BB Forums vs JEC (Regular Team Game)

[MrAce]

Hi folks.

 

As most of you know Jimmy Cayne, sponsoring famous Italians and Anerican pros arranges regular team games in BBO twice a day. Larry Lande is the person who organise and directs these games for Jimmy.

 

I thought it could be exciting if we (BBF regulars) can come up with a team vs JEC and his top worldclass partners / teammates once a week.

 

This will not only allow us to play vs top level worldclass players, but also create a lot of material to debate in the forums after the match. Not to pick up on our teammates or whitch hunt of course.

 

I am thinking we have a lot of players here pottentially can play at these games. And due to my relation with LL i think i can have 1 day every week (except during nationals and world champ events) reserved for us to play vs JEC. But i didnt want to make promises before i check it with you.

 

1- What do you think ? Is this a good or bad idea ?

 

2-If the answer to 1st question is good, then we can talk about it more about ( when, which day and time, who, how etc etc) if u guys think it is not a good idea or that it wont work ...oh well, no hard feelings.

 

 

Thanks to all who replies.

 

EDIT: If you dont want to write your opinion publicly for whatever reason, please feel free to email me turkofla@hotmail.com

[bluecalm]

I for one would be excited to play in such thing with my regular internet pd.

I think if we try pick-up forum partnership we wouldn't represent enough challenge :)

[Flameous]

Would the players/partnerships be cycling regularly or would it basically be just one team from BBF always playing?

I'd have no problem playing occasionally with my partner, but couldn't promise anything regular.

 

Would be good practice to get beaten by some pros :lol:

 

 

Good idea and could get some more attention for the forums :)

[Phil]

Sathya and I are in.

[billw55]

Sounds like a great idea, for so many reasons. If you name the team "BBO forums" or the like, we would probably pick up a lot of lurker traffic, and a fair number of registered users as well. Not to mention all the thread fodder and just plain fun rooting for the team.

 

Of course I would love to play, as almost everyone would. But I recognize that my skills do not warrant such a privilege.

 

Good luck team BBOF! Let's get ready to rummmmmmble

[mikeh]

I don't have a partner who is a regular bbf contributor, tho I have one who occasionally lurks. I have two partners I could probably persuade to do this at least sporadically.

[hrothgar]

If I might make a suggestion...

 

We could (should) use the chance to play against Cayne as some kind of incentive.

 

For example, hypothetically, we could run a knockout lead

Teams form, play each other over the course of a month or two months

Whatever team wins gets to play Cayne

 

This would

 

1. Create an interesting opportunity for the forum regulars

2. Provide an objective way of picking who plays Cayne

3. Help ensure that we don't send out a team of scrubs

 

Alternatively, we could have the winner of the Bridge Pool online (and partner) get one of the coveted slots...

[jillybean]

Fabulous idea. I assume any teams will be made up of bbf superstars and not mere mortals?

 

I like Richard's idea of a knockout lead. Perhaps pairs could face off and the top 2 pairs then form a team.

3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th top pairs could form teams 2 and 3?

[MrAce]

Ok, i will try to answer some of the questions;

 

- The name of our team in my mind was BBF or BBF Regs

 

- How shall we choose our team and will it be always same team or cycle ? Very good question btw.

 

This is where it gets tuff. I may have choosen to keep this idea to myself , talk privately to decent players in forums and arrange the teams. But i wanted this excitement to be shared by all of us and this team to be seen as our own team and share the victory or defeat and debates alltogether. Now i remember the debate about giving stars to people in BBO and what Fred said about how hard it is to do this without upsetting people unless you have required criterias.

 

The plan i have in my mind is to cycle the team. It gets tricky here and I will beg all of your help/patience/forgiving while i try to do this. I am still working/emailing/discussing this with people and of course mainly listening to you guys here, all will be written soon. But shortly, imagine this, EVERY WEEK is a lot. We will have enough matches for everyone in long run.

 

We have time untill the end of next nationals, after that we will be assigned a day of a week and time. LL told me we can even start right away but i wanted to make sure we are organised to fullfit our promises in regards to our consistency.

 

As i said i want this to be belong to all of us but mainly A/E regulars for obvious reasons. After all one of the reasons JEC doing this is to practice for nationals or other big events and our team should be consistent with his expectations. He is not expecting us to come up with OMG team. He needs reasonable and HONEST opponents. We have more than he asks for imo.

