Monaco - favourites for the next European Championships?

[paulg]

The Neapolitan Club, amongst others, is reporting that Fantoni and Nunes, together with Helgemo and Helness, have applied for residency in Monaco with the aim of playing for the country in the 2012 European Team Championships. It seems like Zimmermann is the instigator and he will play with Multon.

 

Monaco finished sixteenth in their group in the championships in Ostend earlier this year with only three teams below them. From being a team that you want in your group they have now become one of those to avoid!

[karlson]

This seems to shatter any last illusions that the international championships are not professional events. I think it's a bit sad.

[han]

Interesting comment from a US citizen karlson. Many top US players have been playing in teams that pay well, instead of teams that have a good chance of winning. This has advantages and disadvantages, but the system certainly has been in place for quite some time. I don't see how this new construction changes anything in that regard. It also has disadvantages (4 top players who will no longer play for their native countries) and advantages (for example, more of the top Norwegian and Italian players will be able to compete, and I bet it has monetary advantages for the players as well).

[TimG]

This US citizen also thinks it is a bit sad. Not that I am under the illusion that that top US teams aren't made up of professionals playing with a single client. The fact that the top US teams usually include a client is one reason I generally root for non-US teams.

[hrothgar]

From my perspective, there seems to be a fundamental disconnect between the goals of the event and the regulatory structure.

 

For better or worse, the European Championships are tied to geography.

In theory, this is a competition between an Italian team, a Polish team, a Dutch team, a Norwegan team, ...

 

Allowing pairs to play games with residency requirements and hop between countries would seem to subvert one of the basic operating principals of this event.

 

I think that the organizers need to ***** or get off the pot. Either

 

1. Divorce geography from the event altogether and allow anyone to enter the event

2. Significant tighten the entry requirements (for example, you need to have been born in a country to represent that country)

 

The current hybrid system seems completely nonsensical.

 

On the bright side, it should be highly amusing to see the current system unwind. I expect that its only a matter of time before we start seeing powerhouse teams springing up in San Marino, Macedonia, Malta, Andorra.

 

Who knows, maybe the Holy See will even get into the act...

[paulg]

I was slightly careless in the topic title and it is important to distinguish between the EBL's two main events.

 

The European Team Championships is for (European) National Bridge Organisations who may enter one team in each event. I expect that it is this event in 2012, I believe in Greece, that Monaco will have an improved team.

 

The European Open Bridge Championships are open to everyone in good standing with their NBO, even if that NBO is not a European one. This is run in the odd numbered years and will be held in Poznan in June 2011.

 

The eligibility requirements for the European Team Championships (Open Series) in Ostend earlier this year were:

 

 

Every proposed player must, along with other criteria, satisfy the Credentials Committee that:

• he/she is nominated by the NBO of the country of his/her birth or the NBO of which such nominated player first became a member, and has not, during the current or immediately preceding two calendar years, represented a different NBO in any WBF competition or any zonal or intra-zonal competition; or
• he/she is nominated by the NBO of the country of his citizenship or bona fide residence and has not, during the current or immediately preceding two calendar years, represented a different NBO in any WBF competition or any zonal or intra-zonal competition

The failed move of Balicki and Zmudzinski to the Russia team shows that the Credentials Committee does take the bona fide residence condition seriously.

[NickRW]

Allowing pairs to play games with residency requirements and hop between countries would seem to subvert one of the basic operating principals of this event.

 

Meh. There have been top Canadian, British and Pakistani players (to mention just the countries I can think of) that have taken up playing in the U.S. Plus we have recently had an Argentinian move to Italy - and various attempts at getting Poles into Russia - or was it the other way round?!

 

So some Mr Got Bucks is taking a handful of people to live in Monaco - big deal.

 

In football - most players play for a club that nominally exists in and represents a particular town or city - yet at the top, a great many are not from that area or from the same country or even the same race.

 

In Rugby Union, a supposedly amateur sport for many many years, folks got round the rules with "sponsorship". Finally the authorities bit the innevitable bullet and allowed players to have proper paid contracts.

 

Face it money, if it doesn't swear, certainly talks. Life goes on.

