January 21st, 2012 ~ Judy Kay-Wolff ~ 42 Comments 
Bobby has been fighting the ugliness of CONVENTION DISRUPTION (in all forms) FOR 25 YEARS PLUS and WHEN IT STRIKES — THE OPPONENTS ARE TOTALLY PARALYZED AND UNABLE TO PROTECT THEMSELVES.
Why? The gurus on high who have the power of appointment either don’t understand the game or don’t want to understand it as it is to their advantage and the appointments are often political – not in the best interest of the law-abiding citizens who live by rules. I am sick and tired of hands-tied directors saying he or she can’t do anything about it as the ludicrous Holy Bridge Bible of the so-called knowledgeable player committee orchestrating laws which favor people, especially playing conventions which are designed to show weak distributional hands with certain suits where many times partner forgets which suits they are. Such a development makes it impossible for the opponents to affirmatively bid their suits that supposedly are inferred in length by one of the opponents. When the authorities don’t crack down on the opponents who either intentionally or unintentionally forgot the convention but nevertheless cause terminal damage to the opponents, it is a sad state of affairs. For our authorities to not address these wrongdoings is to completely abrogate their responsibilities in trying to make (especially tournament bridge) intelligible.
INCIDENTLY THIS WAs THE SECOND DAY IN A ROW that CONVENTION DISRUPTION OCCURRED against us as the opponents don’t know what the hell their bids mean and massacre innocent opponents because they have no recourse thanks to the stupidity of the laws on this subject. Here is yesterday’s one of many debacles we have witnessed with our own eyes:
Bobby opened 1NT (I ANNOUNCED 12-14) holding Q9XX J10 AQX KQXX. THE NEXT HAND FLICKERED A FEW SECONDS AND BID 2H HOLDING JXX KQXXXX JXX X and when my LHO alerted I asked, and was told it was THE MAJORS. My hand was AK10X X XX AXXXXX and since we play double is for takeout. how could I be interested in playing spades as they were obviously stacked on my right. My other alternative was 3C and we eventually reached 5C (for a 1 out of 8) rather than getting to the obvious 4S contract (which happens to be cold for 6) getting an average+ instead of a 1. When (if ever) will the ACBL get off their high horse and surrender to the evils of CONVENTION DISRUPTION. To me, the ACBL is on a rapid downward slide because of situations like the above. By the way, the miscreants who forgot are not evil, and, at least in this case, my LHO was telling me what he thought partner had. They just don’t know any better and since CDers keep getting away with it time after time, with the organization not making an effort to stop it, it will just continue to be a way of life. As long as the dues and card fees keep rolling in and the professionals are the ones who are on the committees allowing convention disruption, I predict eventually the game with go to hell in a hand basket.
THIS IS NOT THE MAJESIC GAME IT STARTED OUT TO BE IN THE TWENTIES. HAROLD VANDERBILT WOULD TURN OVER IN HIS GRAVE!
January 14th, 2012 ~ Judy Kay-Wolff ~ 6 Comments
Just in case you are not a disciple of the Aces on Bridge column, someone brought up the famous guidelines of the Dallas Aces 1968 “Seven Deadly Sins.” Since everyone is so busy preaching and teaching on line, I thought you would enjoy the SDS, of which just about all of us are proclaimed guilty at some time or another, even at the highest levels:
1. Bidding without values
2. System violations
3. Unilateral decisions
4. No-Win declarer plays
5. No-Win defensive plays
6. Impulsive plays
7. Mechanicals
January 11th, 2012 ~ Judy Kay-Wolff ~ 3 Comments
Life in LV for me is very active. Besides housework, blogging, TV, hair dressers and nail salons, I play bridge three times a week and frequent the casinos with Bobby for half an hour each evening and then on to dinner. We don’t do much socializing because of Bobby’s hearing, but every Wednesday at noon when my dear friend Martha Beecher is not on one of her frequent Asian escapades, I meet her for brunch. Today we were joined by my friends Carol Pincus and Jo Goldsmith (Jo — now married to Ben — but the former wife of Bart Bramley).