 

This was one of 2 plans i had in my mind. First one was to ask Fred to give us power to organise tourney in BBO, so we forum regulars can organise an individual every week. We all love this game, we debate here theoretical issues, card plays, defenses, we poke each other, point fingers, get sarcastic or pet each other on the shoulder time to time. I thought it would be nice for us to be able to leave all this "on the paper" aside and play the game we love with the people that we discuss hands everyday. It kinda feels weird to me to discuss so many things about bridge with people and never get to play with or against them. Perhaps thats just me. :)

[rogerclee]

If I might make a suggestion...

 

We could (should) use the chance to play against Cayne as some kind of incentive.

 

For example, hypothetically, we could run a knockout lead

Teams form, play each other over the course of a month or two months

Whatever team wins gets to play Cayne

 

This would

 

1. Create an interesting opportunity for the forum regulars

2. Provide an objective way of picking who plays Cayne

3. Help ensure that we don't send out a team of scrubs

 

Alternatively, we could have the winner of the Bridge Pool online (and partner) get one of the coveted slots...

 

Not that the Cayne games aren't great, but it is not like they are super exclusive matches filled with only world class players. Most of the times it's closer to being like a random star team game. I don't think a trial is necessary, any 4 of the best players on this forum would be favorites to beat a random Cayne team (though not a Cayne-Lauria-Versace-Duboin team, heh).

[MrAce]

If I might make a suggestion...

 

We could (should) use the chance to play against Cayne as some kind of incentive.

 

For example, hypothetically, we could run a knockout lead

Teams form, play each other over the course of a month or two months

Whatever team wins gets to play Cayne

 

This would

 

1. Create an interesting opportunity for the forum regulars

2. Provide an objective way of picking who plays Cayne

3. Help ensure that we don't send out a team of scrubs

 

Alternatively, we could have the winner of the Bridge Pool online (and partner) get one of the coveted slots...

 

 

Thats not a bad idea on paper. Here is what happens in long run (i am saying this because i was asked to regularly bring a team vs JEC every week in the past and it didnt work..) It is very tuff to follow every week this agenda. Its even tuff only to come up with 4 people EVERY WEEK even if we had a coach choosing 4 players of his own choice. It doesnt work that way, people can not or may not be able to do this task every week if they are choosen every week.

 

Also the goal is not to get our best team against them ( of course goal is not "not to get our best team" there either )

 

The more complicated we make this, the harder it becomes to continue. As i said, i predict in less than 3-4 months we will be looking, begging to people to play this. It aint as easy as it looks unless we keep it simple.

[MrAce]

Another thing, imo, to keep the spirit of these games in the borders of BBO Forums, i suggest we should not play with our best pd IF he/she is not writing in forums regularly.

 

@ MikeH: Mike i have nothing but mad respect for you and this respect is not limited to your skills at this game. I can not think of our team to be without you, Andy, Frances, Phil and a lot more names that we all know. Please dont tell me you wont play unless you play with someone that none of us know here. Please dont tell me there is no one in these forums u cant play 28 boards when we need you to :)

 

EDIT to everyone: I am in no way or form telling that i should be the one choosing who gets to play. This is something we all here should decide. I am the one who has responsibilities to LL. Whichever u guys decide to choose, you need to give me the rooster every week, and sub names in case someone has a problem to make it to game on last second.

[FM75]

Choice of team name - BBF Regs is maybe too close to BBF Rags.

 

-- Great idea! Good luck putting it together! (Have you asked Fred for any sponsorship money? ;) He could at least give you space on the ad billboard... )

 

 

$0.02

[bluecalm]

I am ready to play in those with my reg internet pd. I have no credentials besides being bbf regular and he is not bbf regular but he is European and World univ champion.

We are amateurs who don't play much bridge but we likely won't give too many imps for free :)

[benlessard]

Im in for sure, however we should make some team qualifier like a mini round robin would be nice. In fact its a crime we are not running an BBO league.

[mikeh]

Another thing, imo, to keep the spirit of these games in the borders of BBO Forums, i suggest we should not play with our best pd IF he/she is not writing in forums regularly.

