TimG

I thought they had changed to a fixed rate rather than air fare and hotel room, but the end result is pretty close. I am pleasantly surprised that the bonus 4th place participants get an extra full stipend for the district. In District 25, an extra dollar per person per session is collected for KO events and the money goes into the GNT pool. The four teams that represent the district each receive an equal share. So, it varies from year to year. And, from what I can recall, it is generally a bit less than the $1800 provided by your district. Tim (former D25 President)

Well, you said it was real close to a jump overcall. After that, I dismissed the rest of what you said! :-)

Isn't it the case the 1st place gets the airfare and hotel stipend, 2nd place gets one or the other and 3rd place gets invited to participate at their own expense? Yes, there is a District that is awarded a 4th participant based upon some attendance percentage, but are they really given the full stipend? The ACBL covers the NAP prizes (with the increased club sanction fees), but the Districts are responsible for the GNT prizes and they vary quite a bit from District to District.

I think the discussion in this thread indicate that you're going to get a nearly unanimous vote for a heart overcall.

IMPs, white vs white, in 4th seat you hold ♠A6432 ♥3 ♦T92 ♣A985. 1♣-Pass-1♥-1♠ 3♥-3♠-4♥-Pass Pass-Pass Agree with the overcall? What do you lead?

While I'm not surprised that some are overcalling, I am surprised that everyone is overcalling. (Even codo has qualified his pass as being for B/I -- when one advances then overcall with this.) I wonder of someone with BridgeBrowser could search for 5233 hands with an Ace and a King (one of which is in spades) where there was a 1S overcall of 1H and see how the overcalling side scored.

MP, white against red, you hold ♠ATxxx ♥xx ♦xxx ♣K9x. RHO opens 1♥, do you overcall 1♠?

Law 25A deals with "Immediate Correction of Inadvertency". Law 47 seems to say that a played card is a played card. And, I cannot find a Law that addresses the retraction of an inadvertently played card. So, I guess I am wrong. But, it does seem strange that these two situations (inadvertent call and inadvertent play) are not treated in the same way.

I'd be very surprised if you couldn't order a non-alcoholic drink and still fit in just fine in these situations.

It may not technically be a "designation", but I believe an inadvertently played card can be corrected. This happens with some frequency with bidding boxes -- a player intends to bid 2S, but pulls out 2H instead, when he sees 2H on the table he may immediately (without pause for thought) correct the mechanical error. I believe the same would apply to an inadvertently played card as long as the correction was made without pause for thought.

Does anyone know whether BD and LV would have represented Italy in the European Championship if the decision making had been taken out of the hands of Lavazza? Players have a funny habit of being loyal to their sponsors. Especially if it is true that Lavazza makes it possible for these players to devote something close to full time to playing bridge, I can see them declining an invitation to play if their sponsor is removed from her role as selector.

Yes, this sort of thing is what I was alluding to when I asked if other nations have similar problems... Or, of course, maybe it isn't really a problem overall?! Hasn't there been some wrangling over this issue in England in recent years? I seem to think that some players refuse to compete because they cannot play with their sponsors, or something along those lines.

A couple of comments: 1) I think it is common in many team sports for the coach to select the team, through some try-out process, but not one in which potential team members have to objectively win a contest. Often the try-outs will be an invitation only affair. Lavazza acts as the coach (captain). It would appear to outsiders that her money has bought her position, but it is something that the Italian Bridge Federation has endorsed. 2) Many people would consider the US process by which playing clients compete in the process to be much more ridiculous than what is going on in Italy. For the most part -- I guess, Angelini's place on the team was suspect. But, when was the last time the US put forth a team that didn't include a playing member? Still the Europeans were a qualifying event. Again, in most team sports it common to use different team members in qualifying stages than in the actual championship.

Republicans are EVERYWHERE.

