Starting bridge at a late age - how good could one get?

[EricK]

Can someone who takes up the game of bridge late in life (as many players seem to do) reach the very top of the game?

 

eg Bob Hamman is 73 (according to Wikipedia), and Bob Hamman is a World Class player (according to pretty much everybody), and I expect he got to be World Class within a dozen or so years of starting to play seriously. But suppose he had never heard of bridge until he reached, say, 60. If he had played it for the first time then, and dedicated the next 13 years to it, would he still have been able to reach a World Class level?

[mikeh]

Imo, no.

 

I think Fred G wrote on this forum that he thought that bridge players stopped getting better by their mid-forties, and I can't imagine that, if that is true, anyone much older than that has any hope of becoming good.

 

My limited experience with intelligent but older newbies is that they never become very good. I suspect that part of it is that all the truly good players I know wasted a LOT of their high energy youth learning the game with an intensity and passion that few older people can muster for anything, let alone a card game :P Edit: I am such an older guy, btw

 

Add to that the general truism that we lose a lot of mental flexibility and learning ability as we age, and I think it is impossible for a middle-aged or older person to become expert.

[han]

A top player recently told me that people who start in their 20's never become good. This was after I told him that I started when I was 23. :(

[ggwhiz]

It's probably like taking up golf in your early 40's. You might still do Fred Couples but Tiger is way out of reach.

[phil_20686]

How late? And how much are you willing to play?

 

 

I'm sure there is one big name american player who only started in his forties? Remember reading about it in his profile.

 

But generally think you need to have at least one stage when you are playing basically all the time for a year or so to become an expert. Most experts get that in when at uni, and its hard after that.

[JLOGIC]

No chance, I think almost anyone can reach a very very good level, but not the top level if they start older. However, I think starting at 20 is fine, disagree with han about 20s. FWIW Mr. Hamman himself told me you have to start under 25. Many top players started in their young 20s. I think ~25 is a good number.

[jdeegan]

:P I don't think the age you start is that big a deal. What is a big deal is whether you have any talent for the game and the time and willingness to develop whatever talent you have. I started at 17 and became good enough to at least get a tryout for the Dallas Aces (which I flunked). I quit playing for 20 years. At 50 something I started back sporadically and have enjoyed the game ever since.

 

To support my case, I have a story. I picked up a guy named Scott at the partnership desk at the 2006 Atlanta nationals for a regionally rated seniors (55+) pairs event (I happened to be in town unexpectedly on business). He had 400 masterpoints. Turned out he could play. We won the first event and placed in another event the next day.

 

So, we made plans for the upcoming nationals in Dallas. After a few frustrating days playing teams with my friend's peers, we jumped into the Silver Ribbon Pairs and ended up 17th. I think my friend has talent and could develop into at least an above average expert player if he wanted to.

[Vampyr]

Can someone who takes up the game of bridge late in life (as many players seem to do) reach the very top of the game?

 

Well, let's put this in context -- the vast majority of us will never "reach the very top of the game". I started at 11. :(

[antonylee]

A top player recently told me that people who start in their 20's never become good. This was after I told him that I started when I was 23. :(

yay, started at 19 :)

[Statto]

There's a theory that the amount of time and effort you need to put into learning something is directly proportional to your age. So, all other things equal, someone who starts at 40 will by the age of 80 be as good as someone who starts at 20 is at 40. But other things aren't all equal. Retired folk may have a lot more time on their hands to study. I would never rule out someone who takes up bridge in retirement eventually becoming part of a Bermuda Bowl winning team, but I don't think it's ever happened...

[32519]

We need to differentiate here between “Open” and “Seniors” (with seniors now 60+).

 

I am asking the Aussies to come in on this post (shoot it down or provide more info).

 

I read an article once about an Aussie senior woman who took up bridge at a late age. She became a very good player and was invited to a selection tournament (I believe it was in the mid-1980’s) to represent Australia in the Seniors. She didn’t qualify in the end but that fact that she was invited proves that you can still become very competitive. How old was she when invited? Can’t remember.

[barmar]

There are always exceptions to rules like this -- there are very few absolutes in psychology.

[EricK]

Let me expand a bit on my OP.

