January 1st, 2011 ~ Judy Kay-Wolff ~
16 Comments 
It manifests itself in many sizes and shapes and in a multitude of sports and games, including bridge. Aside from cheating, which is worse than abominable, my next least favorite cardinal sin is poor sportsmanship which comes through in many veins.
In sports, there is nothing more despicable and nauseating to yours truly than "hot dogging." Hot dogging is a slang term defined as the act of one who hot-dogs — the performance of intricate, daring, or flamboyant stunts. In sports it is similar to chest thumping — especially in football where one professes to the world how wonderful he is by a sensational catch or tackle or interception. It is a contagious form of showing off and I find it most distasteful.
When an individual displays exceptionally good performance, he does not have to pat himself on the back. Let the audience applaud. Don’t be haughty.
Similar occurrences are witnessed at the bridge table. Probably the worst is the high five! However, others are close behind. If you reach a great slam or game hard to bid — or make an unusual lead or switch that beats the contract, let the opponents admire your brilliance. It is not for you or your partner to laud it over them.
Yesterday, I took a save at 6H that went for too many (both sides vulnerable) which was my poor judgment (and trumps broke 4/0) Had they been 3/1, -500 would have been a good board. The opponents were not happy enough to get +800, but as if we were not at the table, were discussing they couldn’t make 5S which was an erroneous analysis for all they had to do was play it right. It was one of those freakish distributional hands for both sides. My judgment was bad but their analysis (and gloating) was even worse.
Sometimes opponents are like little children. They should be seen but not heard. In my mind, the only thing opponents should say (and Bobby and I are prone to do it at the appropriate time) is "Nice Lead" or "Good Stop." etc. intended with admiration — not disdain to the well-scoring opponents.
This, among many other things, is something that teachers should be concentrating on. As I’ve said before, when I taught at the country clubs in suburban Philadelphia which had six bridge leagues, I spent the first lesson not on bid and play — but on ethics and showing the opponents respect. You know competitive women can be the worst but I took the time to emphasize the niceties of the game and what is expected of them. Reveling in glory and speaking as if their opponents are not at the table are contemptible and it would escalate the dignity of the game if more people minded their manners. It is fine to be inwardly delighted, but hold your exuberance until they leave the table and are not within earshot.
December 31st, 2010 ~ Judy Kay-Wolff ~
4 Comments
Below you will find my response to Alan’s thoughts which were posted the other day.
TO: ANONYMOUS PENITENT
FROM: ‘A PHILADELPHIA STOCKBROKER’
Diamonds are red – clubs are black
All I wants — my OWN coat back
Replete with gloves — and scarf – and keys
The way you found it — if you please
I cannot understand — your taste
You must have acted – in wild haste
For if vicuna — was the booty
Or perchance — a cashmere beauty
I could see — why for the snatch
For it would be — a worthwhile catch
But what you GRABBED — was no great shake
And what you LEFT — I would not take
Your name is known — in many lands
For stealing — overtricks and hands
But I thought — you were confined
To robbing STRANGE – opponents blind
‘Cause never did I — once suspect
That coats of TEAMMATES — you collect
Or this flash of – KLEPTOMANIA
Would touch a friend — from PENNSYLVANIA.
December 30th, 2010 ~ Judy Kay-Wolff ~
4 Comments
One of the greatest delights in my fifty-five years on the bridge scene was getting to know and respect Alan. As I alluded to earlier, England’s loss was America’s gain. However, I must admit after Al Morehead ceased being NYT Bridge Editor, I was very disappointed that Edgar did not fill his shoes — but politics reared its ugly head (a story for another time). However, I soon got over my disappointment as I got to know Alan and developed a unique friendship with him and Dorothy.
Alan and Dorothy (by this time husband and wife) were frequent visitors to Edgar’s NABC after hours get-togethers in his suite. The Truscotts were fabulous game players and I was into that sort of stuff myself. It has been well over forty years and I still remember three quiz questions Alan gave me: (1) What four words in the English language end in DOUS? (2) What two words bear the vowels (a/e/i/o/u/) only once and in alphabetical order; and (3) What word is spelled with an "f" but pronounced like a ‘v’. Believe it or not, I never forgot the answers: (1) horrendous, stupendous, tremendous and the hardest one — hazardous; (2) abstemious and facetious; and (3) the one I couldn’t get — ‘of"; Our love for word games (rather than bridge itself) formed our special bond and I always waited breathlessly for each National to learn some of Alan’s new challenges.
