[Cyberyeti]

I remember many years ago, there was a local tournament in the UK for players below a certain master point rank. We turned up as 4 schoolboys in uniform aged 13-16. There were some grumbles, but only after we won the event. I still can't believe 30 years on that a 7 team random multiple teams was won with +21 IMPS.

We only have one junior player of any great standard locally, and some of the members at the club at which his father directed (or rather used to, he resigned after this) complained that he turned up to play in a baseball cap. Sad but true, why can't people just be tolerant.

These were maily isolated incidents though, I've been playing organised adult bridge since I was 12, and mainly people have been very supportive.

[billw55]

In all fairness, rude people at the bridge table are clearly a minority in my experience. Furthermore I have noticed no correlation whatsoever between rudeness and age.

[JoAnneM]

CSGibson, on Jun 8 2010, 11:12 PM, said:

Elianna, on Jun 8 2010, 08:07 PM, said:

CSGibson, on Jun 8 2010, 06:42 PM, said:

The federal court would say nothing.  The ACBL bans people from games based on age all the time, calling them "senior" events.  They also have gender specific events, too, if I recall.

The only thing would be that, to use age to ban someone, the club would probably have to ban all people of that age and older/younger for the ACBL to continue to sanction the club.

Exactly. We were the only ones under a certain age. Even if they were complaining specifically about us and this other pair for bridge experience reasons, they wouldn't have caught other people in the net if they decided that one had to be over a certain age to play in the club (say 40).

Which, btw, is that several players seem to believe: That those young enough to be their grandchildren (whatever age that may be) shouldn't be at the bridge club, because they come to the bridge club to get away from the grandchildren. (A quote from someone, not something that I made up.)

I have to say that I have been playing ACBL duplicate for 6 years (and am 30 years old now). I have never had anyone seriously suggest that they would rather I didn't play because I was too young, or that they were in any way bothered by my age. In fact, I've had the opposite experience - people are worried that there aren't enough younger people to perpetuate the game that they love.

I don't know why our experiences are different, but I imagine that the difference is probably only a few people - either I've got better old people in my clubs, or our old people have had fewer bad experiences in general with young bridge players to corrupt their view.

The difference might be, Chris, that even though you are an excellent player and even play stuff older players don't play, you have great table presence and a nice smile.

We would like any new players at our club - any age please, I don't care if you can play or not, we will teach you. I bet all of you at one time in your life did not know how to play bridge.

[blackshoe]

I still don't.

[gwnn]

JoAnne are you saying that awm and Elianna have a bad table presence or do you just dislike their smile?

[JoAnneM]

Wow, I walked into that one! As far as I know I have never met them, but I have met Chris, played against him and as a substitute on his team.

I love young players, and just can't understand the attitude of those who don't. Sometimes I think older people just get too self centered, set in their ways, or maybe they just don't feel good. I just pray that doesn't happen to me!

[peachy]

Elianna, on Jun 8 2010, 10:07 PM, said:

...shouldn't be at the bridge club, because they come to the bridge club to get away from the grandchildren. (A quote from someone, not something that I made up.)

I believe this.
Here is a another true story.
In the early nineties, there was a retired schoolteacher in our local club. She had a major problem with a then-nine year old who played bridge at the club on occasion with his mom, dad, or a couple of other players who thought it delightful to see a young man play so well. Her words are like branded in my memory: "I was a schoolteacher and I am now retired. I don't want to see children in the club, I come here to relax and don't want children around me." All I could think after initial shock was 'Thank god you are retired, you should never have been a teacher in the first place if you hate children that much. ' I should have had the guts to actually say it to her, but didn't.

[blackshoe]

Elianna, on Jun 8 2010, 09:08 PM, said:

Tl;dr:  A club CAN ban someone on the basis of age alone.

I asked Memphis about this. Their reply:

Quote

In the paragraph below, the word "class" in bold letters would also include age so a club may not bar a member based on his/her age.

The "paragraph below" is, from the Handbook:

Quote

The club manager can handle many behavior problems by discussing them with the offenders, by issuing a warning, or declaring a period of probation. In extreme cases or cases of repeat offenses, the manager can bar an ACBL member from the club game for a stipulated period of time, or permanently. No open club may bar an ACBL member or members as a class, based upon the player’s race, creed, religion, political affiliation, sexual orientation, national origin, and physical handicap or on his proficiency at bridge.

[Elianna]

blackshoe, on Jun 9 2010, 11:11 AM, said:

Elianna, on Jun 8 2010, 09:08 PM, said:

Tl;dr:  A club CAN ban someone on the basis of age alone.

I asked Memphis about this. Their reply:

Quote

In the paragraph below, the word "class" in bold letters would also include age so a club may not bar a member based on his/her age.

The "paragraph below" is, from the Handbook:

Quote

The club manager can handle many behavior problems by discussing them with the offenders, by issuing a warning, or declaring a period of probation. In extreme cases or cases of repeat offenses, the manager can bar an ACBL member from the club game for a stipulated period of time, or permanently. No open club may bar an ACBL member or members as a class, based upon the player’s race, creed, religion, political affiliation, sexual orientation, national origin, and physical handicap or on his proficiency at bridge.

