[awm]

I'm asking this mostly for USA players. The issue is that representing the US internationally tends to be tough to do -- it's a big country and has many strong teams and good players. As long as we have Meckstroth/Rodwell and Soloway/Hamman, it will be tough to get on the USA1 bermuda bowl team (I believe even the wildly successful of late team of Ekeblad/Rubin and Gitelman/Moss is USA2). On the other hand, there are numerous American (and international) "star" players that I've never heard of. So I'm wondering what people think the requirement should be?

[pclayton]

If Fred is interested in our opinion, I suppose he would ask us.

If this thread becomes an avenue for suggestions for Fred, all the better

If he were to ask, I think there should categories of stars (colors?)

Some possible categories:

- International players that represent their countries, but have not done well in the big events.

- Seniors, Juniors and Women who have excelled in their own categories

- Those that have excelled in their own country but haven't represented .

- National Winners and or those that have a lot of top 10's.

- The Freds, Brads, Meckwells, Bocchi's of the world that have high finishes in the international events.

With these categories, you don't have to get into a big debate about who and who isn't a star.

Just my 2 cents

[mikeh]

I am Canadian, not American, but Canadians are in the ACBL:)

We have separate international representation, but the big domestic tournaments are the NABC's for us as well.

While top US players do face huge obstacles in getting on a Open team, let us remember that:

1) they get two teams to most countries one
2) other countries have a higher per capita number of players
3) I pity any truly fine Italian player who wants to crack the current lineup
4) other countries are consistently represented by a small group of players as well

As for the star system, firstly I shudder at the notion of masterpoints being a criterion. I have occasionally played on pro teams, with clients with far more mps that I will ever earn. Let us just say that some clients would be capable of winning without pros and others....

As for multiple NABC's: some fine players rarely travel. It is not for me to say whether I am a 'fine' player within that comment, but i almost never play NABC's because of the cost (primarily in time but also in $) to attend. Yet several of my friends and occasional partners/teammates do travel frequently, and they have either won one or more or (as with Brian Maksymetz) appeared in the Finals of Spingolds etc. Incidentally, I think that it is far easier in many countries (including Canada) to win the right to go to the Bermuda Bowl than it is to win a major NABC title... take a look at the makeup of the regular top seeds.

I prefer to leave the selection to Fred and his advisors, and I am sorry to hear that he has gone to an 'objective' system. We need something other than self-report, since anyone can claim to be an expert or WC on BBO (I know of at least two alleged WC Canadians whom I am morally certain have never won a Canadian title) but any true expert can very quickly tell if another player can play the game. And while it is silly to expect Fred to know all of the possible star candidates, he certainly knows someone who knows someone, etc... and I would rather trust that sort of arrangement than set targets that may be accomplished primarily through the talents of partners or teammates (or, shudder, attendance awards as represented by masterpoints)

[pigpenz]

Whatever Fred thinks a star should be....I know that there are some who have stars that have represented their contries in world championships and others who have high finishes in Championships events and others I dont know how they got them. But its up to Fred if he wants to give you a star then its yours.

[fred]

Sorry - there is no way that awarding stars is going to become a "judgment call" for me, anyone else, or some kind of star committee (star chamber?).

I have learned the hard way that such a system leads to only problems for me and hurt feelings for rejected star candidates.

Assuming that the standard will remain "objective", I don't think it is right that "representing your country in certain world championship events" should be the only way you could get a star. If we did that there would be 100s of excellent players from strong bridge countries (like USA, Italy, and Poland) who would not have stars.

That is why we also give stars to people who win major "national" tournaments in certain countries. In such countries I consult with trusted local experts as to which events are "star worthy" and which BBO members have won these events.

I personally think the star system is working pretty close to as well as possible now (but keep in mind that there are many issues besides the quality of the actual stars that are relevent here).

In any case, I will look forward to receiving feedback about this difficult (and painful) subject.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[Walddk]

Jlall, on Aug 31 2005, 01:59 AM, said:

I believe it should be, and was for a while, based solely on fred and his staffs opinion. He got a lot of grief for that though, so changed it to an objective format. If you would like to know what it currently is email fred or uday.

The requirements are clearly stated here:

Explore Bridge ---> Bridge Library ---> English ---> Award symbols in your profile.

Roland

[pigpenz]

Jlall, on Aug 30 2005, 10:02 PM, said:

heh. ok then.

you want a ministar JLall?

[Al_U_Card]

This status(?) symbol being required for?

Seeing who to kibbitz?
Scaring off wanna-be pards?
Creating an elite?
Making us feel more (in)secure?

Maybe I should just up my meds and leave it at that.....

[Free]

I prefer to keep the star system as it is: objective so nobody gets discriminated, and with strict rules. The star system is just nice to find some decent table to kibitz, that's all. So giving stars only to very good players seems the best solution imo.

There's only 1 question remaining: what's a very good player? If you give everyone who's been a national champion a star, then there would be too many stars imo. So only decent result(s) at international level should do.

[han]

Free, on Aug 31 2005, 10:02 AM, said:

There's only 1 question remaining: what's a very good player? If you give everyone who's been a national champion a star, then there would be too many stars imo. So only decent result(s) at international level should do.

I think that everyone who's won a Reisinger or Spingold should be pretty interresting to watch! Perhaps you consider these events international.

The current rules seem pretty good.

[Brandal]

awm, on Aug 30 2005, 06:45 PM, said:

I'm asking this mostly for USA players. The issue is that representing the US internationally tends to be tough to do -- it's a big country and has many strong teams and good players. As long as we have Meckstroth/Rodwell and Soloway/Hamman, it will be tough to get on the USA1 bermuda bowl team (I believe even the wildly successful of late team of Ekeblad/Rubin and Gitelman/Moss is USA2). On the other hand, there are numerous American (and international) "star" players that I've never heard of. So I'm wondering what people think the requirement should be?

I voted for Fred's opinion,because I hope he will keep
number of stars to a "minimum",I fear inflation if some
committee or the likes have a say in it.

[pigpenz]

Jlall, on Aug 31 2005, 09:41 AM, said:

pigpenz, on Aug 31 2005, 09:32 AM, said:

Jlall, on Aug 30 2005, 10:02 PM, said:

heh. ok then.

you want a ministar JLall?

sorry I'm too dense to understand the reference, can you explain?

too dense or a knucklehead....didnt you win the Jr. Championship???

that should equal a little star

[han]

Fred,

I'm not a very good player, but I won a flight C GNT, could I have a little star too? Or perhaps a green square or even underlining my name on BBO would do.

Thanks in advance,

Han

[Al_U_Card]

And I won an open event at a regional, can I have a planet or a moon or a meteor or a comet or an asteroid ? roflmao

[han]

That should be worth at least a moon, a purple moon.