Canadian Bridge Federation

[skjaeran]

(whatever happened to Terje Aa?)

Nothing really. Aa-Grøtheim were partners for ages, then they both took a break and now they are back with new partners. Tundal is an old partner of Grøtheim's actually, European Champions even.

 

Terje Aa plays with Jon-Egil Furunes. The joke in Norway is that the Norwegian open team can't afford to have Aa-Grøtheim as a pair. Too many penalties because of time violation. :P

 

Roland

Either of the pairs using Viking Club?

 

I always enjoyed watching it in "action". There was always lots of time to look up the meaning of the auctions...

Tundal played with Grøtheim on the norwegian team in the European Teams Championships in 1987, winning a broze medal losing a tie with Great Brittain.

They played Viking Club then, and does after taking up the partnership again last autumn.

 

Terje Aa played with Jon-Egil Furunes in our Premier League this season on a team with Grøtheim-Tundal, and won the gold medal. Furunes-Aa played in the Yeh Cup in China on a team together with Jørgen Molberg-Børre Lund

 

Aa plays with Jørgen Molberg in the NABC's these days.

 

Regarding the time penalties - that's really a joke. I don't think they ever got penalized.

[mikeh]

Regarding Canada (and that has nothing to do with you, Richard) I don't think they should have an automatic berth. Everyone else (except USA) must qualify, so why should the Canadians have a special status?

 

By the way, Fred who used to play for Canada on several occasions as you all well know shares that view.

 

Roland

I agree 100% that Canada should not get an automatic birth (btw we lost to Mexic once, so it is not always automatic).

 

But the solution is surely to increase the number of countries in the Zone, not to award the US the probability of having all of the teams out of Zone 2... unless you suggest that Italy, Holland, Poland etc get the right to send more than one team to the European Chamipionships, and that, should two Italian teams come in the top 6, both get to go?

 

I would be happy (apart from the cost of travel) to have Canada in a bigger Zone... with or without the US, if each country in the finals got to send only one team forward, as per Europe, as per S. America, as per every other Zone in the World.

 

And note that we operate at a considerable disadvantage here because our best players, those who turn pro and play at the highest levels, end up drawn to the US. Fred told me, while we were teammates in Bermuda in 2000, that he could not see ever winning a BB out of Canada and that was one reason he was planning to relocate to the States. Maybe he'd never win out of Canada, but if we had Fred G.and Hampson, and Chambers and Ferguson and Cohen and so on, we'd have a pretty fair team (of course, I'd never get to win the Canadians so personally I'm happy they are all US stars rather than Canadians...btw the Cohen to whom I refer is not Larry B) )

[mike777]

Do we really want Canadian born to have players in the Bermuda Bowl, no matter where they live? How about total limits of only 6 players from any and all Commonwealth countries? If they happen to be Ausi, India or Brits or Canada ok but only a total of 6 please.

[Guest Jlall]

Do we really want Canadian born to have players in the Bermuda Bowl, no matter where they live? How about total limits of only 6 players from any and all Commonwealth countries? If they happen to be Ausi, India or Brits or Canada ok but only a total of 6 please.

LOL

[Gerben42]

Canada can qualify like any other team, only for them the key is the Olympiad + beating Mexico. It would be nicer to have a bigger zone, say all of America, but that's not how it is and the organizers want to have a geographic spreading.

 

BTW Richard I accept your BB 2013 bet!

[Guest Jlall]

BTW Richard I accept your BB 2013 bet!

How much are you betting? I would like to take as much of Richards action as he'll give me.

[DenisO]

As for the Icelandic team...  I certainly didn't mean to slight their performance in Yokohama, however, when one thinks of traditional bridge powerhouses, Iceland really doesn't top the list.

 

In Eric Kokish's ante-bellum assessment from the WBF book he says "Iceland's aura was extremely positive, and they had been playing better bridge than anyone else over the course of the tournament"

 

One significant problem area for Iceland was that they would have to cope with the Suspensor system used by Balicki/Zmuszinki - the "Passing Poles". You can see how they did here at the link below where Gerben has so far provided Vugraphs of the first five segments:

 

http://www.sarantakos.com/bridge/vugraph/1991/1991-bb.html

[Walddk]

... let me suggest that if players were forced to play only for countries of origin/upbringing, Canada might not do too badly.

I agree entirely, and you could add Vince Demuy, now representing Australia, to that list of ex-Canadian world class players.

 

Let's turn our attention to Scotland for a moment. They are not doing great at European Championships. Small nation, few members to choose from and an independent bridge nation for only 7 years (part of Great Britain before 2000). However, who would write them off if Mike's suggestion became a fact?

 

Michael Rosenberg, Barnet Shenkin, Andrew McIntosh ...

 

Roland

[jikl]

Think how many overseas players have represented Australia (especially Kiwis) (no that we are a huge threat)

 

Sean

[Walddk]

Think how many overseas players have represented Australia (especially Kiwis) (no that we are a huge threat)

 

Sean

I guess that's the reason why Australia is named Oz-One. There is only one of Aussie heritage on the team now :)

 

Roland

[glen]

A whole bunch of USA teams are Canuck-One.

 

2005 Bermuda Bowl Bronze medal winners USA 2 were Canuck Too

[pclayton]

 

Canada / Mexico? Tough one. If someone could educate me on how the different zones send teams, along with the relative bridge populations of the countries involved, I'd feel like I could better judge this matter.

 

Anyone care to comment?

I don't understand that comment... are you suggesting that Canada/Mexico don't warrant a shot at the BB on the same basis as countries in other zones?

