Reno!

The Reno NABC last month was in some ways great but in many ways a disappointment. The town and general atmosphere was kind of trashy. I played with 3 partners over 6 days, which is more variety than I like. I had never played with two of them before, and never played with Emory at an NABC. I was honestly happy playing with Emory, Mike, and Jessica, but the results weren’t as hot as they should have been.

The first two days with Jessica were pretty solid bridge except for two major flyers each session where one or both of us just totally screwed up a board. That led to four straight 53% games and a low overall place in the mixed pairs. Respectable, but we both thought we had a pretty good shot at winning. However, this event was unwinnable thanks to Jenni and Greg’s ridiculousness. Next year.

The next two days with Emory the expectations were a good bit lower, largely because the Silodor is noticeably stronger competition than the mixed. However, we didn’t make day two. The theme here was me not getting my diamond ruffs and other defensive blunders. We rebounded with a couple of pretty good sessions in the “consolation” regional pairs.

The final two days were maybe the most disappointing as Mike McNamara and I didn’t Q for day two of the Swiss. The theme with him was declarer play problems that we didn’t get right. I had several tough problems and got kind of screwed by the opponents on a few of them as it’s hard to get tough problems right when the opponents don’t have what they should have for their bids. As with Emory, we rebounded with a nice finish in the consolation regional Swiss.

I expect it won’t be the last time playing with these new partners.

Kickback and Planning

Over the last eight years, I've probably played more sessions with Emory than anyone else, but our aggreements are somehow less firm than most of my partnerships. This is probably due to most of our games being at the club, where I admit I may not pay great attention to the game.


Anyway, he's the one and only person I play kickback with. There's a reason I've refused to play this with Cristal (who plays it with many of her partners) or anyone else - it can get confusing. Is 1S-2H; 2S-4H; 4S kickback? Is 2H-4S kickback? How about 1D-1S; 3D-4H? The answer probably should be yes to all three, but natural makes a heck of a lot of sense too.


Last night we had the auction 1D-(1H)-1S; 2H-3D; 4H. Do you think this is kickback or a splinter or exclusion or just a cue bid? This one at least can't be natural - it's clearly some sort of diamond slam try. I held Kx, Axx, KJTxxx, Qx so it's a marginal slam try at best. We were off two aces and stopped in 5D, just in. It turns out the winning spot was 3NT by me, but I really needed partner's Qx of hearts for that to be a good contract. 3NT by Emory is the next best spot so this leads to the question, if I bid 3H over 3D, is that askign for a half-stopper now since he kind of denied a full stopper by not bidding NT over my first cuebid? Probably not since there are so many hands where I just need a full stopper from partner, but it would have been cute to have that half-stopper agreement here.



I also have a rant I'd like to get out there. It's something I've ranted about before, and that is planning. Even after years of practice, it still annoys me that my friends can't plan and commit to activities an amount of time in advance that give me peace of mind. For something small and local with just one or two people, a day ahead is fine. I get that you want to hold out to see if some more interesting thing comes along that you may not want to include me in or that you may simply not want to do anything with me, but whatever it is, say so.


Don't say, "I'm free tomorrow eventing so sure, let's get together then" and then when tomorrow afternoon/evening gets here pretend that you don't remember our previous conversation/plan or suddenly have other plans. Don't wait until the last minute and text, "join me at _____ now?" That's maybe a little better because you've at least thought about me, but it's inconsiderate of my time and sanity. And if you have no intention of ever joining me in whatever activity, just say so rather than something like, "that sounds great but I'm busy that day" because I'll try again and I'd really rather not waste my time because you're too afraid to say what you mean.


For something out of town like a bridge tournament or something that'll take up more than half a day, get your act together a month ahead. Situations where a week before, you realize that you've booked something else on top of the tournament are unacceptable.

Adventures at the Greek Bridge Festival

At the end of the Chicago NABC and for a few days after returning home, I was mainly trying to figure out Atlanta Labor Day regional plans. Nothing was too appealing, so I asked Irma if she'd like to go with me to the Greek Bridge Festival in Athens going on at the same time. Irma was one bright spot from an otherwise annoying Chicago trip, so I thought this could be fun. I wasn’t entirely sure how serious I was about this since I had only known her about a week, but she was very interested in the trip so we made it happen.

It has been five years since I had been outside the U.S./Canada (by far the longest I’ve ever gone without a Europe trip). Each summer I toy with the idea of going to a bridge festival in Greece or France, but I’ve just never had anyone I like enough who also wants to go. The day after I made my plans, my aunt and uncle and cousin made arrangements to come from Berlin for a couple of days so it was nice to get to see them too. Yay.

As with any long trip to an unfamiliar place with unfamiliar people there are some problems, but it was basically fun – a steady routine of daytime visits around Athens, one session of bridge each night, and bars until the wee hours.

Irma and I didn't play so well the first 5 days in open and mixed pairs, and by the end of day 5, I think we were both ready to go home. However, we stuck it out and played the Swiss team event with a very nice and decent Greek pair - Thanos and Stefanos.

We needed something good to happen to feel good about the trip, our bridge play, and our friendship. The final two days were much better on all counts.  

Non-bridge players stop here. Bridge players, please read on.

Going into the last round of the Swiss we were in 9th place and up against our friends Tom Paske, Jason Hackett, Giannis Oikonomopoulos and his dad. With a close match we would both make the overalls but with a big win one of us could sneak into the top 5. Here are a few interesting boards from that round.

