the only big swings for us were on a hand where I hold: Ax x KJT87 AQJ10x and overcall 2NT over 1H. Partner bids 4C (undiscussed), and I bid 5C, which seems normal but was worth 9 IMPs. Good defense and declarer play by Lovey kept this match in the bag (I played only 3 hands. The final score was a mere 28-17 in 24 boards. I guess we'll see what tomorrow holds.
Mike won his GNT session tonight, as you can read on his blog, so we might be a teammate short for knockouts tomorrow aft. If you're reading this and are around, let me know if you're interested by commenting or finding us at the Education Fund KO's, team 5.
Why might we want to lose, you ask? Winning this first KO event means we have to play @ 9AM tomorrow for the second round. So it goes, at least we can get 8 hours.
Our opponents and teammates made nearly the same judgement calls (and occasional errors) on every hand, which gave us a low scoring match. One of the only big swings for us were on a hand where I hold: Ax x KJT87 AQJ10x and overcall 2NT over 1H. Partner bids 4C (undiscussed), and I bid 5C, which seems normal but was worth 9 IMPs. Good defense and declarer play by Lovey kept this match in the bag (I played only 3 hands. The final score was a mere 28-17 in 24 boards. I guess we'll see what tomorrow holds.
Mike won his GNT session tonight, as you can read on his blog, so we might be a teammate short for knockouts tomorrow aft. If you're reading this and are around, let me know if you're interested by commenting or finding us at the Education Fund KO's, team 5.
Wednesday, July 18, 2007
On the road again
Our stay in Atlanta was brief, very light on bridge, and enjoyable. We bowled three games tonight (I managed to bowl an honest and sober 67 on the last game, nowhere near my record of 34) and played variously Barbu, Carcassone, Puerto Rico. Tomorrow afternoon we drive to Nashville to play in the early bird knockouts as a team of four.
The two sessions we did play here (one an NAP qualifier) had a few hands worth mentioning. Here's a judgement call for you. As Eric, none vul, you hold:
S A
H AQx
D QJ
C Q9xxxxx
And your RHO opens 1NT. You double, showing clubs or a two suiter, LHO passes partner bids 2C. It goes pass, pass, and LHO bids 2H. Partner raises to 3C, and opener passes. What do you bid? Eric reasoned that if they are leading a heart and partner has a club honor, we could easily be making 3NT, so he bid it, planning to run if they double. As it happens, I have,
Kxxx
x
K9xxx
J54
They lead a spade, and Eric won it in hand, lead a club to J, taking the 10 and being captured by the Ace. They then foolishly switched to a heart (a spade here would be better), which Eric finessed successfully and knocked out the Ace of clubs. Unfortunately, they continued hearts now, which Eric ducked hoping they would NOW lead a spade to give him the king in dummy before running the suit. But sadly, they put him in with his Ace and he had to run clubs, stranding him in his hand. If he had tried to cash the spade first, he would be trapped in dummy and go down five. So down one, which is a 20%. Of course, it could go down much more if they weren't schizo about the leads.
Here's a sample of the slam bidding Eric and I have been up to. Very scientific, as you can see.
Me Eric
2C 2D
3D tank...6D
(making, tied for a top)
or
Eric Me
2NT 3S (minor suit stayman)
4C 4D (keycard in clubs? 6-5 in diamonds? Cue?)
5C (2 with?) 6C (um, I hope this is right)
6NT (ah much better)
(making, tied for top)
on the latter one, I almost bid 3C instead, just because I wanted to hear him say "Super Muppet Stayman," with a straight face (he just taught me this bid). But Eric had warned me he wouldn't use the name if asked and I thought it prudent not to blow the slam on it...
These are the sorts of hands that have been working out well. That, and massive gifts from weird or weak fields. But we've had our share or bad luck and/or fixings too. Playing with Eric, I open 1NT, all vul, with:
S Qxx
H 109
D AKxx
C KQJx
Eric bids 2NT, a transfer to D, and righty bids 3S. I judge the age of my opponent to be greater than 60, so I bid 3NT. I mean, it probably has no legitimate line, but a) they might screw up with AKxx I have six tricks on any 2-1 diamond break b) Eric now knows I have a good supporting diamond hand, and can either run or bid pass with good stuff. And if they double, I'll run. It passes around and now righty bids 4S! What the crap? I make a forcing pass, and Eric chooses double. Honestly, it's hard to blame him. He had a 6 count with the king of hearts and the QJ of diamonds but declarer has a void and we're only taking a heart, a spade, and a club for -790, an absolute bottom. Her hand? 6-5 in spades and hearts, and she luckily finds partner with 3 small spades and AJx opposite Q109xx of hearts. Oh well, we got it back next hand.
Alex and Argenta had a great set yesterday, and a less good set today, but we all still qualified for the NAP (it doesn't take much, but hey). They're all asleep right now, and I can't remember their best stories, so I'll post them tomorrow if they still remember.
Goodnight, hope to see some of you in Nashville.
The two sessions we did play here (one an NAP qualifier) had a few hands worth mentioning. Here's a judgement call for you. As Eric, none vul, you hold:
S A
H AQx
D QJ
C Q9xxxxx
And your RHO opens 1NT. You double, showing clubs or a two suiter, LHO passes partner bids 2C. It goes pass, pass, and LHO bids 2H. Partner raises to 3C, and opener passes. What do you bid? Eric reasoned that if they are leading a heart and partner has a club honor, we could easily be making 3NT, so he bid it, planning to run if they double. As it happens, I have,
Kxxx
x
K9xxx
J54
They lead a spade, and Eric won it in hand, lead a club to J, taking the 10 and being captured by the Ace. They then foolishly switched to a heart (a spade here would be better), which Eric finessed successfully and knocked out the Ace of clubs. Unfortunately, they continued hearts now, which Eric ducked hoping they would NOW lead a spade to give him the king in dummy before running the suit. But sadly, they put him in with his Ace and he had to run clubs, stranding him in his hand. If he had tried to cash the spade first, he would be trapped in dummy and go down five. So down one, which is a 20%. Of course, it could go down much more if they weren't schizo about the leads.
Here's a sample of the slam bidding Eric and I have been up to. Very scientific, as you can see.
Me Eric
2C 2D
3D tank...6D
(making, tied for a top)
or
Eric Me
2NT 3S (minor suit stayman)
4C 4D (keycard in clubs? 6-5 in diamonds? Cue?)
5C (2 with?) 6C (um, I hope this is right)
6NT (ah much better)
(making, tied for top)
on the latter one, I almost bid 3C instead, just because I wanted to hear him say "Super Muppet Stayman," with a straight face (he just taught me this bid). But Eric had warned me he wouldn't use the name if asked and I thought it prudent not to blow the slam on it...
