[PhilG007]

It's been said that Bridge can bring out a person's character. True or false? Agree or disagree?

[AL78]

I think it is more complicated than a binary answer. I'd say partially true. I get fruistrated when I do badly at bridge because I don't like losing, I don't like underperforming, and have never been a good loser. This is only one small part of my whole character, and I am not frustrated in general in all other aspects of life.

[PhilG007]

 AL78, on 2020-December-12, 15:40, said:

I think it is more complicated than a binary answer. I'd say partially true. I get fruistrated when I do badly at bridge because I don't like losing, I don't like underperforming, and have never been a good loser. This is only one small part of my whole character, and I am not frustrated in general in all other aspects of life.

On the flip side of your answer,would you agree if you were always a winner the game would(from your viewpoint) become stagnant and boring?

[AL78]

 PhilG007, on 2020-December-12, 15:48, said:

On the flip side of your answer,would you agree if you were always a winner the game would(from your viewpoint) become stagnant and boring?

I can't say for sure having never played a game where I'm always a winner, but thinking about it yes, if I were to always win, that implies there is no challenge, and if there is no challenge, then it will probably lose its thrill and enjoyment. To get real gratification from winning, you have to feel you had to work for it. I'd rather get a top from finding an advanced card play technique or brilliant defence through logical inferences than be handed a top because a weak pair completely blew the hand.

[pescetom]

 PhilG007, on 2020-December-12, 15:48, said:

would you agree if you were always a winner the game would(from your viewpoint) become stagnant and boring?

Absolutely not, I have in the past been lucky and dedicated enough to reach the point of always winning in a sport and there is nothing more agreeable: winning gives you the confidence to relax and enjoy competing which helps you win, there is less stress and tons of satisfaction. And you know full well you had to work for it.

[AL78]

 pescetom, on 2020-December-13, 03:45, said:

Absolutely not, I have in the past been lucky and dedicated enough to reach the point of always winning in a sport and there is nothing more agreeable: winning gives you the confidence to relax and enjoy competing which helps you win, there is less stress and tons of satisfaction. And you know full well you had to work for it.

Surely if you are always winning, the competition must be well below your standard, the skill differential has to be high enough to overwhelm any luck factor. In such a situation, I don't see how you can feel you had to work for a win the majority of the time since most games will not require full effort to achieve victory. Is it not more satisfying to compete with others on your level where it is anyones game and the result comes down to who played better plus a luck element, or ideally small luck element?

When I played in county competitions years ago, it was far more rewarding to win rounds in teams competitions against decent opposition, than to win when I am sitting in and assisting in the beginner duplicate (the latter is meaningless).

[pescetom]

 AL78, on 2020-December-13, 06:56, said:

Surely if you are always winning, the competition must be well below your standard, the skill differential has to be high enough to overwhelm any luck factor. In such a situation, I don't see how you can feel you had to work for a win the majority of the time since most games will not require full effort to achieve victory. Is it not more satisfying to compete with others on your level where it is anyones game and the result comes down to who played better plus a luck element, or ideally small luck element?

Not at all, of course it would be no fun to dominate lesser competitors. I was talking about periods where you are consistently winning against people at the top of your category, the best of them with the same abilities as you have or even more. At that level it is not about differentials of skill or ability, it's about mental approach, and winning helps win. And of course there is an equal and opposite effect on rivals, who are less likely to win because they expect that you will.

I wasn't talking about bridge, of course I know by now I'm not going to reach that level in bridge, even in national age-group competition. But I enjoy the challenge of improving and I doubt I will get bored for at least a decade.

[AL78]

 pescetom, on 2020-December-13, 07:30, said:

Not at all, of course it would be no fun to dominate lesser competitors. I was talking about periods where you are consistently winning against people at the top of your category, the best of them with the same abilities as you have or even more. At that level it is not about differentials of skill or ability, it's about mental approach, and winning helps win. And of course there is an equal and opposite effect on rivals, who are less likely to win because they expect that you will.

I must admit I don't understand how it is possible to constantly win in a sport against rivals on the same level or slightly better, unless you are having a lucky streak. If you look at the best sportsmen/women/teams in their field (i.e. world champions), they might have a streak of consecutive wins, but they don't always win, at least not in the limited sports I have loosely followed. At some point they have an off-day at a time another not far from their ability plays above their station.

[morecharac]

 PhilG007, on 2020-December-12, 08:09, said:

It's been said that Bridge can bring out a person's character. True or false? Agree or disagree?

It's good at bringing out the bad side of a person's inner character.