As each New year approaches, I will always think of Alan Truscott. However, here’s a story perhaps you may have already heard – the famous New Year’s Morning episode after a traditional Kaplan Bridge New Year Party. Norman and I would arrive late, have the first bye, partake in the festivities with all the NY bigwigs who socialized by playing with their wives or significant others; and at 4 a.m. Norman and I would tiptoe down the stairs, grab our coats and hail a cab for Penn Station (god forbid Norman should miss the start of the first Bowl Game). One particular January 1st, Norman could not fit into his coat for our return trip. He then realized next to my coat was one that did not belong to him — taken by mistake after a lot of partying and a few drinks. Norman braved the snowy cold, got to the Station, arrived safely back in Philly and at 11 o’clock got a call from Edgar with apologies from Alan for carelessly picking up Norman’s coat and leaving his (two sizes smaller). The next morning, the following arrived (penned by Alan from Norman’s prospective).
Note: I have shared this on another occasion but since we have so many new blogging readers, I decided to post it again:
UNHAPPY NEW YEAR (by a Philadelphia Stockbroker from Anonymous Penitent)
Twas on a chilly New Year’s eve
That froze exposed skin
My wife and I were New York bound
To see the New Year In
In Philadelphia Station then
Half dead and half alive
We jointed a line of other folk
At Sixteen Twenty-Five
We still had more than half an hour
To catch the Five o’clock
We shivered in our snailish line
And then had quite a shock
When the two tickets we had bought
Four minutes did remain
We ran and ran only to hear
"No more upon this train"
We gazed upon the empty track
Where the 5 p.m. had been
Were told an Amtrak train would leave
When the clock showed seventeen
We then ran back, in bitter mood
To the place from whence we came
No line for us — my wife screamed loud
For a supervising dame
And she was cold and we were hot
Our tale we did explain
But when she’d found what now we sought
We’d missed another train
So New Year’ Eve was rather bad
And warranted a curse
But looking back it seems to me
That New Year’s Day was worse
(continuing on by Alan) ………………….
HAPPY NEW YEAR
The champagne flowed that merry night
Till we were quite afloat
At 4 a.m. some nincompoop
Removed by new top coat
He’d got my keys, my scarf, my gloves
I could not vent my spleen
And in exchange I had a coat
That better days had seen
On New Year’s Day I shivered home
Suffering from New-Mania
And thought some very nasty thoughts
En route to Pennsylvania
(What a captivating and clever sense of humor – and choice of words. JKW). Saturday I will post for you Norman’s reply TO: ANONYMOUS PENITENT – FROM: "A Philadelphia Stockbroker" (which I composed in retaliation)!
December 26th, 2010 ~ Judy Kay-Wolff ~
7 Comments
I have always been mesmerized by the accomplishments and reputation of Helen Sobel and since I could not begin to do her justice, I decided to quote verbatim an ACBL capsulation of the greatest female player of all time:
Helen Sobel Smith, the first woman elected to the Bridge Hall of Fame, is universally considered the best woman player of all time.
"In my lifetime — said Edgar Kaplan, former editor and publisher of The Bridge World, "she is the only woman bridge player who was considered the best player in the world. She knows how to play a hand." Smith learned to play bridge while a chorus girl in the Marx Brothers’ Animal Crackers and won her first national title, the Women’s Pairs, in 1934. She became Life Master #25 in 1941. Smith’s style was frisky and aggressive — so aggressive that "some of her male partners were intimidated," Kaplan said. "These guys felt they were playing in the Mixed Pairs and they were the girl."
1944 was a banner year for Smith — she won the Vanderbilt, the Spingold, the Women’s teams and the Master Mixed Teams and placed second in the Reisinger. By 1948, she had amassed the greatest number of masterpoints of any woman, taking over the top spot from Sally Young, and holding it until 1964. She won 35 national titles — the Vanderbilt twice, the Spingold five times and the Reisinger four times — and the McKenney Trophy ( now the Barry Crane Top 500) three times: in 1941, 1942 and 1944.
