Established partnerships playing with other pards

[ArcLight]

I've noticed that established partnerships will sometimes play major events with other partners.

 

Why?

 

Is it to gain exposure to other points of view, styles, philosophies, etc.? To avoid getting stale?

 

 

I would think it takes a lot of time to go over various bidding sequences and smooth out partnership agreements. Thus I would think that an expert wouldn't play with too many outside partners.

 

 

Is it the case that some experts are "difficult to play with" and thus they tend to not have as long a partnership as others?

 

What are some of the causes of breakups on long established partnerships?

 

From what I've read - Larry Cohen said he didn't want to use all the Science that Marty Bergen wanted to use. I haven't seen Mr. Bergen do much since then, though maybe he's voluntarily retired and happy to teach.

 

From what I've read Hamman wanted to use more science than Wolff did.

 

Lastly, do older bridge players tend to lack the stamina for long events. How does an experts skill decline from age 60-70 for instance?

[Finch]

You are asking two different questions here: why do expert partnerships not always play together, and why do expert partnerships break up.

 

There are probably as many reasons are there are partnerships, but here are some of the ones I am aware of:

 

Why do experts sometimes play with a different partner?

- Their regular partner was unavailable for the event

- They were offered sufficient money to make it worth while

- They fancied a game with someone else just for a change (either an expert they've always wanted to play with, or a friend). It's quite common to see top experts playing with close friends or significant others in less important events.

- Any of the above applied to their partner

 

For most bridge players, it's supposed to be an enjoyable experience. If you'd enjoy playing a game with someone who isn't your regular partner (and they won't be too upset) then - even if you might not do as well - then why not?

 

Why do expert partnerships break up?

Although some top partnerships say they break up because of fundamental differences in bidding styles, I don't actually know of a successful partnership that has broken up for that reason. Of the expert pairs who have broken up where I know why, the reasons have been:

 

- one player wanted to turn pro, the other continue to play for fun

- one player taking it too seriously/not seriously enough for the other

- not liking poor ethics/poor behaviour/unreliability in partner

- death/retirement/marriage/children/moving away causing someone to stop playing: when a good player stops playing and their partner becomes free, it can prompt rearrangements of other partnerships

 

again, I am sure there are plenty of other reasons around. As well ask why a marriages break up!

[mgoetze]

Why do experts sometimes play with a different partner?

- Their regular partner was unavailable for the event

- They were offered sufficient money to make it worth while

- They fancied a game with someone else just for a change (either an expert they've always wanted to play with, or a friend). It's quite common to see top experts playing with close friends or significant others in less important events.

- Any of the above applied to their partner

Or:

- They aren't allowed to play their regular system in the event and aren't willing to change. (AKA The Meckwell Reason.)

[sceptic]

As well ask why a marriages break up

 

I got caught going through my wifes handbag

[Walddk]

My partnership (and marriage) broke up because I claimed that ♠7 was bigger than ♠6.

 

"Yes dear", she said, and then she left.

 

Roland

[barmar]

I've noticed that some of the top partnerships only play together in certain types of events. For instance, Zia-Rosenberg play together in major team events, but I rarely see them playing in pair events. I think this may have to do with sponsorship -- the team owner hires them both. But in pair events, who pays if a pro plays with another pro?

[Finch]

I've noticed that some of the top partnerships only play together in certain types of events. For instance, Zia-Rosenberg play together in major team events, but I rarely see them playing in pair events. I think this may have to do with sponsorship -- the team owner hires them both. But in pair events, who pays if a pro plays with another pro?

Quite often, nobody directly.

In Verona, for example, many pro pairs had their expenses and fees paid for them in order to play in the teams. As they were knocked out of the teams, they could then play in the pairs "for free" if they wanted to.

[pclayton]

In my 7 years I've had 2 voluntary partnership breakups.

 

1. The first was mutual; it was after the LM pairs at Anaheim. He blamed me for a defensive blunder that cost us a Q; I blamed him for a carding error. Neither of us gave ground so, '''....pooof...." it was over.

 

2. The 2nd was 3 years ago. I felt that my partner was not keeping up in his growth of the game. In spite of having zillions of agreements, he would forget understandings. So I started playing with someone else. We are still good friends and played in the IMP league together.

 

Frances' reasons are valid; but I would add to the top of the list - obligations at work.

[keylime]

My p'ship breakups for most part has been pleasant. You normally know when it's time to leave.

[matmat]

another reason for shuffling partners are events like the cavendish where (and i will probably get this wrong), pairs wish optimize the (probability of win) x (cost at auction) space.

 

btw, my partnerships break up because my p is always wrong.

[luke warm]

i think it's way too hard to *form* a partnership to risk letting one break up for any but the most serious of reasons, like those mentioned by frances... in phil's 1st breakup, i don't think that's a good reason *unless* neither partner was willing to let it go... usually one, or both, will just drop it and chalk it up to just another bad board