She told a story at lunch that had us in stitches, although it had a sad ending. Back in 1971, when married to Bart, on their honeymoon they visited the Southeasterns in Miami. According to Jo .. at the First Table the director was called because of slow play by Bart; at Table Two Jo had the director called on her because she was sucking a lollipop. By the time they reached Table Three, the director had already been summoned as a man had keeled over dead. We have all experienced unusual directorial situations in our bridge careers, but you must admit this sequence is hard to equal.
January 8th, 2012 ~ Judy Kay-Wolff ~ 4 Comments
I just spent a delightful few hours with Tobias Stone’s sister Shirley and his niece Pat . Since he is no spring chicken (having celebrated his 92nd birthday June 8th), time is fleeting and Shirley (a lovely looking blonde from Florida who was recently widowed) arranged to meet her charming daughter Pat in NY and converged on Las Vegas Thursday night together to pay Stoney a visit at Saint Joe’s Medical Facility. Because most of his family is gone, he counted the days till their arrival. Pat shared a number of memories of her Uncle Tobias relating her exciting youthful experiences when Stoney hosted her family on several trips where she met countless famous people (Omar Sharif, Yul Brynner, Sam Spiegel, Billy Wilder, etc.).
When the three of us brunched at the Riviera this morning, I learned so many hilarious experiences of Stoney from his younger days (no surprise) that delighted me no end. What a character!!!! He should have written an autobiography. It would have been an instant best seller. He did it all — and besides had a distinguished bridge career to boot. After an hour of nostalgia at the coffee shop, we headed to see Stoney for another hour and then I left for home but Bobby and I will be back to see him Tuesday on the way to our bridge outing. We always look forward to his incorrigible sense of humor and unequaled wit. Some things never change.
Stoney is the last of the living legends from the fifties …..the days of the early champions that haunted the exhilarating New York bridge scene.
January 3rd, 2012 ~ Judy Kay-Wolff ~ 3 Comments
There has been such a hullaballoo about the way to select the U.S. International teams, I thought you might enjoy two recent constructive pieces of correspondence between GEORGE JACOBS and BOBBY WOLFF …
FROM GEORGE JACOBS:
Marty; Congratulations! (responding to Marty and others) …
You are spot on and the numbers are virtually correct. I have found myself on every possible end of this in the last 15 years; being in the finals after coming through the round robin, having byes, losing byes by having a poisoned pair, seeing teams come in after 6 days of play, win 2 matches and leave as USA 1, teams with byes coming in cold and losing right away, and everything in between.
The fact is that the game has changed. Foreign players are a fact of life at our Nationals. They have made a tremendous impact on both the makeup of teams and the event results. When you see more than 80% of the teams in the round of 16 onward have at least some Foreign influence, you have to take notice. They are here to stay.
What effect has this had on the Trials? It has created a lopsided barometer where byes are rewarded inversely to the number of teams which are eligible to receive them. What this means is that there are only a few teams which meet the criteria of receiving byes, yet the potential of the bye itself is enormous. This was not the situation when byes came into play, nor could it have been predicted. There has been an onslaught of Foreign players in the last 10 years in particular. Nobody has done anything wrong. It is just that the landscape has changed.
So, after giving Howard full credit for the original suggestion, your formula shows a lot of merit. There should still be byes, just harder to earn. By the way, picking one’s opponent is a huge benefit under normal circumstances, but is no lock. The Italians picked South Africa in the round of 8 in the 2007 Bermuda Bowl, and promptly lost.
While I am writing this note, I may as well mention 2 other items:
1) team chemistry: there has been a lot of talk about this topic. I believe that it has no real basis in fact. Yes, it is nicer to have teammates you like and who like you. Dinners together and rooting for one another are great. Being sympathetic about lost imps and being willing to play an extra set are all pluses, but in the end it really doesn’t matter. At various times, I have played with people I didn’t like and had great results and with people I loved and did poorly. Some of the best results I ever had were playing with two pairs who refused to speak to one another over some acrimony in Italy.
