[Hanoi5]

I think it is mostly a matter of skill (and time to dedicate to the game), but it also has to be said that finding the correct bridge partner is like finding the love of your life (or the perfect business partner or associate).

[Codo]

I honestly lost/ left partners for all reasons you gave.

Different skills, different styles, different motivation, non-bridge issues.

The partnerships which I saw breaking up had all kind reasons too. I cann see not the one and only or the most common reason for them.

[shintaro]

My last reason for splitting with my Bridge partner of years was not wanting to upset her when looking quizzical across the table for some off the planet bid or play;

I NEVER would criticise my partner at the table unlike quite a lot I know who do;

And she was much much better looking than ChrisUK is (but then even Sceptic is better looking than Chris)

Now I shall go into hiding and put on my Tin Hat and Tin Knickers and wait for the fall-out

[NickRW]

Personal experience: I lost one partner due to the fact that we finished with school and didn't see much of one another after that - apart from in the pub sometimes! The other regular partner that I lost was when I moved away in connection with work. I haven't lost any other regular partners.

Other observation etc: Death seems to be a cause of losing bridge players! Rumour has it that, at one local club, they're in and out of each other's beds - I think this is probably a gross exaggeration - but it seems that some of it has gone on.

Nick

[NickRW]

TimG, on Dec 2 2008, 03:48 AM, said:

I think partnerships fail to form primarily because of bridge reasons, be they different skill, different style, preferred system, different objectives, different temperament (which is sometimes a good thing), etc. But, that once partnerships form, the non-bridge reasons (family/relationship, career, geographic move, etc.) predominate.

Personally, I'd go along with that. Although I've never lost a partner for bridge reasons, there are people who I've played with that I would rather not play with again - either because they are plain not good enough, or have totally archaic ideas or are not so easy to get along with.

Nick

[vuroth]

The one regular partnership I had is on hiatus due to each of us adding children to our respective families.

Work schedule/family commitments are probably a principle reason that I haven't formed another solid partnership yet.

0.02

V

[ArtK78]

NickRW, on Dec 2 2008, 06:32 AM, said:

Rumour has it that, at one local club, they're in and out of each other's beds - I think this is probably a gross exaggeration - but it seems that some of it has gone on.

That used to be the story going around in the Washington DC bridge scene. Just check out Jerry Machlin's book.

Jerry had one story in his book about a very pretty female player who was rumored to be sleeping with a number of the local experts. At one tournament, where the air conditioning was turned up quite high so that the room was very chilly, she showed up wearing a very short skirt. Seeing this, Jerry turned to one of his fellow directors and said "If I didn't know better I would say that that was the coldest ass in the room!"

[y66]

I voted "other". Changing that to "different objectives" after reading your definition.

[mike777]

TimG, on Dec 1 2008, 10:48 PM, said:

I wonder what it takes to make a bridge partnership, at least for your purposes.  If I play with someone off and on for a few months and nothing ever comes of the partnership, was there a partnership break-up or did it never really form?

I think partnerships fail to form primarily because of bridge reasons, be they different skill, different style, preferred system, different objectives, different temperament (which is sometimes a good thing), etc.  But, that once partnerships form, the non-bridge reasons (family/relationship, career, geographic move, etc.) predominate.

I think money drives many partnerships, but no doubt you can find other reasons why people play at very top levels for more than ten years.

Please, below list top hundred partnerships that have played last ten years and still play.

[mike777]

mike777, on Dec 3 2008, 02:52 AM, said:

TimG, on Dec 1 2008, 10:48 PM, said:

I wonder what it takes to make a bridge partnership, at least for your purposes.  If I play with someone off and on for a few months and nothing ever comes of the partnership, was there a partnership break-up or did it never really form?

I think partnerships fail to form primarily because of bridge reasons, be they different skill, different style, preferred system, different objectives, different temperament (which is sometimes a good thing), etc.  But, that once partnerships form, the non-bridge reasons (family/relationship, career, geographic move, etc.) predominate.

I think money drives many partnerships, but no doubt you can find other reasons why people play at very top levels for more than ten years.

Please, below list top hundred partnerships that have played last ten years and still play.

I may have been unfair:


List top =20 that play today
ok ok...LIst your top ten world..wide that play last ten.. ten years.................only ten years......Assume money did not matter

[brianshark]

I think that if there is a gap in skill level, or bidding style differences, then a partnership will fail to form rather than last a long time and eventually end. So I don't think those two are the main cause of partnership break up.

I don't think a difference in temperament is necessarily a bad thing. Sometimes a person who gets worked up and worried and overly focused can be complimented well by someone who is chilled and laid back. Same with dominant and submissive personality, or aggressive and passive personalities.

I think one major reason that seems to be missing from your list: Sometimes a pertnership who gets to know each other better and become more familiar just gradually get on each other's nerves.

And I do think that it is common enough for one person in a partnership to slowly lose interest in serious improvement and competitive bridge while the other still wants to work hard and compete in everything and take everything seriously.

I myself haven't had a real serious partnership that I've played in everything with, mostly because I haven't been playing bridge all that long.

