[mtvesuvius]

Phil, on Jun 14 2009, 11:24 PM, said:

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.

Yes, they are 4 handed for the final match, apparently if someone cannot play the sufficient # of boards in a match for a clearly non-bridge related reason (i.e. health problems) they can be exempt from playing a match (along with their regular partner). This is what I have heard... I haven't verified it.

[USViking]

TimG said:

Did any of the players on the last US Olympic basketball teams play in any "trials" in order to make the team?

How about the baseball players which represented the US in the World Baseball Classic?

No, these players got a bye all the way to their selection.  Of course, their performance in the regular season(s) was a major factor in their selection.

The USBF Trials are somewhere in between selection of players for the US Olympic basketball team and selection of professional basketball teams to play in the NBA post-season playoffs.

Anyway, I don't think your analogy between USBF team selection and Russell, Chamberlain and Abdul-Jabbar is quite on.  If professional athletes had been eligible for US Olympic teams when these players were in their prime, they would have absolutely had a bye onto the team.

You are correct that my analogy is imperfect.

It would be more precise if the US Olympic team
had been the NBA champion prior to the introduction
of so many non-Americans to the NBA.

Now the team would have to be a hybrid if it were to
consist of a core of the NBA champ.

As it is the US Olympic basketball team has always
been chosen by commitee.

The fact remains that in North American professional sport
byes are not universally employed, and never, I think, for
more than one round. Certainly not for four rounds!

I am still waiting for a convincing argument as to why
Bridge should be an exception.

[USViking]

geller said:

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.

Incorrect in characterizing seeding as equivilant to a bye.

If you must play do not have a bye.

If I were to comb google I believe I could come up with
a case where a 1st seed lost to a last seed, although
perhaps not in the NBA to date. It is only a matter of
time before it happens in the NBA.

geller said:

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. 

I missed the fact that there were byes for a few NBA seasons,
most lately over 30 years ago. The fact remains that the no-bye
format has been much more prevelant.

geller said:

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. 

I have not taken issue with the one-bye system.

Get back with me on the four-bye system if you can think
of anything which does not involve altering word definitions.

[jdonn]

Why should bridge be like any other sport? Just think of it as they have combined selecting a team with anyone being able to try out. Since other "sports" are usually not open for anyone to try out, they obviously won't have the same system.

[Jlall]

THEY EARNED IST WATF IS THE PROBLEM GUYSSSSSSssssssssssssssssss???????

[Jlall]

fred, on Jun 14 2009, 04:54 PM, said:

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

Yeah man, they were/are ridic good. But I believe the Zia type is a better type of partner for Hamman. Of course this is just speculation.

[USViking]

jdonn, on Jun 15 2009, 01:47 AM, said:

Why should bridge be like any other sport? Just think of it as they have combined selecting a team with anyone being able to try out. Since other "sports" are usually not open for anyone to try out, they obviously won't have the same system.

I am asking why bridge should be different, and replies like this
do not provide any explanation.

As for the "openess", there were 27 teams in the tournament,
quite a few I will allow, but are you saying anyone could have
shown up with a team and joined the field?

[USViking]

Jlall, on Jun 15 2009, 01:49 AM, said:

THEY EARNED IST WATF IS THE PROBLEM GUYSSSSSSssssssssssssssssss???????

Stop screeching.

[Stephen Tu]

Quote

The fact remains that in North American professional sport
byes are not universally employed, and never, I think, for
more than one round. Certainly not for four rounds!

I am still waiting for a convincing argument as to why
Bridge should be an exception.

Depends if you are running the contest for the sake of having a contest, or for the sake of determining the best team to be your country's representative. These trials are run over a limited period of time, there is always a certain amount of luck involved between teams this close even over 120 boards, and here the early rounds are half that. Allowing good teams byes in effect just makes the big NABC events part of the trials, and reduces the luck factor, since I think it's undisputable that repeated top finishes in recent Spingold/Reisinger etc. are more proof of level than knocking off a top seed in a single 60 bd match.

If you wanted to run a single tourney to determine the best tennis player in the world at the moment, you would want to give Nadal/Federer byes to at least the quarters if not the semis, you don't make them slog out early rounds to get upset by the Soderlings of the world.

As long as everyone has an equal chance of obtaining byes by doing well in the open NABC events, I don't see any unfairness. Maybe you could argue about adjusting formulas so that it's harder to get bye all the way to the semis, maybe you only want to see at most byes to the quarters? That would be OK with me. Anyway I think the USBF must have voted on this so the people involved think it's OK as is.

Also when you bring up the NBA, they have no byes now but they are running best-of-7 series. Would you also think no byes was best if they ran it "one-and-done" like the NCAAs, which has much greater luck factor?

If they ran much longer trials, I could support no byes, but given the time constraints I think the current strategy produces the best team if you want to run open tournaments.

[jdonn]

USViking, on Jun 15 2009, 01:56 AM, said:

jdonn, on Jun 15 2009, 01:47 AM, said:

Why should bridge be like any other sport? Just think of it as they have combined selecting a team with anyone being able to try out. Since other "sports" are usually not open for anyone to try out, they obviously won't have the same system.

I am asking why bridge should be different, and replies like this
do not provide any explanation.