Smith was invited to play on Ely Culbertson’s team in the World Championship conducted by the International Bridge League in 1937 in Vienna . This was tacit recognition that Culbertson, like many other experts, considered her the equal of any male player. The team, which included Josephine Culbertson and Charles Vogelhofer, finished second to Austria .
Smith and frequent partner Charles Goren won the De La Rue International Invitational Pairs Tournament in London in 1956 — billed as a world championship – and represented North America in the Bermuda Bowl in 1957 and the United States in the World Team Olympiad in 1960.
Goren was the bridge writer/promoter and Smith "was the player. She was a marvel," Kaplan said. Smith "had a unique quality as a card player," Kaplan said. "Every deal was fresh to her and her results were beyond the reach of her fellow experts.
She was incapable of making a learned play that was wrong on a given hand. Helen was not learned. She was brilliant." Smith had a poker face, Kaplan said, "and nobody ever knew what she was doing. Her judgment was extremely good and she would always feel perfectly free to deviate from her so-called system."
Smith was a good partner — "very tolerant of success" — who was "lovely and humorous and frisky and magnificent," Kaplan said. "There’ll never be another one like her."
The only thing I can attempt to add to this wonderful tribute was when playing with Charlie was asked by some outer space kibitzer what it feels like to be playing with the best player in the world, to which she quickly retorted something to the effect. “I don’t know, why don’t you ask Charlie?”
The consensus of opinion half a century later still holds true … there is still no close second female challenging her talents. She could at least hold her own with the best of the opposite sex.
December 21st, 2010 ~ Judy Kay-Wolff ~
53 Comments
At a local club today the auction proceeded:
1NT (15-17) 3C X (RANDOM CARDS) FOLLOWED BY TWO PASSES.
You are playing 3C is a minor two-suiter but there is no alert given. What are your options?
December 19th, 2010 ~ Judy Kay-Wolff ~
19 Comments
… or perhaps from the mouth of a wolff, it should be re-titled A Big Howl? In any event (just coming off the last few seconds of the amazing Eagle victory over the Giants), I became energized to write about a subject I have been thinking about since its announcement over a month ago.
For those unaware, Jose Damiani, who has stepped down in his 16th year as WBF President, introduced the Beijing (Bridge) Sports Accord Games (with monetary prizes) wherein four national teams (including the U. S.) were invited to send their BEST team in December of 2011. That means one that is comprised of their three best pairs and reading between the lines excludes sponsors. Then came the outpouring of personal views originated by ITT chairman, Mike Becker, opening up varying avenues of dissension. Everyone had an opinion (or two or three) and none of this group fears being totally frank even if it is apparent their best interests are being represented by their suggestions. The elite group would want it by a selection process. Others with no chance via selection preferred pairs or team trials. They took straw polls and many ideas were thrown open for discussion.
The decision was made last evening: Billy Pollack, President of the USBF (which includes a wide diversification of backgrounds, and talents are: VP Steve Beatty, Secretary Joan Gerard, Treasurer Sylvia Moss and members Cheri Bjerkan. George Jacobs, Mike Passell and Howard Weinstein), announced their verdict. His exact words were:
ITTC Bloggers:
Here’s the invitation I just sent to the three pairs that have been invited to represent us in the SportAccord Games.
As USBF President, I thought it would be inappropriate to comment as all the dialogue ensued, but I, for one, did find the discussion to be useful. Thanks for providing the USBF BoD with good input, and special thanks to Mike B for all his help. We listened.
Best regards,
Bill Pollack
The actual event includes an Open and Women’s Team, a Pair Game and an Individual. Unfortunately, it comes at what may be considered an awkward time — after the conclusion of the Fall NABC in Seattle, Washington, ending early December, less than a week before the Sports Accord games begin. It creates quite a problem for those with non-playing spouses or others with real 9-5 jobs to be away from home for such an extended period of time.
Those officially invited to play (with the option of refusing by the end of January) were Jeff Meckstroth and Eric Rodwell and Steve Weinstein and Bobby Levin – with Lynn Deas and Beth Palmer being the women’s invitees. That leaves one pair in the Open and two pairs in the Women’s to be named. I don’t think there is any question or problem with the above three pairs — but let’s wait and see what happens if one or more of the six decline to play and in addition to replacements, the "Committee" will have to make a difficult decision (especially in the Opens) who else should be invited to fill out the respective teams.