If you really look at this honestly, the most successful American team in the last 20 years has had some people try to get individuals and pairs replaced on the team, or to force them to change their systems. I am not judging in any way, merely observing that in spite of some dissention on the team, their results have been remarkable.
There are lots of really nice people that you might wish to have on your teams, but when push comes to shove, you want winners and fighters and people who take advantage of any opening within the rules. If they are not your favorite dinner companions, so be it.
2) standing up for what is right in these discussions rather than what is best for you: All of us know that having things one way or another is better for us personally. The beauty of this discussion group is that it amplifies your voice. You are heard by more people and more people have an opportunity to be heard. Please do not take advantage by only trumpeting your own narrow position. In the previous discussions there were 20+ calls for the vote when the chairman had said that further discussion was due. We are not unique. I can assure you, having been President of two other National organizations, that this is a pattern of all such groups. It is so easy to only argue from your own selfish position that it often takes a reminder that doing what is best for the group at large trumps personal benefits.
We have had individuals state the same point of view, over and over, as if sheer volume would replace the quality of their position. Make your view known and allow others the same courtesy. When we have resorted to name calling and shot taking, we have not in any way made it better or swung someone over to our side. That kind of stuff is a distraction and takes away from the value of what we are doing.
It is also important that we not blindly support Howard’s position. It would be easy to overwhelm the three teams that are the most likely to ever receive deep byes. I would be just as unhappy to find that people were voting against a team or teams rather than what they believed was right for the future of bridge.
As far as when to start the repachage or who to allow or what round robins should be played or not, I will support whatever decision is made. Strangely, I have no opinion on this and find the mathematical discussions to be sort of a distraction. So to help you with a complete understanding and simplification of the dynamics of the formulas involved, I leave you with this anecdote:
A farmer died, leaving 17 cows to his three sons, to be divided as follows. His oldest son was to get 1/2 of the cows, his middle son to get 1/3 and his youngest to get 1/9 of all the cows. No one could figure out how to do this until a wise man said to borrow a cow from a neighbor, making 18 cows. He gave 9 (1/2) to son #1, 6 (1/3) to son #2, and 2 (1/9) to son #3, for a total of 17. Now he returned the borrowed cow to the neighbor.
Thanks, George
IN RESPONSE FROM BOBBY WOLFF…..
Hi George,
I’m here to tell you that your letter is one of the best ones I have ever read for clarity, summing up the current USBF bridge world (in its entirety), and also recounting recent (and also more stretched out) major events in the past 15+ years.
You also are DIRECTLY on target in discussing so-called camaraderie issues. I have been on countless teams, as many different combinations as is almost humanly possible, and never has it played any force on what happened when we played together. It simply doesn’t matter, unless lunatics are involved and while there probably are some in the bridge world I, at least up to now, have been fortunate in avoiding them.
The same with working out exact mathematical CofC’s. The main and only important issue concerns itself with FAIRNESS and the idea of at the very least, giving an excellent team, at that time of the tournament, a chance to win without spraying the road with nails in front of them.
Also, the thought of the future of the game with its constant changing complexion, has to always be of current intense interest, with the hope that future younger players make it with their personalities maturing along with their experience gleaned from playing with and against the best in the world. When I see otherwise excellent field goal kickers in high-level college football (it has also happened often in the NFL) missing chip shot field goals in crucial situations it should be a reminder to all of us, that less confident mindsets lead to these very sad endings and the anxiety many of our oral disputes cause, plus the pressure of professionalism, is often guilty of causing them.
The foreign bridge invasion at U. S. nationals have been a major plus, but also a minus in attempting to regulate our own International representation. Such is also the case when sometimes the people in control misuse their power to try and self-serve and get what is best for them.
What I am attempting to say above to you, George, has also been better said and although sometimes you may regard me as an enemy to professionalism, I can assure you that the overall plus from professionalism is very necessary for our future, but, as with everything else, it has to be somewhat regulated otherwise the USA (or call it the USBF) will fade into oblivion while losing several steps, going straight downhill.
