[ArtK78]

This entire thread is a sweeping generalization, and, like most sweeping generalizations, it is more wrong than right (which is also a sweeping generalization).

And it is also demonstrates a condescending attitude towards the perceived lesser group.

[phil_20686]

If Phil's point was that young and potentially good players find it hard to break into the upper tiers, then I definitely agree.

In the UK there seems to be, depending on what exactly you count, between 5 and ten U25 players who are quite good, and have the potential to be very good. Of these, at least 3 seem to have functionally given up playing. Mostly because club bridge is just not of a high enough level to be satisfying. Then we are caught in a cycle where we are not playing enough to be at our best, which is annoying when we do play in something semi-serious, and we are not visible enough to be able to form good teams. This is compounded by the fact that many of us are in Professional careers where we sometimes have to work long and un-predictable hours, and where we may be very mobile as well.

In my case, I work in Lancaster and Live in London at the weekends, and don't play much club bridge in either. This makes it virtually impossible to have a ready supply of team mates and partners for serious events. To make matters worst, since my NBO is scotland, when I live and work in England, none of the adult players that I come into contact with via junior events are ever likely to be viable candidates for actual events, seeing as how they live in a different country. (Admittedly the UK is a small place, so its not that far.)

In these circumstances building a proper partnership is all but impossible, and a lot of my generation seem to be essentially leaving bridge because of the difficulties. I have no idea what to do as a solution, but I am aware that this is a massive problem, and that without really meaning to I have got to the point where I have not entered a significant team event for nearly two years, except being roped in as a sub for a single GC match, and occasionally I play with my family. My case is hardly unique. One top U25 pair withdrew from the England U25 squad because they didn't want to give up their holidays to play in the Junior Europeans. Surely symptomatic of our general disillusionment.

[jjbrr]

ArtK78, on 2011-May-23, 13:25, said:

This entire thread is a sweeping generalization, and, like most sweeping generalizations, it is more wrong than right (which is also a sweeping generalization).

And it is also demonstrates a condescending attitude towards the perceived lesser group.

That's funny. I was just thinking if you reread the OP and replace "bridge" with any skill-based hobby, "smart" with athletic when appropriate, and "club/tournament" with "social game/competitive game" about 95% of Phil's post will still apply.

[DrMunk]

Phil, on 2011-May-22, 15:07, said:

I started to post in "Is Bridge Dying", but to avoid a threadjack, I started another.

Let's accept that Bridge is a segmented game with two distinct groups:

(The references made here apply to the ACBL, but I suppose they could be true in nearly any large bridge playing country).

Group 1 consists of the following:

- Club players that enjoy the accumulation of points. Players in this group want recognition from their peers, and enjoy the social element.

- Their card play is intermediate at best, and will spend a lot of their time discussing conventions and the latest fads, although the heart of their bidding knowledge will come from older players that learned Hardy 2/1 30 years ago. Their judgement is based on "rules".

- Many in this set learned when they were younger, but probably took a lot of time off for work, family, etc., although a lot of them started in their 40-50's as beginners. They do not learn at the same clip as a younger player, and won't be as competitive at a higher level.

- Many of them spend a lot of time on their game, although many do not. Some are achievement-driven, since they were probably successful at something during their careers, but again, many are simply interested in seeing their friends on Wednesday afternoons. The better ones will read, but Kelsey, Reese, Pottage and Root are too difficult for them, so they will gravitate toward Bergen, or the articles in the ACBL Bulletin.

- You will occasionally see a group of them break through and win a Bracket I or II KO an A/X swiss at a regional, and this will be their most significant accomplishment of their lifetime. They have little interest in competing at NABC's, and when they go, they frequently play in regionally rated events. Sometimes a player that does things differently than their peers will transcend this group and become part of group 2.

- Their goal was to become a life master and have a letter in front of their player number. Once they accomplished that, goals became less important. For these players, getting more points is a mixed blessing. They have to leave their group of friends in the 99/NLM/499er game and play in the "open" game with the sharks.

- They are of the opinion that there is a strong correlation between masterpoints and skill.

- They generally disdain unfamiliar methods.

- They do not support the ACBL's support of the WBF, or the subsidizing of international teams.

- They hate psyching.

- They will oppose making rank requirements more difficult by having to earn extra gold or platinum, and will support the league's desire to award more points for charity games, and for KO's with players that have a lot of MPs.


Group 2 is generally younger, smarter and better than Group 1.

- They tend not to play in club games, but when they do they will usually place in the top 2 or 3.

- They spend a lot of time playing and thinking about bridge, and working on their partnerships. Many are interested in building a better mousetrap (i.e., system), and enjoy the problem solving aspects of the game. Many of this group are actually older, but when they are they have a lot of points.

- They might have started as juniors, but at the very least started in their 20's or 30's at the latest. Their annual point totals will vary greatly, depending on other commitments they have. Some are social, but many of the younger players are not, although you see this changing as their social skills catch up with their intellectual talent.

- They have very lofty goals, although the accumulation of masterpoints is not one of them.