By the way some of the men earlier in the discussion were "maybes". (In my day when you were invited to represent your country, no one was so independent. You jumped for joy, saluted and made your plane reservations). Today, the considerations are what expenses are being covered?; economy, business or first class (and did that include your spouse or S.O.)?; how much is the remuneration if you do well?, etc. TIMES HAVE CHANGED. As Stevie Weinstein said when he and Bobby Levin won the World Open Pairs in Philadelphia, he missed the playing of The Star Spangled Banner. Though just a young man, he remembers the glory days of old. Different strokes for different folks!
Incidentally, a huge committee (30 for each the open and women’s) will be polled to fill the vacancies that remain. With this many people involved, it will be one big jungle and quite a cumbersome undertaking. I was appalled that it would be thrown open to so many people and I decided to ask my old friends Larry Cohen and David Berkowitz how they felt about it. Larry was teaching all week and was not as current with the matter as David. Here is David’s reply to me.
“My opinion is that Meckwell and Levin-Weinstein deserve to be on the team. In the interest of team harmony they (if they accept) should be allowed to add the non-sponsor pair of their own choosing.
The method they have chosen will turn into a semi-popularity contest, which I do not think is correct. You may quote me.” (AND I SURE DID).
I, personally am not ‘big’ on the ‘selection process"’ because of all the hanky-pank that could go on. However, I agree with David and in this early stage, it does not ring true. Yet, with so many others potentially involved in the next decision, it could turn into a circus so I am inclined to agree that the big four (if they accept) come up with the best pair to round them out. Realistically, I think there are two or three possible pairs to easily fill the bill.
Just giving you something to sleep on.
December 18th, 2010 ~ Judy Kay-Wolff ~
8 Comments
When the name HARRY FISHBEIN, an old time legend of the 50s and 60s, is mentioned, two things immediately flash before your mind: The convention bearing his name and his array of berets, which were his claims to fame – never seen without his beret. Fishbein was a convention to try to combat pre-empts and although played for a while is more or less outmoded. However, his association with dozens of unusual berets will live forever as his unequaled trademark. Harry, a New Yorker, was (of all things) a basketball player, President of the famous Mayfair Club and served as proprietor from 1940-1970 when some of us were still in our cradles. While Norman was involved in the Mixed Teams with stock brokerage clients, Fishy sympathized with my plight and invited me to play with him on a team as his partner with Dave Claren and Dora Brechner. The next morning after his gracious invitation, I hit the stores to find an appropriate beret to identify myself as his other half, which of course brought smiles to our opponents’ faces.I don’t remember where we placed, but I recall it was higher than Norman (quite an accomplishment).
He won many distinguished events (including 12 North American Championships) and scores of other major titles. He also served as ACBL Treasurer from 1952-1966. was named Honorary member for 1966 and was elected as a member of the Hall of Fame. Best of all, he was known for his loveable personality and great sense of humor.
My favorite Fishy story involved his close friend Charlie Goren. They would often motor to nearby tournaments together and it seemed Charlie (with his entourage) normally bested Fishy. I know this story is mentioned in Bobby’s The Lone Wolff and is one of my favorites. I don’t remember the exact orders of finish, but if Fishy was Second – then Goren won. If Fishy was Third, Goren was Second. This would happen time and after and Fishy got sick of being second best. One night, driving home from a luxurious hotel where the tournament was held, Fishy proudly removed a dozen bars of soap which he had snitched from the hotel – sure that he had put one over on Charlie. With that — Goren stopped the car, emptied both his pockets full of the same soap bars and uttered, ‘SECOND AGAIN, HARRY!.
Harry was one of the most beloved characters in the bridge world and had a tremendous fan club!
December 14th, 2010 ~ Judy Kay-Wolff ~
19 Comments
1. In first place, WITH NO CLOSE SECOND, must be the infamous ‘OH, SHIT’ case which made the U. S. the laughing stock of the entire bridge world. Basically, Bobby’s team got screwed in spades by the worst ruling in history — partially due to the involvement of Co-Chairs, Doug Heron and Bob Gookin, Director Henry Cukoff and a few other peripherally involved who were known enemies of Bobby Wolff — all of whom should have immediately recused themselves from being involved in the decision. You can read about it in The Lone Wolff (TLW) in great detail. This one is a real doozy!