As for the "openess", there were 27 teams in the tournament,
quite a few I will allow, but are you saying anyone could have
shown up with a team and joined the field?

My last sentence offered an explanation.

And yes, anyone could play (they have to preregister, they can't just show up). Which is why the system is the way it is. It is a medium between the two goals, letting anyone play and at least have a shot to win, but making it very likely that a strong team will actually win.

[Jlall]

USViking, on Jun 15 2009, 01:57 AM, said:

Jlall, on Jun 15 2009, 01:49 AM, said:

THEY EARNED IST WATF IS THE PROBLEM GUYSSSSSSssssssssssssssssss???????

Stop screeching.

lol moron

[USViking]

jdonn, on Jun 15 2009, 02:02 AM, said:

My last sentence offered an explanation.

And yes, anyone could play (they have to preregister, they can't just show up). Which is why the system is the way it is. It is a medium between the two goals, letting anyone play and at least have a shot to win, but making it very likely that a strong team will actually win.

OK with the "openness", which suprises me, but I still fail
to see the connection with justification for four byes.

If there had been 270 teams then fine, several teams might
reasonably be due four byes.

With a field of 27 and one bye max the top seed would only
have to play four rounds prerepechage, which does not strike
me as unfairly burdensome. I am not all that opposed to two
byes for the Hammans and Meckstroths of the world. You still
have to make a case for four.

[USViking]

jlall said:

lol moron

Thanks for dropping the cap lock, Einstein.

[jdonn]

USViking, on Jun 15 2009, 02:15 AM, said:

I am not all that opposed to two byes for the Hammans and Meckstroths of the world. You still have to make a case for four.

I don't have to do anything, you just have to learn to live with it and to realize that 2 and 4 are equally arbitrary.

[Jlall]

USViking, on Jun 15 2009, 02:17 AM, said:

jlall said:

lol moron

Thanks for dropping the cap lock, Einstein.

WANNA PLAY MONEY BRIDGE?

[USViking]

jdonn, on Jun 15 2009, 02:22 AM, said:

I don't have to do anything, you just have to learn to live with it and to realize that 2 and 4 are equally arbitrary.

They may both be arbitrary, but they are not equal.

One requires 240 more deals to play than the other, right?

You should be able to come up with a better argument than x = (x + 240)

[USViking]

Jlall, on Jun 15 2009, 02:50 AM, said:

WANNA PLAY MONEY BRIDGE?

No.

Your intellectual majesty has me cowed.

[NickRW]

Dunno really what's the problem here. The people in charge made a system - maybe not a perfect in everyone's eyes - but a reasonable system. Live with it.

As to byes - there are other sports where there are lots of byes. For example in England & Wales the FA Cup has all sorts of preliminary rounds of which all 90 or so of the teams in the top four divisions are exempt. Then the first two rounds of the main competition only takes place between the qualifiers from the preliminary rounds and the teams from the lower two of the main leagues. Finally the teams from the top two leagues join in the third round.

I'm fairly sure in snooker the top 16 or 32 people in the world rankings get some sort of exemption from the qualifying rounds in the world championship as well. So it is not uncommon in both individual and team sports.

Nick

[geller]

USViking, on Jun 15 2009, 03:19 PM, said:

TimG said:

Did any of the players on the last US Olympic basketball teams play in any "trials" in order to make the team?

How about the baseball players which represented the US in the World Baseball Classic?

No, these players got a bye all the way to their selection.  Of course, their performance in the regular season(s) was a major factor in their selection.

The USBF Trials are somewhere in between selection of players for the US Olympic basketball team and selection of professional basketball teams to play in the NBA post-season playoffs.

Anyway, I don't think your analogy between USBF team selection and Russell, Chamberlain and Abdul-Jabbar is quite on.  If professional athletes had been eligible for US Olympic teams when these players were in their prime, they would have absolutely had a bye onto the team.

You are correct that my analogy is imperfect.

It would be more precise if the US Olympic team
had been the NBA champion prior to the introduction
of so many non-Americans to the NBA.

Now the team would have to be a hybrid if it were to
consist of a core of the NBA champ.

As it is the US Olympic basketball team has always
been chosen by commitee.

The fact remains that in North American professional sport
byes are not universally employed, and never, I think, for
more than one round. Certainly not for four rounds!

I am still waiting for a convincing argument as to why
Bridge should be an exception.

The USBA championships are a bit like the English tennis championships in that there are many prequalifying rounds open to anyone in the case of the USBA or open to almost any pro in the case of Wimbledon. There are four or five qualifying rounds (not sure exactly) before the lucky qualifiers can play in the main event. In the case of the USBF the "real" tourney starts in the round of 8 (round of 16?) so Nickell "really" gets a bye for only one or two rounds.

The confusion arises because the USBA doesn't label the rounds before the round of 8 (round of 16?) as a qualifying tourney or "play in" or what have you.

Actually since the conditions for getting USBA tourney byes were announced well in advance I don't really see what the problem is....

-Bob

[mtvesuvius]

USViking, on Jun 15 2009, 03:29 AM, said:

Jlall, on Jun 15 2009, 02:50 AM, said:

WANNA PLAY MONEY BRIDGE?

No.

Your intellectual majesty has me cowed.

Say, I know of a cliffside resort with a free bar that you might like!

lol?