Partneris Optimumis

[Double !]

There a famous bridge story about an average bridge player (hereafter identified as AP) that approached a world famous bridge player (hereafter identified as WFP)with a bridge question and handed him a piece of paper with a hand written on it. (you've all heard this story and probably recall it better than I.) The WFP asked the AP who his partner was. The AP thought and answered, "another you". The WFP then asked who his opponents were? The AP answered that they were also "another you" (i.e. same level, style etc.). The WFP then gave the hand back to the AP and said, "sorry, I wouldn't play in that game. It's too tough!"

 

Thinking about this story made me wonder, and so I ask........

 

Since we can't have clones of ourselves as our partners, what constitutes the ideal partner for YOU?

What qualities and attributes (skill, personality, sex, age, experience, interest, motivation, knowledge base, etc., etc.) do you look for in a partner?

What features are most important to you? In a casual game or weekly game? At tournament level? At the highest level that you feel comfortable competing at?

For a short-term partnership?

For establishing a long-term bridge partnership for the highest level of competition that you seek?

What qualities and attributes would automatically make you not want to play with someone?

What qualities and attributes would initially interest you in someone as a potential partner?

 

Thank you in advance for your considerations and responses to this set of questions.

 

Don

[pbleighton]

Context:

 

I have played for a couple of years , and have become a pretty reasonable club player (I do fairly well in "B" events, but don't yet belong in the "A"s), and am looking to get better. To the detriment of my bridge results, I am far more interested in bidding systems than in learning how to defend well, though I am attempting to change my ways. I currently have 4 partners:

1) My most frequent partner is a friend who I started playing online bridge with. We play a very aggressive homebrew system.

2) I have two partnerships where I play 2/1, who are about my level (one the same as I am, one somewhat weaker).

3) My fourth partner has been playing for 20 years, and is somewhat stronger than I am. We play Precision.

 

They are all nice people, whose criticisms are always constructive, and delivered pleasantly. This is not optional. It is by far the most important attribute.

 

The second thing is level: The range I look for is somewhat stronger to somewhat weaker (I prefer somewhat stronger).

 

The third thing is willingness to try to improve. It could be bidding, it could be defense, but I like to try to do something. Any interest in non-standard bidding systems is especially appealing, even though realistically mucking around may not improve short term results :)

 

Peter

[luke warm]

What qualities and attributes (skill, personality, sex, age, experience, interest, motivation, knowledge base, etc., etc.) do you look for in a partner?

 

*** someone who is high intermediate (a level most "adavanced" players are really at) and up... sense of humor... someone who prefers practicing and talking about system things at least as much as, if not more than, actually playing... i'm not sure it's an age/sex thing, but it does seem more difficult to form lasting partnerships with other men... probably an ego thing :) (not that women don't have egos, just that they already know what babies we men are and tend to make allowances for it - something men aren't as likely to do for one another)

 

What features are most important to you? In a casual game or weekly game? At tournament level? At the highest level that you feel comfortable competing at?

 

*** someone who knows 2 opps are more than enough and who tries not to be a 3rd (knowing ahead of time that i'm the same way)... someone who can take and give constructive criticism, but prefers to do neither in public

 

For a short-term partnership?

 

*** short-term? doesn't matter

 

For establishing a long-term bridge partnership for the highest level of competition that you seek?

 

*** see above

 

What qualities and attributes would automatically make you not want to play with someone?

 

*** someone so insecure they must comment in public about bids and plays, usually motivated by a fear that others will view them in a bad light or by a desire to appear to be more than they are.. such a person rarely sees his own shortcomings but has no problem seeing others'

 

What qualities and attributes would initially interest you in someone as a potential partner?

