[MarkDean]

bidule4, on Jun 12 2009, 04:14 PM, said:

strange vugraph attendance:

300 watching "A" final
1700 watching "B" quarterfinal

yvan

Well, it is the last quarter for the quarterfinal, and still in the first half for the final: might be part of the reason.

[TimG]

MarkDean, on Jun 12 2009, 06:20 PM, said:

bidule4, on Jun 12 2009, 04:14 PM, said:

strange vugraph attendance:

300  watching "A" final
1700 watching "B" quarterfinal

yvan

Well, it is the last quarter for the quarterfinal, and still in the first half for the final: might be part of the reason.

And, the final is not particularly close.

[nickf]

Hanoi5, on Jun 13 2009, 02:53 AM, said:

I heard the Italian Bridge Federation appoints the three pairs that will represent the country.

Not quite correct. Strictly speaking it's the owner of a popular brand of Italian coffee that decides these matters.

nickf
sydney

[jkljkl]

nickf, on Jun 12 2009, 09:32 PM, said:

Hanoi5, on Jun 13 2009, 02:53 AM, said:

I heard the Italian Bridge Federation appoints the three pairs that will represent the country.

Not quite correct. Strictly speaking it's the owner of a popular brand of Italian coffee that decides these matters.

nickf
sydney

Hello,

well stricly speaking the person in charge to select the "Men Team" is also owner of a brand of coffee.

- http://www.federbridge.it/BDIonline/artico...rtfile=1333.pdf -

Attività Agonistica Alto Livello:

Responsabile Coordinazione: Tamburi;
Responsabile Squadra Nazionale Maschile: Lavazza;
Resp. Sq. Naz. Femm-Mista-Senior: Bernasconi;
Resp. Sq. Naz. Juniores: Failla.

Fino ai Campionati del Mondo di S.Paolo viene prorogato Resta quale Resp. Sq.
Femmimile.


ciao stefan

PS
Tamburi is the new elected president of the FIGB that won against Rona
Lavazza is also vice-president of the FIGB

[gnasher]

Mbodell, on Jun 13 2009, 12:06 AM, said:

I agree that the USBF setup is quite good. There is a debate in some other (typically smaller) countries about if selection produces better teams or trials.

Some countries respond to this debate by changing the method used for selection every couple of years.

[OleBerg]

Hanoi5, on Jun 12 2009, 06:53 PM, said:

Quote

Are there trials in Norway and Italy, for instance?

I heard the Italian Bridge Federation appoints the three pairs that will represent the country.

It is the norm in Europe, that the resident federation appoints the team to represent the country.

In Denmark this has very often meant, that the team is composed of pairs from two or three different teams.

The practice has it's pro's and con's.

[NickRW]

OleBerg, on Jun 13 2009, 10:58 AM, said:

Hanoi5, on Jun 12 2009, 06:53 PM, said:

Quote

Are there trials in Norway and Italy, for instance?

I heard the Italian Bridge Federation appoints the three pairs that will represent the country.

It is the norm in Europe, that the resident federation appoints the team to represent the country.

In Denmark this has very often meant, that the team is composed of pairs from two or three different teams.

The practice has it's pro's and con's.

I suspect it mainly has pros when the pairs from different teams have national spirit or when a team captain can create a good team atmosphere (Or when they are the onlyhalf decent pairs anyway). Otherwise it might be better to go with the best overall team.

Nick

[mike777]

We have had this discussion often before. I still do not think that the top priority should be to come up with the "best" team. The highest priority should be the open competition itself. If that means the third best team wins the trials, so be it.

If you want to give seeds/byes to the best overall team, fine, but make them play in an open competition to represent.

If novices win, they win!

[3for3]

On the notion of a pairs trial, one of the winners of this years event is an ardent supporter of using a pairs format for the year that 2 teams are selected.


The byes seem to be a huge advantage, and yet 2 teams from the RR were in the main final.


There have been proposals for a 'somewhat' closed tournament, which would limit the amount of byes, but that is not happening in the current setup.

[Jlall]

TimG, on Jun 12 2009, 07:20 PM, said:

MarkDean, on Jun 12 2009, 06:20 PM, said:

bidule4, on Jun 12 2009, 04:14 PM, said:

strange vugraph attendance:

300  watching "A" final
1700 watching "B" quarterfinal

yvan

Well, it is the last quarter for the quarterfinal, and still in the first half for the final: might be part of the reason.

And, the final is not particularly close.

And the USA 2 match has clearly better teams than the USA 1 match lol.

[JoAnneM]

Do we want the teams with the best reputations to go, or do we want the teams who are playing the best bridge at the time to go. I think that is a crucial question. I would also favor limiting byes.

