[mike777]

Difficult discussion then if we don't really have a way to measure what is optimal if a country in the OP Poland is better off with a team trials or selection method.

I found it interesting how the WBF was broke for decades. The President Ortiz-Patino used to write a big check at the end of the year out of his pocket. Sponsors would be hired and then renege. Putting on the Bermuda bowl is a huge expense for the WBF and often they were not sure where the money was going to come from. The politics behind the championships are as interesting as the actual play.

I had forgotten that the Burgay tape scandal arose out of a feud with a selector in Italy. According to Burgay he was promised a spot and then denied.

I had forgotten how the Europe Zone (EBL) was on the verge of leaving the WBF and in open conflict with the ACBL. Something to do with the new WBF president Howard but what is not clear.

[Aberlour10]

mike777, on 2013-August-27, 13:52, said:

Difficult discussion then if we don't really have a way to measure what is optimal if a country in the OP Poland is better off with a team trials or selection method.

The Polish Bridge Union used many methods in the last decade, any of them seemed really to work.

Now they found the way to get B-Z back on Bermuda Bowl team, there is a private sponsor involved, ( any details have been published)

Due to the offical regulations 2013, this team is the Polish Team Open, until it will be beaten in a long 160 board match ( 1 every year) by the other.
The right to play in this match would have the winner of the special trials. (IMO there will be anybody who will take part in it seriously)

[mgoetze]

Are you sure the word "any" means what you think it means?

[32519]

I can't find the hand records for Bali. Does anyone have a link to them? The WBO site thus far only shows the results for each round.

[paulg]

32519, on 2013-September-17, 20:18, said:

I can't find the hand records for Bali. Does anyone have a link to them? The WBO site thus far only shows the results for each round.

I'm not sure that the old men of Scotland have been sent to Bali to box, certainly very little of it was included in the training that I was involved in. Of course this would explain why they beat South Africa by 78-8 IMPs this morning but came out with black eyes.

Perhaps looking on the WBF site instead and reading the rubric at the bottom of the round results will help, clicking through to a match scorecard and then selecting a board.

Then you can find hands like this.

[32519]

paulg, on 2013-September-18, 01:18, said:

I'm not sure that the old men of Scotland have been sent to Bali to box, certainly very little of it was included in the training that I was involved in. Of course this would explain why they beat South Africa by 78-8 IMPs this morning but came out with black eyes.

Perhaps looking on the WBF site instead and reading the rubric at the bottom of the round results will help, clicking through to a match scorecard and then selecting a board.

Then you can find hands like this.

How about all the hand records for each round on 1 sheet of paper? This helps but is not preferable.

[paulg]

32519, on 2013-September-18, 04:02, said:

How about all the hand records for each round on 1 sheet of paper? This helps but is not preferable.

You can always download the BBO vugraph archive and print from there, especially if you have DM Pro.

[Aberlour10]

mgoetze, on 2013-August-29, 06:40, said:

Are you sure the word "any" means what you think it means?

Sure, my english is still poor, but I think, its not too hard to get the right meanings in my postings

Anyway, today was a great day for the Polish Open Team>>, beating in the row>>> Monaco by 18>>> USA1 by 35 and >>>USA2 by 25 IMPs.
Its stiil early in the tournament, but polish kibbers enjoy already.>>> B-Z are back.!.

[chasetb]

Some 'surprises' so far:
1.) Japan currently sit in 3rd, 3.05 VPs behind leaders Poland. However, of the 7 teams they have faced, only Germany and Canada are any good; they lost and won respectively, and they lost to Bahrain. Japan isn't a bad team, but they aren't top-flight either and I expect them to finish somewhere between 12th - 14th.

2.) USA 2 currently sit in 19th, but they haven't faced a bad team yet - USA 1 and China are the 'worst teams' so far. Their next 2 matches today and the first match tomorrow should be cakewalks, how they 'fair' will let us know if they can compete for a QF spot (pun intended).

3.) Canada is currently in 6th, and their results are a bit odd. Lost to Japan and badly to England, but beat up on Poland and the Netherlands. Their next two matches (against Italy and China) will also let us know how 'for real' they are. I have them just missing out, but if they show up and gain at least 20 VPs, then I will slot them in for a QF spot.

[squealydan]

There have been very few top match-ups thus far so it's a bit hard to know what to make of these results. Think I'm right in saying that Italy have yet to play any of the other seven sides who make up the curren top 8 at end of day three (though they have played USA2), and Poland and Monaco have only played two of the other top 8 teams. USA2 have had the toughest draw of any of the sides thus far (though they did lose nearly all of the matches against sides above them, which doesn't augur too well for them). So there is plenty of scope for change at the top.

I too find it frustrating not to be able to see all the hand records from a round in one easy page...