Some otherwise inoffensive or sociable people show what's under their public face when the cards come out. A few actually become nicer.

Is winning the most important thing or is fun? I know I've had good results and been bored, had bad results and still had fun.

And I can attest, as a retired director, that some players care not a whit about any rule they don't caught breaking.

[AL78]

 morecharac, on 2020-December-13, 10:56, said:

Is winning the most important thing or is fun? I know I've had good results and been bored, had bad results and still had fun.

Not winning as such, but having a good result due to nice solid play up to the limit of your ability. I have had sub 50% evenings which were enjoyable because I had cards where I could play an active role in the defence, I could formulate a plan, execute it in cooperation with my partner, and punish them for overbidding, or do the best we can. That is the core of the gameplay for me, solving a puzzle logically and getting something tangible out of it from sound reasoning and execution. Continuous sub 50% results where I keep making blunders, or I have no clue what we did to deserve finishing second to last, or a streak of evenings with poor hands where the opponents get the cards most of the time and do the optimal things with them and we get whipped, or I declare twice in 20 boards three times in a row are not enjoyable. There is a correlation between doing well and enjoyment, and there is a correlation between my average HCP and enjoyment.

It is certain individual hands in an evening that tend to lower the fun, like when opponents bid and make a cold 6NT on a combined 36 count, and we get 29% because some have overbid to 7NT going off, some didn't get past game, and one hero stopped in 2♥.

[pescetom]

 AL78, on 2020-December-13, 10:07, said:

I must admit I don't understand how it is possible to constantly win in a sport against rivals on the same level or slightly better, unless you are having a lucky streak. If you look at the best sportsmen/women/teams in their field (i.e. world champions), they might have a streak of consecutive wins, but they don't always win, at least not in the limited sports I have loosely followed. At some point they have an off-day at a time another not far from their ability plays above their station.

I follow quite a few best sportsmen/women in their field, and don't see it being a mere question of off-days or freak streaks. To give one example look at Nadal, arguably less talented than his principal rivals but when he managed to pull down the screws he made it near impossible for anyone. In 2008 he started off losing right left and centre but once he beat Federer three times in a row he became unstoppable, including the greatest Wimbledon final ever. I could cite similar examples from Formula 1, road cycling or other sports. Bridge is a bit different both in being a pairs sport and having more incidence of luck than most, but the mental/training/success aspect will still predominate in the medium term I expect. In a recent post mikeh commented that at a regional event he expects to win and explained how that changed his propensity to risk. Imagine having the same confidence at national level and how it changes your game.

[AL78]

 pescetom, on 2020-December-13, 15:33, said:

I follow quite a few best sportsmen/women in their field, and don't see it being a mere question of off-days or freak streaks. To give one example look at Nadal, arguably less talented than his principal rivals but when he managed to pull down the screws he made it near impossible for anyone. In 2008 he started off losing right left and centre but once he beat Federer three times in a row he became unstoppable, including the greatest Wimbledon final ever. I could cite similar examples from Formula 1, road cycling or other sports. Bridge is a bit different both in being a pairs sport and having more incidence of luck than most, but the mental/training/success aspect will still predominate in the medium term I expect. In a recent post mikeh commented that at a regional event he expects to win and explained how that changed his propensity to risk. Imagine having the same confidence at national level and how it changes your game.

So are you saying that to a certain extent, your beliefs shape your reality. If you really believe you can win, that in itself will increase your probability of winning? I've heard this stated in the context of dating, whereby believing you are a failure with women makes it more likely you will continue to fail, because of the negative vibes that women pick up on.

[poppagene]

In some people, bridge brings out their worst selves.

[pilowsky]

The best thing about Bridge is that you can socialise your losses and keep the wins for yourself:

[spade7]

Agree with that quote.

[haka9]

 morecharac, on 2020-December-13, 10:56, said:

Is winning the most important thing or is fun? I know I've had good results and been bored, had bad results and still had fun.

Hideous Hog once said (as I can remember): "My second greatest pleasure in bridge is winning. My greatest pleasure in bridge is seeing my opponents lose."

[barmar]

And Vince Lombardi said (although didn't originate) "Winning isn't everything, it's the only thing." However, the context of this is rallying a team to play their best, it's not meant as a life goal.

[pilowsky]

 haka9, on 2021-January-04, 11:21, said:

Hideous Hog once said (as I can remember): "My second greatest pleasure in bridge is winning. My greatest pleasure in bridge is seeing my opponents lose."

Mr Schadenfreude