Until someone becomes a bridge pied piper and leads us into the sunshine from the dark position we are now presently situated, we will continue to be confused and lost in the desert. Why don’t you get the Red Sea to part and I will be the first one to follow you?
Best,
Bobby
December 25th, 2011 ~ Judy Kay-Wolff ~ 14 Comments
I had tried with multiple lack of success to follow up on Bridge Winners but I have had password problems. You may remember the flood of suggestions of individuals for Brent Manley’s Monthly Bridge Bulletin editorial about the 52 most INFLUENTIAL people in the last 75 years of the ACBL’S existence. This is my post originally intended for Bridge Winners:
I was stunned by the soft memories of the ‘experts’ and the unfamiliarity of the newbies with the career of my husband, Bobby Wolff, in the category of influential individuals ala Brent’s article.
He is most widely celebrated for winning eleven world championships and being the only one to win in five different categories. Also his column, Aces on Bridge, appears in over 100 newspapers worldwide. That’s just for starters.
He started playing tournament bridge in the very late 1940’s (at the age of 16) and was active politically in his Unit and District. He represented District 16 (Most of Texas and Mexico) on the ACBL BOD in 1963 as an Alternate filling in for the elected District 16 Representative who (because he was President that year) at that time had Bobby take his place on the BOD. He was then elected back to the BOD in 1981 and served through 1992 after having been President in 1987 and Chairman in 1988, but resigned in 1992 when he became President of the World Bridge Federation through 1994 because he perceived a possible conflict of interest. He served officially on the WBF Executive Council and WBF Management Committee from the late 1980’s up until recently but only attends while at World Championships when he has been qualified to play in an official event.
He was elected (68 votes out of 68 ballots the world over, the only time that ever happened) to the WBF’s distinguished Committee of Honour in 1994 and to the ACBL Hall-of-Fame in 1995 He was appointed President Emeritus of the WBF Appeals Committee in 2009, served on the ACBL Laws Commission for many years, created the ACBL National Recorder and acted as its first Recorder in 1985 through the late 1990’s when he turned it over to his successor, Bob Rosen, but not before spending an average of at least two hours per day at every NABC getting its job done. He created the concept and title of Active Ethics during his 1987 ACBL Presidency and authored its slogan, Always Disclose, Don’t Abuse, Never Intimidate, Practice Active Ethics which has been on all ACBL convention cards since 1987. He was elected ACBL Honorary Member of the year and also currently does the official scoring for the Bidding Box in the monthly ACBL Bulletin. He served as the first President of the Hall-of-Fame committee which was recreated from the original Bridge World Magazine beginning in the early 1960’s and restarted in 1995 by the then-CEO of the ACBL, Roy Green. He is still on the staff of the Bridge World Magazine and was the longest running Master Solver’s Bridge Director ever when doing so from the 1970’s through the mid 1990’s. He is also on the English Bridge Magazines bidding panel and has served stints on both the Australian Bridge bidding panel and the Turkish Bridge bidding panel. He has also been honored by being selected to the Italian Bridge Federation’s honorary organization because of his contributions to European and World bridge.
He created and developed Wolff sign-off (a method of signing off over a constructive 2NT), and also designed and named the Rule of Coincidence which has to do with unusual bridge leads, plays and bids which might and possibly tend to indicate some illegal activity in the playing of the game. He contributes and authors “The Aces of Bridge” a world wide bridge column currently in over 100 world wide newspapers on a 7 day a week time period. He is very active with Bridge Blogging.com which features his column on a two week delayed basis, answering daily questions sent in by readers usually pertaining to bridge problems originating from the bridge column. He has recently been an active member on the internet bridge organization called Bridge Winners and has tried to be innovative in several critical subjects pertaining to the future and hoped-for betterment of world-wide bridge. He authored an autobiography of his life in bridge called “The Lone Wolff” where, rather than like most bridge books concentrating on teaching, was a chronology of about 55+ years of being active in many important bridge activities which he hopes have been much more positive than negative. He can say without fear of contradiction that he has been involved in solving many bridge cheating scandals in both the ACBL and the WBF. Also he has been very vocal and constructive in not allowing certain conventions and treatments including destructive ones, and of course, controlled psychics which otherwise lessen the game itself by acting as a form of what he refers to as “ poison gas” to their opponents. He has also been a champion of fairness in Conditions of Contest and Appeals procedures (both the ACBL and the WBF) in not favoring the elite players and especially their undeserved advantages over lesser lights.