[awm]

I think we want the team playing the best bridge to go.

The Nickell team was arguably the best in the world for many years (their only serious competition being the Italians) but the loss of Paul Soloway has hurt them somewhat. While Zia Mahmood is certainly a world-class player, Hamman and Soloway had a great partnership and I'm not convinced the team is as strong as it once was. Players age as well, and at some point the level of play deteriorates. It's not obvious that the Nickell team will always be the best team to send to everything (especially if the composition of the team changes!) just because they were a dominant force for so long.

[jdonn]

The Nickell team got a bye because of results this year, not because they have a reputation as the best team over a long time period.

Also if they are getting worse, then I think age is very likely the reason but Zia for Soloway is not. I believe Zia is a better player, and him and Hamman have been playing for decades too.

[Gerben42]

The team is not representing just themselves in the Bermuda Bowl, they are representing a country. For this reason I think every nation should send the team that at the time of the tournament seems to have the biggest chance of doing well (goal may differ for countries, for USA the goal will be 1st place of course).

How this is done best is of course difficult, as is the same for other national teams. The Dutch soccer team is an example of a team that has, over the last 40 years, been world class in players, but not always world class as a team. For this reason, picking just 3 pairs may not work best. However this is the method used in the Netherlands, but here the pairs are picked from a pool of 5 or 6 pairs who train together every Friday, so probably they will harmonize as a team also.

In Germany, teamwise qualifications happen whenever the open team does not qualify in the top 10 of the European Championships, i.e. unlikely to happen soon.

In Poland I think there is a pairwise qualification phase were all may participate, and some pairs may be already set for the team (last time I think Martens - Jassem had this status).

So what do I favour? I would say a teamwise qualification (4-handed) and the choice for the 3rd pair from a rather short list.

[cherdanno]

awm, on Jun 14 2009, 12:00 PM, said:

I think we want the team playing the best bridge to go.

The Nickell team was arguably the best in the world for many years (their only serious competition being the Italians) but the loss of Paul Soloway has hurt them somewhat. While Zia Mahmood is certainly a world-class player, Hamman and Soloway had a great partnership and I'm not convinced the team is as strong as it once was. Players age as well, and at some point the level of play deteriorates. It's not obvious that the Nickell team will always be the best team to send to everything (especially if the composition of the team changes!) just because they were a dominant force for so long.

Whenever there is a KO match between Nickell and any other team except the Italians, I am happy to offer you a bet of 50$ that Nickell is going to win that match.

[fred]

jdonn, on Jun 14 2009, 06:02 PM, said:

Also if they are getting worse, then I think age is very likely the reason but Zia for Soloway is not. I believe Zia is a better player, and him and Hamman have been playing for decades too.

To me it doesn't make much sense to compare Soloway and Zia as players because they are (or were in the case of Paul) very different types of players.

Soloway was perhaps the most "solid" player I have ever played against. The frequency of his errors, even when his health was failing, was extremely low. His bidding judgment was truly exceptional.

Zia is what I would call a "flair player" - he is gifted in terms of things like imagination and table presence.

IMO Soloway was and Zia still is among the very best (or maybe even the best) of their respective species, but we are talking about 2 very different species of bridge players.

Which species turns out to be best in terms of an effective partner for the great Hamman remains to be seen...

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[jdonn]

All I know for sure is the few boards I have played against each, I got whooped...

[barmar]

fred, on Jun 14 2009, 05:54 PM, said:

Which species turns out to be best in terms of an effective partner for the great Hamman remains to be seen...

Of course, one of the things that presumably makes players like Hamman so great over such a long time is that they can adapt and play well with many different types of partners.

Furthermore, he's played with and against Zia many times, they both know each other's style. If the two of them didn't agree that they could be nearly as good a partnership as HamWay was, I doubt Zia would have replaced Soloway.

I doubt Nickell simply threw Zia onto the team without due diligence like this.

[geller]

Quote

On the other hand, in a different sport, such giants as Bill Russell,
Wilt Chamberlain and Kareem Abdul-Jabbar never got one bye
in their entire professional lives. They would not have gotten a bye
even if they had been on the same team.

1. Since the NBA playoffs are a revenue producing sport Kareem et al had to play from the beginning round but if their team was the top seed they were matched against the bottom team in their conference, and thus effectively got a bye.

2. IIRC there was a time when there were twelve teams in the NBA playoffs and the top four teams got a first round bye.

3. In the NFL playoffs the top four seeds get a 1st round bye. This is an enormous advantage because they get an extra week of rest, and play their first game at home.

[Phil]

By the way, does anyone know what is happening with Nickell? Someone at the vugraph mentioned Freeman was sick and left NY, but Nick hadn't played any of the first two segments I don't believe.