[bidule5]

Things may change fast, after 12 rounds:


Team VP Rnk AVGTop NTop AVGBot NBot
ITA 166.80 1 11.20 5 15.83 7
MON 158.15 2 9.61 4 14.96 8
JAP 157.68 3 8.32 4 15.55 8
POL 154.53 4 11.80 5 13.64 7
GER 154.02 5 12.73 4 12.89 8
US1 146.10 6 11.08 8 14.37 4
NET 137.09 7 8.75 4 12.76 8
CHI 133.90 8 8.59 5 12.99 7
ENG 127.80 9 7.72 3 11.63 9
INO 124.65 10 9.67 7 11.40 5
US2 122.69 11 8.99 7 11.95 5
CAN 120.90 12 7.87 8 14.49 4
BRA 117.29 13 9.27 7 10.48 5
ARG 115.19 14 6.82 7 13.49 5
AUS 109.14 15 7.01 4 10.14 8
SAF 97.13 16 6.84 8 10.61 4
GUA 87.47 17 4.36 5 9.38 7
IND 87.23 18 5.61 7 9.59 5
NZL 85.68 19 5.99 8 9.45 4
CHT 82.62 20 5.56 7 8.74 5
EGY 76.79 21 4.34 7 9.28 5
BAH 75.15 22 7.25 8 4.28 4


MON, JAP, GER & NET only played against 4 of the top 11 team.

yvan

PS: no idea how to format a table.

[Aberlour10]

bidule5, on 2013-September-20, 14:18, said:

MON, JAP, GER & NET only played against 4 of the top 11 team.

Poland played already against 5

[gwnn]

bidule5, on 2013-September-20, 14:18, said:

PS: no idea how to format a table.

With the "code" tag (+ square brackets).

Team      VP    Rnk     AVGTop NTop     AVGBot NBot
ITA	166.80	 1	11.20	5	15.83	7
MON	158.15	 2	9.61	4	14.96	8
JAP	157.68	 3	8.32	4	15.55	8
POL	154.53	 4	11.80	5	13.64	7
GER	154.02	 5	12.73	4	12.89	8

[y66]

From a story in the Daily Bulletin Issue No. 6 (pdf) by Mark Horton.

When it comes to bidding, one of the toughest areas, even for the best partnerships, is to diagnose the presence of a perfect fit, which will deliver a low-point-count slam. In Round 10 of the Venice Cup only one pair was able to solve the problem of this deal:

---

North bid out her shape with 3♠ and as soon as she heard of a club control she asked for keycards and then bid a careful 6♣ to offer partner a choice of contracts.

That gave France 13 IMPs here in Bali, and in 12 months time I have a feeling it might just earn the French pair one of those highly prized IBPA awards.

In the Bermuda Bowl, 5 pairs got to 6♦, including Bathurst and Dwyer, who picked up 13 IMPs against Italy.

[32519]

Why are there no women in the Open Event? Is it because -
1. They are not good enough? or
2. They are excluded?

[chasetb]

32519, on 2013-September-21, 23:11, said:

Why are there no women in the Open Event? Is it because -
1. They are not good enough? or
2. They are excluded?

I have heard from 2 top USA Experts, who prefer to stay off the record, that it is because of not being aggressive enough. Players like Auken, Jenny Wolpert, Pamela Granovetter are very good players, but because of being women and that game, they can't hang with the men at a WC level because they lack that killer instinct, that putting the foot on the opponents' neck and applying pressure when they are down. Men in general are better at focusing on one detail over women, that is mostly genetics.

[Hanoi5]

chasetb, on 2013-September-22, 01:39, said:

I have heard from 2 top USA Experts, who prefer to stay off the record, that it is because of not being aggressive enough. Players like Auken, Jenny Wolpert, Pamela Granovetter are very good players, but because of being women and that game, they can't hang with the men at a WC level because they lack that killer instinct, that putting the foot on the opponents' neck and applying pressure when they are down. Men in general are better at focusing on one detail over women, that is mostly genetics.

You gotta be careful with that comment and Vampyr.

Anyway, Monday seems to be an interesting day at the BB. I think there are 8 teams fighting for 5 spots. It's gonna get interesting.

[barmar]

I've seen Sabine recently playing (and doing well) on a team in open events. But Jenny has been hired onto a team that has continued to enter into the fading women's events.

[mycroft]

Well, I'll have to tell Judith Gartaganis that he's a man now. At least, in Canada, same-sex marriage is legal, so he won't have to get divorced :-)

(Oh, and there's another one on the Indian team. Note, I'm cheating, having read the bulletin this morning. Thanks, Ms. Lund Hansen)

I think a lot of the reason we don't have many women on the Open team is that there are Women's Teams events at championship level. I make good money at my (real) job, even though there's more prestigious and more lucrative jobs in my field available, that I may (or may not) be good enough to do. Why *should* they play in the open if they can live very comfortably (likely more comfortably) not?

I also think that in many countries' cases, the Women's championships (the big national events and the "qualify for National Team" ones) are held simultaneously to the Open, so the women have to choose (unlike the Seniors' events, which are frequently carefully timed that appropriate men (usually) can attempt to win the Open, then attempt to win the Seniors (not with the Spingold, though, which is odd)). I think this also is a disincentive to women playing in the Open.

In countries with selectors, they're men. And they play in the open game, and there's a women's game played simultaneously, and they don't know how good the winners are. Or there's parallel team leagues, same deal. Same problem.

Edit: I'm not saying that by and large, the best women aren't less skilled than the best men - at the moment, that's almost certainly true. But with the current setup actively providing incentives for the best women to not compete against the best men, that can't be *helping* the women's games.

[gnasher]

mycroft, on 2013-September-23, 10:43, said:

In countries with selectors, they're men. And they play in the open game, and there's a women's game played simultaneously, and they don't know how good the winners are. Or there's parallel team leagues, same deal. Same problem.

In those circumstances, I don't think one should ascribe the selectors' decision to sexism or ignorance. If a pair chooses to play in restricted events rather than open events at national level, they can't reasonably expect to be selected for open events at international level.