I am leaving for last his impressive playing accomplishments such as winning over twenty combined Spingolds, Vanderbilts and Reisingers along with a large number of National Men’s Teams (with many different teammates) as well as a Blue Ribbon Pair and a World Open Pair. His record, along with his teammates, of winning 33 straight Spingold matches from 1993-1997 is likely never to be equaled. Incidentally, Bobby is one of only six Americans to win The World Team Olympiad (1988) held every four years while representing the USA. Although in semi-retirement and reaching an advanced age, he has (along with partner Dan Morse) won three of the last four Senior Trials with his one loser being in the finals while playing four-handed — and every one of the four with different teammates. Summing up his record he has enjoyed seven victories, four second places and one third place in the twelve Bermuda Bowls in which he has represented the U. S . — (and probably being the most proud of his team’s performance for finishing third in Monte Carlo in 2003).
His six decades of overall outstanding victories, achievements and contributions are incomparable to any other individual in the game!
How quickly we forget!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
December 22nd, 2011 ~ Judy Kay-Wolff ~ 8 Comments
Last evening at a social gathering I was having a pleasant conversation with an ethical bridge friend whom I play against often at the duplicates. The subject arose about calling the director when an infraction has been committed. Another guest, seated back to back with me and not included in the conversation, piped up, “Duplicate is only a game where you come to have fun.” Who asked her? I countered that when you pay a card fee and you receive sanctioned points from the ACBL it makes you have a responsibility to play by the rules. If you want a free for all – play Solitaire or Kitchen Bridge, but while at a duplicate you are expected to play according to the bridge laws and if you don’t know them, LEARN THEM!
On the way home, I discussed it with Bobby whom, of course, agreed with me. He was incensed that the interloper (an average player at best) even suggested that the rules not be abided by … actually a form of cheating. I don’t look at bridge at any level as a form of frivolous fun, but rather as a serious competition where everyone has the responsibility to abide by the format of the game in fairness to all who entered the competition. I am heartily in favor of calling a director (in a polite way) if there is an obvious hesitation or miscue. That is the director’s job.
December 19th, 2011 ~ Judy Kay-Wolff ~ 8 Comments
Since I have trouble writing on Bridge Winners (password problems), I felt compelled to quote in its entirety, a blog on the above subject, written by Bob Heitzman which appeared today on the BW site.
It is brilliantly stated and obviously from the heart. Bob pulls no punches and tells how he feels (and I certainly agree). Excuses for pair trials are simply selfish reasons to strengthen the professional community and are detrimental to bridge and certainly don’t give our country the best chance of emerging victorious – but does keep the money flowing.
Bob Heitzman
December 19, 2011
I am very sad that there will be no pairs trials, although the outcome of the vote was totally predictable. The bridge "establishment" in the U.S nowadays is made up almost entirely of pros and clients. Clients would not like a pairs trial since it would be very hard for a client to do well in–in a pair event, there are no sit outs, and far fewer places to hide when you are in. Pros wouldn’t like it because it behooves them to like what their clients like. Besides, it is probably much easier to find a client to hire you for a team event than a pairs event, so in effect a pairs trial would mean one less payday for many pros.
In an ideal bridge world, there would be a pairs trial with lucrative cash prizes for those who do well along of course with fully subsidized expenses to the world championship. But that is not the way bridge in the U.S. has evolved. In effect, the money that is available for team trials and world championships is spent sending league officials to preside over these events and the money that the players need in order to be able to afford to compete is provided by the clients.