These are the sorts of hands that have been working out well. That, and massive gifts from weird or weak fields. But we've had our share or bad luck and/or fixings too. Playing with Eric, I open 1NT, all vul, with:
S Qxx
H 109
D AKxx
C KQJx
Eric bids 2NT, a transfer to D, and righty bids 3S. I judge the age of my opponent to be greater than 60, so I bid 3NT. I mean, it probably has no legitimate line, but a) they might screw up with AKxx I have six tricks on any 2-1 diamond break b) Eric now knows I have a good supporting diamond hand, and can either run or bid pass with good stuff. And if they double, I'll run. It passes around and now righty bids 4S! What the crap? I make a forcing pass, and Eric chooses double. Honestly, it's hard to blame him. He had a 6 count with the king of hearts and the QJ of diamonds but declarer has a void and we're only taking a heart, a spade, and a club for -790, an absolute bottom. Her hand? 6-5 in spades and hearts, and she luckily finds partner with 3 small spades and AJx opposite Q109xx of hearts. Oh well, we got it back next hand.
Alex and Argenta had a great set yesterday, and a less good set today, but we all still qualified for the NAP (it doesn't take much, but hey). They're all asleep right now, and I can't remember their best stories, so I'll post them tomorrow if they still remember.
Goodnight, hope to see some of you in Nashville.
Monday, July 16, 2007
"Princton", or, the state of inter-collegiate bridge
Our motley crew is now in Atlanta safe and happy, but since we didn't play bridge today I want to write about something that's been on my mind for a long time: the college bridge tournament. There's an upcoming meeting on this in Nashville and we ended up chatting about it a couple days ago. Here's what I have to say.
For mediocre junior players like Alex, Argenta and I, inter-collegiate bridge is a big deal. We like playing on teams with our classmates; we like that it forces us to get better for the sake of defending our college rivalry, and it's one of the few kinds of victories that non-bridge playing friends of ours respect. There are really only two events right now on the college bridge calendar: the joker OKB/Fifth Chair tournament (which is not worth discussing here) and the big-deal official ACBL tournament with a high-stakes qualifier on BridgeBase. The latter is a serious tournament for which Yale always fields a number of teams and, in my opinion, is one of the best ways to get people more interested about competing at bridge. Unlike most entry level junior bridge, there's a lot on the line: bragging rights, a free plane ticket, room and board, and, if you win at the NABC's, a $500 scholarship.
I'm pretty sure the ACBL thinks it really cares about trying to bring new juniors into the game, but this extremely important online qualifier has for the past two years been poorly planned and poorly executed. The format speaks for itself - 4 unseeded brackets, with 5 5-board matches(!), and Swiss match-ups (instead of a round robin), even though there are only about 8 teams per bracket. Only the top team in each bracket qualifies, meaning the bracketing makes a huge difference. However, the bracketing process is not revealed to schools and from my understanding is hand-picked by ACBL honcho, based on nothing but reputation.
No bridge player I've talked to seriously believes this type of event is a good judge of skill, and it sheds bridge in the worst possible light to new players. While the ACBL doles out thousands of dollars to design a flashy and largely irrelevant (save Mike's enjoyable blog) pre-teen website and finance random junior classes, it refuses to spend or raise money (or even ask juniors for money) to fix the event or let more teams fly down to nationals: an exciting incentive that brings more juniors to the table and makes teaching bridge an easier sell to friends.
In short, here are the problems:
1) The event is way too short. 25 boards is a not a good way to judge skill, and 5 board matches are very random, and yet the rewards are large.
2) The bracketing is at best arbitrary, and at worst conspiratorial. There's no way to seed teams fairly, and this delegitimizes the event when only team per bracket can qualify.
3) The event is run slowly and awkwardly because of the lack of good BBO chatting options and because the people running aren't good computer people.
4) The qualification rules are bent or broken for teams that ask for it.
5) The event needs more money so that 8 teams can qualify again for Nationals as they did in the past. No $5000 (or whatever it is) would be better spent on junior bridge.
Here are my proposed solutions:
1) Eliminate bracketing, and make it one big Swiss with 4 or 5 7-board matches. This makes the event more fair, faster to run (no waiting for one slow team), and can quickly show which teams are in the running.
2) If ACBL wants to send 8 teams to the NABCs, it can have the first 4 teams qualify automatically and have the next 8 play-off in a Knockout or Swiss, seeded by VP score, for the last 4 spots. If the ACBL wants 4 teams to qualify, they can qualify the first two automatically and have the next four fight it out in a play-off for the remaining two spots. This playoff method is not ruined by changing the number of qualifying teams (removes the winner takes all) and means that beginner teams with less serious players who don't want to play 48 boards don't have to.
3) Get the money, somehow, for 8 teams to go every year. Ask Bill Gates. Ask Warren Buffet. Ask the membership, but gosh darn it, where is all that Junior money going? Into my pocket for teaching lessons, yes, but events where something is actually on the line is THE BEST WAY to get the non-bridge playing junior public interested in the game - exactly what the ACBL is trying so hard to do in more expensive, less efficient ways. Give it more billing in the magazine. Run better press releases in non-bridge media. Make this event a big deal and it will make help foster more college clubs, which will in turn create more high school interest...
4) Let volunteer juniors run the event, and/or pay them to design good online score reporting/directing, and/or pay BBO so that these tournaments are easier to run.
5) Let us juniors dictate and enforce the conditions of contest so that we can determine what the most fun qualification rules would be, and can vote to see if this format makes sense, etc. It matters so much more to us than to you.
At least #5 might be soon implemented. The ACBL, in response to widespread complaints, is letting Eric (the one on our trip) call a meeting to discuss these problems. If you're going to be at the Nashville NABCs, and care about this at all, you should come and speak your mind. First Sunday at 11am.
Why does this event matter so much? Old people put all this stock in teaching bridge to middle schoolers and elementary school kids. "Get 'em hooked early," or whatever. Ok, fine, but are middle schoolers going to think Bridge is cool when their bridge class gives homework and no kids they know older than them are playing? There's no junior bridge in a vacuum (Eric: "Unless it's a reaaally big vacuum). Kids look to older kids as to what is worth doing in school and in life. If it isn't cool to start learning in college, it will never be cool to start learning in middle school or high school. And college bridge is a hell of a lot cooler if there is a good, competitive outlet for skill in it with an obtainable prize.
Bridge IS cool. We can prove it, one college club at a time, if the ACBL doesn't let us down.
(In the interest of full disclosure, we came in second in our bracket by one VP this past year and were pretty disappointed that the ACBL changed the number of qualifying teams per bracket from 1 to 2. But this isn't just sour grapes either: we sent a lengthy email to the ACBL about it three months before the qualifier and never got a response; Alex and I are going to the NABC anyway; and I won't even be playing in the event next year. The event needs to change for junior bridge's sake, not for ours.)
(For those confused about the title of this post, the previously mentioned meeting was called into existence by a semi-hilarious email forwarded on June 27th, titled by Mable Wilkes as: "Message from Eric Mayefsky, captain of the Princton bridge team." (forget the spelling - Eric has gone to Stanford for 5 years and only played for Princeton once). It's sort of a metaphor for the handling of juniors in general, I think...)
For mediocre junior players like Alex, Argenta and I, inter-collegiate bridge is a big deal. We like playing on teams with our classmates; we like that it forces us to get better for the sake of defending our college rivalry, and it's one of the few kinds of victories that non-bridge playing friends of ours respect. There are really only two events right now on the college bridge calendar: the joker OKB/Fifth Chair tournament (which is not worth discussing here) and the big-deal official ACBL tournament with a high-stakes qualifier on BridgeBase. The latter is a serious tournament for which Yale always fields a number of teams and, in my opinion, is one of the best ways to get people more interested about competing at bridge. Unlike most entry level junior bridge, there's a lot on the line: bragging rights, a free plane ticket, room and board, and, if you win at the NABC's, a $500 scholarship.