- They are abstract thinkers, and disdain 'rules'.

- Any younger player that learns, and sticks with the game, will almost always gravitate to Group 2.
-------------------------------------------------------

My guess is that Group 1 outnumbers Group 2 by a multiple of about 30, but about 1/2 of Group 2 also belong in Group 1. The objectives and goals of the each group are different, but there are some common denominators. They both love the game, and many of both groups now play online.

Can these diverse groups live in peace?

My answer is YES, but the other needs to respect the other's 'turf'. I would propose that daytime club games are the domain of Group 1. Evening club games and all tournaments are the domain of Group 2.

Both groups will play in their other's domain, and both will complain. Group 1 will hate playing against pros at the regionals and nationals. Group 2 will claim that the directors at clubs are terrible, and that the players are unethical.

Certain rules violations at clubs are not expected to be enforced as strictly tournaments.

Yet, as long as the league understands the objectives of each Group, everyone can be happy.

P.S., CHudacek's ideas could be tried at Clubs or Sectionals, since thats whom he is trying to appeal to. He will claim that better players will support his concepts, but he is wrong.

Nah!

I thought everybody knew that:
"There are three kinds of bridge players.
Those who can count
And those who can't"

[JLOGIC]

ArtK78, on 2011-May-23, 13:25, said:

This entire thread is a sweeping generalization, and, like most sweeping generalizations, it is more wrong than right (which is also a sweeping generalization).

And it is also demonstrates a condescending attitude towards the perceived lesser group.

For once we totally agree Art.

Also, as usual Hanp wins thread.

[glen]

JLOGIC, on 2011-May-23, 14:42, said:

... as usual Hanp wins thread.

that's because he has the most threadpoints

[awm]

There are basically three steps in recruiting new bridge players:

(1) Teaching people the basics of the game.
(2) Getting people who know the basics of the game to play duplicate regularly (clubs or local tournaments).
(3) Getting people involved in "serious" tournament bridge.

Usually the steps occur in that order, although there are a few cases of people who skipped directly from "basics" to "tournaments" and never really played in clubs or in local tournaments. There are also definitely cases of people who don't get all the way through step 3. Anyway, assuming that our goal is for tournament bridge to survive and thrive, we need to consider what we can do to ease each step of the process.

A lot of the effort made by ACBL (and by other organizations) focuses on step 1. Years ago when bridge was more popular, almost everyone knew the basics of the game. It's true that a lot of people who learn the basics will not start playing regular duplicate. But having a lot of people who know the basics (and maybe play socially at home on occasion) will help to teach the game to more people, will lead to people who are more supportive of initiatives like bridge in schools, and maybe some of the people who don't catch the duplicate bug right away will end up coming back to the game later in life (when kids leave home or when they retire or something like that).

Nonetheless, it makes sense to think a little bit about steps 2 and 3. We need to consider (especially in the context of younger players) how to make these transitions easier.

[nige1]

Lewis Caroll almost said:

"You are old. father William," the young gun said,
"And you play on-line bridge every night,
And yet you write garbage in this forum thread,
Do you think, at your age, this is right?"

"In my youth," said the Ace, "I played in a group
Who knew all that there is to be known,
Although now I forget a simple Bath Coup,
I can still cope with basic Roth-Stone."

[kenberg]

I live in Maryland. So what?
Well, the Preakness was Saturday. I have already forgotten which horse won.
The lack oi interest in horse racing is regularly bemoaned around here. What can be done to get me interested in horse racing? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. I know people who are great enthusiasts. I'm not. If I had a horse and if I were fifty years younger and if I grew up in horse country, then maybe. But I don't, I'm not, and I didn't.

I can't think of a thing that would get my non-bridge playing friends interested in playing bridge, tournament or otherwise. Nor would I know how to get those who ride horses for pleasure to take up polo. Or jousting.

If the finances of tournaments are a problem, then that has to be addressed. Fantasizing that the solution is to get large masses of people to suddenly show up at tournaments is not addressing it seriously, however.

[qwery_hi]

So it makes all the more sense to cater to the needs of people already interested in playing bridge. How about at each Nationals having a nationally rated pair game where superchart methods are allowed. AFAIK there isn't one. The people who'd sign up for this would know what they are getting into surely.

kenberg, on 2011-May-23, 15:43, said:

I live in Maryland. So what?
Well, the Preakness was Saturday. I have already forgotten which horse won.
The lack oi interest in horse racing is regularly bemoaned around here. What can be done to get me interested in horse racing? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. I know people who are great enthusiasts. I'm not. If I had a horse and if I were fifty years younger and if I grew up in horse country, then maybe. But I don't, I'm not, and I didn't.

I can't think of a thing that would get my non-bridge playing friends interested in playing bridge, tournament or otherwise. Nor would I know how to get those who ride horses for pleasure to take up polo. Or jousting.

If the finances of tournaments are a problem, then that has to be addressed. Fantasizing that the solution is to get large masses of people to suddenly show up at tournaments is not addressing it seriously, however.