 

Nick

[Phil]

Interesting comment from a US citizen karlson. Many top US players have been playing in teams that pay well, instead of teams that have a good chance of winning. This has advantages and disadvantages, but the system certainly has been in place for quite some time.

 

Do these teams have a shot at representing a country in international competition? Big difference with some top pairs getting hired for the Spingold, and getting hired for the championship PaulG discusses that earns a Bermuda Bowl / Olympiad / Mind Sports berth. Also a big difference AFAICS with getting hired to play on a sponsored team to try to represent your own country (like many of the US pros do in the USBF) than to change driver's licenses.

[Fluffy]

Joining with with friends and creating Andorra's NBO has often get commented between spannish and portuguese players. But we never seriously tried.

[paulg]

Joining with with friends and creating Andorra's NBO has often get commented between spannish and portuguese players. But we never seriously tried.

You would have to live in Andorra. No great hardship if you ski, but I'm guessing its football teams are not at the same level as Madrid's.

[Fluffy]

do you really think any of the Monaco new members will live there?. Neither will, just they will pay taxes there. Same as Buratti & Lanzarotti who only came to Spain to steal some weekend tournaments.

[han]

do you really think any of the Monaco new members will live there?. Neither will, just they will pay taxes there.

 

Or perhaps more to the point, they will not pay taxes there.

 

But what's new? Hampson and Gitelman moved to the US and have since represented the US. Balicki and Zmud have played for Russia. The motives may or may not have been different, but the situation is the same. If you move to a different country and live there for long enough, you can play for that country. I don't see what the organizers of European championships can do about it.

[fred]

Or perhaps more to the point, they will not pay taxes there.

 

But what's new? Hampson and Gitelman moved to the US and have since represented the US. Balicki and Zmud have played for Russia. The motives may or may not have been different, but the situation is the same. If you move to a different country and live there for long enough, you can play for that country. I don't see what the organizers of European championships can do about it.

 

Why would they want to do anything about it?

 

It is a fact of life that people immigrate to new countries for a variety of reasons. I can't think of any reason why those who do so legitimately should not be able to represent their new countries in bridge (or any other sport for that matter).

 

Note that the WBF has some sensible rules in place to prevent abuse in this area:

 

1) In order to represent a country, you must be either a legal permanent resident or a citizen of that country

2) In order to switch to a new country, you must not represent any other country for a period of at least two years

 

Assuming that the Norwegians and Italians follow these rules, I don't see how anyone could have a problem with what they are doing. Those who conclude that professional bridge is evil should consider that one of the primary reasons why people immigrate is economic opportunity.

 

Fred Gitelman

Bridge Base Inc.

www.bridgebase.com

[hrothgar]

 

Note that the WBF has some sensible rules in place to prevent abuse in this area:

 

1) In order to represent a country, you must be either a legal permanent resident or a citizen of that country

2) In order to switch to a new country, you must not represent any other country for a period of at least two years

 

Assuming that the Norwegians and Italians follow these rules, I don't see how anyone could have a problem with what they are doing. Those who conclude that professional bridge is evil should consider that one of the primary reasons why people immigrate is economic opportunity.

 

Fred Gitelman

Bridge Base Inc.

www.bridgebase.com

 

I don't think that anyone has made a claim that professional bridge is "evil".

I stated that I'd like a "German" team in the European Championship to consist of Germans.

 

As I understand matters, Europe actually switches the conditions of contest for its championships every other year.

 

Half the time, there are no geographical restrictions (Anyone can enter, there's no linkage between country and team)

Half the time, the event has a geographic component. Teams represent individual countries and there are a limited number of entries)

 

I don't think that it makes sense to run a system in which

 

1. You insist on a some kind of geographic restrictions

2. Individuals can game the system by purchasing the right to represent Monaco...

 

Either put in some real restrictions or abandon the pretense.

 

(As I understand matters, the IOC requires that individuals establish citizenship rather than just residency)

[TimG]

It is a fact of life that people immigrate to new countries for a variety of reasons. I can't think of any reason why those who do so legitimately should not be able to represent their new countries in bridge (or any other sport for that matter).