 

Mexico has a very small bridge population, presumably having to do with the socio-economic demographics.. but Canada's is in line, per capita, with the US and, as a country, has more registered players than several entire zones! Thus we have more players than all of the South American Zone, all of the African Zone, all of the Carribean and so on.

 

It is important to remember that the BB is not about establishing which 6 players constitute the best team in the world. The BB is about nations vying for the world title... thus we do not allow mixed teams, altho that principle is honoured more in the breach than the observance. Zia, Rosenberg, Hampson, Fred.... none of these players are US by birth or education.

 

Indeed, to those who claim that Canada, if forced to compete in a US team trial, would not reach the top 10, let me suggest that if players were forced to play only for countries of origin/upbringing, Canada might not do too badly. We'd have had available to us two of the aforementioned players along with others who have done not-to-badly on the world or North American stage. I am not going to list all of those who spring to mind out of concern that I might leave some out.

 

Back to the 'best country' not best team approach: I like it. I think it not unreasonable to preserve that approach notwithstanding the pressure brought to bear by the top pros and wealthiest clients.

 

The US already gets treated differently than any other country.... in recognition of its size. If having 2 US teams seems too few (there is an argument that it is too many), the answer is not to place Canada and Mexico in the unique position of being effectively barred from every competing in the BB, but to award an extra team, or two, to the US. Compare the bridge populations of Europe to Zone 2 and adjust the US entitlement to a pro rata equivalency... don't sideline Canada or Mexico. If you are going to sideline us, give us back a chance by forcing Canadian players to play for Canada, rather than for the land they have adopted for financial reasons.

 

This is NOT, repeat, NOT a knock on Canadian bridge players who have gone to the States: they are only and quite properly doing that which many bright, successful people, in all walks of life, have been doing for generations.

 

I find myself rambling, so I will stop.

What I'm suggesting is that Canada should not have a auto-berth every other cycle if the bridge population isn't large enough to justify a berth. Thats why I asked the question in the 1st place, because I don't know how the different zones select a winner along with their respective bridge populations - in their country and in the zone as a whole.

 

Of course they should be able to qualify in their zone. What zone they should play in a matter of opinion, and how USA2 is involved is a matter of opinion.

[PeterGill]

In reply to someone's query about the other Zones:

 

Australia and New Zealand in Zone 7 qualify for the Bermuda Bowl (BB) in much the same way as Canada - virtually automatically, as long as Zone 7's previous Olympiad form is not disastrous. French Polynesia and New Caledonia are not major challengers, and Zone 7 has two spots in the BB subject to adequate performance in the previous Olympiad.

 

Similarly, South Africa and Egypt have little competition in the African Zone and qualify for the BB with much the same ease as Canada.

 

India and Pakistan have only Jordan and a few minor countries to get past in order to qualify for the two spots in the Bermuda Bowl from their Zone.

 

Competition for BB spots in the European, Pacific Asian (Zone 6), Central American and South American zones has more contenders.

 

Thus the Canada/Mexico positions in the world bridge scene is not at all unique.

 

If you read Damiani's reports on the WBF website, there is (or was) a move to reduce the number of bridge Zones to five in line with the five Olympic zones of the world. Now that would be quite a change for Canada, being grouped with all the Americas. Personally I do not see any merit in this Olympic zonal concept for bridge.

 

Peter Gill

Australia.

[paulg]

I note that a team of canucks (Ray Grace, Garry Karst, Gerry McCully, Rhonda Foster) appear to have dumped Justin out of the Vanderbilt in the round of 64.

[pclayton]

I note that a team of canucks (Ray Grace, Garry Karst, Gerry McCully, Rhonda Foster) appear to have dumped Justin out of the Vanderbilt in the round of 64.

I believe Gerry is "McKim" around BBO.

[mrdct]

I think reducing the number of Zones is a splendid idea. As Peter Gill noted, there are several countries in the world (including Australia) that seem to have an unreasonably easy path to the Bermuda Bowl.

 

There are 8 Zones at the moment (registered players in brackets):

 

1 Europe (394,542) - 7 spots

2 North America (158,027) - 3 spots

3 South America (3,860) - 2 spots

4 Middle East Asia (8,818) - 2 spots

5 Central American & Caribbean (1,803) - 1 spot

6 Pacific Asia (52,667) - 3 spots

7 South Pacific (47,856) - 2 spots

8 Africa (7,346) - 1 spot

 

I think you could easily condense this to four zones (my suggested allocations):

 

1. Europe - 8 spots

2. Americas - 5 spots

3. Africa, Mid-East & Central Asia - 2 spots

4. Pacific Asia and South Pacific - 5 spots

 

Each Zone should be required to convene a Zonal Championship in Bermuda Bowl years to which individual countries can send one team, with the exception of any NBOs that have more than 100,000 financial members who can send two teams (at the moment this would be France and USA but will presumably include China also once they get their act together with player registration). The Top n places in the respective Zonal Championships should determine Bermuda Bowl spots.

 

Addressing the original topic of Canada's qualification path, if we were to assume a continuation of USA's dominance in North America, the task will be to finish 3rd, 4th or 5th which will require them to be competitive with the best couple of teams from Latin America. Sounds like a reasonable hurdle to me.

 

Similarly, if Australia can't make the top 5 in the PABF Championship (in which they already compete by invitation but non-contending for BB qualification) they don't deserve to be in the Bermuda Bowl.

[mike777]

Sure you can do anything, but why?

 

When you start tossing words like: deserve, fair, just....it is very tricky and random.