Captaining a Team

[awm]

I'm curious as to whether people have advice about how to captain a six-person team in a long event. Some questions:

 

(1) Supposing that there are a number of established and effective partnerships among the six players, is it better to run the team as three pairs (so the partnerships are fixed) or to mix and match among more pairings provided we're not putting together people who haven't played much before?

 

(2) Is it better to plan the lineups in advance, or to try to adjust them based on who is playing well each day?

 

(3) If one pair is stronger than the others, what's the best strategy to make use of this pair without tiring them out (i.e. playing the strong pair every session is not a good solution over a very long event)?

 

(4) How do these things change if the team includes a client who is a much weaker player than the other five?

 

(5) If we have seating rights in a match, are there general strategies to take maximum advantage?

[vang]

i'm curious too, but until people with real experience in this will gave their advice, those are my oppinions:

 

1. dinosaur bridge is dead. the team should be 3 pairs, not 6 people (use stable partnerships)

2. dunno

3. probably make sure the stronger pair plays in tougher matches

4. even the client should have his estabilished partnership.

5. make sure the client is confortable, i.e. plays against a pair who uses an easy to understand (natural) bidding system, strong NT etc or knows the opponents, played againts them before, ask him before the match what he prefer (he should be "protected").

[luis]

I think I have a good vibe to captain some teams, our team has won our national teams championship 3 years in a row (03,04,05) of course we are destined to lose this year :-). While I don't have the answers to all your questions I will tell you what my experience is and I hope you find the information useful.

 

Even when there are 3 pairs I like a lot the ability of a team to be re-configured in different ways, what you need is to have a formation whoever 2 players you remove from the team, this is very hard to achieve sometimes but I think it is great when possible.

 

If you have a very good player ask him if he wants to play or not and with whom, and follow advice, you want your best player happy and if he feels he is playing badly let him remove himself from the team, if he sees the team can win without him he will enter refreshed the next match.

 

Label each formation for example you should have an "agressive" formation with pairs that create points and use it in difficult matches or when you are behind, you may also have a "rock" formation to use when you are ahead or when your team is better, they won't create swings and you will prevail. A combo "crazy" - "rock" can be very effective depending on the other team.

 

Pay attention to the positions (North, South, East, West) when you need swings put your best player in the same position as their worst player, when you don't want swings put your best player in the same position as their best player (if possible). Pying attention to who holds the cards of whom is important.

 

Team spirit is everything, whatever happens transmit tranquility to your players, keep cool at all times and always listen to them about formations.

 

If you are ahead by a many points mix the formation don't waste a pairs energy, they may have fight in an irrelevant board and you don't want that.

[DrTodd13]

Does anybody know about seating rights in the BBO league? The team listed first has seating rights in the first half and the other team has rights in the second half?

[joshs]

I'm curious as to whether people have advice about how to captain a six-person team in a long event. Some questions:

 

(1) Supposing that there are a number of established and effective partnerships among the six players, is it better to run the team as three pairs (so the partnerships are fixed) or to mix and match among more pairings provided we're not putting together people who haven't played much before?

 

(2) Is it better to plan the lineups in advance, or to try to adjust them based on who is playing well each day?

 

(3) If one pair is stronger than the others, what's the best strategy to make use of this pair without tiring them out (i.e. playing the strong pair every session is not a good solution over a very long event)?

 

(4) How do these things change if the team includes a client who is a much weaker player than the other five?

 

(5) If we have seating rights in a match, are there general strategies to take maximum advantage?

Meta Comment: I think its important that everyone on the team respects the other players, so a bad set by a pair doesn't cause blame and resentment. I really hate having a team where everyone doesn't already know each other. It seems that something bad happens every time that occurs...

 

 

1. I think sticking with fixed partnerships usually works best. If a pair has played a reasonable amount together, and does not play complicated methods that require a review of the system notes, and if someone gets sick, or a pair has become disfunctional, then a change is warrented.

 

2. In theory its best to adjust based on who is playing well (and who is tierd) but this depends on the personalities on the team. If everyone has perspective and is properly self-critical, then being flexible is the best plan. Otherwise, I would use a fixed lineup. Exception: If one pair is especially swingy, plan on them playing in the final quarter but change your plan if you are significantly ahead (but make sure they have played enough) and make it up to them the next day by letting them play more.

 

3. Have them play about 75%-87.5% (1 quarter sit out per day or per every other day) and the other pairs about 62.5% (1 quarter off one day, 2 off the other). Plan on the best pair playing the final quarter of your long match, but then don't use them if up by a lot, and you will still be playing tomorrow. This does depend some on endurance. Also, if a heavy favorite in day 1, try to get away with playing the best pair only half if you are ahead by a lot. (I would play them quarter's 1 and 3, and then 4 only if needed on day 1)

 

4. Play the client the minimum (50%) and usually the earlier sessions. This gives the other pairs a target for how much action they need to generate.

