Walddk

Suggestions as to how it should be in the future are excellent but not really relevant. This is not going to happen any time soon according to Fred. It would be more interesting to hear what can/should be done as it is now. Tim did contribute, but most people did not. They are virtually all English speaking and perhaps can't see the problem. I realise that we won't get the views of the Poles, Turks, Chinese and Italians, but one could still voice one's opinion as to whether one should show consideration towards those groups or not. Or should they just learn English and make it a non-issue? Or to turn it around: should people from English speaking countries learn other languages? Just the basic stuff in order to get the gist of the commentary in a foreign language. Provocative perhaps, but isn't it a fact the we speak too few languages? Roland

It has been a tradition since our vugraph start in 2001 that Italian commentary is in the open room, whereas all "other" languages are spoken in the closed. I don't think there is a reason why this can't be changed. I have no strong feelings, though, but I know that some WBF officials in Beijing were wondering why it was like this. Roland

You may argue that it's unnecessary to have Danish commentary in one room when we have USA v Denmark, because "everyone" in Denmark speaks English. That is a valid point. However, this is not an irrevocable decision, even when the broadcast is in progress. Let me give you an example from a year ago or so when we had a broadcast from the Norwegian Championships. We offered English in one room and mixed Scandinavian commentary in the other. It transpired that Helness-Helgemo were playing in the room with Scandinavian commentary, which we could not know until we saw it. We had many hundreds of spectators there, and after a while I suggested that the commentators switched to English in order to please as many kibitzers as possible. Not a problem. Scandinavian commentators can do that in no time at all. When it comes to say Polish, it is not that easy. First, our Polish commentators can't switch to English just like that. Some have some knowledge of English, but it's not good enough for vugraph commentary. And secondly, even if it was possible, we would disappoint the many Polish viewers who came to that room for Polish commentary. So a switch would benefit English speaking viewers, whereas we would make life difficult for the vast majority of Polish viewers who don't understand English. Roland

It's virtually impossible to judge. Some go to a particular room because of language, others because of players, and the rest depending on which commentators they like (and do not like). The perfect solution is of course the multiple channel opportunity, but since this does not exist in the current version, we have to deal with the issue as it is. The current solution is not perfect, but given the circumstances it's the best there is in my opinion. This my personal view: I suspect that many people from English speaking countries don't really care if we provide this service or not. As long as they can get English. I would (rather not) like to see all the complaints we get if we have Polish and Turkish in a match between Poland and Turkey - and no English. This is theory because it is not going to happen. Our policy of at least one table with English prevents that. So as it is now, people who understand English are the privileged ones. They will always get a language they understand. That is not always the case for Mr. Safranek in Prague. Roland

As I pointed out above, this is not going to happen. We always have one room with English commentary. I don't see why it shouldn't happen. Why should you exclude Italian only or Norwegian only speakers from a match between those two countries? In your example we don't exclude anyone, because people in Norway understand English. Another scenario, however, is a match between Italy and Poland, which in fact took place in the quarter-finals. Then tossing a coin is the only option. Why must we have English at all times? Because this is an American site, and the official language is English. I think we will get many more complaints if an Italy-Poland match had Italian in one room and Polish in another. I can't tell for sure, because it never happened. I am open to all suggestions, but I doubt that Fred wants me to change our policy of English in at least one room. Regarding your comment on time zones and which countries to show, I agree with you. Unfortunately, at major championships BBO does not decide which matches we get, but I know that the organisers usually are aware of the fact that a match involving USA will be better suited for the 11 pm than for the 2:20 am EDT slot. We can't change time zones, so when an event takes place in China, you are not going to get prime time in USA, at least not on the east coast. Roland

As I pointed out above, this is not going to happen. We always have one room with English commentary. Roland