The trouble is the word "legitimate". What is legitimate? Is anything that meets the WBF's requirements legitimate?

 

Those who conclude that professional bridge is evil...

I spoke earlier in this thread about often rooting for foreign teams in preference to teams from the US which include sponsors. That does not mean that I think professional bridge is evil. I can understand that a professional player like yourself would encounter negative comments about professionals, an earlier post in this thread referred to professionals "stealing" tournaments. You are probably more sensitive to such comments than a non-professional. I may have contributed to this sort of thing by expressing an opinion that it was "sad" that a sponsored team of non-native Monacans could represent Monaco. But, I did not mean to suggest that anyone involved is evil.

 

It is my opinion that virtually all country representation in game and sport should be considered anachronistic. I don't really see the purpose and am not convinced it is beneficial to society.

[Phil]

A private high school across town wants our star QB for their football team. Can this person transfer? Sure but there are rules.

 

Give the Geirs and Freds of the world the right to change residency every 'x' years, but it should not happen too often if these competitions are being portrayed as 'international'.

[fred]

I stated that I'd like a "German" team in the European Championship to consist of Germans.

 

Sure, but don't you think that a person who immigrates to German and becomes either a citizen or permanent resident of Germany should be considered a German?

 

I immigrated to the USA about 8 years ago. Shortly thereafter I bought a house in the USA, incorporated two businesses in the USA, and became a legal permanent resident of the USA (green card holder). I have spent 99% of my time in the USA ever since. I pay taxes in the USA.

 

About a month ago I actually became a citizen of the USA. I now own a USA passport, but that is besides the point (as are most of the other things I mentioned in the previous paragraph). To me it is obvious that I should be considered an "American" for everything other than my country of birth.

 

Of course the same goes for a person who immigrates to Germany, Monaco, or anywhere else.

 

Fred Gitelman

Bridge Base Inc.

www.bridgebase.com

[hrothgar]

 

Sure, but don't you think that a person who immigrates to Germany and becomes either a citizen or permanent resident of Germany should be considered a German?

 

 

Citizen yes.

Permanent resident, no.

 

There's a pretty significant difference between "Aufenthaltsberechtigung" and citizenship...

Moreover, I think that most residents of German differentiate between a Gastarbeiter and a "German".

[fred]

The trouble is the word "legitimate". What is legitimate? Is anything that meets the WBF's requirements legitimate?

Of course since it is qualification to play in WBF tournaments that we are talking about here.

 

If the WBF's requirements were too lenient (I don't think they are) or if they were not enforced (I have no reason to believe they are not) then I could understand people being upset about this.

 

I spoke earlier in this thread about often rooting for foreign teams in preference to teams from the US which include sponsors. That does not mean that I think professional bridge is evil. I can understand that a professional player like yourself would encounter negative comments about professionals, an earlier post in this thread referred to professionals "stealing" tournaments. You are probably more sensitive to such comments than a non-professional. I may have contributed to this sort of thing by expressing an opinion that it was "sad" that a sponsored team of non-native Monacans could represent Monaco. But, I did not mean to suggest that anyone involved is evil.

Well maybe I shouldn't have used the word "evil", but clearly you have something against professional bridge (or at least sponsors).

 

In my experience, most of the people who complain about professionalism in bridge are either not wealthy enough to sponsor teams or do not have what it takes to be successful professionals themselves (or, most likely, both). For whatever it's worth, I feel that professional bridge has been a very good thing for our game. It has definitely been a major factor in the international success that countries like the USA and Italy have enjoyed in recent decades - without sponsors this almost certainly would not have happened to anywhere near the same degree.

 

Fred Gitelman

Bridge Base Inc.

www.bridgebase.com

[paulg]

As I understand matters, Europe actually switches the conditions of contest for its championships every other year.

 

Half the time, there are no geographical restrictions (Anyone can enter, there's no linkage between country and team)

Half the time, the event has a geographic component. Teams represent individual countries and there are a limited number of entries)

You have misunderstood. The European Bridge League runs two championships that are completely unrelated.