 

In other activities, even people who reach the top at a young age, can't seem maintain that level into middle-age, let alone old age. This is not just true of overtly physical activities (like football) or even "semi-physical" activities (like snooker), but also of mental activities like chess. There are very few chess players who maintain a world class level once they are over 50 let alone 60 or 70. Obviously, they are still very good compared to most other chess players, but they are not consistently challenging for the world title or winning major tournaments. This suggests that someone taking up chess at a late age could never reach that level.

 

Now is Bridge different? Or is Bob Hamman different?!

[mgoetze]

In other activities, even people who reach the top at a young age, can't seem maintain that level into middle-age, let alone old age. This is not just true of overtly physical activities (like football) or even "semi-physical" activities (like snooker), but also of mental activities like chess.

 

Oh, proof by example, very good. Would you like a disproof by counterexample? I offer the game of Go.

[Statto]

We need to differentiate here between "Open" and "Seniors" (with seniors now 60+).

I was thinking open, but the fact that there is a separate seniors comp suggests there is some declination due to age. However, that may be in part due to not adopting the latest bidding theory...

[frank0]

Oh, proof by example, very good. Would you like a disproof by counterexample? I offer the game of Go.

I don't understand how is that a counterexample, for Go, there are lots of legend pro players in China, Japan and Korea reach top level at their young age but cannot defend their title when the younger generation start to challenge them even though their skill is still there, or even better.

[mgoetze]

I don't understand how is that a counterexample, for Go, there are lots of legend pro players in China, Japan and Korea reach top level at their young age but cannot defend their title when the younger generation start to challenge them even though their skill is still there, or even better.

 

Go Seigen, when he retired from tournament play, did so not because his Go was declining, but because he was not physically capable of playing stressful multiday matches anymore. He is still consulted by top pros today, at the age of 97.

 

Karigane Junichi challenged Go Seigen to a Jubango at the ripe old age of 62.

 

Honinbo Shusai played against Kitani Minoru (probably the 2nd best player in the world at the time) when he was 64, 2 years before his death, and aquitted himself quite well.

 

Sakata Eio won a professional Rapid Go championship at the age of 60.

 

So I think the reason that older Go professionals do not contend for major titles nowadays is a decline in stamina, not a decline in skill.

[EricK]

Then we can ask the same question about Go. Can a player take up Go at a late age and still reach World Class level? Or does he have to have started young, reached world class level while relatively young, and then "simply" maintained that level?

[mgoetze]

I'm not aware of any world class Go player who started playing after the age of 12 or so.

[JLOGIC]

I would guess that all of the top 100 bridge players* in the world started under 30. I cannot think of anyone who didn't off the top of my head, someone may exist but I doubt it.

 

*-excluding clients if you are looking at some official ranking.

[aguahombre]

There is another category of player which could, IMO, move to the top class at a late age.

 

A person who in-fact "started" when young ---with all the passion, energy, sponge-like learning abiility, etc --- then wallowed for 20 years due to mundane issues, like making a living....could conceivably develope a World Class game when he/she finally has the time to devote.

[Finch]

We need to differentiate here between “Open” and “Seniors” (with seniors now 60+).

 

Why?

 

The question was whether you could get to the 'very top' of the game or not.

[nigel_k]

I disagree.

 

Bridge is different from chess, go and other games. It just doesn't require the same level of pure, extended, concentrated brain power as those other games. It's almost like comparing marathon running with equestrian or lawn bowls. If a 15 year old and a 40 year old each spend ten years becoming as good as they possibly can, and all other factors are equal, it is pretty much a toss up as to who will be better at the end of the ten years.

 

But certainly, if you have the natural talent to become a top expert, you will very likely get involved in the game before age 25. And if you don't start until 40, chances are you just won't have anywhere near as much free time to devote to the game as you did at 15.

[Phil]

Yes I doubt anyone that takes up the game after 30 can become world class in any sense. But, so what? I think that an intelligent person that devotes a lot of study and gets th right training can still be very good and can be competitive at local and regional events.

 

What I am curious about is whether or not there are players in the 2nd tier, say a very good player in 0-5000 events that didn't touch a card until they were in their 30's or 40's.

[Statto]

Bridge is different from chess, go and other games. It just doesn't require the same level of pure, extended, concentrated brain power as those other games.

I'm not so sure. 88 boards a day (or however many there are these days), day in day out at the Bermuda Bowl? I feel mentally exhausted after a mere 24 board session, don't feel like playing the next day, and I'm only 40 :o