On the second board (#22), Tom had this defensive problem against my 4NT, knowing I have a weak NT with 4 hearts.

Dummy (on your left): ♠8643  ♥K7  ♦AKJ862  ♣A

Your hand: ♠A52  ♥JT982  ♦5  ♣9642

The ♥J lead was won in dummy with partner playing the 6 (upside down). A, K, a diamond to partner, assume you discard a discouraging club and a low heart. Then partner leads the ♥5 to declarer's A, ♣A, then 3 more diamonds. What are your three discards? Partner throws the clubs starting with the Q.

You know 9 of declarer's points (♥AQ, ♣K) and can count eight tricks for him (5 diamonds ♥AK and ♣A) so if you get in with the spade and lead a heart or club, that gives declarer the entry to score the ♥Q and ♣K he can't otherwise get to. So there's no reason to keep any clubs. Yes, if I held QJx or KJ(x) or KQ(x), all fairly reasonable holdings for this auction, there is nothing that can be done, but on the actual deal I help ♠QJ-doubleton, and Tom didn’t work out the position.

On board 24 in third seat none vul I picked up ♠AQ98  ♥KJ4  ♦9  ♣Q7653 and opened 1♠. It proceeded: 2♥-2♠-P; P-X-P-P. I seriously considered running to 3♣ – spades are almost certainly 5-1 or 6-0 and we probably have a club fit that will split nicer. Fortunately I passed out 2♠X and this is what Irma produced: ♠743  ♥QT53  ♦A7654  ♣K. Tom led ♦K. I won and knocked out the ♣A. Now a trump and I was able to score two minor suit tricks, four trumps in hand, and two club ruffs to bring in 470. Leading trumps on opening lead wouldn’t help because Tom couldn’t lead a second trump when in with the club. He could get to Jason by playing A and a heart so Jason could lead a second trump, but then they lose trump control and I could just ruff one club, draw trumps and have heart winners.

The next board (#17) they tried too hard to make up for the previous bad scores. Tom held ♠KQJ ♥KQT2 ♦AJ642 ♣J. I opened on his right: 3♣-X-4♣-X; P-? He opted to pass this and hope for 500 on pure power or that 4♥ wouldn’t make. Nothing to the play. We went down 1 and 4♥ makes exactly 4.

Board 19 put the nail in the coffin. At my table Jason, in third seat favorable, tried responding to 1♣ with 1♥ holding ♠J64 ♥T86 ♦KT853 ♣Q6. I like this tactical bid in this state of the match. The whole auction: 1♣-P-1♥-1♠; 2♣-2♥-P-4♠; P-P-5♣; X-P-P-P. This was a good sac (down 3 for 500). Oikonomopoulos bid ambitiously on our cards to 6♠.

♠AT32 ♥AQ74 ♦7642 ♣3

♠KQ987 ♥KJ6 ♦AJ ♣T98

A diamond lead kills the slam off the bat, but our teammates understandably led a big club. Now the contract can be made by finding the jack of spades: ruff one club low, ruff another club high, then finesse for the jack. I don't know the bidding at their table, but it’s not so clear to take that line of play. Knowing clubs are 7-2 swings the percentage in favor that line over one of the others (ruff the third round of clubs with the ten and be sure to pick up trumps, or ruff third round of clubs high and play for the ♠J to drop doubleton, or draw two rounds of trumps before ruffing the third round of clubs), but it’s still not clear.

The final tally was 38-6 in our favor. We moved all the way to 4^th for a decent payout, just .09 VP behind the high-powered Milner team.

4 or 7 Hand but I was in 5

I faced a brutal play problem last night at the club. It was a 4 or 7 hand and I was in the worst possible level – 5!

 

♠AQ  ♥AK9xxx  ♦x  ♣Qxxx

 

♠KJTxxx  ♥J8x  ♦AK  ♣Jx

 

First let's start with the auction. That was pretty interesting too. My RHO opened 3Din first seat, both vul. I overcalled 3♠, what do you do with the north hand? He bid 4♦, in theory a slam try in spades but not necessarily a diamond control. I tried 4♥, my only semi-cooperating bid available even though I don't have a heart control. I didn't think the hand was strong enough to commit to the five-level by cuebidding 5♦ - it probably isn't good enough to cooperate at all. I figured partner might cue 5♣ and then I could cue 5♦.

 

The auction took a strange turn when partner bid 5♥ over my 4♥. Is he now trying to suggest hearts or is he making another slam move with no minor suit control? Regardless, no club cue so I sign off and play 5♠.

 

LHO leads the ♦10 and I basically have to get hearts right to make the contract, and getting hearts right likely means taking all of the tricks because if I get hearts wrong (or if the preemptor had Qxx and there is no right play), they will surely cash their two club tricks.

 

The non-high club lead suggests the club honors are split because he likely would have led a big club from AK so RHO has a club honor and ♦QJ. LHO rates to have three hearts so if I go with that, I have a couple of options on how to play.

 

A)      Draw trumps, then cash the ♥A, taking all the tricks when RHO has stiff Q and making 5 when RHO has stiff ten, and going down when he has one of the two small singletons.

B)      Draw trumps and lead the ♥J, planning to double finesse. This makes 7 when RHO has stiff ten and 5 in all other cases (only way back to hand to lead hearts a second time is by losing two clubs and ruffing a club).

C)      Lead the ♥J now, then draw trumps and take a second heart finesse. This makes 7 when LHO has ♥QT(x) but goes down when LHO has ♥QTxx.

