[kgr]

Why was the name of the team "Ekeblad" and not Gitelman, BBO, ....?
Is he the best player, sponsor,..?

[Gerben42]

Probably he is the team captain. Notice that all other teams have also the name of one of the players.

[luke warm]

i think he foots the bill

[kgr]

Jlall, on May 24 2005, 01:12 PM, said:

Why would it be BBO? lol. Just because Fred is on the team does not make it team BBO even if thats who everyone watching on vugraph is rooting for. Ekeblad is their captain and also a sponsor.

BBO was example. Could as well be any other company name (if allowed) who would sponsor them.
If Ekeblad is their sponsor then this explains why the team has his name.
- Is it for most teams that the person who gives his name to the team is the sponsor?
- I tought that in the earlier days the sponsor is the weakest player and that pair only plays one set to be part of the champs; Is that correct and is it still true that it is the weakest pair? (It looked that Ekeblad played a lot and good).

[hrothgar]

kgr, on May 24 2005, 04:18 PM, said:

It looked that Ekeblad played a lot and good

I've been MAULED by Ekeblad when we were both playing in the Boston area.

Admittedly, this doesn't mean that much given my standard of play, however, his teams were clearly much stronger than the others that we were encountering

[joker_gib]

Do you really think you can beat Welland in a 120 brds team match with a weaker pair ? Not me !

Alain

[FrancesHinden]

kgr, on May 24 2005, 08:18 AM, said:

- Is it for most teams that the person who gives his name to the team is the sponsor?

Maybe the US is different, but here in the UK it is not yet true that "most" teams have a sponsor.

[Walddk]

Before anyone gets the funny idea that Ekeblad is in the team because he is the sponsor, maybe it would be appropriate to quote from the Encyclopedia (2001, latest edition):

EKEBLAD, Russell (Russ) (b. 1946) of Providence RI, co-owner (with wife) of jewelry distributing firm. WBF World Master, 3rd Rosenblum Teams 1990, Grand Life Master with 11,544 MPs as of 3/2001, won Spingold 1992; Vanderbilt Open Pairs II 1993; placed 2nd Blue Ribbon Pairs 1999. Won Canadian Invitational Pairs Calcutta 1990, 2nd in 1991; placed 3rd in the Cavendish Invitational Pairs 1991. Placed 2nd Blue Ribbon Pairs 1999, Open BAM Teams 1997. Contributor to Bridge World.

.....

No doubt a few things to add between 2001 and now, other than what this is all about: Winning the US Team Trials 2005.

But now it's up to you to judge for yourself. Is he there more in name (he can play) than in actual fact (he is a sponsor)? Right, he is a fine player.

Finally, I would like to add: Sponsors, world class players or not, are good for the game! That's a different topic entirely and probably worth a discussion in a separate thread. Not least because sponsors would be most welcome in various areas as far as BBO is concerned.

That would make life a lot easier for many people.

Roland

[kgr]

Thanks all for the answers.
This clarified it for me: Most teams play with a sponsor, but this sponsor plays as well as his teammates.
Last open question (agreeing with Ronald that sponsors can be a good thing for bridge): would it be allowed to give the team a name of a sponsoring company (not a name of any of the players); like f.i. Microsoft?

[Walddk]

kgr, on May 24 2005, 10:46 AM, said:

Last open question (agreeing with Ronald that sponsors can be a good thing for bridge): would it be allowed to give the team a name of a sponsoring company (not a name of any of the players); like f.i. Microsoft?

In most parts of Europe the answer is yes. And why not? Bridge needs the money, so who cares (would/should care) if the team name is Peterson, Smith - or Microsoft, Sony, Volkswagen, whatever?

Don't know what the policy is in North America.

Roland

[csdenmark]

I think Luke is right. He is the person who foots the bills.

I also think it is the spokesman and contactperson for tournament organizers making arrangements.

Roland as far as I remember we until 5 years ago or something like that in Denmark had many teams with company names. Just like we see on Vugraph they have from Italy and Poland. But I think those names are gone now.

My guess for that is that it is a problem for a company for justify the cost/benefit with the very little public attention to bridge. Such is needed and carefully examined by auditers and the authorities.

7.000 logins for a worldwide web-site might cause problems for software etc. but such small figures will never be able to rate for any kind of company promotion. You will need segment-TV to attract a bigger audience or perhaps a new edition of Shariff Bridge Circus.

[Walddk]

csdenmark, on May 24 2005, 03:44 PM, said:

I think Luke is right. He is the person who foots the bills.

I also think it is the spokesman and contactperson for tournament organizers making arrangements.

Roland as far as I remember we until 5 years ago or something like that in Denmark had many teams with company names. Just like we see on Vugraph they have from Italy and Poland. But I think those names are gone now.

My guess for that is that it is a problem for a company for justify the cost/benefit with the very little public attention to bridge. Such is needed and carefully examined by auditers and the authorities.

7.000 logins for a worldwide web-site might cause problems for software etc. but such small figures will never be able to rate for any kind of company promotion. You will need segment-TV to attract a bigger audience or perhaps a new edition of Shariff Bridge Circus.

Yes, Team Scandata (Adamsen), Team Q8 (Schaltz) and the like were quite common in the Danish Premier League some years ago, but as soon as the federation set a limit as to how much (minimum) the companies had to pay a season, they backed out.

All companies got nice publicity in the daily newspaper columns, even the headlines, and the monthly magazine, but it wasn't enough to keep them interested then.

How this can be achieved on BBO, and perhaps at the venue at major championships, I am not quite sure. Something needs to be done though. The interest is there, the money is there; now it's up to us to convince company managers that it pays to support bridge.

Roland

[pclayton]

Jlall, on May 24 2005, 06:06 AM, said:

Ekeblad is a very strong player, so let's not get sponsor confused with weak player. Indeed, Welland is a sponsor and can hold his own with the best in the world. Ekeblad and Welland are 2 of the strongest sponsors around. There is no reason a sponsor cannot play every bit as well as a pro, they are just financially well off and have the luxury of being able to hire them. To be considered part of the winning team and get the medal/masterpoints/etc every player must play at least half the boards in each match. So the sponsors must hold their own as they are playing 60 boards in the final, 60 in semi-final, etc.

Most teams with sponsors have the sponsors name as the team captain but not all. There were about 10 or 11 sponsored teams in the trials out of 18. Additionally there were 2 junior teams which were "training" in the event and given expense money by the ACBL. The only team that was a serious threat that didn't have a sponsor was Robinson (who qualified last in the round robin).

And dont forget about Nickell and Reese Milner either. Rose can play too - her high finish in the LM pairs (04?) is testamant to that

A sponsor that cant play OTOH can really drag a good team down.