We have addressed this topic before, but only superficially. There is more substance to it after the WSMG in Beijing because I have received some messages from other users, mostly from people who were not happy. I got messages to this effect: "Why don't we have English commentary when this (top) pair is playing." "How do you expect me to enjoy the show when I have this (foreign) language?" "Why can't you just mix the commentary?" As you may have guessed, these complaints (not many I would like to add) came from users in English speaking countries, for instance when we had Polish commentary in a room where Meckwell appeared. Those users could not understand why we did not have English commentary when this American top pair played. "Everyone here wants to understand what the commentators write, and we can't when Polish is all we see", was what I got from some. I can certainly understand this point of view, but let me try to explain how it works. The minute I know which matches we get the following day, often very late before the actual broadcast, I get in touch with my contacts in countries involved in that particular broadcast. I ask them if they can provide commentary in XXXish for this match. Next step is that those people get in touch with local potential commentators to find out if they are available. This may of course take a while, because there is no guarantee that they are at home to take a phone call or an e-mail. Finally, the local organisers get back to me to tell me "yes" or "no". In most cases I get a "yes", and then I will let the closed room have Polish, Turkish, Japanese, Chinese, whatever. Please note that there will always be at least one table per match with English commentary. Since we can't know the line-ups in advance, it is therefore also impossible to predict where top pairs like Meckwell, Lauria-Versace, Zia-Rosenberg are going to play. Consequently, we may see Meckwell in a room where I have scheduled Polish commentary. We did a few days ago. "But why don't you just have English in all rooms" you may ask. That would work for people in English speaking countries, and also for people in countries where most people speak and understand English. However, and this is the crux of the matter, it will not work for Mrs. Klimowicz in Warsaw, Mr. Zahan in Ankara, Mrs. Yu Li Peng in Shanghai, Mr. Cannavaro in Milan, and Mr. Okamoto in Tokyo. Very few in those countries understand English, and we have thousands of spectators from exactly these five countries. I am sure Uday can tell us how many. If English was all we offered them, we would let them down, would we not? In my view it is selfish when "you" say that English is a world language and that we therefore should go with that language only. It is indeed a world language, but it's not the only one. As an example, let me remind you that twice as many have Mandarin (Chinese) as their first language. So should we just brush them aside if we have a match between USA and China? We should not in my opinion. Finally, let me address the issue regarding mixed languages in one room. As it is now, we subscribe to the policy that the commentators must be able to understand each other. We feel that it's important that Kit Woolsey understands Song Zhao's comments, and vice versa. Otherwise, the commentary will not be ideal when one asks in East and the other one responds in West. So long as we don't have multiple language channels to choose from, I think the best way to go about the problem is to do what we do today. A little of everything to please as many as possible. In fact, I think it's a great service when we offer commentary in 11 languages like we did from Beijing. It is certainly no disgrace to speak nothing but English, but that also applies to the user in Turkey who speaks nothing but Turkish. Tolerance and understanding are the key words as far as I am concerned. Constructive criticism is obviously welcomed. I will have a look at all posts (hopefully many) in this thread and consider once I have seen everyone's views. Roland

And now on to the last day of the WMSG. As usual, four matches in all three sessions. They are: Italy v England China v England (Women) USA v Japan (Seniors) Yeh Bros v Russia (Transnational) Hope you enjoyed our coverage. Roland

Perhaps it is not such a bad idea, in vugraphed matches where the running score is known, that the NPC has the option of throwing in the towel if he thinks his team has had enough. Just like he does on occasion in the boxing ring. "Sorry guys, you are groggy, let's call it a day." Roland

