Help
Clearly that is not happening. Many of the best pairs are not participating. Nor is the competition as sharp as could be. Some of the world class pairs are using unfamilar methods, a natural disadvantage, especially when other pairs are using their normal methods.
Fred is in a much better position than I am to know why that the best pairs are not participating. I read his earlier note saying that the root cause why the best pairs do not participate is that players have to purchase 10% of their auction price. It makes sense.
But even if the best pairs were participating, the competition would not be as instense as possible because of where the Cavendish draws the line on conventions. I suspect Fred is correct that Rodwell and Meckstorth would play SAYC in an event if the money were right. But is R-M playing Bocci-Duboin and both of them playing SAYC maximizing the competition between them? Wouldn’t an SAYC competition be susceptible to bidding accidents because they are not using their normal systems? And doesn’t the strain of using an unfamiliar bidding system detract from the energy they have to spend on play and defense?
If I understand Fred correctly, this is irrelevant: I am (or was) expecting the wrong thing. The purpose of the Cavendish is not to be yet another competition between the best pairs under World Championship rules with the only difference being that money is at stake. Per Fred, the purpose is to market bridge to social players and attract sponsors as a result. In addition, the assumption is that social players are put off by exotic bidding systems. Other considerations (like letting pairs play their normal systems) are secondary to these goals and this assumption.
Fair enough. Given this purpose and assumption, I will adjust my expectations. No longer will I expect the Cavendish to be a premier pair event without qualification. Instead, I will expect it to be a strong pair event participated in by the pairs that can (1) get past the money issue and (2) bid and play well with conventions much more restricted than they are in the World Championships.
Will the Cavendish achieve its goal of attracting social players and sponsors? I hope so. Something needs to help, especially in the U.S. I suspect that the money aspect gives the Cavendish appeal. I would love to see data from the target audience that tells whether they prefer seeing players use their usual systems or seeing only “standard” conventions.
One possibility is that the Cavendish will fail to achieve its goals regardless what is done about making pairs eligible on merit alone or using more restrictive, less restrictive or the same restrictions on conventions. I.e it is possible that bridge will never be widely popular no matter what is done. How will bridge survive if that turns out to be the case? What do we need to do now? Using the internet to aggregate bridge players into a large enough audience to survive is probably part of the answer. I.e. BBO (and similar organizations) may be more important to bridge long term than the Cavendish. Are there other things bridge players should do?
As for being seriously out of touch with reality, I talked to my psychiatrist, and he said I should just ignore such comments, at least until they’re not true.
No offense taken. Hopefully none given.Chris Wiggins
P.S. Good luck to Fred in the event.
s
t
r-m
nd
ing) tr. v. - Any bid made by bridge player with which partner disagrees.
