Stephen Tu Posted July 6, 2007 Report Share Posted July 6, 2007 Weaker players do play unusual systems. Weaker means below Hamman or Rosenberg. Sure some strong players do also but given there are 25 million weaker players, the vast majority tend to be the weaker players. Eh? So you've just classified say 99.99% of bridge players as "weaker players". Say 5% of these players play unusual systems. Even though on average these players are better than say 85% of bridge players as a whole, this justifies your conclusion that people who play unusual systems are weaker?? Hamman himself plays an unusual system (strong club, 4 cd M, canape tendencies).The tendency among the ruling elite to me seems to be "weird stuff that I like to play & am familiar with is fine, weird stuff others play I don't know should be banned". This makes sense since it tends to keep them at the top with less study required (though Hamman IMO would remain near top no matter what was allowed). I thought that drives paying customers from the game.I never hear complaints about people being driven from the game because they don't like to encounter opps playing weird stuff. I hear people say "I don't like to play against (Precision/weak NT/other "weird" stuff)", but I never hear them say "I'll quit the game because I don't want to play against it". Most complaints in my view are about opponent behavior (rules lawyering etc., newbies often being put off by experienced players calling the director, since the proprieties of the game were never adequately explained to them). The Zero Tolerance policies seem to be a good step in reducing that. In Australia, where system regs are much more lax, the reports are that the LOL/LOMs just shrug their shoulders when they encounter weird stuff & just muddle through without too much whining. It would take awhile here, but IMO if regs were loosened everyone would eventually adjust. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pbleighton Posted July 6, 2007 Report Share Posted July 6, 2007 Weaker players do play unusual systems. Weaker means below Hamman or Rosenberg. 1. A classic case of moving the goal posts. "Weaker" means the bottom 99.99% of bridge players? ROFL.2. Even with that narrow definition, you are dead wrong on a percentage basis A few years back I looked at the cc of the final 16 teams in the BB. Something appraoching 30% of players were playing some sort of strong or mixed (Polish,Swedish), and there were a few unusual non-club systems as well. Contrast that to a club game or regional, where less than 10% play something other than 2/1 or SA. If you disgree with me or my cites and the conclusion I reach fine. Yes, Mike, many of us disagree. I think it's pretty clear. Peter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pbleighton Posted July 6, 2007 Report Share Posted July 6, 2007 Most complaints in my view are about opponent behavior (rules lawyering etc., newbies often being put off by experienced players calling the director, since the proprieties of the game were never adequately explained to them). Agree absolutely. Peter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cascade Posted July 6, 2007 Report Share Posted July 6, 2007 Most complaints in my view are about opponent behavior (rules lawyering etc., newbies often being put off by experienced players calling the director, since the proprieties of the game were never adequately explained to them). Agree absolutely. Peter Me too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArcLight Posted July 6, 2007 Report Share Posted July 6, 2007 >My main point is if Arclight prefers to vote to ban unusual systems f2f players, those that pay, should get to vote. Those who disagree should continue to convince the rest of us. Just do it politely please Woah! I didn't exactly say that. I said I don't enjoy destructive and randomizing methods. Id rather not play agaisnt all sorts of systems, though I would like to play against experts using systems I'm generally familiar with. People who want to play their pet systems should have a place to do so also.I just take exception to the posts that moan about how terrible it is that such and such is banned, and that its ruining the game. Allowing those systems would make the game less fun for many. Solution - 2 venues. But since I don't play F2F right now, I don't really care. And since you vocal group likes to complain about the harm the evil ACBL is doing, I say ... good :) Ban MOSCITO :( Down with all your favorite systems :( Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pbleighton Posted July 7, 2007 Report Share Posted July 7, 2007 Woah! I didn't exactly say that. I said I don't enjoy destructive and randomizing methods. Id rather not play agaisnt all sorts of systems, though I would like to play against experts using systems I'm generally familiar with. People who want to play their pet systems should have a place to do so also.I just take exception to the posts that moan about how terrible it is that such and such is banned, and that its ruining the game. Allowing those systems would make the game less fun for many. Solution - 2 venues. But since I don't play F2F right now, I don't really care. And since you vocal group likes to complain about the harm the evil ACBL is doing, I say ... good Ban MOSCITO Down with all your favorite systems In the same spirit: It's obvious that your head spends a lot of time burrowing where the sun don't shine :) How is the dark, murky, sticky place known as SAYC-land? Do you feel... well regulated? Peter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.