To my ears Michael and Stefan make it sound as if I am anti-German. I am not; I have a perfectly normal relationship to our southern neighbours. We have several excellent German commentators on the panel - Michael Gromöller included - and I am all for having German commentary whenever possible. My error in this case was that I trusted usually reliable sources at the venue immediately after the "incident" took place. My judgement was wrong; I should have waited until I had all facts before me, preferably from the players themselves. In this context I would like to add that Tom Townsend from the England team messaged me later to tell that the German players had done nothing wrong. I will obviously take his and Michael's words for it. I am sorry that I have caused an issue that seems out of proportion after the facts hit the table, so I hereby express my sincere apologies to the German team. Tomorrow I will be happy to announce that the withdrawal happened in a cordial atmosphere with the approval of the chief tournament director. I will even wait until we reach the third session of the day when most people are online during our broadcast. Roland ..... And here a translation into German: Für mich klingt es so, als brächten Michael und Stefan zum Ausdruck, ich sei gegen die Deutschen. Das bin ich nicht; ich habe eine vollkommen normale Beziehung zu unseren südlichen Nachbarn. Wir haben mehrere exzellente deutsche Kommentatoren im Gremium - Michael Gromöller eingeschlossen - und ich bin total dafür, Deutsche Kommentare zu haben, wann immer es möglich ist. Mein Fehler in diesem Fall war, daß ich Quellen am Austragungsort, die normalerweise vertrauenswürdig sind, direkt nach dem "Vorfall" vertraut habe. Meine Beurteilung war falsch; ich hätte warten sollen, bis ich alle Fakten - vorzugsweise von den Spielern selber - vorliegen hatte. In diesem Zusammenhang möchte ich gerne hinzufügen, daß Tom Townsend, Mitglied des Teams aus England, mir später eine Nachricht geschickt hat, um mir zu sagen, daß die Deutschen Spieler nichts Falsches getan haben. Selbstverständlich vertraue ich seinen und Michael Gromöller's Worten. Es tut mir Leid, daß ich ein Problem verursacht habe, das nun, wo die Fakten auf dem Tisch liegen, unverhältnismäßig erscheint, und so bringe ich hiermit meine aufrichtige Entschuldigung dem deutschen Team gegenüber zum Ausdruck. Morgen werde ich gerne bekannt geben, dass die vorzeitige Aufgabe in einer herzlichen Atmosphäre mit Genehmigung des Haupt-Turnierleiters stattgefunden hat. Ich werde sogar bis zum dritten Durchgang des Tages warten, wenn die meisten Leute während unserer Übertragung online sind. Roland

You must have missed mrdct's post ... Board 24: This one I have to say was pretty suspect in terms of the allegation of the Germans deliberately throwing imps. At Nil Vul after a first seat 3♠ opening, Wladow chose to double holding Kxx Axxx AQTx Jx which is neither here nor there, but after LHO bid 4♠ and it came back to him he doubled again! The opps then redoubled to play, Elinescu ran to 5♣ and Wladow sat that doubled which went for 1400 and 14 imps. Elinescu could have easily saved one trick and only gone for 1100.

Thursday in Beijing we will be showing all three finals, and the Open playoff match between Norway and Germany. At some point the last one may be replaced by a different bronze medal match, depending on scorelines. Italy v England China v England (women) USA v Japan (seniors) Norway v Germany (playoff) Roland

The trouble with Entscho Wladow is that he has a record, a bad one, and he has been suepended before. Guess why? Yes, because of "unethical behaviour". I know this pair very well; as a matter of fact Michael Elinescu and I are friends. With this said, it is also a fact that this pair is not very well liked (to be diplomatic), not in Germany and not outside the country. Please note that I am talking about their behaviour at the bridge table, not away from it. They are both very nice individuals. I don't mind if people tell me that my bridge play is rotten, so long as they don't say that my behaviour at the table is dubious. Fortunately I have no such reputation after 45 years in the game - also at the highest level. Roland

Let me make this clear so that no misunderstanding is possible. I do not speak on behalf of BBO, but on behalf of Roland Wald. Even a vugraph coordinator is allowed to express his personal views I would think. Roland

Ban them for throwing IMPs away deliberately. Our posts crossed, but that is the first time it's been said in this thread that they threw imps deliberately. I was there (no surprise), and they definitely did. Wladow overbid deliberately. Unfortunately we don't have it stored in our archives, because the match finished in midstream! There is no doubt in my mind that all commentators and spectators will agree that Wladow lost his temper at some point and bid like a lunatic. You ask Peter Crouch for example (one of the commentators). You know him well, so I am sure you believe him when he says exactly the same. Roland