That said, my opinion on the top 3 reasons for partnership break up is:
1. Non-bridge lifestyle changes, changing of free time availability, people moving to different countries/cities, etc.
2. One of the pair loses interest in serious competitive bridge.
3. Getting on each other's nerves leading to falling out or mutually agreed bridge split up.

[onoway]

In my choice, enjoyment vs winning, I think there is a balance that partnerships need to find that both are comfortable with.and this seems very difficult to achieve. To wish to enjoy the game doesn't at all mean a player is not competitive, but that his/her ultimate priority might be different than that of a player who wishes to win to the point that enjoyment of the game is secondary.

I would assume this applies more the further down the scale you go from professional players...

[TimG]

mike777, on Dec 3 2008, 02:52 AM, said:

Please, below list top hundred partnerships that have played last ten years and still play.

Talking about the very top partnerships is different from talking about the best partnerships in a region let alone the average partnerships. My, perhaps naive, opinion is that money plays a role in very few partnerships. At least money passing between partners. Similar abilities to spend money on bridge travel would add to partnership compatibility.

[MickyB]

I've been through a fair few partnerships in the juniors over the past few years. I think all of the factors listed have played a part. Some have ended due to one member becoming too old for the U20s or U25s; A couple only really started because there was no-one else of a similar standard available, and, in those cases, bidding style+system contributed to the split.

Quote

Then I moved to Scotland. Here, the elite players (who are probably not quite so elite) have a very high level of churn in partnerships. It is how I imagine the professional scene works, except that there are no professionals! Players make agreements to play for one or two seasons, and then everyone gets on the merry go-round and finds a new partnership.

I suspect that professionals have more reason to stick together - it's more attractive to hire an established partnership.

[JanM]

TimG, on Dec 3 2008, 09:41 AM, said:

mike777, on Dec 3 2008, 02:52 AM, said:

Please, below list top hundred partnerships that have played last ten years and still play.

Talking about the very top partnerships is different from talking about the best partnerships in a region let alone the average partnerships.

I'm not sure what the first quoted sentence means. There are certainly a large number of long-term partnerships among the top pairs in the world. There have also recently been a number of partnership break-ups at that level, and I think that they have been caused by several of the things on Frances' list, just as break-ups at lower levels are caused by different things. Among top pairs who've been together for at least ten years:
In the US:
Meckstroth-Rodwell
Garner-Weinstein
Levin-Weinstein
Gitelman-Moss
Greco-Hampson
Cheek-Grue
Smith-Cohen
Boyd-Robinson
Martel-Stansby

Note- these are listed as they occurred to me, not in any particular order (except I politely put my husbands last ).

Recent break-ups and causes:
Berkowitz-Cohen - different objectives (Larry didn't want to play "bridge at the top" any more)
Rosenberg-Zia - it wasn't fun for them to play together any more (I know some will say it was because Hamman asked Zia to play with him on the Nickell team, but I don't think Hamman would have asked or Zia accepted if Z-R were still having fun together - sort of like I don't really believe marriages break up because one of the spouses meets someone new, that happens because the marriage was shaky to begin with)

In Europe:
Lauria-Versace
Fantoni-Nunes
I guess Lanzarotti-Buratti, although I haven't heard anything of them recently
Helgemo-Helness
Balicki-Zmudzinski
Gromov-Dubinin
Elinescu-Wladow
Elahmady-Sadek
Auken-von Arnim
Brink-Drijver (I think they've played together more than 10 years)

Recent break-ups (don't know any reasons, sorry):
Bocchi-DuBoin
Brogeland-Saelinsminde

These are just the ones that I thought of without putting any effort into it. Still don't know the point, though. Obviously long-term partnerships have a big advantage - they have had time to develop their bidding system, they know what sorts of things their partners will and won't do, they're usually comfortable together. So it's no surprise that good pairs stay together.

[jdonn]

JanM, on Dec 3 2008, 08:38 PM, said:

Among top pairs who've been together for at least ten years:
In the US:
...
Cheek-Grue
...

Really? I don't even think it's been half that long, although I wouldn't stake my life on it.

[JanM]

jdonn, on Dec 3 2008, 08:42 PM, said:

JanM, on Dec 3 2008, 08:38 PM, said:

Among top pairs who've been together for at least ten years:
In the US:
...
Cheek-Grue
...

Really? I don't even think it's been half that long, although I wouldn't stake my life on it.

You're probably right, although it seems like a fairly long time.

[y66]

Saw a thoughtful blog entry on this topic the other day.

[Phil]

I missed this one during my hiatus.

I think I wrote about this a few years ago. In the last 20 years my experience has been with these partners:

1. Blowup after an event.

2. Drift (as Adam describes it) mostly due to work commitments.

3. Conscious effort to stop playing due to unrealized expectations and poor results.

4. Still play, but on an infrequent basis, mostly due to professional commitments.

Fortunately, I am still very good friends with these four. I have several 'dormant' partnerships too that I don't count. I hope to revive these when things change a little.

[keylime]

I think what makes Larry and I function so well, is that there's a genuine friendship, and we are each other's favorite partner.

Besides that, our style is so similar.