They aren't looking for sympathy. They just don't go. I don't think they are upset about it. If it was in their backyard, they might play. But, I think most players have some limit on how many times per year they will travel to a bridge event that would require an overnight stay. And, people from Maine who do travel to play bridge choose to attend regionals (or NABCs) rather than the GNT/NAP. By the way, in 2004 an average of 26 players from Maine attended each regular New England regional and made up 4% of the entries bought by District 25 members. We really are dealing with small numbers. Regarding travel distances, yes, things are usually much closer on the east coast. But, I live outside Portland, Maine. I can drive about 6 hours south and be in Manhattan (if I don't get stuck in traffic along the way); I can drive about 6 hours north and still not reach the northernmost point in Maine (where I am more likely to hit a moose than get caught in traffic). There are players in Maine who cannot practically travel to a bridge tournament and play a two-session event the same day or play an event and then drive home afterwards. Once you get to the point where you have to allow for a travel day before and after a regional, I don't imagine it really matters whether you are 400 or 700 miles away, you either commit a day to travel or you don't go. But, most players in New England are fortunate to be within commuting distance to at least one regional a year and are seldom faced with the problem of having to allow for travel days.

There is a chat log feature. I know a screen shot is better, but one may not think to take a snap shot in the heat of the moment.

D25 is New England. The person who directs the club game closest to my house sometimes call me in to play with him so they don't have a 2 1/2 table game with a 5 board sit out. Splitting this game into a regular and NAP game would prove difficult. This is particularly small, but the average club game in Maine is below 10 tables.

In my experience the club qualifying games are not big earners for the clubs. Typical is to increase the entry fee by the same as the increase in sanction fee. Attendance is not greater, in fact, some people choose to skip these special games. I'm sure they are big earners in some areas, just not around here. Folks from around here simply have no desire to travel to the District event. So, there is little reason to hold the club games. If people were asking for the games, the club owners would offer more of them. I think they are "getting it" just about right.

I agree that if a District opts to hold Unit qualifying, the units ought to hold an event (or some accommodation should be made for players in that unit). But, forcing units to hold a game is impractical -- what happens if 2-3 pairs show up? There are some very small units membership wise. D25 does have a four session District qualifying game. Many players consider the Flight A Finals the premiere pair event in New England. Even if it doesn't attract more than a single section. I admit that playing in the seven table finals is fun.

I think it is a District option whether to hold Unit qualifiers or not. District 25 used to hold unit qualifiers, but they were poorly attended in the smaller units, so rather than force those who live away from the bigger units to travel twice (once for Unit qualifying and once for District qualifying) D25 opted out of the Unit phase. I think forcing units to hold a game is a bad idea. If I play in the event this year, I will likely be the only person from my unit to play at the District level. It seems wrong to force my unit to hold a game just so I can play. Back when D25 held unit qualifying for the GNT, it was not uncommon for only one Flight A team to show up in a particular Unit. The solution was for them to pay their entry fee and then go home. I suppose you could do the same for NAP if your unit doesn't hold a game or if not enough players show up to hold a qualifying event in your flight.

That is true. It used to be that they could run one qualifying game (per regular weekly session) in each of June, July and August. Since these games award more masterpoints, lots of clubs take advantage and run games as often as they can. Other clubs, not liking the increased sanction fee associated with the game, run one or two and leave it at that. In all of Maine, there will be two NAP qualifying games at the club level held in the evening. That's it for all of Maine for the whole June, July and August qualifying months. I imagine you'll have more options in NYC!

From David Moss: "There will be a district final only this year. B's in Long Island on Oct 26 and A's &C's in NYC on Nov 9" So, qualify at a club, then no Unit level event, just straight to the District event. Tim

The Robson-Segal book is freely available in .pdf form. It shouldn't be too hard to find it using your favorite search engine. It is well worth the read even if you don't adopt all the methods.

You'll want to be in touch with gnyba.org, their list of officers is at: http://www.gnyba.org/about.html Club qualifying runs from June through August. I'm pretty sure that D24 is one of the Districts that also holds Unit qualifying, but someone from the list of officers ought to be able to help you. Tim

Seems inexcusable for District 24 not to list the dates for the District level event on their website.