 

Given that I was in 5 (not 4), I probably should take the safest line to make 5, which is definitely B. However, table feel and just the desire to take all the tricks led me to the slightly inferior line that risks a 4-0 heart split.

 

So the ♥J was covered with the Q and no ten appeared. Then LHO showed up with four spades so the count no longer is much in favor of a 3-1 heart split – LHO has 7 pointed cards, RHO 8. So do I go back to playing for hearts to be 2-2 or continue with the double finesse. Is the good club player on my right equally likely to preempt with x, Qx, QJxxxxx, Hxx and x, x, QJxxxxx, Hxxx? I don't know but the latter is certainly a more attractive 1st seat vulnerable preempt.

 

So I tanked and played a heart to the nine, won all the tricks, and all the matchpoints.

 

Chicago NABC Summary

This NABC was quite an experience. I like structure and plans in my life so when things get chaotic and my plans get screwed up, I take it poorly. When you agree to play with me, I expect a few things, and I think these should go without saying, but maybe I should make this more clear: be decently-well rested, hold yourself to high ethical standards, remain friends and have a post-mortem with me over dinner and drinks regardless of how good or bad our game was, and illness and failure to qualify are the only acceptable reasons to cancel our plans.

So, the first Saturday was miserable as I had one partner skip dinner without properly notifying me, another cancel on me to play with someone else for basically the rest of the tournament, and another "friend"cancel on hanging out with me during my planned days off in Chicago. I nearly came home after 2 days out of frustration.


Fortunately Sunday morning I went to the ACBL Board of Governors meeting and things turned around. I assisted with the Learn Bridge in a Day class that afternoon and a got a couple of games with Sean Ganness who I had wanted to play with for awhile. Monday I started hanging out more with the young foreigners - Swedes, Danes, Aussies mostly - and then played with the lovely Irma Petersen Wednesday-Friday. It turned out to be a fine week as long as masterpoints don't matter.


Even before I was good, I never appreciated going to a tournament without a pre-determined schedule of events to play and people to play them with. My time is too valuable to spend at tournaments without playing with my preferred people. I know this is hard for many to understand because relatively few bridge players have a day job with a 4 week vacation limit per year. At this tournament, however, I found the lack of a clear plan for the tournament after day 2 gave me more stuff to talk about, helped me socialize more and socialize with crowds I maybe wouldn't normally venture into.


One of the more interesting guys I met several nights at the bar was Mish, a mediocre bridge player but a well-known financial blogger so here's a shout out to him. I'll start reading his blogs more and hope to see him at a tournament again sometime. It was kind of funny how one of my non-bridge friends in Atlanta asked me if I had played against Mike Shedlock. I found it to be kind of a strange question and the name was unfamiliar to me, then he said he probably goes by Mish, and then I instantly recognized him. My friend is a regular reader of Mish's blog, and in one of his posts, he mentioned that he was between sessions at the National bridge tournament.


Here's one thing from the bridge table that irked me. I wasn't at the table but my opinion of someone in particular went way down when I heard this. You pick up a 4333 6-count and see partner open 2C, she bids 2D waiting (which partner announces as a transfer), partner rebids 2H, what do you do with this hand? Well, obviously you raise hearts, probably 3H but 4H is fine too, especially if you were playing that 2D promised a little something. What you don't do is pass. That's a highly unethical thing to do. Yes, we all get that partner thought she opened 1NT, and given that, it's clear the best chance to go plus is to pass 2H, but you aren't allowed to "know" that. As far as you know, your side is going to at least game in hearts because opener showed a monster with 5+ hearts, right? Anyway, that made 2 but the director adjusted to 4H -2. I would tack on a procedural penalty as well. Then this pair has the nerve to ask the director to reconsider that the contract should be 3H -1 because they would raise to 3H with the responder hand and opener with a 15-count and 4-card "support" would pass. Really? At imps, don't all hands with 4 card support accept invites? You're asking the director to give you more leniency after they've let you off without a procedural penalty for blatant misuse of UI. End rant.


I won't be seeing any of you at the Atlanta Labor Day regional for the first time since I've been a bridge player (15 years). I'll see some of you at the Greek Bridge Festival in Athens, Greece, instead!

July 4th Bridge

Three years ago, Sean and I drove to Bethesda, MD for the July 4th Washington DC regional and one of the most exciting weeks ever. I think I wrote about it back then. Two years ago was a similarly good experience at the DC regional in Reston. Last year, there was no incentive to go to DC and this year the DC regional wasn't over the 4th so I'm kind of sad. Instead I went to as Vegas the week before and Nashville the week after, each for three days, possibly influenced by the fact that Mikey and Alli and Liz would be at both of those.




In Vegas I played with Cristal, and we had a second in a bracket 2 KO and were in good position to finish second in the Swiss until having a bad last round. In Nashville I played with Sam Goldberg, and we had a second in a bracket 2 KO and were in good position to finish second in the Swiss until we had an unfortunate penultimate match against the leaders. After a blitz the last round, we finished second far ahead of third.