Wait, are you saying that the big score losses were deliberately throwing hands??? They didn't just concede rudely, but threw tricks? If so, that's an entirely different situation, and completely unethical. But that's not what the original post in this thread says. I said "threw IMPs" by overbidding intentionally. Same thing. It's unethical in my world. Roland

Ban them for throwing IMPs away deliberately. This is hardly "ethical behaviour", and there is a section where it reads that players must behave ethically correctly at all times. Feel free to think that this behaviour is ethical. I don't think it is. Roland

You bring the game into disrepute when you deliberately concede 1100, 1100, 800 and 1400 ... and then walk away!. Is that how we want to teach the youngsters? If you are about to lose, just do like the Germans did!? I don't think that is the way forward, sorry. I also agree that the Germans should be allowed to play on, as there doesn't seem to be a rule to penalise them. However, I am sure that the DBV will take an appropriate action very soon. In fact, I know they will. It can't happen soon enough. Roland

It's bad sportsmanship because once you decide to sit down to play, you are committed to playing the full set and not leave the room in disgust! You are obviously entitled to forfeit due to a medical condition, but that was not the case. Please note that Norway conceded after a session. That is completely different. Roland

Here are our matches for the first session Wednesday in Beijing (Open unless stated): SF4/6: Italy v Norway England v Germany USA v China (women) England v Turkey (women) SF5 and SF6 to be decided. Roland

Open against Germany, women against Turkey. I think it's 50-50 in the Open (slight advantage Germany perhaps), and 60-40 to England in the women's. I don't think I offend England or Germany when I claim that the clash between Italy and Norway would be worthy of a final. They are no doubt the world's two strongest nations at the moment when we look at the open series only. Roland

Our congratulations to Norway (U-28), Denmark (U-26) and France (U-21) on winning the gold medal in the youth events. Also well done to the silver medalists: Poland, Poland (again) and England. Bronze medal: China, Norway and China (again). The most remarkable come-back for years was achieved by Norway in the U-28 final against Poland. The Scandinavians trailed by 47.3 IMPs going into the last 16 boards, and prevailed in the end by 1.7 IMP! This was Denmark's second World Championship, exactly 10 years after their win in Hamilton, Canada, in 1998. The small Nordic country also has a silver medal to her name, in Paris 2003 where Italy won. Roland

Same as yesterday. All the organizers want to reveal at this point is our pairings for the first semi-final session Tuesday in Beijing. The rest to be announced online. SF1/6: Italy v Norway England v Germany USA v China (women) USA v Egypt (seniors) Our congratulations to Norway (U-28), Denmark (U-26) and France (U-21) on winning the gold medal in the youth events. Also well done to the silver medalists: Poland, Poland (again) and England. Roland

All we get in advance for tomorrow (Monday in Beijing) is the first segment. The organisers, understandably, want to have a look at the running scores before they decide regarding the last two sessions of the quarter-finals. Our matches are: QF4: Poland v Italy Germany v Netherlands England v Romania Germany v China (women) The youngsters have reached the finals. I am sure we will get one for all sessions. To see the schedule, I suggest you take a look in Monday's youth bulletin at http://www.worldbridge.org/tourn/Beijing.08/Bulletins.htm Session 1: Poland v Denmark (U-26). The rest to be decided. Roland

Quarter-Finals tomorrow (Sunday in Beijing). Segments of 16 boards, six altogether, three per day. Our matches for the first two sets are as follows (Open unless stated): QF1: China v Norway Poland v Italy Germany v Netherlands Indonesia v Netherlands (S) QF2: Poland v Italy Germany v Netherlands England v France (W) Germany v China (W) QF3: TBD mid way through QF2. Then add the match from the semi-finals of the U28, U26 or U21. We still don't know which until we see them. Roland