I'm pretty sure the ACBL thinks it really cares about trying to bring new juniors into the game, but this extremely important online qualifier has for the past two years been poorly planned and poorly executed. The format speaks for itself - 4 unseeded brackets, with 5 5-board matches(!), and Swiss match-ups (instead of a round robin), even though there are only about 8 teams per bracket. Only the top team in each bracket qualifies, meaning the bracketing makes a huge difference. However, the bracketing process is not revealed to schools and from my understanding is hand-picked by ACBL honcho, based on nothing but reputation.
No bridge player I've talked to seriously believes this type of event is a good judge of skill, and it sheds bridge in the worst possible light to new players. While the ACBL doles out thousands of dollars to design a flashy and largely irrelevant (save Mike's enjoyable blog) pre-teen website and finance random junior classes, it refuses to spend or raise money (or even ask juniors for money) to fix the event or let more teams fly down to nationals: an exciting incentive that brings more juniors to the table and makes teaching bridge an easier sell to friends.
In short, here are the problems:
1) The event is way too short. 25 boards is a not a good way to judge skill, and 5 board matches are very random, and yet the rewards are large.
2) The bracketing is at best arbitrary, and at worst conspiratorial. There's no way to seed teams fairly, and this delegitimizes the event when only team per bracket can qualify.
3) The event is run slowly and awkwardly because of the lack of good BBO chatting options and because the people running aren't good computer people.
4) The qualification rules are bent or broken for teams that ask for it.
5) The event needs more money so that 8 teams can qualify again for Nationals as they did in the past. No $5000 (or whatever it is) would be better spent on junior bridge.
Here are my proposed solutions:
1) Eliminate bracketing, and make it one big Swiss with 4 or 5 7-board matches. This makes the event more fair, faster to run (no waiting for one slow team), and can quickly show which teams are in the running.
2) If ACBL wants to send 8 teams to the NABCs, it can have the first 4 teams qualify automatically and have the next 8 play-off in a Knockout or Swiss, seeded by VP score, for the last 4 spots. If the ACBL wants 4 teams to qualify, they can qualify the first two automatically and have the next four fight it out in a play-off for the remaining two spots. This playoff method is not ruined by changing the number of qualifying teams (removes the winner takes all) and means that beginner teams with less serious players who don't want to play 48 boards don't have to.
3) Get the money, somehow, for 8 teams to go every year. Ask Bill Gates. Ask Warren Buffet. Ask the membership, but gosh darn it, where is all that Junior money going? Into my pocket for teaching lessons, yes, but events where something is actually on the line is THE BEST WAY to get the non-bridge playing junior public interested in the game - exactly what the ACBL is trying so hard to do in more expensive, less efficient ways. Give it more billing in the magazine. Run better press releases in non-bridge media. Make this event a big deal and it will make help foster more college clubs, which will in turn create more high school interest...
4) Let volunteer juniors run the event, and/or pay them to design good online score reporting/directing, and/or pay BBO so that these tournaments are easier to run.
5) Let us juniors dictate and enforce the conditions of contest so that we can determine what the most fun qualification rules would be, and can vote to see if this format makes sense, etc. It matters so much more to us than to you.
At least #5 might be soon implemented. The ACBL, in response to widespread complaints, is letting Eric (the one on our trip) call a meeting to discuss these problems. If you're going to be at the Nashville NABCs, and care about this at all, you should come and speak your mind. First Sunday at 11am.
Why does this event matter so much? Old people put all this stock in teaching bridge to middle schoolers and elementary school kids. "Get 'em hooked early," or whatever. Ok, fine, but are middle schoolers going to think Bridge is cool when their bridge class gives homework and no kids they know older than them are playing? There's no junior bridge in a vacuum (Eric: "Unless it's a reaaally big vacuum). Kids look to older kids as to what is worth doing in school and in life. If it isn't cool to start learning in college, it will never be cool to start learning in middle school or high school. And college bridge is a hell of a lot cooler if there is a good, competitive outlet for skill in it with an obtainable prize.
Bridge IS cool. We can prove it, one college club at a time, if the ACBL doesn't let us down.
(In the interest of full disclosure, we came in second in our bracket by one VP this past year and were pretty disappointed that the ACBL changed the number of qualifying teams per bracket from 1 to 2. But this isn't just sour grapes either: we sent a lengthy email to the ACBL about it three months before the qualifier and never got a response; Alex and I are going to the NABC anyway; and I won't even be playing in the event next year. The event needs to change for junior bridge's sake, not for ours.)
(For those confused about the title of this post, the previously mentioned meeting was called into existence by a semi-hilarious email forwarded on June 27th, titled by Mable Wilkes as: "Message from Eric Mayefsky, captain of the Princton bridge team." (forget the spelling - Eric has gone to Stanford for 5 years and only played for Princeton once). It's sort of a metaphor for the handling of juniors in general, I think...)
Sunday, July 15, 2007
Hi ho silver
In our biggest win so far, our motley crew got second in the B strat of the swiss teams today, for about as many silver masterpoints as Lovey and I got on the rest of this trip combined. It was a really fun session. We went 4-3, with all big wins and one very small loss. Each us have our favorite hands, but sadly no hand records. Some brief highlights:
In one of our blitzes (a maximum victory), Argenta and Bob made two slams that Lovey and I set for 31 IMPS. The slam that Argenta played was a huge and hilarious defense error, with her left hand opponent leading Q from Qx offside. On the one that Bob made, they lead an ace which left Bob very little guesswork, where I had a lead a trump they guessed wrong.
I made a couple of aggressive 2S calls in 3rd seat favorable (like 5 spades, J9xxx with 8 points) which both worked out really well, most notably winning our last match big because lefty failed to overcall 2NT over 2S with a stopper (she chose double) and Lovey raised to 3S, forcing righty to bypass 3NT when 5D is down two on best defense.
Lovey also played this 4S quite nicely, at least relative to how I'd been declaring. All vulnerable, Lovey opened 1S in 3rd seat, and it went double, 2C by me (10-12 and clubs, an odd choice but I thought safe), 2D, Lovey rebids 2H, pass, I raise to 3S, Lovey bids 4S ("It's IMPs").
They lead a diamond (and kept leading diamonds) and I put down this dummy:
QJx
10x
AK10x
987x
Lovey holds:
AKxxx
Q9xx
Qxx
J
After testing to see if the jack of hearts was onside (it wasn't), Lovey played this as a dummy reversal and found clubs 3-3 to make, when it was badly misplayed at the other table .
We felt really good playing teams together and celebrated our good spirits by going to Outback and playing Tigris and Euphrates. Tomorrow, we drive to Atlanta and goof off for a few days... but we'll still be playing bridge, so more posts to follow.
In one of our blitzes (a maximum victory), Argenta and Bob made two slams that Lovey and I set for 31 IMPS. The slam that Argenta played was a huge and hilarious defense error, with her left hand opponent leading Q from Qx offside. On the one that Bob made, they lead an ace which left Bob very little guesswork, where I had a lead a trump they guessed wrong.