 

5. Keep your client away from dealing with agressive pairs or even away from weak NT's if you can help it.

[nickf]

fwiw, here's the Australian Bridge Federation's guidelines for captains.

 

http://www.abf.com.au/events/playoffs/npc/NPCDuties.pdf

 

nickf

sydney

[mikeh]

I have been the playing captain in several week-long round-robin followed by long knockout match events, altho more often with 4 than with 6.... and, frankly, so long as the 4 are healthy, I much prefer 4... even tho fatigue can be an issue.

 

With 6: definitely go with fixed partnerships. A good partnership is more than the sum of its parts

 

In the round-robin, we used rotation, but gave every pair two consecutive matches off: so that it was a meaningful break, especially for the 1st and last two matches. For the knockouts (or if you need to push to get to the knockouts) ride your strongest horses. There is, in my view, no reason that your best pair cannot anchor, and they should anchor if they are clearly your best pair... absent health issues, playing 3 straight days (after a round robin in which they have been rested) should not be an issue. If the event is going beyond 3 days, then rest the top pair especially if you get a good lead at the half or 3/4 mark.

 

I have played on teams with clients, but never as captain. I know that when I have been added to such a team as the 5th, it has been to play the second half of the match with the top gun on the team, with the client on the bench.

 

Other than that, my guess would be put the client in the middle segments: start and finish with your best lineups.

 

As for seeding, I remember Joey Silver telling me, as the captain, that we should ignore seeding rights...make the opps think we don't care ;)

 

That made sense to me on the teams we had, and given that we were not facing weird methods. But I usually ask if either of my pairs have any desires to meet or avoid pairs on the other team. There are players against whom I have no memory of ever losing (I am not claiming I have never lost to them) and so I want to play them, because I feel more strongly than usual that we 'own the table'... conversely there are pairs against whom I have had a tough time... and others on the team may feel the same way.

 

If no such factor exits, look at methods, and ensure that your best pair is playing against the opposing pair with the most difficult or unfamiliar methods.

 

Try to pick teams where everyone is reasonably friendly....and as captain be supportive of each teammate, no matter how you may feel about the state of play so far.

[Elianna]

I think that you're not understanding what Adam's saying about possible partnerships:

 

Say you've got players A, B, C, D, E, F. A-B, C-D, E-F are established partners, as are A-C. In fact, it's possible that A-C play together more than A-B, or C-D. Should you always keep the first pairs listed, or should you sometimes allow the line up to be B and D sitting out?

 

What I mean is, he's not advocating letting non-established pairs play over established partners.

[PeterE]

fwiw, here's the Australian Bridge Federation's guidelines for captains.

 

nickf

sydney

here ? where ?

 

B)

[paulg]

Does anybody know about seating rights in the BBO league? The team listed first has seating rights in the first half and the other team has rights in the second half?

Team listed first has seating rights in the first match. The losing team has rights in the second match.

 

paul

[fred]

I have quite a bit of experience captaining teams in World Championships (and more experience playing on teams with captains). Here are a few thoughts:

 

- If the team has a sponsor it is important for the captain to know if he is working for the sponsor or working for his Bridge Federation. In the former case, his primary goal should be to make the sponsor happy. If, in his judgment, this involves hurting the team's chances for success then so be it. For example, a sponsor might say "I have always wanted to play against Italy". The captain may think that this is against the best interests of the team, but if there are no external factors (such as a responsbility to his Bridge Federation to make sure the team does as well as possible) he should give the sponsor his wish - after all it is "his party".

 

- The worst mistake a captain can make is to give his players bridge lessons. If the captain is asked for his bridge opinion he should give it (but he should be aware that most questions of this nature are designed to shift blame to partner or to another partnership and thus answer such questions in a diplomatic fashion). Captains should NEVER volunteer opinions like "I would have bid 4S with your hand". If the captain cannot separate his own personal bridge ego from the event then he will make a terrible captain.

 

- Very important for the captain to deal effectively with things like the official score of the match, making sure players have convention cards, making sure there are no problems at the hotel, etc. Players who don't have to worry about "paperwork" tend to perform better.

 

- Making a schedule of who plays when is a good idea, but such a schedule should not be seen as even close to "set in stone".

 

- The captain should frequently ask all the players on the team how they are feeling and try to get a sense of whether or not they want to change the schedule. Many players will never volunarily say "I want to sit out" even when it is clear that either they do want to sit out or that they should be sitting out. Sometimes the captain has to read between the lines.