 

*** hmmm... i guess it would be a person who knows it's just a game, who is understanding when i (and when they) make mistakes, but who actually enjoys working to improve both system and play... someone who forgets their own mistakes once the lesson has been learned, and doesn't dwell on them... i prefer someone with a good sense of humor... hear the one bout the cajun and the alligator on the streetcar? heheh

[42]

Hi! Just to introduce myself:

I am not bad for a woman (*joke*), play in the highest group in my local club and was recently more often on an upper rank in bigger tournaments as I was on a low... :) I am allowed to work as TD

 

What constitutes the ideal partner for YOU? What qualities and attributes (skill, personality, sex, age, experience, interest, motivation, knowledge base, etc., etc.) do you look for in a partner?

- I like to play (and work) with men (hairstyling, fashion, diet, hormons and other men are rarely a theme; they focus on 1 thing at the time: when playing bridge then they play bridge), though I also have some female partners who I like very much and who do so as well. When I speak of "he" I also mean "she" ;)

- He should be patient and nice, take me as I am, I need no further education (I hope). Since I play in a partnership I want to be treated as a partner: we share tops and zeros, no matter who made them.

- He should be intelligent (no problems so far :P ), he should have a big sense of humour, I love to laugh. There should exist a life besides bridge: when there is a break I like to talk about other things than bridge.

- Age plays no role.

- I love to play with stronger partners (who not?), I like to learn from their experience. I am willing to adopt their favourite system.

- I do not like to play in club tournaments anymore , I rarely play teammatches there.

- I state myself to be a true person, so the different partnerships are longterm-partnerships (I am very lucky that they accept me as well as partner), I feel uncomfortable changing partners like my shirt and to be insecure about system and signals and so on.

 

What qualities and attributes would automatically make you not want to play with someone?

- rudeness, unkindness

- uninvited teaching at the table

- overruling (just like bidding always NT to play himself)

- arrogant behaviour to me and opps

- stupid analysis after every 2. hand

- very bad bridge skill (except when playing with a friend)

- lay down the law

- unethical behaviour or cheating

- disgusting oddities (permanently finger in the nose, sneezing into the cards or such things. They happened!!)

 

What qualities and attributes would initially interest you in someone as a potential partner?

Good looking and smell :P Seriously: perhaps kibbing someone and finding out that we are on the same wavelength in personality and understanding of bridge. And I cannot deny that I would be proud to accept to play with a star, although I would be very, very excited and make of course many stupid mistakes...

 

Interested? Chiffre 129745680375694763 :D

Caren

[kenberg]

I really like this topic.

 

Desirable features, roughly in order of importance:

 

1. Shares my level of committment to the game, having neither a great deal more nor a great deal less. This, for me, means more than casual but less than total devotion. For example: I would be happy to read Kantar's book on RKC (the edition must be specified because the details change) and learn and adopt all of the agreements. I would not be willing to spend a week to hash out a detailed system of our own devising (for Key Card or for anything else).

 

2. Wants to play a system along the lines I would like.

 

3. Is more interested in discussing the everyday type hands than the extremes. Extemes are for amusment, the everyday hands are where the winnings are.

 

4. Is someone I could have to a party with my non-bridge playing friends.

 

 

 

Undesirable:

 

1. He cannot be rude to opponents. This is not an option. Being rude to me is certainly not a plus but if it is in an occasional fit of pique I can handle it. Also, I realize a few opponents invite rudeness by their own behavior and I can make some allowance here, but restraint is expected and appreciated.

 

2. He should not have a long list of favorite but non-standard ideas about how to bid. Even if I were able and willing to adapt to these, it would screw up my game with other partners.

 

3. He should not have an overinflated view of his ability. I recall a friend, fifty years ago in high school, who frequently lost at cards. In exasperation he claimed "You guys know I play better than you do, I just have terrible luck". More realism is expected of adults.

 

4. Does not feel the need to frequently critique the past hand while sorting the next. I can handle criticism, I just can't handle constant jabbering.

 

I think bridge is a great game, and I expect my partners to respect the rules, ethical standards and courtesies.

 

Important, but subject to the items above, I do like to win.