I made a couple of aggressive 2S calls in 3rd seat favorable (like 5 spades, J9xxx with 8 points) which both worked out really well, most notably winning our last match big because lefty failed to overcall 2NT over 2S with a stopper (she chose double) and Lovey raised to 3S, forcing righty to bypass 3NT when 5D is down two on best defense.
Lovey also played this 4S quite nicely, at least relative to how I'd been declaring. All vulnerable, Lovey opened 1S in 3rd seat, and it went double, 2C by me (10-12 and clubs, an odd choice but I thought safe), 2D, Lovey rebids 2H, pass, I raise to 3S, Lovey bids 4S ("It's IMPs").
They lead a diamond (and kept leading diamonds) and I put down this dummy:
QJx
10x
AK10x
987x
Lovey holds:
AKxxx
Q9xx
Qxx
J
After testing to see if the jack of hearts was onside (it wasn't), Lovey played this as a dummy reversal and found clubs 3-3 to make, when it was badly misplayed at the other table .
We felt really good playing teams together and celebrated our good spirits by going to Outback and playing Tigris and Euphrates. Tomorrow, we drive to Atlanta and goof off for a few days... but we'll still be playing bridge, so more posts to follow.
Saturday, July 14, 2007
director!
Neither Argenta and I, nor Lovey and Eric, had any particularly good sessions today, but we still had a good time and experienced (with some disapparation - er, disappointment) the new Harry Potter movie. Argenta and I also experienced the excitement of an appealed director ruling. How would you vote on our appeals thingy? South bids 1S in the third seat, and west overcalls 1NT. North comes in with a double, and it passes back to west, who bids 2D. North now breaks tempo (about 30 seconds) and passes, putting South in the passout seat with:
S AJ963
H QT83
D J
C QJ8
For those of you who don't know, after a break in tempo South is not supposed to bid if pass is a viable option. What would you bid? Do you have a second choice bid? North's double was penalty oriented and showed values, let's say about 8-11. I still don't know the final ruling, and I'm trying not to bias you by not telling you who is who.
For the more play inclined, here's a play puzzle for you. Hint: I blew it big time. You're in 3S, holding as South (hands rotated)
S AKQJ93
H K
D K32
C J97
and partner has
S T65
H 4
D JT54
C KT852
Forgetting that they should be in 4H making, they lead a heart with east taking the ace and leading a trump (trumps are not 4-0). How do you plan the play? For reference, east opened the bidding and west raised to 2H over your 1S interference. If you're me, you win this spade in your hand, then play a club towards dummy so that you still have hearts guarded and an entry left over. The ace comes down before you play the king and west promptly leads back a club. Does this change your plan?
At this point, I played high and got roughed. Then they lead a diamond and I stupidly flew with my king, which means I must go down two, because I must lose the Q of C before getting any pitches, giving them a chance to take two diamonds (+ 2 clubs, 1 heart and a rough). But I think it's always right to duck that club. Either clubs are 3-2 with the finesse on, or 3-2 with the finesse off, or 4-1 with the finesse on. If it's any 3-2, you either win or gain control (by guessing the diamond ace onside), drawing trump ending on the board and run clubs pitching diamonds. If the clubs are 4-1, you'll play small, and if even if he roughs, you play the jack under the rough, gain control by guessing diamonds, draw as much trump as necessary ending in hand and finesse clubs with your 9, overtaking with the 10 and playing the king to drop the queen. You will lose 1 diamond, 1 heart, and one or two clubs (one only if it's onside 3-2), no matter what. And you know 4H is making, either result should be great.
You can easily make 3 if trumps are 2-2 and the queen of clubs can be picked up (as is here) but if they win the queen and lead their last trump, they can cut you off from dummy. Of course, on the lie of the cards that still wouldn't matter since the A and Q of diamonds were on - making it far superior to my pathetic line.
Tomorrow we're playing in a two-session Swiss. Can't wait to have IMP disease be a good thing.
S AJ963
H QT83
D J
C QJ8
For those of you who don't know, after a break in tempo South is not supposed to bid if pass is a viable option. What would you bid? Do you have a second choice bid? North's double was penalty oriented and showed values, let's say about 8-11. I still don't know the final ruling, and I'm trying not to bias you by not telling you who is who.
For the more play inclined, here's a play puzzle for you. Hint: I blew it big time. You're in 3S, holding as South (hands rotated)
S AKQJ93
H K
D K32
C J97
and partner has
S T65
H 4
D JT54
C KT852
Forgetting that they should be in 4H making, they lead a heart with east taking the ace and leading a trump (trumps are not 4-0). How do you plan the play? For reference, east opened the bidding and west raised to 2H over your 1S interference. If you're me, you win this spade in your hand, then play a club towards dummy so that you still have hearts guarded and an entry left over. The ace comes down before you play the king and west promptly leads back a club. Does this change your plan?
At this point, I played high and got roughed. Then they lead a diamond and I stupidly flew with my king, which means I must go down two, because I must lose the Q of C before getting any pitches, giving them a chance to take two diamonds (+ 2 clubs, 1 heart and a rough). But I think it's always right to duck that club. Either clubs are 3-2 with the finesse on, or 3-2 with the finesse off, or 4-1 with the finesse on. If it's any 3-2, you either win or gain control (by guessing the diamond ace onside), drawing trump ending on the board and run clubs pitching diamonds. If the clubs are 4-1, you'll play small, and if even if he roughs, you play the jack under the rough, gain control by guessing diamonds, draw as much trump as necessary ending in hand and finesse clubs with your 9, overtaking with the 10 and playing the king to drop the queen. You will lose 1 diamond, 1 heart, and one or two clubs (one only if it's onside 3-2), no matter what. And you know 4H is making, either result should be great.
You can easily make 3 if trumps are 2-2 and the queen of clubs can be picked up (as is here) but if they win the queen and lead their last trump, they can cut you off from dummy. Of course, on the lie of the cards that still wouldn't matter since the A and Q of diamonds were on - making it far superior to my pathetic line.
Tomorrow we're playing in a two-session Swiss. Can't wait to have IMP disease be a good thing.
super-chart
For a couple of days, Lovey and I have nominally been playing this new convention I cooked up to atone/make me feel better for one of my more spectacular errors. I opened 3D first seat non-vulnerable with AKQxxxx and out and it went pass, 4D, pass, and I stupidly thought Lovey's bid must be invitational - after all, how else could he invite? After bidding 5D, which the opponents were kind enough not to double, I immediately realized I was an ass, but I was still intrigued - what's the best way for Lovey actually to get more information from me here? So agreed the following weird convention:
After 3C/3D, the next step up either shows a forcing hand with that suit OR a general asking bid. After that:
The next step shows - a good hand but no support for the suit responder bid
Two steps - a good hand and support for the suit responder bid
Three steps - a bad hand and support for the suit responder bid
Four steps - a bad hand and no support for the suit responder bid
I thought this convention was great. When you bid a forcing suit over partners 3 level minor, when do you ever get any information other than a raise or a rebid of the original minor? How do figure out if 3NT is going to make if all you need to know if that seven card minor is headed by something to be proud of? AND this system still preserves a way of bidding a forcing suit and finding out if there is support.