Here is one deal that was a 26 imp swing against Ron and Linda Smith and probably cost us 1st in the event. I held x, A9xxxx, KQx, AJx. I deal: 1H-P-2D-2H; 3D-3S-4H-P. Surely this hand is worth a slam try because as little as xxx, KQx, AJxxx, xx makes 6H pretty much cold, and that hand isn't good enough to make a 2/1. However, some other game-forcing hands such as AQx, Qxx, AJxxx, xx give 6H no play. So I blackwooded and found 2 with the Q so bid the slam, knowing that if partner has the SA instead of HK, I may need a heart finesse or a club honor from partner or a non-club lead. Unfortunately Sam tabled essentially the latter hand and Linda found a club lead from Qxx. How do we bid to get to slam on the hand with xxx, KQx in majors and not when responder has Axx, Qxx in the majors? I don't know.


After the session Sam had said he should have bid 2C to psych them out of a club lead. That would have made it harder for Ron to show his weakish 5-5 black hand. The night before, I held a hand where I psyched a 2D response to 1H with AQx, Kxx, Jxx, KJTx. Sam rebid 2S and I bid 3NT, confident that they would lead a black suit and I'd take 9 tricks while hopefully hearts also had only 9 tricks. That, however, was disastrous because my LHO still led a diamond from ATxxx so 3NT went down while 4H is cold.




These three-day regional trips are starting to get to me, and this week in Nashville I didn't even drink much despite it being the only one of the 3 tournaments in 5 weeks that I felt stressed at all. I'm going to start implementing a 2 am curfew (1 am when the next day starts at 10 am).

Lessons from the bridge club

Last night was an interesting night at the bridge club. I learned a couple of things: when the opponents bid 1Major-2Major, let them play it there. Twice I either Emory or I balanced and they proceeded to bid a cold game. Annoying.

Another lesson was that psyching and successfully keeping them out of their 4-4 spade fit which makes 3 or 4 is not such a good result. They played 2D and made exactly 2 for what ought to be about an 80-90% board for us. I held xx, xx, KJx, QT9xxx and at favorable vulnerability the auction was 1C-X to me so I obviously bid 1S. Next hand doubled, showing 4 hearts, partner support redoubled, confirming to me that the opps had a spade fit. Then it went 2D-swish. I was satisfied with -90 as there ought to be lots of -140 and -170 scores. This is why you should play penalty/stolen bid doubles opposite a takeout double - to ensure that the opponents don't psych you out of your major suit fit. This double (1C-X-1S-X) as takeout isn't so useful - if you have hearts, just bid them.

Of course, against good competition, the opponents never would ahve tried to sell out to 2Major and the field would have actually gotten to a spade contract in the latter scenario.

Suit Preference When Returning Partner's Lead in NT

In 2nd seat, all red, You hold:
T865
K9
AQT4
986



Auction:
1C (strong) - P - 1D (0-7) - P;
P - 1S - 2H (5-7, 5+H) - P;
2NT - P - P - P
Opening lead: D4



Dummy:
Q2
QJ753
532
JT5



Partner wins K and returns 9, covered with the J. You cash the Q and T. Dummy sheds a club. Partner follows with 8 and 6. Declarer pitches S7 and HT. Your lead to trick 5. What are your thoughts? For the 2NT rebid, we can expect declarer to have 16-17 (maybe 18) hcp, leaving partner with 4-6 in the remaining three suits.


Partner is up to something here by not returning fourth best. Normally the only reason for not returning 4th best is if he needs to remain on lead for a finesse through declarer or to unblock, and neither is the case with declarer known to have a doubleton diamond. So partner must be trying to show some suit preference. Does playing to-down in diamonds suggest a spade or a heart? I think it suggests hearts because spade tricks are clearly not going away and hearts aren't running. If declarer has AKJ and AK in the black suits, he has 9 tricks as soon as he gains the lead. If declarer has the heart ace, it's now stiff so it can't hurt to lead a low heart. The HT discard is very telling. It kind of gives away the position. Either he had blanked the A and is banking on a (winning) black suit finesse instead of a heart finesse to make his contract, probably with an overtrick or he just has a stiff T and has 9 black suit winners.




But what if this guy is being a hand hog and actually has three hearts and was just trying to entice you into leading from the K with a hand like AKJxx, ATx, Jx, Axx instead of attacking his vulnerable club suit? with that hand, a heart ensures the contract while a club lead could set 2NT. But if that's the case, he can have the good board and we'll chalk it up to a fix.




This play is more difficult if declarer keeps the HT and instead throws a low black card on the fourth diamond. When partner has the heart ace, it's still likely declarer will get 8 tricks if you don't take both hearts now, but he would have to be 5-5 in the blacks for it to matter. How much should we cater to declarer not bidding 3C on a 5-5 hand? I don't know - we would have to know the player's tendencies a little more. Anyway, we are back to the question of what partner's diamond plays suggest about what to do next.  We know that the heart suit isn't a threat But from partner's perspective, declarer could have xxxxx, AK, Jx, AKQx in which case a spade lead is very crucial. I suppose partner could play the 8 at trick to suggest hearts, but three-suited suit preference situations can be confusing. I'm gonna go with: in this context, spades is the suit to avoid so for partner to show a heart preference, he would lead back 4th-top-bottom (6-9-8) and to show a club pref he would lead back 4th-bottom-top (6-8-9), leading back not 4th best in this non-unblocking situation and then showing 4 suggests something else, in this case a spade. If dummy's hearts were better, I'd say hearts would be the unexpected suit and the normal suit pref signal would be between spades and clubs.



As it turned out, declarer's hand was AKJxx, T, Jx, AKQxx and the trick 5 play of a heart would lead to -1, anything else making 3. It didn't make any difference in the matchpoints because the field was either making 4S or going down 2 in 3NT.

