[awm]

Note that I don't mean "make you worse while you're doing it" -- obviously most people play worse when drunk (for example). The question is whether playing bridge can actually make your skills deteriorate, if you play under certain conditions. Feel free to add other suggestions if nothing on the poll fits.

[kfay]

Playing against weak pairs I think.

You start to do crazy things (at least I have) to try to exploit them and then when it works or you think it should have worked it wiggles whatever you've done kinda wiggles it's way into your regular play. I think if you were to play against weak pairs for a long time who never double you when you make some poor overcall (or something of the like) that you'll do the same thing when you play competent opponents and get cracked. You're desensitized to bad actions.

[jtfanclub]

My vote was for goulash, especially of the 'pass three cards to your left' variety. When you start to count on a suit splitting 3-0....

[JanM]

jtfanclub, on Mar 5 2008, 04:04 PM, said:

My vote was for goulash, especially of the 'pass three cards to your left' variety. When you start to count on a suit splitting 3-0....

I don't know about "counting on" but surely considering possible bad breaks is a good thing to do at any form of the game. I think that anything, whether playing, watching, reading, discussing, even just thinking about possible positions, will make you a better player. Chip used to think I was wasting my time kibbitzing BBO (because when you get to see all four hands you can sort of drift), but changed his mind when we played recently after I hadn't done anything much bridge-related except watch BBO.

[mikeh]

I voted for playing against weak opps. It is not because I do crazy things against them: I assume that I will score well just playing bridge. It is that the opps never challenge one to dig deep. I play a lot, on average more than once a week, at our local club. We have some very good players, but I usually partner the best And the bulk of the players are weak. There is almost no need to focus on every card... nor to worry about giving away too much information in either the bidding or the play, since most opps don't even understand that you have given them info, let alone know how to use it. There is little need to look for unblocks or squeeze-breaking plays... while I do try to recognize them, there is little sense of urgency since the opps won't endplay me or squeeze me intentionally.

Overall, it is just that one can play against poor players and win, without ever being focussed.. try that against a WC pair, and get eaten alive.

While I am sure that there are players who claim, accurately or not, that they bring the same intensity to every game regardless of the opps, I am not one of them. And sloppy habits make it difficult to refocus when it is needed.

The only event that I play in semi-regularly where there is a relatively consistent level of pretty strong opps is the Canadian Team Trials, which begin with a long round robin... for which I am always grateful because it takes me a couple of days and 120+ boards before I start to feel that I am really at the table. If I only played Nationals and bigger regionals, I suspect (hope?) that it wouldn't take that long

[gwnn]

Whenever I play fast without lots of thinking (and I'm at a stage where I need lots of thinking to get anything right) I feel like my brain is slowly but surely melting down, like the tender snow on the streets of the Cluj of early March.

[pclayton]

Strongly believe playing speedball or fast pairs makes you a worse player. If you do it on a frequent basis to avoid time penalties you have to play by feel instead of actually counting the hand. When this happens, all hell breaks loose.

I don't think playing against bad players makes you a bad player, but it can make you a little sloppy, especially at MPs when you start trying crazy stuff to win (and it works), and as a result, you aren't as tight as you should be with taking tricks. At IMPs, I don't know of a lot of good players that really change around their strategy against weaker players. They just expect to win by playing a better game.

I haven't played enough goulash to really know, but bidding one more on freak hands is generally a good philosophy and getting seasoning on a frequent basis can't be a negative.

Not playing at all is obviously detrimental.

[y66]

I think you have to define "better" or "worse" relative to your individual goals.

My goal is to become a competent player against tough opps.

If I spend the next 6 months playing a/x competition, I will get better. If I spend the next 6 months playing b/c competition (weaker than a/x), I will get better too, but I will not improve as much and I may further ingrain habits that are hard to undo later.

Either way, after 6 months, I expect to be a somewhat better player. But I think I will be worse off, relative to my goal, if I take the b/c route instead of the a/x route.

[han]

Playing on BBO against US juniors hurts my bridge game. I think that every white third seat opener is a psyche.

[cherdano]

pclayton, on Mar 5 2008, 04:07 PM, said:

Not playing at all is obviously detrimental.

I agree, and I think it is worse than all the other options (which is what this thread should be about IMO).

[rogerclee]

I think that if you analyze the hands after you play them, it is difficult for any session of bridge to make you worse.

[Cascade]

cherdano, on Mar 6 2008, 11:43 AM, said:

pclayton, on Mar 5 2008, 04:07 PM, said:

Not playing at all is obviously detrimental.

I agree, and I think it is worse than all the other options (which is what this thread should be about IMO).

If you do not play at all how do you know if you are worse or better?

[mikeh]

Jlall, on Mar 5 2008, 06:05 PM, said:

cherdano, on Mar 5 2008, 05:43 PM, said:

pclayton, on Mar 5 2008, 04:07 PM, said:

Not playing at all is obviously detrimental.

I agree, and I think it is worse than all the other options (which is what this thread should be about IMO).

Yes, I think that is clearly what this thread is about and some people are missing that point.

I disagree.

It depends on how you spend your time.

Anyone who leaves the game entirely, for an extended time, is probably going to get worse.

But say that you stop playing but take up serious kibitzing: you spend many hours per week kibitizing the Cayne matches on BBO, or the finals of the Spingold or the Bermuda Bowl, while reading voraciously and participating in these fora?

I'd guess that such would be far better for your game than playing 3 times a week at the local senior citizens' resthome.

[han]

Cascade, on Mar 5 2008, 06:28 PM, said:

cherdano, on Mar 6 2008, 11:43 AM, said:

pclayton, on Mar 5 2008, 04:07 PM, said:

Not playing at all is obviously detrimental.

I agree, and I think it is worse than all the other options (which is what this thread should be about IMO).

If you do not play at all how do you know if you are worse or better?

Do trees fall when there is nobody in the forest? And does that have anything to do with this thread?

[cherdano]

mikeh, on Mar 5 2008, 05:34 PM, said:

Jlall, on Mar 5 2008, 06:05 PM, said:

cherdano, on Mar 5 2008, 05:43 PM, said:

pclayton, on Mar 5 2008, 04:07 PM, said:

Not playing at all is obviously detrimental.

I agree, and I think it is worse than all the other options (which is what this thread should be about IMO).

Yes, I think that is clearly what this thread is about and some people are missing that point.

I disagree.

It depends on how you spend your time.

Anyone who leaves the game entirely, for an extended time, is probably going to get worse.

But say that you stop playing but take up serious kibitzing: you spend many hours per week kibitizing the Cayne matches on BBO, or the finals of the Spingold or the Bermuda Bowl, while reading voraciously and participating in these fora?

I'd guess that such would be far better for your game than playing 3 times a week at the local senior citizens' resthome.

I think you still misunderstand the question. Adam was asking whether a bridge activity would make you a worse bridge player, not if you could improve more by doing another bridge activity (which is what your answer is about).

I.e. if you didn't play at all for a year, wouldn't you still be happy that the Canadian trials start with a long round robin?

[pclayton]

What's really weird is that my game elevates after doing a strenuous mental activity like a tough crossword.

[MickyB]

A one-time NPC of mine said that he had seen teams fail to win tournaments due to playing Barbu the previous night.