Fortunately for everything except this convention, Eric (Bob) and Argenta got in last night. Whilst talking bridge, Bob took one look at my card and panned this convention. "Are you telling me that 3H over 3D doesn't necessarily show hearts?" "You know, if you're going to psych a heart I'd rather not have partner tell the opponents I might be." "I've got a recommended defense to this convention - bid 4S with any 13 cards." After laughing this one off and defending it vigorously, Bob attacked it on more frightening grounds - "Is this even general chart?" We took a look at the general chart itself, and it's unclear exactly where this falls. Is it an artificial raise not game forcing? How different from Ogust is this really, just because it might also show hearts? Please post your comments and or professional directorial opinion.
Because we're in a rush to the sectional, I won't tell you about any of our best hands from yesterday. It was a great session, we robbed a couple people, made some good bids but we got a bad score for a great slam save and I misplayed a few hands. More on this later, and the session from today.
After 3C/3D, the next step up either shows a forcing hand with that suit OR a general asking bid. After that:
The next step shows - a good hand but no support for the suit responder bid
Two steps - a good hand and support for the suit responder bid
Three steps - a bad hand and support for the suit responder bid
Four steps - a bad hand and no support for the suit responder bid
I thought this convention was great. When you bid a forcing suit over partners 3 level minor, when do you ever get any information other than a raise or a rebid of the original minor? How do figure out if 3NT is going to make if all you need to know if that seven card minor is headed by something to be proud of? AND this system still preserves a way of bidding a forcing suit and finding out if there is support.
Fortunately for everything except this convention, Eric (Bob) and Argenta got in last night. Whilst talking bridge, Bob took one look at my card and panned this convention. "Are you telling me that 3H over 3D doesn't necessarily show hearts?" "You know, if you're going to psych a heart I'd rather not have partner tell the opponents I might be." "I've got a recommended defense to this convention - bid 4S with any 13 cards." After laughing this one off and defending it vigorously, Bob attacked it on more frightening grounds - "Is this even general chart?" We took a look at the general chart itself, and it's unclear exactly where this falls. Is it an artificial raise not game forcing? How different from Ogust is this really, just because it might also show hearts? Please post your comments and or professional directorial opinion.
Because we're in a rush to the sectional, I won't tell you about any of our best hands from yesterday. It was a great session, we robbed a couple people, made some good bids but we got a bad score for a great slam save and I misplayed a few hands. More on this later, and the session from today.
Friday, July 13, 2007
harryyyy
Yesterday was a great day, except for maybe the drive. Ok, the drive was fine too. We shared a imaginary trip into a world where Ron (who is obviously Lovey) is eating Lavender Brown's face (clearly fiction), and Professor Slughorn (David Gershkoff, anyone) is proving himself a master schmooz. We're all seeing the fifth movie with our friends tomorrow, who once again are the illustrious Eric (Bob) and Argenta (who believe or not studied in Argentina.)
To make the day really great, the afternoon set we played was one of the more amusing sets of duplicate bridge I can think of.
On one hand, I open a heart with
S void
H AK9xx
D KT7
C AQ653
and Lovey responds 3NT, nominally showing a strong spade splinter but obviously trying to bid a concealed splinter because righty passes quickly and they would have 12 spades. I smirk and cuebid clubs anyhow after describing the convention. (We end up in game, I play the diamonds wrong for +1, an average). On the very next hand, against the owner of the club, I hold:
S AT86
H T8732
D T7
C AK
I open a heart, and Lovey bids 3NT. I immediately start laughing, and alert it as a strong spade splinter with absolute confidence :) I cuebid clubs, Lovey cuebids diamonds (A/K) and I bid 4H, which I think is a mistake. I know the splinter is good news, but he doesn't really since I would cuebid anyway when he shows such a strong hand, so I should bid RKC I think. Lovey does me the favor of just bidding 6H, which was a good guess. Dummy comes down:
9
AK5
AKQ
J97543
The hand is not totally obvious but fairly straightforward. They lead a spade, and I win my ace. I reason that I don't have enough spade pitches and roughs to make this unless the Q and J of hearts drop (I need a 3-2 break at any rate). Therefore, I need to draw two rounds of trump and rough out clubs while keeping spades stopped when the Q of H ruffs in as I make pitches on clubs. All goes according to plan, for a tied for top. Most people in are in 4H making 5, and a couple are down in 6.
While talking to our pro friend Ken, he mentioned a story he calls "your ignorance is showing." Basically, the story is that someone with a 18 count and 7 hearts to the AKQJ opens 1H, which passes out, making 7. After the hand, his partner/girlfriend says: "Partner, you can't open that hand 1H!" Ken mentally cheers. "You've gotta open that hand 4H!" Ken mentally boos.
This was hilariously repeated for us today, when I open 1D, lefty doubles, pard bids 1NT, right bids 2H, I pass, and doubler bids 2S! Is this a 60 point deck, we each wonder? (I have a full open and pard has a max for his 1NT) 4S, all pass. Trust me, we're beating ourselves up now for not doubling. Lovey leads a diamond and dummy comes down with a 7 high and 5-5 in the majors. At least this guy is reasonable, we think. We take them down 2, and look at doubler's hand. He has a 4-3-3-3 11 count with no aces, 1 king, and QJx in my suit. His partner exclaims "You can't double with that hand!" We mentally cheer. "You've gotta have at least a 14 count to double on your first turn!" We mentally booo.
How would you bid this one? It goes 1C on your right and you hold:
S KT
H AKJT2
D AJ875
C 9
You probably bid 2NT if you play unusual as 2 lowest and mini-maxi like we do, and Lovey holding this hand does. So far, so good. It goes pass, 3D, pass. Now what? If you play 3S as stopper asking, you're stuck, but 3S stopper showing is still probably wrong. Are you worried about clubs? Do you want to fakely show a 6-5 in order to invite somehow? I'm not good at this sort of thing, but I would bid 4D. 3NT is not insane, but on this hand you're easily down two because the only lead for them is clubs. Lovey chose 5D, which is insane, but these are the same people who doubled with that 4-3-3-3 11 count and points in my suit.
I'm now playing 5D holding:
Jxxxx
x
KT3
T752
West (rotated) leads the king of clubs, and east signals high. He tanks, then switches to a spade which I play the king on, which holds. I play a diamond to king, heart to 10, rough a heart, 10 of diamonds, queen covers. I draw drump, play A and K of hearts, dropping the Q, and give a club and a spade for making 5, a top. Not hard when they lead a spade for you, but if they didn't, I would have to play hearts for the queen being Qxx or roughing two hearts and drawing trump without finessing. Actually, all of these things would have worked, but we still get a top because Lovey is insane.
It's really sad to know we won't be playing at the Columbus Bridge Center for a while. We got to play with some really great people, and more national champions and pros than I've ever played with knowingly. Even with all the age barriers, it was nice to feel welcome in a place we had visited just for the silver points. Bridge is a special game.
To make the day really great, the afternoon set we played was one of the more amusing sets of duplicate bridge I can think of.