 

In even-numbered years there is a championships between affiliated countries that decides the European Champions and the right to compete in the Bermuda Bowl. The EBL Credentials Committee is responsible for ensuring that players meet the eligibility criteria. As far as I know, it was this committee who decided that Balicki and/or Zmudzinski did not meet the bona fide residency requirement when they tried to play for Russia in 2008. One test for this as a bridge professional could be where does your spouse live?

 

I fully expect that the Credentials Committee will be scrutinising the Monaco team in 2012.

 

In odd-numbered years there is an open-to-all championship, in essence a European-run version of the Rosenblum. Anyone can play who is in good standing with their federation.

 

As these are different championships, it is right that they both have their own conditions of contest.

[hrothgar]

You have misunderstood. The European Bridge League runs two championships that are completely unrelated.

 

Thanks for the clarification

[fred]

Citizen yes.

Permanent resident, no.

 

There's a pretty significant difference between "Aufenthaltsberechtigung" and citizenship...

Moreover, I think that most residents of German differentiate between a Gastarbeiter and a "German".

I don't know about Germany, but in the USA permanent residents can:

 

- serve in the armed forces

- vote or run in non-federal elections

- live in the country forever

- own property

- pay taxes

 

I am only aware of a couple of additional rights and responsibilities that USA citizens have:

 

- vote or run in federal elections (but you have to actually be born in the USA to run for President)

- serve on a jury

 

To me it is kind of dumb to think that "play international bridge" should fall into the second category instead of the first (though of course I am biased).

 

Disclaimer: I am not an expert on USA citizenship/immigration law. Some of the above may not be completely accurate.

 

Fred Gitelman

Bridge Base Inc.

www.bridgebase.com

[paulg]

do you really think any of the Monaco new members will live there?. Neither will, just they will pay taxes there. Same as Buratti & Lanzarotti who only came to Spain to steal some weekend tournaments.

I hope that the Committee will continue to be stronger than it was in the past. The EBL's Bona Fide Residence Requirements state:

 

It is for the player who seeks to rely upon this requirement to satisfy the European Bridge League and demonstrate the genuineness of their residence. It is not to allow the transfer of a player's allegiance for any reason other than their genuine relocation to a country that is not the country of their birth. Those players who are unable to demonstrate to the absolute satisfaction of the EBL's Credentials Committee will not be allowed to represent the chosen country in international championships.

 

This seems a reasonable approach to me.

[mgoetze]

Sure, but don't you think that a person who immigrates to German and becomes either a citizen or permanent resident of Germany should be considered a German?

 

No. Furthermore I feel strongly that becoming a German citizen should have requirements such as knowledge of the German language, knowledge of German culture, knowledge of German history, willingness to uphold the German constitution¹, and so on.

 

---

¹Technically, Germany does not have a constitution at this point. What I mean is the "Grundgesetz".

[hrothgar]

 

In my experience, most of the people who complain about professionalism in bridge are either not wealthy enough to sponsor teams or do not have what it takes to be successful professionals themselves (or, most likely, both). For whatever it's worth, I feel that professional bridge has been a very good thing for our game. It has definitely been a major factor in the international success that countries like the USA and Italy have enjoyed in recent decades - without sponsors this almost certainly would not have happened to anywhere near the same degree.

 

 

Hi Fred

 

Let me play devil's advocate here...

 

In what way is "the international success" of the USA and Italy good for our game?

 

I definitely understand how this is good for professional players.

I see how this is good for the sponsors.

I even agree that professional players have improved the level of play at the top of the game.

 

I fail to see how any of this has any significant positive impact on the game.

 

With or without professionals, folks would be playing bridge.

With or without professionals, there would be world championships and someone would win.

The level of play in these championships might very well decline without pros.

But once again, what does it matter? (Would the average duffer even recognize the difference?)

 

One might argue that professional bridge creates more opportunity for celebrity players to emerge. In turn, this might increase participation. However, I'm far from certain there is any casual link.

 

Honestly, I don't really care one way or the other. However, I don't think that you've made a particularly compelling case that professionalism is good for anyone either than the pros or the sponsors.

 

From my perspective, the most compelling argument is probably:

 

Pros and sponsors like it

No one else gets hurt that much

Therefore, on balance this is a good thing...