 

 

For a casual game I can more or less play with anyone, although I recall a pick-up partner who called the director because an opponent claimed a hand saying she would run her clubs. My partner said she didn't specify whether she would run them from the top down or the bottom up, and in the latter case he could win a trick. I suppose there would be consequences if I just got up and left.

 

Ken

[sceptic]

A sense of humour, it makes everything else pale into insignificance

[Fluffy]

for a regular partner I would like someone who has interest, time, similar skill level and age, sincee the closest guy who acomplishes these requeriments lives about 700 km away from me, I just play with whoom I can.

 

for online games its different, I play for fun, and I get the fun from opponent's level more than partner's, I don't care much about partner, but I Want the opponents to be as good as possible.

[andych]

I prefer a partner who is polite and understanding. If your partner plays badly, you could choose not to play with again.

 

BTW which world-class player has the most ego at the table?

Which world-class player is nicest to play with?

 

:) :ph34r:

[Chamaco]

One of my previous signatures was:

 

"Bridge is like dance: technique is important, but what really matters is not to step on partner's feet".

 

I did not intend this as a joke.

I really think being optimal bridge partners depends first and foremost on "chemistry":

- sharing a compatible attitude on how to tackle the difficulties of tough bidding and play situations;

- face the setbacks and success with an attitude that lets us enjoy the game, whether we win or lose. This means that the hours we play at the table will not be a way to pump up our ego, but, above all, some time to enjoy with a person we like.

 

 

The above are a general statement: I will add specifically for my case, that I love to be able to play with a pard that likes to workout on the details (e.g. is not scared of building a system with specific nuances).

[helene_t]

I don't like partnerships at all. Maybe I'll find the ideal partner some day but so far I prefer indys or pick-up.

[Free]

- I like to play artificial systems, so I prefer someone who wants to play relays and stuff like that. If they want to improve the system, they're already one step ahead.

- I always want to improve, and would like a partner who also wants to improve. It's the only way to get higher up. It's all about ambition: without, you won't start reading books to improve your knowledge, or do anything else to become a better player.

- Since I usually know when I'm wrong, I like partners who also know when they're wrong, and who don't start bitching for a mistake from my side. A simple "sorry" is much more convincing imo.

- My partner should trust me completely! If I did something I shouldn't do, it's my responsability, not his. This also works the other way around: I should be able to trust my partner completely as well.

(- I also prefer young people, so I could build up a very-long-term partnership and similar agressiveness/style (I'm also quite young). This doesn't mean I don't like to play with older people!)

 

In other words, my f2f partner is quite perfect :)

[han]

That's funny Helene, I don't like indys or pick-ups, I prefer to play real bridge. (This is not intended as a degrading comment about you)

 

I must admit that I haven't found the perfect partner either, but I still enjoy playing with my regular partners very much. I noticed that some mentioned age. I agree that this is of some importance, but far less than comparable skill level and motivation are. And all of these are irrelevant to me if I can't stand the person (which fortunately rarely happens).

[pigpenz]

That's funny Helene, I don't like indys or pick-ups, I prefer to play real bridge. (This is not intended as a degrading comment about you)

Real Bridge:

what is real bridge????

Real bridge is playing for money or your life!

Truely imps is more real bridge so is rubber bridge,

but lets be truthful matchpoints is the most exciting but

it is not real bridge, but I love it anyway :lol:

[han]

In this case I meant partnership communication, the part of bridge that I like best.

 

I don't care about the kind of scoring, and I certainly don't want to play for my life.

[pigpenz]

actually indi's are the purest form of communications in bridge, back to the basics nothing fancy and hope your partner knows what the basics are :lol:

[inquiry]

I want a partner who is like the "duck" that Weiid Al wants....

 

I want a new duck.

One that won't try to bite. <<<----- partners has to be polite at table

One that won't chew a hole in my socks.