On one hand, I open a heart with
S void
H AK9xx
D KT7
C AQ653
and Lovey responds 3NT, nominally showing a strong spade splinter but obviously trying to bid a concealed splinter because righty passes quickly and they would have 12 spades. I smirk and cuebid clubs anyhow after describing the convention. (We end up in game, I play the diamonds wrong for +1, an average). On the very next hand, against the owner of the club, I hold:
S AT86
H T8732
D T7
C AK
I open a heart, and Lovey bids 3NT. I immediately start laughing, and alert it as a strong spade splinter with absolute confidence :) I cuebid clubs, Lovey cuebids diamonds (A/K) and I bid 4H, which I think is a mistake. I know the splinter is good news, but he doesn't really since I would cuebid anyway when he shows such a strong hand, so I should bid RKC I think. Lovey does me the favor of just bidding 6H, which was a good guess. Dummy comes down:
9
AK5
AKQ
J97543
The hand is not totally obvious but fairly straightforward. They lead a spade, and I win my ace. I reason that I don't have enough spade pitches and roughs to make this unless the Q and J of hearts drop (I need a 3-2 break at any rate). Therefore, I need to draw two rounds of trump and rough out clubs while keeping spades stopped when the Q of H ruffs in as I make pitches on clubs. All goes according to plan, for a tied for top. Most people in are in 4H making 5, and a couple are down in 6.
While talking to our pro friend Ken, he mentioned a story he calls "your ignorance is showing." Basically, the story is that someone with a 18 count and 7 hearts to the AKQJ opens 1H, which passes out, making 7. After the hand, his partner/girlfriend says: "Partner, you can't open that hand 1H!" Ken mentally cheers. "You've gotta open that hand 4H!" Ken mentally boos.
This was hilariously repeated for us today, when I open 1D, lefty doubles, pard bids 1NT, right bids 2H, I pass, and doubler bids 2S! Is this a 60 point deck, we each wonder? (I have a full open and pard has a max for his 1NT) 4S, all pass. Trust me, we're beating ourselves up now for not doubling. Lovey leads a diamond and dummy comes down with a 7 high and 5-5 in the majors. At least this guy is reasonable, we think. We take them down 2, and look at doubler's hand. He has a 4-3-3-3 11 count with no aces, 1 king, and QJx in my suit. His partner exclaims "You can't double with that hand!" We mentally cheer. "You've gotta have at least a 14 count to double on your first turn!" We mentally booo.
How would you bid this one? It goes 1C on your right and you hold:
S KT
H AKJT2
D AJ875
C 9
You probably bid 2NT if you play unusual as 2 lowest and mini-maxi like we do, and Lovey holding this hand does. So far, so good. It goes pass, 3D, pass. Now what? If you play 3S as stopper asking, you're stuck, but 3S stopper showing is still probably wrong. Are you worried about clubs? Do you want to fakely show a 6-5 in order to invite somehow? I'm not good at this sort of thing, but I would bid 4D. 3NT is not insane, but on this hand you're easily down two because the only lead for them is clubs. Lovey chose 5D, which is insane, but these are the same people who doubled with that 4-3-3-3 11 count and points in my suit.
I'm now playing 5D holding:
Jxxxx
x
KT3
T752
West (rotated) leads the king of clubs, and east signals high. He tanks, then switches to a spade which I play the king on, which holds. I play a diamond to king, heart to 10, rough a heart, 10 of diamonds, queen covers. I draw drump, play A and K of hearts, dropping the Q, and give a club and a spade for making 5, a top. Not hard when they lead a spade for you, but if they didn't, I would have to play hearts for the queen being Qxx or roughing two hearts and drawing trump without finessing. Actually, all of these things would have worked, but we still get a top because Lovey is insane.
It's really sad to know we won't be playing at the Columbus Bridge Center for a while. We got to play with some really great people, and more national champions and pros than I've ever played with knowingly. Even with all the age barriers, it was nice to feel welcome in a place we had visited just for the silver points. Bridge is a special game.
Thursday, July 12, 2007
happy hour
Another drive by blogging this morning, which is possible thanks to my magically working-again laptop. Without warning, my laptop screen actually booted up on the 11th try? If tries were independent (a suspect assumption), then at an alpha of 5% the chance of it booting up any given time is at least, er, about 5/1000. Oh man, that doesn't make me feel comfortable. Maybe I'll be leaving the laptop on...
Anyhow, Wednesday was great fun. We made less (fewer!) mistakes at the table, and grabbed a 51% in the morning and 56% in the evening. It's become increasingly obvious that we should be happy with those scores at this club. Monday night and last night were fairly tame, but the fields Tuesday and Wednesday morning were really sharp. So that 51% might be our best accomplishement. Also hysterically (hilariously!) enough, all but one session has given us .7 silver for 1st C or 2nd B - whether we got a 46% or a 51%, we beat the same three other people in the C strat. The one actually decent score, 56% for second A, was worth only 1.1 silver. I'm sure better bridge players than us don't think about weirdnesses like this often, but Masterpoints are a broken system...
To make the day even better, Lovey and I each spent $7.50 for food today, total, and that's including two beers each. Happy hour special at 4pm with bridge players - hard to beat.
Speaking of hard to beat, 1NT wasn't for us, as we set it for 300, 200, and 150 in the same session, earning us an average of 79%. Defense has been good to us today. Even more random is that I held the following hands IN A ROW in the morning: 18 high, AKQ 5th of D; 20 high 4 trip 3; (one boring); 20 high 4-by-1; AKQJ 8th of diamonds, A9x hearts, Kx clubs. Then later in the session I held ANOTHER 20 HCP hand, 4432. Three out of these 5 times, my partner opened the bidding! Our average on the those boards: 26%. I feel like this might be telling us something about our slam bidding... and declarer play.
The most fun board for me was the following one, which I actually declared well--by accident. The defense is a little tricky, and because they gave it away I ended up making an interesting endplay. I'll give it to you from their perspective. You as west (rotated) hold
S 9
H 432
D KQT
C AQJ943
The vulnerability is favorable for you, at matchpoints. South deals and opens a heart. You overcall 2C, north doubles, pass, opener rebids 2H. You pass, all float. First of all, what do you lead? I probably lead a diamond like an idiot, but if you said a spade, so far so good. Dummy comes down with:
JT8752
9
AJ65
62
Partner plays K and then A, dropping the Q from south's hand. What do you discard? The 4 or 3 of clubs is unlikely to get the club lead through declarer you want, and the 9 would be important if declarer held KTXX...but then you could give partner his onside trump honor by leading a 3rd club. So I think I'd play the nine of clubs. A neutral heart also might be right, because partner should figure this one out. On the actual hand, he actually signaled with the 4 of clubs, and instead of east leading a club like he wanted, east led another "safe" spade, forcing declarer to trump high. Now look at it from my hand as declarer, south. I have remaining
S void
H AQJT65
D 42
C K5
What's your plan? I tank and lead a diamond up to my AJxx, planning to win the ace, take the heart finesse, and lose two clubs and a diamond hopefully catching the king onside (which is likely) and doubleton as my only line to make. But that's obviously wrong. I really should finesse the jack of diamonds in case west has KQ and doesn't split her honors, because I can rough another spade return high and this loses nothing on the old line. But I'm not thinking of that. Fortunately for me, west does split her honors, because now I cover with the ace, finesse the heart, drop the king with the ace, and play a diamond. No thanks to me, west is endplayed. She knows she has to win her king of diamonds, but now she either has to lead a small diamond and let me pitch a club or lead away from her AQJ. Making +1 is worth 86%. w00t!