Bridge hiatus?

Summer 2015 is approaching and lifestyle changes are coming. It seems about once a year there’s a significant life change, but none too big because I’ve lived and worked in the same place now for 7 years. I haven’t posted a lot on here lately and I still don’t have any bridge hands to write about but they will come as I’m probably going to be playing more bridge again. My life has been all over the place. I’ve been involved in so many things outside of work, and trying to schedule time for everything has been crazy: bridge, Bob, other Atlanta friends, Alexandra, my parents, my dog, directing bridge club games, the D7 News, tournament flyers, freelance writing, ALTA tennis, USTA tennis, T2 tennis, trying to find a woman for me, and trying to understand women. You’d think I would know a lot about women and be able to read their minds pretty well given that I have a lot of female friends I talk to on a regular basis, but they still baffle me and drive me crazy, but that’s for a different blog. I think I’m going to resurrect my old blog that used to be mostly about travel, but it’ll have more of a male-female relationship theme to it.

Back to bridge. I played a lot of bridge in late Feb through mid-March with, I think, tournaments in 5 out of 6 weekends but have not been to a tournament in the last 8 weeks, skipping Gatlinburg for the first time in probably a decade. This may well be the longest I've gone without a bridge tournament since I was serious with Hillery in 2008. Weekend getaways to sectionals no longer appeal to me as something to do to keep from being lonely. Regionals have even lost some their luster except when they’re either financially beneficial or with someone I really like in a place I like.

Summer typically has more tournaments that I like going to, but all I have scheduled is three days in Las Vegas in June, and nine days in Chicago for the NABC in August (half with Cristal and half with Sean). Memorial Day weekend is now unexpectedly open. Last year is the first time I did not attend a Memorial Day regional in a long time because I was at my good friend Brian’s wedding in Lexington, and I didn’t miss bridge that weekend at all. I thoroughly enjoyed that trip and wedding. I had planned on a more traditional relaxing beach/water park vacation for Memorial Day, but various circumstances have made those plans dissolve. It bothers me slightly to have a holiday weekend right around the corner with no real plans. Then again I’m often slightly bothered by things that probably shouldn't bother me. Anyway, I'm open to playing somewhere over Memorial Day, playing in Greenville June 12-14, in Jacksonville over July 4th, or Pasadena or Nashville or Reston July 10-12 if there's a good offer. Suggestions?

The trip to Providence a couple of weeks ago was quite a pleasant trip. It was low on stress and low on drama, much unlike the previous two. The quality of bridge at my table was acceptable. Cristal and I qualified for the second day of the LM Pairs, had one decent session in the final and then collapsed. It was a real struggle – we didn’t really get any gifts the whole two days and I was pretty pleased with how both of us played. In the two-day BAM, Sean and I played with Cristal and Igor. On the first day, Sean and I got lots of gifts and stole a few boards as well, enough to carry the team into day 2. On day 2, we didn’t get so many gifts, had a couple more than our share of bad boards, but Cristal and Igor did just enough to get us into the extremely low overalls.

Here’s one of our best boards that wasn’t a gift.

QJTx, AK, x, AKTxxx
AKx, Jxx, AKxxx, xx
1♣¹ - 2♣²
2♦³ - 2♠⁴
3♠⁴ - 4♦⁵
4NT⁶ – 6NT⁷
7♠⁸ – P

1 – 15+, balanced or natural

2 – 0-7 w/ 6+♦, or game forcing w/ 5+♦
3 – happy playing 2♦ if responder has the weaker hand
4 – natural-ish, but possibly just a concentration of values
5 – cue bid
6 – RKC for spades
7 – might be off the rails but this is what I think we can make
8 – probably a Moysian but I think this will make

The contract rolled home when spades split 4-2 and clubs split 3-2.

GT-FSU this weekend

I haven’t posted my college football rankings at all this season. Frankly, I’ve been too busy to even bother looking at it until last week. I got caught up on all the games and stuff before Thanksgiving and now heading into conference championship week, I’ll post the rankings.

1. Alabama (11-1)
2. Oregon (11-1)
3. Ohio State (11-1)
4. TCU (10-1)
5. Mississippi (9-3)
6. Florida State (12-0)
7. Arizona (10-2)
8. Georgia Tech (10-2)
9. Michigan State (10-2)
10. Boise State (10-2)
11. Georgia (9-3)
12. Wisconsin (10-2)
13. UCLA (9-3)
14. Mississippi State (10-2)
15. Missouri (10-2)

Yep, my computer dislikes FSU even more than the people. How is Mississippi #5 at 9-3? Does my algorithm have some sort of bias toward Ole Miss for some reason? That's the only ranking that I see as being inappropriate.
Predictions for conference championship games:
Georgia Tech (a 3 point underdog) to win 31-27 in Charlotte on Saturday
Alabama (a 14 point favorite) to win 30-24 against Missouri
Ohio State over Wisconsin 34-31
Oregon over Arizona 37-31

 

I’ll be at the Tech-FSU game rooting for the Yellow Jackets. I’ve actually put in some theoretical results for this weekend’s games and the computer has the winner of GT-FSU moving up to #3 or 4 pretty much regardless of what else happens. I think it’s almost impossible for the selection committee to put GT in the playoff (top 4) even with a convincing win but would be worth considering especially if a couple of the 10-1/11-1 teams lose.

Think!