One that won't quack all night. <<<--- and now squawk about last hand

 

I want a new duck.

One that won't steal my beer. <<< --- absolute requirement of courese

One that won't stick his bill in my mail. <<< ---- mail here means my bid

One that knows "The duck stops here." <<<--- we are each reesponsible for results

 

 

One that won't drive me crazy <<<---- goes without saying

.....

One who'll teach me how to swim, <<<---- help me out

And help me not to drown.

And show me how to (NOT) get down. <<<<--- ok, forgive me Al, I added a not

 

-------------

 

So what I want is a partner who will wait until we are away from the table to talk about the good and BAD hands. One who is willing to work on making our agreements better, away from the table. One who will never question a bid or play in the heat of battle but when wer are away from the table.

 

And of course, one that will not steal my beer....

 

Ben

[Elianna]

My single greatest requirement for a partner is an even temper (ie is unlikely to blow-up if you take a strange view of matters).

 

I like playing with people that, when they're placed in our 3-1 fit instead of 4-5 take it in stride, and their first thought is "how do I make the best of the situation I'm in" rather than "how much yelling am I going to do? Shall I wait for after the round, or after the hand?"

 

And I don't mean that I want a partner that never criticizes, that's no good. What I mean is, I like a partner that knows that bridge must continue to be played, and that same exact mistake will not be repeated.

 

I guess I also have learned with some partners to make clear that we are just partners, as it has happened to me a few times before that I thought there was this person that I played bridge with a lot, and he thought that we were dating!

 

Otherwise, I can usually play with anyone, but for long term partnerships, I like playing with someone that doesn't mind spending hours talking about agreements (carding, 2/1 style, raising on 3-card support, what cues show, preempts and doubling, etc).

[uday]

Jeff Rubens, who edits The Bridge World magazine (I respect him and his opinions very much, and think he is a very smart man about bridge-related issues) says that

 

".... It is my personal theory that online play in any non-fixed-partnership

format should be based on a provided system that is available (preferably in

an "in context" style to avoid delays) to active players...."

 

He has more to say on the subject, but he also said

"....you may use my personal views in a BBO forum. However, those that you refer to were written informally, not with a mind to publication. The

latter requires much more care--in obligation to the reader and to any

referent, and also because it is so much harder to correct any error or

carelessness "

 

So I won't include more than that original snippet.

 

His editorials in TBW are almost always excellent reading. His latest one on regulating one-bids is a typical example.

 

 

Anyway, back to BBO

 

Wouldnt it be nice if, for casual pickup play on BBO, we didnt need to guess what we were playing? Implementations of this thought might be something like

 

- when you make a bid, mousing over the bids shows you what they mean before you make them

 

- when P makes a bid, it is automatically explained and partner can access this information

 

Something along these lines would possibly make it more fun to play online, and remove some of the current problems we see with pickups.

[inquiry]

Jeff Rubens, ... says that

 

- when you make a bid, mousing over the bids shows you what they mean before you make them

 

- when P makes a bid, it is automatically explained and partner can access this information

 

Something along these lines would possibly make it more fun to play online, and remove some of the current problems we see with pickups.

Sure, he had clever things to say, but what did he say about his parnters stealing his beer? Bet he is against it.

 

Anyway for the idea you propose here.. this will be the nightmare we would have at TD's and yellows....

 

Person A picks up balance 18, opens 1NT and says "16-18"

Picks up balance 17, opens 1NT with "15-17"

Picks up balance 16, opens 1NT with 14-16

Picks up balance 15, opens 1NT with 13-15, you get the idea, but it gets worse

 

 

2D - "flannery"

2D - "mexican"

2D - weak

2D - 4-4 in majors.

 

1M - 3C = weak

1M - 3C = invite

1M - 3C = Bergen

1M -3C = minisplinter

1M - 3C = Fit jump

1M - 3C = Strong...

 

All depending upon the hand.... after all their partners can mouse over to see what they have.

