Help
Today there was an interesting tournment using a neat new feature of the BBO software: The ability to load pre-screened hands for the tournment.
The hands were a challenging mix, including one where the correct play was to jettison a blocking ACE, to give a trick the opponent's king, a couple squeezes, a hand that requires the underlead of AKQJ in order to get a ruff to defeat a slam, to name a just a few. It made the tournment exciting for the kibitizers, as they got to discuss "what is the trick" to each hand while the players struggled along. I can imagine some very interesting tournment hands in the future... :-)
Ben
Page 1 of 1
Neat new feature adds to tournment excitment
#1
- Group: Admin
- Posts: 14,566
- Joined: 2003-February-13
- Gender:Male
- Location:Amelia Island, FL
- Interests:Bridge, what else?
Posted 2004-January-05, 22:10
--Ben--
#2
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 6,951
- Joined: 2003-September-07
- Gender:Male
- Interests:Bridge, poker, politics
Posted 2004-January-06, 05:27
kewl.. can anyone do this in a tourney?
"Paul Krugman is a stupid person's idea of what a smart person sounds like." Newt Gingrich (paraphrased)
#3
- Group: Admin
- Posts: 14,566
- Joined: 2003-February-13
- Gender:Male
- Location:Amelia Island, FL
- Interests:Bridge, what else?
Posted 2004-January-06, 11:34
luke warm, on Jan 6 2004, 06:27 AM, said:
kewl.. can anyone do this in a tourney?
It is a feature of the new client. I assume once everyone who can direct tournments upgrades, then yes, everyone coudl do it. Of course this requires that you prepare the hands ahead of time in lin file format.
--Ben--
#4
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 131
- Joined: 2003-August-03
- Location:Sydney
Posted 2004-January-06, 17:17
I've kibbitzed a few of the pre-set hands events and it makes for interesting kibbitzing - and it's certainly a great innovation.
However, I don't know where the directors get their pre-set hands - ie if they make them up themselves.
In one event they looked like level 2 and 3 declarer play problems from Bridgemaster (but not exact copies), together with some defense problems - and there were interesting problems in most hands I saw. What would have gone better with this sort of event would be 1 board a round with a brief synopsis of the hand problem or solution between each round OR a posted link to the hands and solutions after the event.
In another event however, the hands were mostly wicked misfits and bad trump breaks - if you opened a weak 2 you could almost guarantee your LHO opp would have 6 cards in your suit sitting over you - and the person in pass out seat would always balance with a long suit in which their partner was void and in which the other opp had a stack... . The lesson of these hands seemed to be 'dont bid'. The hands were cruel. And if you knew these were the hand types you'd change your methods to play Weiss or similar over weak 2's to get good penalty doubles... . With these sort of hands I didn't really see the point in bridge terms except 'amusement value'.
There's another new innovation in tournaments - which is cutting the field to the top x% after 2,4,6 etc. rounds. This 'innovation' I really don't like a lot - I know a number of times in other events with barometer scoring where I've come back from a really bad score after 2 rounds... If you organise with a friend to play an event at a certain time it seems a bit severe to be chopped after 2 rounds in a much longer event.
However, I don't know where the directors get their pre-set hands - ie if they make them up themselves.
In one event they looked like level 2 and 3 declarer play problems from Bridgemaster (but not exact copies), together with some defense problems - and there were interesting problems in most hands I saw. What would have gone better with this sort of event would be 1 board a round with a brief synopsis of the hand problem or solution between each round OR a posted link to the hands and solutions after the event.
In another event however, the hands were mostly wicked misfits and bad trump breaks - if you opened a weak 2 you could almost guarantee your LHO opp would have 6 cards in your suit sitting over you - and the person in pass out seat would always balance with a long suit in which their partner was void and in which the other opp had a stack... . The lesson of these hands seemed to be 'dont bid'. The hands were cruel. And if you knew these were the hand types you'd change your methods to play Weiss or similar over weak 2's to get good penalty doubles... . With these sort of hands I didn't really see the point in bridge terms except 'amusement value'.
There's another new innovation in tournaments - which is cutting the field to the top x% after 2,4,6 etc. rounds. This 'innovation' I really don't like a lot - I know a number of times in other events with barometer scoring where I've come back from a really bad score after 2 rounds... If you organise with a friend to play an event at a certain time it seems a bit severe to be chopped after 2 rounds in a much longer event.
#5
- mmm Duvel
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 10,728
- Joined: 2003-July-30
- Gender:Male
- Location:Belgium
- Interests:Duvel, Whisky
Posted 2004-January-06, 17:55
I like the knockout, it's something new! You have to play well during the entire time. Makes sure nobody will start shooting in slams when they are way behind...
"It may be rude to leave to go to the bathroom, but it's downright stupid to sit there and piss yourself" - blackshoe
#6
- Group: Admin
- Posts: 14,566
- Joined: 2003-February-13
- Gender:Male
- Location:Amelia Island, FL
- Interests:Bridge, what else?
Posted 2004-January-06, 18:50
I have to admit that I do not like the survival tournments. This is more a theoretical dislike than anything else. I think the fairest pair competition is when each pair plays each other pair.... and may the best pair win (or a complete round robin in team events).
Of course, in an on-line event, this isn't usually going to be feasible, with 20 or 100 tables. But if you are "unlucky" enough to draw the first two rounds against, let's say, two expert pairs and you "hold your own", say average or average slightly minus or plus. The pairs who got the flip side of that coin (the novices/beginners/ and people with a just off day) have built a huge lead, and walla, the players who are struggling are gone. I like swiss events, where you move up or down to play people with similar score, but I am sort of against the survivor movement. Now, I realize survivor is an absolute requirement for a "directorless" event, but other than that, it really does't match anything in the real world.
And think it is going to save you from the slam shooters? Then you haven't played board 4 against a pair with a horrible first round and worried about being kicked out at the end of the second round. The shooting just happens earlier.... and if the shooters get you, you maybe gone yourself... But I do play in them, and if the field is large enough (40 tables or so), they seem to work more of less fairly.
Ben
Of course, in an on-line event, this isn't usually going to be feasible, with 20 or 100 tables. But if you are "unlucky" enough to draw the first two rounds against, let's say, two expert pairs and you "hold your own", say average or average slightly minus or plus. The pairs who got the flip side of that coin (the novices/beginners/ and people with a just off day) have built a huge lead, and walla, the players who are struggling are gone. I like swiss events, where you move up or down to play people with similar score, but I am sort of against the survivor movement. Now, I realize survivor is an absolute requirement for a "directorless" event, but other than that, it really does't match anything in the real world.
And think it is going to save you from the slam shooters? Then you haven't played board 4 against a pair with a horrible first round and worried about being kicked out at the end of the second round. The shooting just happens earlier.... and if the shooters get you, you maybe gone yourself... But I do play in them, and if the field is large enough (40 tables or so), they seem to work more of less fairly.
Ben
--Ben--
Page 1 of 1