 

@ MikeH: Mike i have nothing but mad respect for you and this respect is not limited to your skills at this game. I can not think of our team to be without you, Andy, Francis, Phil and a lot more names that we all know. Please dont tell me you wont play unless you play with someone that none of us know here. Please dont tell me there is no one in these forums u cant play 28 boards when we need you to :)

 

EDIT to everyone: I am in no way or form telling that i should be the one choosing who gets to play. This is something we all here should decide. I am the one who has responsibilities to LL. Whichever u guys decide to choose, you need to give me the rooster every week, and sub names in case someone has a problem to make it to game on last second.

 

 

Ok....the problem is that when one plays these kinds of matches...we played the israeli national team and a couple of other strong teams in practice for the BB....one doesn't want to be embarrassed by having gaps in partnership agreements come out, and they will absolutely come out, usually with devestating consequences. This means that two players who haven't played together before have to choose between doing a lot of work for what is really an exhibition series or winging it or (perhaps) being permitted to communicate during the match, which seems a solution that is worse, in many ways, than the problem.

 

It's not as if I am likely to establish a regular partnership with anyone here....not because of any unwillngness on my part but because playing bridge, rather than writing about it, is currently far down on my life priorities.....I simply don't travel to play bridge. And regular BBO just isn't interesting to me.

 

I'm not saying 'no', but I am saying that these are issues that for me and, I suspect, some others, are real impediments. I know that some of the best posters here do play with and against each other on a fairly frequent basis, so perhaps the forum team is best made up of those players.

 

Oh: the idea of a qualifying round robin almost certainly rules me out....there is only so much time in my life for bridge, and the demands of that would rule me out....to say nothing of the S.A.F. (anyone into audiophile stereo equipment will be familiar with the acronym).

[MickyB]

As i said, i predict in less than 3-4 months we will be looking, begging to people to play this. It aint as easy as it looks unless we keep it simple.

 

This. If you are happy to do so, I think you should just sort the team, compromising between the strongest team available and rotation as you see fit.

 

Another thing, imo, to keep the spirit of these games in the borders of BBO Forums, i suggest we should not play with our best pd IF he/she is not writing in forums regularly.

 

Agree in principle, but as you say, you'll probably be struggling for numbers a few months down the line, at which time being flexible on this point would make your life much easier!

 

I'd be interested in playing with one of my regular partners if needed.

[Flameous]

Some thoughts regarding earlier posts.

 

First for what comes to agreeing system, there hasn't really been a problem in Cayne matches for asking something. They have even asked for elementary stuff like 0314 or 1403. Sure it's better with people who have some firm agreements but I don't see it that big a problem.

 

What comes to playing a TM to qualify, it seems a lot of work (I still remember winning Christmas Swiss teams bit too easily year back ;)) though I'd like to get some top pairs. I'm not actually sure if forum regs form any regular partnerships? But I'd say they are stronger than pairs that play first time together.

 

I'd suggest this to follow some kind of pattern where we have the core of 4 pairs who play, one team every other week. If a "top pair" like this can't make it, the fill in is from the larger pool of forum regulars. (And possibly partners off the forums if it goes to that) This would help to keep the quality of the team high quite constantly, yet during long periods of time, all regulars would get chance to play.

 

Also I'd suggest it's the skipping pairs' job to get the subs and not MrAces, though if you know it two weeks in advance or something, it's quite easily handled with one forum post I think :rolleyes:

 

With all this said, it seems it's time to force my partner to forums :P He's been reading some stuff here anyhow so might as well make appearance.

[Fluffy]

I would love to play if the time permits (I supose everyone will have the same problem). My regular partners are unrelated to BBF so I would be fine playing with any forum regular, I´d be honnored to play with any star like mikeh.

 

 

My experience says that this needs a lot of planning, and cylcing would make it even harded, having a core of players and some substitutions requires a lot less work than some cycling where some players forget they have to play and nobody knows untill its too late. We all want to have the best team-mates at the other table I supose :)

 

 

I love this idea for some reasons I will tell you privatelly.