Over the years, I’ve been accused of not sharing enough information and being vague about my plans, but I also am often the one trying to plan activities in advance more than other people. A few times I’ve been accused of giving too much information or being too persistent in getting other people to commit to things, so I don’t quite know where the happy medium is. I guess it's different for everyone. Regardless of the specific situation, I aim to encourage other people to think and reach their own conclusions rather than feed them information, even when it is on a subject that I am an expert on.

When I was a teaching assistant at Georgia Tech, I asked people to explain things rather than simply look at the result and checking the work as done. College, especially in engineering, is about learning how to solve problems more than anything else. In presentations, I asked tough questions like why they chose a particular algorithm for controlling their robot. All too often, teachers give a formula and say it applies in these circumstances so all they have to do is plug in numbers into a formula (or in the case of non-math based classes, recall facts that they memorized). In the real world, things rarely if ever fit that mold - we'll generally have time to look up the formulas or facts but what is critical is knowing how to use that information. Essay questions, particularly those that get students to put their thoughts into coherent sentences and articulate rather than regurgitate what was in the book are great and help create a strong level of understanding.

As a bridge teacher, I try to teach people what to think about during a bridge deal rather give them formulas for what to bid and what to lead. Of course, students always like the plug and chug methods because they are easier and require less brain power. When a beginning student asks if he should open 1H with a particular hand, I ask “What does 1H show? Does your hand fit that description?” When a beginning bridge student asks which card he should play, I ask “why do you want to play that card or that suit” and remind him of the few general guidelines (like leading top of sequences, leading partner’s suit, etc) and “what might happen if you play that card”. Even beginners can intuitively figure out the right plays when forced to think about the right things and visualize potential outcomes. The problem is many people were never taught a proper thought process, particularly for defense. When he asks if he should bid again, I ask whether he has already shown and whether he has something close to that, and whether his partner made a forcing bid. In bridge, what you can assume from the student varies widely depending on their level, but everyone should have some base from which you should assume they know or can figure out something and work toward something more.

As a friend, I also apparently want to try to make others think and connect the dots by leaving out bits of information. This probably isn’t quite as good a quality as being friends isn’t supposed to be exercise of the mind like school and work and bridge are. Basically, I don’t like telling people how to get places or trying to give them directions or telling them what time they need to leave to get somewhere on time, in much the same way you probably don’t like having a back seat driver or your mom nagging you to clean your room and brush your teeth. We all have smartphones and GPS now so we can fend for ourselves if you give us an address, right? We’ll meet at X time ay Y place. The end. I will assume you can handle all the intermediate steps like planning your day to meet the schedule, making arrangements with whoever else is needed, driving, parking, taking toilet breaks, and calling if you’ll be late or need help with something. Time and time again I get bitten by this because some people just need the details spelled out.

While playing bridge when, it is assumed that my partner is already thinking plenty, I like to do what I can to guide him to the right decision. Similar to the other examples, he still has to think and process the information and form his own conclusion. I often times hear other people say “well, I told you to lead hearts when I discarded a high heart.” I think that is fundamentally a bad way to look at signaling. Giving an encouraging heart signal more appropriately is saying, “I have a preference for hearts (possibly because I have good hearts, because I want to trump hearts, or because I have nothing useful anywhere but this looks lease detrimental)”. Regardless, partner has the right and obligation to think and decide for himself, based on his hand and other clues, whether to agree to your suggestion or take an alternate defense. I would rather partner take time, think, and come up with some reason for his play, whether right or wrong, than to play quickly not considering the options. Anyone who plays bridge with me can tell you that the errors that bother me way more than the other are ones that come as a result of not taking time to think about a play that would be clear if you took a few seconds to analyze the situation. If you think, then you must have some rationale and if you have rationale, all is good. The logic used to get there may be flawed but it's a heck of a lot better than having no logic.

Memorable Atlanta regional

The Atlanta regional last week was one of the most memorable tournaments. Emory was inducted to the Georgia Bridge Hall of Fame, and Bryan and I teamed with Emory and Olin for a respectable showing - 2nd in a KO, 3rd in Sunday Swiss, and just missed overalls in the Monday Swiss. We ended up being the only team to beat Meckwell all week (in the semis of a KO). In addition to the bridge and the ceremony, I had a ton of fun hanging out with some really awesome friends.

 

A critical deal in that match was when Levin and Weinstein had the uncontested auction 1C-1H; 1S-5C; P. What do you think he should have for this 5C call? Basically, is it exclusion or natural? I believe it's exclusion, that's what I thought at the table, and that's what Levin intended. I'd be interested in hearing their post mortem about this. Meanwhile a bunch of good players were pretty much split on the issue but many said they wouldn't bid it without having previously discussed it. Tim Crank had the interesting idea that it should be exclusion but for hearts instead of spades. For spades, you can splinter and then bid exclusion; there are lots of ways to bid clubs (and 5C natural here is a rather unilateral decision especially when the opponents aren't in the auction); but there's not really any way to set hearts and then exclusion for hearts with a club void. You'd have to go through 4th suit forcing and then bid hearts and a 5C bid over that would still be very nebulous.

 

Yesterday I finished up the September D7 News as well so like will be kind of calm for awhile for 3 weeks. After that, the fall looks busy again. I'll probably make to 8 tournaments with 4 or 5 different partners between Sept 26 and the end of the year - all just weekend trips except the Charleston regional at the end of the year.

 

I don't particularly like my column this time. There are a couple of other things I wanted to write about - relationships in bridge including drama with the youth programs/international teams, reasons people quit bridge, the bridge rating/mp system as compared to tennis/chess/scrabble - but couldn't organize my thoughts in a coherent manner.