[kenberg]

qwery_hi, on 2011-May-23, 15:56, said:

So it makes all the more sense to cater to the needs of people already interested in playing bridge. How about at each Nationals having a nationally rated pair game where superchart methods are allowed. AFAIK there isn't one. The people who'd sign up for this would know what they are getting into surely.

Sounds good to me, both the general principle and the specific application. I might well sign up for the superchart game providing I am not required to, myself, play some of these weird things. But very much I like the philosophy of bridge tournaments for bridge players.

When I first started playing, the Washington Brisge League unit game had an upstairs downstairs dichotomy. Steve Robinson et al played upstairs, I played downstairs. This was not so I could win masterpoints, it was because I was a beginner and it seemed stupid to go play where I wouldn't understand what was going on. Steve, and Peter and many others, still outplay me but now I belong upstairs. Whether I belong in a superchart game could be debated, but I don't think I would come in last.

[Vampyr]

Phil, on 2011-May-23, 10:17, said:

Any "+" or "++" will denote a tournament player, and they need to keep a necessary % of colored points to maintain this status.
Doesn't everyone win in this scenario?

Not the clubs.

[awm]

kenberg, on 2011-May-23, 15:43, said:

I live in Maryland. So what?
Well, the Preakness was Saturday. I have already forgotten which horse won.
The lack oi interest in horse racing is regularly bemoaned around here. What can be done to get me interested in horse racing? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. I know people who are great enthusiasts. I'm not. If I had a horse and if I were fifty years younger and if I grew up in horse country, then maybe. But I don't, I'm not, and I didn't.

I can't think of a thing that would get my non-bridge playing friends interested in playing bridge, tournament or otherwise. Nor would I know how to get those who ride horses for pleasure to take up polo. Or jousting.

So first of all, it's important to get more people on a horse when they are young. This does not automatically translate into an interest in horse racing -- maybe some people hate riding the horse, or just get involved in other things and never come back to it. In your case, maybe if you had spent a lot of time around horses when you were in your 20s you'd be into horse racing now. Or maybe not... but it seems like a necessary pre-condition. This is basically what ACBL is trying to do with bridge -- give lots of people an introduction to the game when they are young and hope that it catches on with a few of them.

However, there's a second question of how to get people who do ride horses into horse racing. It could well be that lots of people enjoy riding a horse but still don't care at all about the races. If this is the case, then making sure everyone spends some time on a horse when they are young may not be enough to keep horse racing viable. There are some things that can be done to address this, by making the races as welcoming as possible, by increasing publicity or prize money, by having the best jockeys do some PR or community service work, by having special events where people who are only moderately experienced riders can compete, and so forth. This is what I'd call the "second stage" of improving bridge popularity -- getting people who already know how to play at a basic level and enjoy social bridge to participate in duplicate events. Obviously this is not for everyone, but there are things that can be done like making clubs as welcoming as possible, trying to improve the demographics at clubs by encouraging young players to come out, having prizes, having the best players do some PR or community service work (i.e. bridge lessons, commentating on vugraph), by having special events where people who are only moderately experienced players can compete, and so forth.

It seems to me that ACBL makes a very concerted effort to teach the basics of the game, but doesn't do as much to get people out to clubs and tournaments. The "zero tolerance" policy is probably the biggest advance in making clubs friendly, but enforcement of that policy is kind of a joke. Prizes are a joke. Some top players do significant PR or community service work, but it's pretty much on their own dime. There are events where moderately experienced players can compete but I think it's an issue how strictly segregated these are from the top players (to the degree that they are sort of separate from the "main tournament") and how the bracketing/flighting is based on master points and not skill level.

[matmat]

Any time someone like Han sits down at my table on BBO it totally ruins the pleasure of playing for me, and I either leave or boot them. I don't want to hear why my play was backed only by the authority of a large number of monsterpoints.

[han]

awm, on 2011-May-23, 15:14, said:

There are basically three steps in recruiting new bridge players

That's a sweeping generalization.

[JLOGIC]

han, on 2011-May-23, 23:42, said:

That's a sweeping generalization.

They say the OP sets the tone of a thread...

[BillHiggin]

All Bridge players fall into one of two groups:
Those who are similar to me
The rest

[Vampyr]

awm, on 2011-May-23, 16:49, said:

Prizes are a joke.

Here in the UK, first prize at a duplicate game is generally not significantly more than the table money, and a win at a tournament will often not be enough to cover expenses for the weekend. I assume that other countries have similar levels of prizes.

Would better prizes help? My guess is that any increase in interest would be offset by the necessary rise in entrance fees. For many people a duplicate session represents a reasonably-priced evening's entertainment; and tournament numbers (here at least) are suffering lately, largely due to the expense.

[crazy4hoop]

I was also thinking that making bridge affordable might be in the list of priorities. Unfortunately, I don't think I have the solution(s).

[gnasher]

I used to think that there were two types of bridge player: those who knew how many masterpoints they had, and those who knew how to play bridge. Then my world view was shattered by overhearing a Bermuda Bowl winner telling someone how many masterpoints he had.