I know people talk about team chemistry and so on as the reason for a team trial rather than a pairs trial. Maybe there is something to that, but the cynic in me prefers to see other more nefarious motivations for the vote.
WELL SAID!
December 16th, 2011 ~ Judy Kay-Wolff ~ 2 Comments
We have received calls and emails concerning my husband, Bobby Wolff’s, alleged illness because of messages from his birth daughter Wendy Wolff who refers in Peter’s Bridge News/Facebook reports to Sidney Lazard (her mother Betsy’s second husband) as Papa or my dad, referring to her step dad. The reports are optimistic and we wish Sidney a complete recovery.
But make no mistake, Bobby Wolff is healthy, vibrant and living in Vegas.
December 12th, 2011 ~ Judy Kay-Wolff ~ 2 Comments
Since so many of you are not necessarily familiar with Bridge Winners, I am taking the liberty of reprinting two pieces connected to Brent Manley’s original editorial on the 52 most influential individuals in the last 75 years which was just printed in a current monthly bridge bulletin. Bobby, now 79, has been involved in bridge play and administration (too involved to detail at this time) for the last 55 plus years. He has comprehensive knowledge of information probably more so than anyone in the bridge world today. I am taking the liberty of reprinting his last two renderings.
(NO. 1)
By mentioning Carl Albert Perroux as a major influence in bridge over the last so many years, we can now mention a Johnny come lately to major league baseball who until yesterday, would have just been a minor footnote as any kind of influence since his only highlight up to now was winning the National League most valuable player in 2011, and that is Ryan Braun.
It only proves what has already been alluded to, positive and negative both shake things up and create notoriety. Perhaps it should be up to us to at least have asterisks (like Roger Maris’ famous season with 61 home runs which broke the Babe’s record but had more games to accomplish it).
Bobby Wolff
(NO. 2)
For a brief moment I considered doing a much too long article about what I thought needed to be done in order to get an accurate history and therein tradition of our 75 years of tournament bridge. Instead let me just offer a few caveats which some may take seriously and some not so.
1. Like all other competitions which last over a long period of time with all major sports acting as good examples, there are major differences of opinion between current (and therefore usually younger) opinions and also geezers who were there, some up close and some not so.
2. IMO the negatives (mostly cheating scandals, but also other political squabbles) have been underestimated by too many with almost all of the more known ones actual and far from fantasy.
3. Bridge has improved greatly (IMO 90% bidding methods, 9% defensive carding and 1% declarer play) through the last 60 years, due to innovation, imagination and most important, understanding the strengths and difficulties of the game.
4. Professionalism has been very necessary as an enabler to bridge talent to remain 90%+ involved in the game as opposed to requiring difficult to obtain other economic means. However, again IMO professionalism needs to be controlled at least to some extent and it is bad news that money too often is more important than our great game itself. Reality means something, but so does the
future of our game and its world competition.
5. BBO and its ramifications are the most important single happening in the future of bridge and might be the necessary solution to its perpetuation, but many other factors need to be considered such as the entwinement of professionalism and relationships between the WBF and its world members.
6. I’ll leave you with a question of, as an individual please render opinions on how you compare using performance enhancing drugs in physical sports to stealthy cheating in bridge and how should both be handled. As of today there is no real consensus to the way to handle both and it is important that we as a bridge group decide together the discipline we need to restore the glory of our game and how to keep it that way.
Thanks for listening and keep up your interest and opinions, but be careful giving them about eras which you did not experience personally.
Bobby Wolff
Bobby would like to make an addendum ….
In Number 5 above, it should also be said that “up and coming heretofore basically unknown partnerships (usually young) should be afforded a better than less than 1% chance of having the opportunity to compete in a formal trials or some-such event in order to show off their skills and numeracy talent in order for the high-level community to be able to evaluate them as on the way to being world class’’.
|
Subscribe to our feed
Bridge-related