BBO Discussion Forums: 2013 Vanderbilt - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

  • 3 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

2013 Vanderbilt

#21 User is offline   bluecalm 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,555
  • Joined: 2007-January-22

Posted 2013-March-21, 17:04

I hope vugraph operators choose your match. It's going to be fun :)
0

#22 User is offline   cherdano 

  • 5555
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 9,519
  • Joined: 2003-September-04
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2013-March-21, 17:06

 rogerclee, on 2013-March-21, 16:50, said:

one time

four more times
The easiest way to count losers is to line up the people who talk about loser count, and count them. -Kieran Dyke
2

#23 User is offline   cherdano 

  • 5555
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 9,519
  • Joined: 2003-September-04
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2013-March-22, 01:12

Three more times!
The easiest way to count losers is to line up the people who talk about loser count, and count them. -Kieran Dyke
0

#24 User is offline   Aberlour10 

  • Vugrapholic
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,018
  • Joined: 2004-January-06
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:At the Rhine River km 772,1

Posted 2013-March-22, 02:48

It doesn't count as JEC #35, but I think after 34 loses this great win brings a lot of good feeling to the BBF :)
Preempts are Aberlour's best bridge friends
0

#25 User is offline   GreenMan 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 767
  • Joined: 2005-October-26

Posted 2013-March-22, 03:45

 Aberlour10, on 2013-March-22, 02:48, said:

It doesn't count as JEC #35, but I think after 34 loses this great win brings a lot of good feeling to the BBF :)


Ahem. 33 losses, 1 win. :angry:
If you put an accurate skill level in your profile, you get a bonus 5% extra finesses working. --johnu
0

#26 User is offline   Aberlour10 

  • Vugrapholic
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,018
  • Joined: 2004-January-06
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:At the Rhine River km 772,1

Posted 2013-March-22, 03:47

 GreenMan, on 2013-March-22, 03:45, said:

Ahem. 33 losses, 1 win. :angry:



Didn't get it, mea culpa :rolleyes:
Preempts are Aberlour's best bridge friends
1

#27 User is offline   lalldonn 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,066
  • Joined: 2012-March-06

Posted 2013-March-22, 06:13

If I had played the way I did in my forums vs jec match we would have lost by 100 :P
"What's the big rebid problem? After 1♦ - 1♠, I can rebid 1NT, 2♠, or 2♦."
- billw55
2

#28 User is offline   ewj 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 303
  • Joined: 2005-April-12

Posted 2013-March-22, 06:32

Anyone know what the appeal hand was that Auken's team won to defeat Monaco (last I checked they were 70 odd down so quite some comeback)
0

#29 User is offline   MickyB 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,290
  • Joined: 2004-May-03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London, England

Posted 2013-March-22, 07:07

http://bridgewinners...the-vanderbilt/
0

#30 User is offline   y66 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,496
  • Joined: 2006-February-24

Posted 2013-March-22, 07:44

So good. More please.
If you lose all hope, you can always find it again -- Richard Ford in The Sportswriter
0

#31 User is offline   jogs 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,316
  • Joined: 2011-March-01
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:student of the game

Posted 2013-March-23, 13:50

None of the top four seeds made the final 4. Has this happened before?
0

#32 User is offline   MickyB 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,290
  • Joined: 2004-May-03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London, England

Posted 2013-March-23, 20:23

I partnered Dennis Bilde for three boards in the Junior Indy in Philly in 2010.

On one board, declarer had A987x opposite xx in a side-suit, with the ability to take one ruff in the dummy. Declarer led one to the nine, and holding KJx Dennis won the jack and played the king back, giving declarer a losing option out of nowhere. Ever since, I've been following his progress closely, expecting great things.
0

#33 User is offline   bluecalm 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,555
  • Joined: 2007-January-22

Posted 2013-March-24, 19:57

They are playing very well. Impressive.
0

#34 User is offline   hrothgar 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 15,484
  • Joined: 2003-February-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Natick, MA
  • Interests:Travel
    Cooking
    Brewing
    Hiking

Posted 2013-March-26, 08:41

Over the weekend, I had an interesting idea that we should base Vanderbilt seeding on amount of money that that pros on the team are being paid.