Vegas Wrap Up

The verdict is in: 21 days at bridge tournaments in a 25 day span is too much. However, it's not so much the bridge that is exhausting but all the other stuff that goes along with bridge that makes for many very late nights. No other time of the year are there so many good friends in such close proximity. Even three people I normally spend a lot of time with at bridge tournaments (Joel, Alli, Mikey), I hardly saw in Vegas.

At the Las Vegas NABC, Sean and I peaked in the Wernher Open Pairs in the middle of the tournament, putting together four fairly solid sessions for 20th place in that event. The day before the Wernher, I won B in a regional pairs with Mila, good for 16 points. The rest was really not very good. We stumbled through the LM Pairs and just missed qualifying for day 3 to start the tournament and weren't close to qualifying in the fast pairs or Open Swiss at the end of the tournament. Given three missed Q's and Monday that was already a planned day off, Sean and I didn't play a whole lot of bridge together. I enjoyed reconnecting with Mila for the first time in awhile, and on two of the off days I played with her. On the other off days I played a lot of poker and wandered up and down the strip taking in the sights and sounds.

I had intentions of actually resting and catching up on sleep while in Vegas and staying out of a lot of the casino/bar/social scenes because I was pretty exhausted at the beginning of the tournament, right on the heels of the Columbia regional. Two days early in the week, I did go to the pool in the mornings and get to bed around 1 am, but then I realized that gambling can be fun and enjoyed reconnecting with Mila who I hadn't really interacted with in a couple years. The casino atmosphere with bars that don't close encourages staying up much later than a normal city. It was clearly getting to us by the end of the tournament. I think I might have to start imposing a 2 am curfew or myself and my partner. That still leaves a solid three hours for socialization after the evening session which ought to be plenty.

So, upon taking a redeye flight home and going straight to work, I'm supposed to be super exhausted and sleep a ton for a couple of days. That strangely hasn't happened. I'm still been sleeping only about 5 hours per night, waking up before my alarm each morning. Weird. Maybe it's because for a change I have actually missed my home life and have been looking forward to this weekend, which should include a pool party at my condo in Atlanta, and catching up with Elena and sharing stories of our long vacations.

Jack Doubletons in Columbia

One more day left in the Columbia regional. We have amassed 45 points somehow, but this is the story of the jack doubletons.

In the first KO, in which we finished 3rd/4th, I went down in a slam when I finessed for the HJ holding Qx opposite AKTxx. I knew that clubs split 6-2 and in another side suit each opponent had at least two but that's as much of a count as I could get before having to decide on the heart suit. Apparently the odds still didn't sway in favor of taking the hook, but that one didn't really matter in the outcome of the match - we won anyway.

The next one comes from the second round of the second KO and cost us another date with Joyce Hill's team in the semis.

-
AKTxxx
AQxxx
KQ

QTxxx
Q9
KTx
xxx

We were white and they were red, and lho opened 2S in 3rd seat. This pair plays weak twos 3-7 often with a five card suit.

She led a low club, ruffed in dummy, I played a heart to my hand to ruff another spade and seeing no ace decided she opened a five card suit. She then showed three hearts. Now the question is how to play diamonds. If she was somewhat sane, she wouldnt be 5332 so that rules out 5-3-3-2. A 5-3-1-4 hand would be much more suitable to a preempt.

Alas, the lady had Jx of diamonds and I finessed into her. It was a 26 imp swing and we lost that match by 9 (and lost the other match in the three-way by 4).

Thursday in the Swiss I was put to the test again.

Txx
KT9x
Kx
Qxxx

AQJxx
A8xx
Axxx
-

We reached 4S. LHO had overcalled 2D, and the hand eventually came down to getting the heart suit right for no losers. He had dropped the J under the HA and I knew from the play he started with exactly 5 diamonds and 2 spades. This one was pretty easy to work out to drop the QJ doubleton rather than play him for a singleton J and finesse through RHO. The main inference is from  the fact that he did not make an unusual 2NT overcall. with 2-1-5-5 distribution he may well have done that instead of overcalling 2D: Kx, QJ, QJxxx, AJxx is more consistent with the bidding than Kx, J, QJxxx, AJxxx. It was just funny seeing Sean's reaction and being worried that I was going to finesse and lose to yet another jack doubleton.

Winter has had a good time here. The DoubleTree is pet friendly, making this one of my favorite regionals, even if it is a bit on the small side. I really like Columbia. The Riverwalk along the Broad River and Bush River has been a place Winter and I have been almost every day to walk/jog. The final table count will probably be around 1650, substantially down from 2010, but that was kind of expected given its position right between an Atlanta supersectional and the Las Vegas NABC and a Raleigh regional just over a month ago.

Later today I will begin my summer travels, sort of, with 3.5 days at the Atlanta super sectional. It’s already off to an ominous start as team plans dismantled at the last minute. After last weekend’s plans didn’t pan out, I had decided to make no more plans and just play everything by ear. That’s so not me. I got anxious last night and started making plans – or at least attempting to, and that was probably a mistake.