Life is good. We'll post again soon.
Anyhow, Wednesday was great fun. We made less (fewer!) mistakes at the table, and grabbed a 51% in the morning and 56% in the evening. It's become increasingly obvious that we should be happy with those scores at this club. Monday night and last night were fairly tame, but the fields Tuesday and Wednesday morning were really sharp. So that 51% might be our best accomplishement. Also hysterically (hilariously!) enough, all but one session has given us .7 silver for 1st C or 2nd B - whether we got a 46% or a 51%, we beat the same three other people in the C strat. The one actually decent score, 56% for second A, was worth only 1.1 silver. I'm sure better bridge players than us don't think about weirdnesses like this often, but Masterpoints are a broken system...
To make the day even better, Lovey and I each spent $7.50 for food today, total, and that's including two beers each. Happy hour special at 4pm with bridge players - hard to beat.
Speaking of hard to beat, 1NT wasn't for us, as we set it for 300, 200, and 150 in the same session, earning us an average of 79%. Defense has been good to us today. Even more random is that I held the following hands IN A ROW in the morning: 18 high, AKQ 5th of D; 20 high 4 trip 3; (one boring); 20 high 4-by-1; AKQJ 8th of diamonds, A9x hearts, Kx clubs. Then later in the session I held ANOTHER 20 HCP hand, 4432. Three out of these 5 times, my partner opened the bidding! Our average on the those boards: 26%. I feel like this might be telling us something about our slam bidding... and declarer play.
The most fun board for me was the following one, which I actually declared well--by accident. The defense is a little tricky, and because they gave it away I ended up making an interesting endplay. I'll give it to you from their perspective. You as west (rotated) hold
S 9
H 432
D KQT
C AQJ943
The vulnerability is favorable for you, at matchpoints. South deals and opens a heart. You overcall 2C, north doubles, pass, opener rebids 2H. You pass, all float. First of all, what do you lead? I probably lead a diamond like an idiot, but if you said a spade, so far so good. Dummy comes down with:
JT8752
9
AJ65
62
Partner plays K and then A, dropping the Q from south's hand. What do you discard? The 4 or 3 of clubs is unlikely to get the club lead through declarer you want, and the 9 would be important if declarer held KTXX...but then you could give partner his onside trump honor by leading a 3rd club. So I think I'd play the nine of clubs. A neutral heart also might be right, because partner should figure this one out. On the actual hand, he actually signaled with the 4 of clubs, and instead of east leading a club like he wanted, east led another "safe" spade, forcing declarer to trump high. Now look at it from my hand as declarer, south. I have remaining
S void
H AQJT65
D 42
C K5
What's your plan? I tank and lead a diamond up to my AJxx, planning to win the ace, take the heart finesse, and lose two clubs and a diamond hopefully catching the king onside (which is likely) and doubleton as my only line to make. But that's obviously wrong. I really should finesse the jack of diamonds in case west has KQ and doesn't split her honors, because I can rough another spade return high and this loses nothing on the old line. But I'm not thinking of that. Fortunately for me, west does split her honors, because now I cover with the ace, finesse the heart, drop the king with the ace, and play a diamond. No thanks to me, west is endplayed. She knows she has to win her king of diamonds, but now she either has to lead a small diamond and let me pitch a club or lead away from her AQJ. Making +1 is worth 86%. w00t!
Life is good. We'll post again soon.
Wednesday, July 11, 2007
phoney
Writing from my phone today, because my laptop screen isn't working. Be concise, Jon!
Yesterday was an adventure, on many levels. After an up and down first session, the weird guy who was chatting us up on Monday turned out to actually be a local pro named Ken Eichenbaum. He gave us some rambling but ultimately helpful bidding advice, took us to the bar where the owner and some other players were chatting about the hands, and offered to give us his bidding notes. And it turns out he really did write some stuff, including a bridge musical called "The Wizard of Odds." The whole 3 hour intercession was spent listening to his insane bridge stories, which eventually turned to this awful client of his, and how he got suspended from bridge for 6 months while playing with her. That was actually the best story, because the person in charge of his appeal turned out to be stealing money from the ACBL treasury, and he got it revoked (so to speak).
Anyhow, he kibitzed us for the evening session, which really ought to be called something else since every game at the Columbus Bridge Center is 26 boards or more (the morning was 30!) and takes nearly four hours. While he watched, we played sloppily but we bid (and Lovey excellently played) a couple of good slams that the field didn't often find. The most interesting hand of the day was this 2NT opener: I hold
S A32
H AKQ8
D Q32
C AQ8
Lovey bids 3C, Puppet stayman, and right has the nerve to double. A sensible person might answer normally and be pleased lefty will now lead into his tenace for a top anyway, but no - I'm out for blood. I redouble, which we have no agreement on but I mean for business, and Lovey passes, which I hope means he has some clubs. It floats around and the doubler leads a club. Lovey has:
KQ87
643
94
T943
How would you play it? Would you bid it our way? In this hand spades are 3-3 so if you play low at trick one, which holds, you only lose two clubs and two diamonds. Lovey played Q then A in real life.
Out of room on phone, peace!
Yesterday was an adventure, on many levels. After an up and down first session, the weird guy who was chatting us up on Monday turned out to actually be a local pro named Ken Eichenbaum. He gave us some rambling but ultimately helpful bidding advice, took us to the bar where the owner and some other players were chatting about the hands, and offered to give us his bidding notes. And it turns out he really did write some stuff, including a bridge musical called "The Wizard of Odds." The whole 3 hour intercession was spent listening to his insane bridge stories, which eventually turned to this awful client of his, and how he got suspended from bridge for 6 months while playing with her. That was actually the best story, because the person in charge of his appeal turned out to be stealing money from the ACBL treasury, and he got it revoked (so to speak).
Anyhow, he kibitzed us for the evening session, which really ought to be called something else since every game at the Columbus Bridge Center is 26 boards or more (the morning was 30!) and takes nearly four hours. While he watched, we played sloppily but we bid (and Lovey excellently played) a couple of good slams that the field didn't often find. The most interesting hand of the day was this 2NT opener: I hold
S A32
H AKQ8
D Q32
C AQ8
Lovey bids 3C, Puppet stayman, and right has the nerve to double. A sensible person might answer normally and be pleased lefty will now lead into his tenace for a top anyway, but no - I'm out for blood. I redouble, which we have no agreement on but I mean for business, and Lovey passes, which I hope means he has some clubs. It floats around and the doubler leads a club. Lovey has:
KQ87
643
94
T943
How would you play it? Would you bid it our way? In this hand spades are 3-3 so if you play low at trick one, which holds, you only lose two clubs and two diamonds. Lovey played Q then A in real life.
Out of room on phone, peace!
Tuesday, July 10, 2007
Drive by blogging
Yesterday was our long trip to Columbus...fairly uneventful, listened to Harry Potter 6 the whole way. We've already ordered our copies of 7 at a bookstore in Nashville. At about 5PM, we checked into our smelly Rodeway, which was actually fine once we got to our room. There's no internet here, but there's unsecured wireless at the nearby Motel 6 so I'm going to (literally) do a drive-by-blogging. "Are we in range Bit?" "Get closer, get closer!"