Looks as if the New York Times beat me to this insight: http://www.newyorker...iness/ncaa.html
Alderaan delenda est
0

#35 User is offline   aguahombre 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 12,029
  • Joined: 2009-February-21
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:St. George, UT

Posted 2013-March-26, 09:33

 hrothgar, on 2013-March-26, 08:41, said:

Over the weekend, I had an interesting idea that we should base Vanderbilt seeding on amount of money that that pros on the team are being paid.

Looks as if the New York Times beat me to this insight: http://www.newyorker...iness/ncaa.html

And do you think someone (anyone) could quantify that? Would they even have access to all the fluctuating travel and expense costs? What would be the seed of a team with (perish the thought) no deep-pocket sponser that decided to win together ---with one or two of the pros paying one or two of the others just because they can?
"Bidding Spades to show spades can work well." (Kenberg)
0

#36 User is offline   billw55 

  • enigmatic
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 4,757
  • Joined: 2009-July-31
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2013-March-26, 09:55

 aguahombre, on 2013-March-26, 09:33, said:

And do you think someone (anyone) could quantify that? Would they even have access to all the fluctuating travel and expense costs? What would be the seed of a team with (perish the thought) no deep-pocket sponser that decided to win together ---with one or two of the pros paying one or two of the others just because they can?

Sure, there are some practical obstacles. But it's not a bad idea in principle.

Also wondering, how many teams actually had paid pros? Or would it be easier to count the ones that didn't (or probably didn't)?
Life is long and beautiful, if bad things happen, good things will follow.
-gwnn
0

#37 User is offline   gnasher 

  • Andy Bowles
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 11,993
  • Joined: 2007-May-03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 2013-March-26, 10:07

 hrothgar, on 2013-March-26, 08:41, said:

Over the weekend, I had an interesting idea that we should base Vanderbilt seeding on amount of money that that pros on the team are being paid.

So a sponsor could obtain a higher seed by voluntarily paying his team more money? There would also be opportunities for a husband-and-wife partnership to improve their seeding by means of a notional transaction.
... that would still not be conclusive proof, before someone wants to explain that to me as well as if I was a 5 year-old. - gwnn
0

#38 User is offline   aguahombre 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 12,029
  • Joined: 2009-February-21
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:St. George, UT

Posted 2013-March-26, 10:05

Or a mixed (or not) team not involving husbands/wives who would have to put a monetary value on other forms of payment.
"Bidding Spades to show spades can work well." (Kenberg)
0

#39 User is offline   WellSpyder 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,627
  • Joined: 2009-November-30
  • Location:Oxfordshire, England

Posted 2013-March-26, 10:32

 aguahombre, on 2013-March-26, 10:05, said:

Or a mixed (or not) team not involving husbands/wives who would have to put a monetary value on other forms of payment.

who might also be able to improve their "seeding" by making these non-monetary payments in both directions?
0

#40 User is offline   ArtK78 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 7,786
  • Joined: 2004-September-05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Galloway NJ USA
  • Interests:Bridge, Poker, participatory and spectator sports.
    Occupation - Tax Attorney in Atlantic City, NJ.

Posted 2013-March-26, 10:34

Wow. There are a lot of people with a lot of time on their hands.

The NYT article is an interesting piece, but no one is suggesting that the idea should be taken seriously. Richard made a very interesting extension of the idea to professionalism in bridge. I don't think that he was suggesting that the idea be adopted.

Having said that, I am sure that we can require all of the paperwork (player contracts, travel vouchers, hotel vouchers, etc.) submitted to the ACBL Committee on Seeding and Professional Oversight prior to the commencement of the event. The committee can take it from there.

As for non-monetary compensation, that brings to mind a story from Jerry Machlin's book on his life as a tournament director. One time (many years ago) he and another director seeded the field in a pair event based on, for lack of a better term, the hotness of the female players. After it became apparent how the seeding was done, some of the women thanked him for their seed. Others complained that they should have been seeded higher or that another woman should have been seeded lower.
0
  • 3 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

3 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 3 guests, 0 anonymous users