 

Although I’m usually pretty adaptable, I like having a plan because it gives me peace of mind. I recognize that some people simply have difficulty planning ahead, and I’m kind of afraid that I’ll lose them if I push them too much to plan something rather than go along with their non-plan of “I’ll call you when I get free that day.” There’s got to be a happy medium somewhere. Anyway, it’s lunch at Chipotle, bridge with Sean, then brewery and whatever else needs to be done to celebrate David’s birthday today. More of the same tomorrow except it’ll be the nation’s birthday instead of David’s. Saturday and Sunday look about the same, with a tennis match thrown in Saturday morning and possibly an evening session of bridge. Hopefully I’ll get to see all of my Atlanta friends and make some new ones during these evenings with no bridge. It’ll be fun.

 

I’m not sure if I’ve mentioned this before, but I think I actually like these morning and afternoon games, at least when I don’t care about being productive like this Atlanta sectional. Many tournaments, however, I have other responsibilities and things I’d like to accomplish like jogging, playing with the dog, and working on the D7 News or the daily bulletin – the morning and dinner break are much more conducive to productivity than an evening with no bridge.

 

I don’t really have anything actually about bridge today because I haven’t played serious bridge in several months. I’ve been having quite an active social life, and the whole buying and fixing up a condo in Atlanta has taken up a lot of time.

Restructuring tournaments for substantial cash prizes

Since the Dallas NABC in March, I haven't played a lot of bridge. Well, actually I have - it's just mostly been in bridgebig.com. If you are unfamiliar, this is a site where you play bridge for money and it's an all individual format and you don't know who your partner is so cheating really is eliminated. There is, however, a decent amount of randomness based on who you happen to get for a partner on a particular board. Plus, the bidding system isn't very well defined so if the auction gets complicated at all, you're pretty much just guessing.

About a month ago, they made some major upgrades to the site, which is based in the Netherlands, that have really attracted a lot more people. The big 32-board Sunday afternoon game used to draw 20-25 players and is now getting about double that, and daily tournaments of 20 boards, and cash games are doing well too. If you're scared about playing for money, there are some free games and low-stakes games, but if you're not in it for the money, you're probably better off on bridgebase where you can socialize. But really the biggest improvement they made since the initial bridgebig release a year or two ago is the mobile-friendly version so it is not tedious at all to play on a smart phone.

I've been playing pretty consistently on bridgebig and have won a couple of sizeable prizes. All in all, I'm just a little bit in the green but am optimistic about winning more.

When people ask what can be done to increase interest in bridge, they suggest teaching classes, making it a school elective, newcomer games, easybridge, and so forth, but very few seem to suggest monetizing the game. I think that would be great. Money makes the world go round, and the majority of bridge players are upper-middle class people who can afford a few extra bucks in the entry fee for the chance to have a real cash prize.

Look at how poker took off in the 1990's. Why was that? Because the game is simple enough that you can learn it relatively quickly and the fact that you can lose a little bit of money or win a substantial amount in a tournament is exciting. That gets the masses involved and then they can find what types of games work for them later on. It won't work with the kids but might work with the empty-nesters, recent retirees, and middle aged white collar workers, and that's really the demographic that will produce the most bridge players.

At a typical regional, entry fees are $11/player/session and in the MABC, 8 free plays are given to winning KO teams and 4 free plays to winning pairs in regional pair events. Let's take a look at this past Thursday in Raleigh - seems like a typical regional schedule. 69 tables in the two-session pair events so that's 552 individual session entries, and since there were four flights (A, X, 750, 300), 4*4*11 = $176 in free plays were awarded. That's 32 cents per entry. In the KOs, there were 70 teams in 6 brackets. That comes to 148 team sessions so 592 individual session entries. 6*8*11 = $528 were awarded in free plays, so 89 cents per entry. Like the masterpoint formula, this is skewed much in favor of KOs, although smaller regionals will favor pairs more (KO brackets sized are fairly fixed but pair game sizes can vary a lot). Regardless, it's less than $1 of each entry that goes back into the prizes for the winner. That's almost negligible.

I'd like to see some restructuring of prizes and entry fees. Raise the entry fee of the top bracket by $5/person that will all go to prizes. Over the course of a 16-team bracket, that's 120 individual entries or $600. If we put that on top of the $100 or so that is already being allocated to that bracket's winners, it's a $700 prize pool. Let's pay out something like $450 to 1st, $225 to 2nd, and $25 to the ACBL. Do a similar thing with the flight A pair event. In lower brackets and flight B events, give players an option to buy in to the prize pool, and only the people who paid the extra are eligible for a prize. Obviously, that will make the prizes lower.

In the 20 tables A/X pairs (9A and 11X), everyone pays $5 extra so that's 160 individual entries or $940 to the prize pool for that event. Since there are 40 competitors instead of 16, we'll pay more than two places and the X prize pool will be 11/20/2 times that for A so that's $737 to A and $203 to X. That payout for flight A might look something like $330 for 1st, $180 for 2nd, $120 for 3rd, $80 for 4th, $27 to ACBL. For X, $115 for 1st, $80 for 2nd, and $8 to ACBL. In the 49 table gold rush game, maybe only 20 tables pay in to the prize pool, meaning about $1100, counting the initial 80 cents/entry. Similar payout structure as for the A/X pairs but only people who opt-in are eligible for any winnings. And maybe the flight B or gold rush games should have only a $3 or $4 extra charge. Maybe the open games should be more like $8-10 extra per session. This could start a trend of players playing pro without a sponsor.

Yes, radical ideas for bridge because we are so used to seeing no monetary prizes in bridge, at least in the US, but a lot of other games give cash prizes, and European bridge tournaments often have cash prizes, so it's really not such a strange idea.