[mgoetze]

What comes to playing a TM to qualify, it seems a lot of work (I still remember winning Christmas Swiss teams bit too easily year back ;))

 

I was thinking all the time I was reading from hrothgar's post to yours that I should probably mention that. ;)

 

In any case I agree that once a week is quite often and we will certainly get enough slots for all the truly good players on BBF. The problem will be determining who those truly good players are, I think there a few(*) regular posters with rather inflated self-estimation here ... but we'll see what happens.

 

I've been thinking of having another try at the BBF tournament BTW. Maybe for Easter. But this time I would ask for registrations first and only then start discussing rules, with only the team captains having a say. Anyone with an opinion on the best way to get such a tournament going should feel free to contact me privately.

 

---

 

(*) This is not meant to be an euphemism, I really mean a small amount.

[Fluffy]

This is just my opinion, and I don´t feel this very strongly but still

 

When the goodwins went to the BBOF challenge, I didn´t feel like they were part of the BBF comunity at all. TimG has contributed enough (althou not as much as others), but his partner was totally unknown to me.

 

We all want to win, but having some pair who has 325 posts in 1 player and 23 on the other wouldn´t make me feel like they are part of the team. Even if they played semifinals in the bermuda bowl on last decade. I would rather have rex&jay as team mates.

 

Putting a limit will always have problems, because there is a continuous distribution among posters and no limit will be fair. But putting no limit would be even worse IMO.

[MrAce]

My opinion is , we should let our players with BBO Star play if they volunteered for that week. And we should ask our other regulars to register with their forum pd. This pdships can change too.

 

For example i may play with Gonzalo this week and i can also register with Phil, Cherdano, Nuno or Hroathgar at get our name in the list and can play with them lets say4 weeks later in another match or 8 weeks later. We dont have too many players with stars so i am expecting to run out of star names due to theor availibility pretty soon, probably in less than 1 or 2 months.

 

So if we have a star player or pdship, they gets the spot auto, the other table (if there isnt any other star player or pdship) is one of the registered pdships. Lets say Timo-Phil registered and played this week and Timo is also registered by Nuno and Phil is also registered by Sathya, after they play this week their other pdship auto goes to the bottom of the list to wait their turn to come again. We post this list and update it every week.

 

How shall the the list will be sorted for the first time ? We can simply throw a coin for first sort, totally fair, no ?

 

This makes things easier and simple for me too. I regularly email every week to our star players " Mike or Andy or whoever, do u wanna be in this week? " Mike says " Yes i am in with this or with that person" Andy says " Yes or no..." I come and update the current weeks rroster; Table 1 = mike and Cherdano Table 2= No star so whoever is at the top of the list gets in, if they say they are not available this week the pair after them gets in but the pair who couldnt make it keeps its place for the next week. The pair who got to play this week goes to bottom of the list after that.

 

I insist we shd keep this in BBF and not with our best pd, but whatever u guys say will happen so please give more input about keeping it among us or not please.

 

What do u think ?

[wank]

i wouldn't pay too much attention to who has a BBO star. they give them out like confetti.

[MrAce]

i wouldn't pay too much attention to who has a BBO star. they give them out like confetti.

 

I am talking about the ones in forums, who regularly writes here and eventhough i agree with you on what you said in general, i dont think thats the case for the ones we have here.

 

Also i think people, when watching a player with star, forget one important thing that these guys are playing in their home environment, not fully focused or prepared or not with their best pd. Before internet bridge we used to see good players like Hamman, Zia , Rodwell once every year in a bridge magazine or book where the hands are hand picked by editor or author and we thought these guys were godlike.

 

Now we know they are not. We know if u hit hard they bleed too. We now know Bob Hamman can fail to count trumps or his tricks in 3 NT when he is tired or distracted for whatever reason. We know Erick Rodwell fails to count in a grandslam contract in defense and lets Fred Gittelman make it. And none of those are internet games. I can easily see people, if their name was not Hamman or Rodwell, saying that "Where did this guy take his star from, flee martket ? " Even if someone belives that he wld not make this mistake, this doesnt change the fact thatthey are still great players and at the level that this someone will probably never be.

[Fluffy]

The idea looks fine on paper.

The problem will be to pick between the regulars, BBF has something great and that is that between BILs and JLall you can find a continous looking spectrum of levels. This thing is however not so great for this differentiating. Having to put a discriminating criterium where someone is in and someone is not must lead to some feelings hurted of why someone yes and why someone no.