 

- The captain should NOT make an effort to seriously study every board at every table to see which pairs are playing well and "deserve" to continue. If, at some late point in the event, the captain has to make a lineup decision based on "which 2 pairs are playing best", he will know what to do even if he does not know the results on any of the previous boards.

 

- The bottom line is that the captain's main function is to act as leader/gopher/friend/babysitter to the players and his main goal should be that the players play as well as they possibly can. It is neither necessary nor desirable for the captain to get seriously involved in board-by-board bridge results.

 

- Stick with 3 partnerships and don't mess with that unless someone gets sick.

 

Fred Gitelman

Bridge Base Inc.

www.bridgebase.com

[whereagles]

I think it's also important to say that a capitain's #1 duty is to make sure the team plays at its best possible level.

[Finch]

A few comments from the perspective of a player, which are mainly on how not to act as a captain.

 

There are (at least) two possible roles for the captain:

i) Administration

ii) Team selection

 

As fred says, keeping all the admin out of the way of the players is a useful job (line-up sheets, who is sitting where, restaurant reservations, system submissions etc). If you screw that up, you shouldn't be captain.

 

Team selection is the difficult and thankless part of the role. To keep sub-dividing further, there are two sorts of captain:

 

i) Those who can play bridge nearly as well as/better than the team

ii) Those who can't

 

If you aren't as good a player as your team, then don't try and decide who should sit out based on how you think it's going. Fred says don't give bridge lessons and don't study the boards - and he is definitely in category (i). One of the most frustrating things as a player is to be sat out because you 'had a bad card' the previous set, or because you 'have the worst cross-imp'. There are lots of reasons for a bad card, and it's quite possible you were playing extremely well.

 

Ask the players how they are feeling. If possible, get to know your team well. Some pairs love to get right back in there after a disaster and will be brilliant; some need time to cool off. If a pair are yelling at each other after the set it may be a good idea to sit them out, but some pairs are like that all the time!

 

Before the event starts, ask the players when they want to sit out. Because of my working hours, I always play worst the last session in the evening and best first thing in the morning. On of my poker playing friends can't do Sunday mornings.

 

As for your questions:

 

1. That is more up to the players than to you. In general, the advice to stick to 3 pairs I would agree with, but I've played in that sort of team quite a lot, and it can be a good idea to mix around at times, particularly if one half of a pair particularly wants to sit out. It's slightly more stressful for the players to keep swapping if they play different systems. If things are going well, and/or there is an unimportant set (for whatever reason) swapping pairs around can be as good as a rest and allow people to relax a bit.

 

2. I think it depends to some extent on the event, but it's usually helpful to have a plan, and for the players to know and hopefully agree the plan. You always have the right to change the plan! For the Tolleache (teams of 8) the rule for the first match is always 'last pair to arrive sit out' which encourages people to turn up on time!

 

3. Just depends on the pair, and how much stamina they have. Pros can usually last much longer than amateurs as they have more practice and fewer hours in the office the week before.

 

4. Don't know. I have never played with a client on anything other than a team of four (and then very rarely as I'm not a pro).

 

5. This is a long topic in itself. I've already written too much!

[the saint]

One thing I have paid attention to, which has saved me a match or two since. If you have a big set in, its very easy for your team to lose focus and become complacent. Watch for this, and if you think it had happened, don't be afraid to switch pairs round or bring the third pair in to regain that concentration.

 

Otherwise I can't really add to the excellent advice given out by Fred at al.

[andych]

Very interesting thread....

 

I have never been involved in such high level bridge that requires a team captain. The kind of team match I play is anything goes ... just make up a 4-some !!!... :lol: :lol:

 

Not denying the importance of a team captain. Indeed it sounds to me that a capable team captain could bring a lot of good.

 

Just wonder what a team captain is like e.g. for Nickell team. Is he making the final calls, with the tycoon (not saying he is not good bridge player) and the superstars there? Or is Nickell team having a playing captain?

 

Also would appreciate if Fred share his (personal!!!) experience captaining the USA team some time ago. There are superstars like Zia/Rosenberg within the team!! Even it is Fred, there may still be problems ...... :) :lol: What does he think of each player within the team after the event? Who does Fred consider to be most difficult to manage? What is the most difficult decision he has to take during the event? etc

 

Another question ... in football (British style), it would be extremely difficult for the manager to sit out players like Zidane/Ronaldinho. What if you lose the match!? Similar thing exists for Bridge captains? How to deal with? :lol: :lol:

[cherdano]

Also would appreciate if Fred share his (personal!!!) experience captaining the USA team some time ago. There are superstars like Zia/Rosenberg within the team!! Even it is Fred, there may still be problems ...... :lol: :lol: What does he think of each player within the team after the event? Who does Fred consider to be most difficult to manage?

I suppose part of being a good captain is not making such statements in public afterwards??