We played in the open night session at the Columbus Bridge Center, which was a pretty pathological field. In several hands which game is making, one or no pairs bid it, yet some of our best boards were setting stupid games that we pushed them into. Lovey and I hadn't played bridge in a couple months, so we made our own healthy share of gross errors. In my favorite disaster of the night, Lovey and I have a somewhat sensible 2/1 auction:
1S - 2D - 2NT - 3NT - 4NT
2NT for us shows either 12-14 or 18-19 with all suits stopped. 3NT is to play, 4NT reveals 18-19. Lovey has:
S J9
H AQ2
D J9742
C AJ5
What would you do? Lovey passed ("I see a max of 32 and no long suit to run"), which turned out to be wrong but seems perfectly reasonable. I have
S AQT43
H KT7
D AK8
C K2
and the spade finesse is on and the Q of D is dropping, so everyone is making 7. However, this is my first hand in two months, so genius that I am, I FAIL TO TAKE the spade finesse and duck my AK of diamonds when they win the king of spades, and making 5 is a bottom of course. And worst of all, only one pair is in slam, so if I'd just played it half intelligently we'd have been fine.
Despite having a weird half-conservative half-bidding-unmakeable-games field, we had lots of gifts too. On one hand, I open 1C with A8 A973 J94 K764, lefty bids 1S, Lovey negative doubles, and righty bids 2S. I make a questionable 3H bid (we have no agreement as to the strength of this) they advance to 3S, Lovey bids 4H, all float. They lead a spade and lovey comes down with K64 JT8654 T8 A3. I win it on the board, and play the J of hearts. Righty thinks for a moment and plays Q from Qx, virtually guaranteeing that her honor will crash with partners, no matter what cards I have. 4H+1 is worth 90%, so shockingly she wasn't the only one to do it.
On the whole, a very fun night of bridge. It's good to be back. All this added up to a 51%, we're hoping to kick it into gear today. There's also this weird guy... he won both sessions yesterday, and claims to have invented several conventions that other people stole, and to be a published songwriter. I'm sure we'll have more to say about him tonight, so more on that next post.
We played in the open night session at the Columbus Bridge Center, which was a pretty pathological field. In several hands which game is making, one or no pairs bid it, yet some of our best boards were setting stupid games that we pushed them into. Lovey and I hadn't played bridge in a couple months, so we made our own healthy share of gross errors. In my favorite disaster of the night, Lovey and I have a somewhat sensible 2/1 auction:
1S - 2D - 2NT - 3NT - 4NT
2NT for us shows either 12-14 or 18-19 with all suits stopped. 3NT is to play, 4NT reveals 18-19. Lovey has:
S J9
H AQ2
D J9742
C AJ5
What would you do? Lovey passed ("I see a max of 32 and no long suit to run"), which turned out to be wrong but seems perfectly reasonable. I have
S AQT43
H KT7
D AK8
C K2
and the spade finesse is on and the Q of D is dropping, so everyone is making 7. However, this is my first hand in two months, so genius that I am, I FAIL TO TAKE the spade finesse and duck my AK of diamonds when they win the king of spades, and making 5 is a bottom of course. And worst of all, only one pair is in slam, so if I'd just played it half intelligently we'd have been fine.
Despite having a weird half-conservative half-bidding-unmakeable-games field, we had lots of gifts too. On one hand, I open 1C with A8 A973 J94 K764, lefty bids 1S, Lovey negative doubles, and righty bids 2S. I make a questionable 3H bid (we have no agreement as to the strength of this) they advance to 3S, Lovey bids 4H, all float. They lead a spade and lovey comes down with K64 JT8654 T8 A3. I win it on the board, and play the J of hearts. Righty thinks for a moment and plays Q from Qx, virtually guaranteeing that her honor will crash with partners, no matter what cards I have. 4H+1 is worth 90%, so shockingly she wasn't the only one to do it.
On the whole, a very fun night of bridge. It's good to be back. All this added up to a 51%, we're hoping to kick it into gear today. There's also this weird guy... he won both sessions yesterday, and claims to have invented several conventions that other people stole, and to be a published songwriter. I'm sure we'll have more to say about him tonight, so more on that next post.
Friday, July 6, 2007
woot
Hello world, welcome to this brand-spanking new blog. I'm leaving tonight for the start of the great bridge sojourn, so there's not much to this post, but it feels like I've gotta start somewhere.
If you're here, you're probably a friend of ours, so I'll make the introduction short: I'm Jon, this is Alex (hereafter: "Lovey"). We just graduated Yale, and we used to run the Yale bridge club. We love bridge - we are not particularly good (nor particularly bad) at bridge. We're 22, which makes us ACBL "juniors." We teach bridge to whoever listens, and want to make sure there are people our age to play with now and in the future. We believe that the ACBL is trying hard but working inefficiently towards promoting bridge for people under 30, that juniors know junior bridge best, and we're optimistic that bridge has a bright future even for people our age.
Because I think both of us are a little jealous about hearing our friends out west get reported on (we enjoy reading Mike's bridge blog), I decided to start a site about our trip to this year's summer NABCs. Silver points are hard to come by, so instead of flying down we're taking an 11 day road trip to hit up some sectionals. We'll be stopping first at the STaC's in Columbus, OH and the sectional in Durham, NC, where'll we be joined by Eric from Stanford and Argenta, formerly of Yale. Then we'll be taking a break for club games in Atlanta, GA for about 4 days before going to the NABCs. If you're around and want to play with us somewhere, email me at yalebridgeclub a-t gmail dot com or post a reply to this post.
This blog will be about what we're up to, hands we played, conventions, funny stories, and about junior bridge in general. I'm not planning on being personal, ranty, or preachy. We'll be updating every day or two about our trip. We leave tomorrow morning. Come back soon!
If you're here, you're probably a friend of ours, so I'll make the introduction short: I'm Jon, this is Alex (hereafter: "Lovey"). We just graduated Yale, and we used to run the Yale bridge club. We love bridge - we are not particularly good (nor particularly bad) at bridge. We're 22, which makes us ACBL "juniors." We teach bridge to whoever listens, and want to make sure there are people our age to play with now and in the future. We believe that the ACBL is trying hard but working inefficiently towards promoting bridge for people under 30, that juniors know junior bridge best, and we're optimistic that bridge has a bright future even for people our age.
Because I think both of us are a little jealous about hearing our friends out west get reported on (we enjoy reading Mike's bridge blog), I decided to start a site about our trip to this year's summer NABCs. Silver points are hard to come by, so instead of flying down we're taking an 11 day road trip to hit up some sectionals. We'll be stopping first at the STaC's in Columbus, OH and the sectional in Durham, NC, where'll we be joined by Eric from Stanford and Argenta, formerly of Yale. Then we'll be taking a break for club games in Atlanta, GA for about 4 days before going to the NABCs. If you're around and want to play with us somewhere, email me at yalebridgeclub a-t gmail dot com or post a reply to this post.
This blog will be about what we're up to, hands we played, conventions, funny stories, and about junior bridge in general. I'm not planning on being personal, ranty, or preachy. We'll be updating every day or two about our trip. We leave tomorrow morning. Come back soon!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)