 

Now if everyone would follow the rules and bid normally, it would be fine. But alas some will not, and others will claim people are not.. But the cure is much worse than the disease.

 

ben

[pclayton]

Its not too tough - look for someone like yourself.

 

Like systems? - better not a person that likes "KISS"?

 

Get animated at the table? Better not partner a wallflower.

 

Age usually matters. Sex doesn't matter too much.

 

Their playing schedule should gel with yours.

[MickyB]

Jeff Rubens, ... says that

 

- when you make a bid, mousing over the bids shows you what they mean before you make them

 

- when P makes a bid, it is automatically explained and partner can access this information

 

Something along these lines would possibly make it more fun to play online, and remove some of the current problems we see with pickups.

 

Person A picks up balance 18, opens 1NT and says "16-18"

Picks up balance 17, opens 1NT with "15-17"

Picks up balance 16, opens 1NT with 14-16

Picks up balance 15, opens 1NT with 13-15, you get the idea, but it gets worse

I think "explained 'automatically'" is meant to mean 'by the software'.

[helene_t]

I think "explained 'automatically'" is meant to mean 'by the software'.

If I understand this correctly there should be an agent that explained the meaning of partner's (and your own?) bid for you. Now as far as you're allowed to make non-standard agreements with partner, this won't work. Now assuming, say, BBO-Basic (maybe the agent would offer a menu of standard systems), it would be possible to make an agent that explained the meaning of most calls in noncontested auctions. In contested auctions it will not since the meaning of your call will depend on the meaning of opp's calls.

 

But shouldn't it be part of the challenge to see if you and partner both understand standard bidding? Suppose you bid 4NT in a sequence where it could be debated whether it is quanti or Blackwood. I think it's part of the challange to

1) Know what is standard, and if that is obvious enough for your "intermediate" partner to understand

2) If no (obvious) standard applies, try to deal with such ambigious calls, for example by avoiding them.

[Fluffy]

Jeff Rubens, ... says that

 

- when you make a bid, mousing over the bids shows you what they mean before you make them

 

- when P makes a bid, it is automatically explained and partner can access this information

 

Something along these lines would possibly make it more fun to play online, and remove some of the current problems we see with pickups.

Sure, he had clever things to say, but what did he say about his parnters stealing his beer? Bet he is against it.

 

Anyway for the idea you propose here.. this will be the nightmare we would have at TD's and yellows....

 

Person A picks up balance 18, opens 1NT and says "16-18"

Picks up balance 17, opens 1NT with "15-17"

Picks up balance 16, opens 1NT with 14-16

Picks up balance 15, opens 1NT with 13-15, you get the idea, but it gets worse

 

 

2D - "flannery"

2D - "mexican"

2D - weak

2D - 4-4 in majors.

 

1M - 3C = weak

1M - 3C = invite

1M - 3C = Bergen

1M -3C = minisplinter

1M - 3C = Fit jump

1M - 3C = Strong...

 

All depending upon the hand.... after all their partners can mouse over to see what they have.

 

Now if everyone would follow the rules and bid normally, it would be fine. But alas some will not, and others will claim people are not.. But the cure is much worse than the disease.

 

ben

That's why before making an unclear and not agreed call I ask my partner what that call would be, he can't see mycards therefore he can't pick the right answer except by luck :P.

[Al_U_Card]

One and only one requirement to ensure enjoyment; that we share the same partnership philosophy, namely "Do unto partner as you would have partner do unto you". The rest is just details and results. :unsure:

[Al_U_Card]

More of the same :unsure:

 

Our Partner, who should be perfect,

think not of our shame,or who is to blame.

Make bids in tempo, and remember conventions.

Play well, as always you try to,

and forgive us our attitude,

as we know what’s right

and want you to know too.

Remind us, since we play together,

that we could be in your shoes.

For you have the wisdom,

to keep us both smiling,

and be better partners.

 

Amen.