As they further define which classes they are protecting in that same sentence, it seems that whoever wrote to you has reading comprehension issues.

[matmat]

JoAnneM, on Jun 9 2010, 12:22 PM, said:

Wow, I walked into that one! As far as I know I have never met them, but I have met Chris, played against him and as a substitute on his team.

I have.

adam and eli have the most vicious looking glares this side of the basilisk. I fear and tremble them whenever i get to their table.

[blackshoe]

Elianna, on Jun 9 2010, 04:50 PM, said:

As they further define which classes they are protecting in that same sentence, it seems that whoever wrote to you has reading comprehension issues.

That thought did occur to me, but given the cavalier way the ACBL has treated the language in other cases, I see no point in arguing with them. Heck, write to them yourself. Maybe you'll get a different opinion. Wouldn't surprise me any.

[gnasher]

Elianna, on Jun 9 2010, 09:50 PM, said:

As they further define which classes they are protecting in that same sentence, it seems that whoever wrote to you has reading comprehension issues.

I think there might have been a writing problem too.

You can't bar someone because of their "race, creed, religion, political affiliation, sexual orientation, national origin, and physical handicap".

Doesn't that mean that the only restriction is on barring someone because they meet conditions on all of these categories? For example, I can't bar someone for being a straight Republican-voting WASP with a gammy leg, but I can bar him simply for being white.

[matmat]

gnasher, on Jun 9 2010, 05:28 PM, said:

Elianna, on Jun 9 2010, 09:50 PM, said:

As they further define which classes they are protecting in that same sentence, it seems that whoever wrote to you has reading comprehension issues.

I think there might have been a writing problem too.

You can't bar someone because of their "race, creed, religion, political affiliation, sexual orientation, national origin, and physical handicap".

Doesn't that mean that the only restriction is on barring someone because they meet conditions on all of these categories? For example, I can't bar someone for being a straight Republican-voting WASP with a gammy leg, but I can bar him simply for being white.

quit it with your logic.

[NickRW]

I dunno what all the fuss is about. I'm in the UK it is true - but the culture here isn't that wildly different to the US - I have 3 late teen/early twenties bridge playing offspring and I've taken them to four different local clubs - including one that is both rather conservative and reckons they're the strongest for miles (probably with some degree of truth on their side) and I haven't come across any nastiness about age or their manners or the way they dress etc. In fact quite the reverse.

Nick

[barmar]

Elianna, on Jun 9 2010, 04:50 PM, said:

blackshoe, on Jun 9 2010, 11:11 AM, said:

Elianna, on Jun 8 2010, 09:08 PM, said:

Tl;dr:  A club CAN ban someone on the basis of age alone.

I asked Memphis about this. Their reply:

Quote

In the paragraph below, the word "class" in bold letters would also include age so a club may not bar a member based on his/her age.

The "paragraph below" is, from the Handbook:

Quote

The club manager can handle many behavior problems by discussing them with the offenders, by issuing a warning, or declaring a period of probation. In extreme cases or cases of repeat offenses, the manager can bar an ACBL member from the club game for a stipulated period of time, or permanently. No open club may bar an ACBL member or members as a class, based upon the player’s race, creed, religion, political affiliation, sexual orientation, national origin, and physical handicap or on his proficiency at bridge.

As they further define which classes they are protecting in that same sentence, it seems that whoever wrote to you has reading comprehension issues.

Apparently they're reading it as intending that to be a list of example classes, not a comprehensive list, despite the poor wording.

The general point is that you're allowed to kick out specific people for cause, but not bar any general class of people. So you also can't bar redheads, lefties, sci-fi fans, etc.

[Lobowolf]

My experience with usually being the youngest or among the youngest has pretty much always been positive, with respect to other players. In my early 20s, though, I did think it was funny that the Anaheim club had 2 designated "senior discount" days, the effect of which was to charge everyone other than my regular partner and me a dollar less than the regular card fees; then we'd get asked 3 times a day why more young people didn't play bridge. Those being my days of fewer social graces, I do have admit, once or twice I did say, "Gee, I don't know...maybe if we weren't the only ones in the room who had to pay extra to play on Fridays..."

[Fluffy]

I was the youngest player on the city for like 10 years, I didn't have such problems but probably because at first I was playing with my grand-father and not with another crazy junior, and after that everyone knew me anyway.

[JoAnneM]

No one has mentioned the fact that if you limit your game in any way (by barring redheads) it is now an "invitational" game and not eligible for full masterpoints.

[hrothgar]

gnasher, on Jun 10 2010, 01:28 AM, said:

You can't bar someone because of their "race, creed, religion, political affiliation, sexual orientation, national origin, and physical handicap".

However, you can bar Estonians from using conventions...

[NickRW]

hrothgar, on Jun 11 2010, 09:59 AM, said:

gnasher, on Jun 10 2010, 01:28 AM, said:

You can't bar someone because of their "race, creed, religion, political affiliation, sexual orientation, national origin, and physical handicap".

However, you can bar Estonians from using conventions...

Ha