The remainder, not in any special order, but nevertheless still appalling, are the following:
2. The firing of Bob Rosen, as Recorder, a position Bobby Wolff created out of whole cloth in 1985 to educate the bridge public, right the wrongs and even on occasion challenge stealthy cheating and other untoward behavior. For the initial three years, Bobby worked overtime performing this difficult task having several assistant recorders available to help him, but it wasn’t until sometime later that Bob Rosen, from Florida, came onto the scene. Bob turned out to be (and according to Bobby’s own admission) perhaps twice as effective as Bobby had been. Rosen had a genuine love for the game; was both bold and subtle when necessary and at the appropriate time; confronted evil with no backing off; and always was fair as well as engagingly conscientious with legal principles. But, after Bobby stepped down in Bob’s favor, Rosen was fired by Cecil Cook for taking a position against Howard Piltch in the famous Ace of Spades Case — obviously a personal vendetta to protect the "honor" of said offender Piltch. Later, Richard Colker and others followed as Recorders but the ACBL was (and is possibly still) afraid of scandals and law suits, so they down pedal what is necessary to maintain the integrity of the game. One of the ACBL personnel who is now retired once said to Bobby … "Don’t get so upset — it’s only a game." Truthfully, bridge is not even a game worth playing unless the time honored active ethics and unusual nature of partnership communication which is indigenous to bridge are executed properly.
3. The "Losing Team Wins’ (again in TLW) where Germany wrongly (and consciously) won the match against Canada when a technical scoring error was discovered in the middle of the night, LONG BEFORE the next match was to begin (and easily correctable). However, the politics and forces arranged for it not to be overturned although there were rampant believable rumors about the witnessed haughtiness of the team that were declared winners but since the details cannot be substantiated, we will leave it at that.
4. My own "An Appeal to Remember" (Chapter 20 of TLW), admittedly not an earth shattering piece of history, took the cake for inefficiency, complacency, bias and ignorance of the law, etc. However, it is still worthy of making this list if only to show what did happen to relative unsuspecting and non-famous bridge players and it could happen to others of you as well. STAND UP AND PROTECT YOUR RIGHTS!
This is what caused the brouhaha: I opened 1S. Lefty with 4/3/4/2 and 13 high card points (plus very good spot cards) studied an enormous amount of time and finally decided to pass (and threw his right hand up in despair because he couldn’t come up with a bid). My partner, Jane was busily preparing the slips for the round and paid no attention to the histrionics before passing while East rose to the occasion after about 40 seconds of wrestling with his conscience (and losing) and balanced with Q2 J104 J43 Q10752 — eking out a 2C call. You had to be dumb, deaf and blind to have missed their dog and pony act!
I immediately called the director (before I saw either opponent’s hands) and he never even looked at their holdings – merely asking if there was any time irregularity. East and West denied it and Jane admitted she was not paying it any mind. We were told to routinely continue. They made either +90 or +110 while most allowed South to play 1S for –50. We lost the appeal in a pathetic pretense of a court, with Ron Gerard presiding over the committee – consisting of Bill Passell (though his wife was listed as the appeal member), Dick Budd (oft time partner of Howard Piltch), Eddie Wold, Mike Kovalchic, and Doug Daub. Curiously, Lefty never appeared at the meeting but allowed his wealthy glib-tongued partner (owner of some minor league baseball teams) to soft soap the panel. Not only did we lose the appeal, but were given an outrageous AWMW (AWARD WITHOUT MERIT WARNING). I fought tooth and nail and Jane and I were so wild, we engaged an attorney and would stop short of nothing until our names were cleared. It was not until then (fifteen months later) that I was told we couldn’t sue until we had a hearing on the AWMW before the Appeals and Charges Committee. We had been fighting it from Day One but it took all that time to be advised of our rights according to the reigning body. A bit tardy in retrospect, don’t you think?
Jane could not be there and under doctor’s advice, I was instructed to not attend. (In those last sixteen months I had developed high blood pressure which suddenly appeared with no warning — no doubt from the humiliation of character assassination and an insulting warning not to do it again). NOT TO DO WHAT? PROTECT MY RIGHTS FROM THIEVING OPPONENTS?. Bobby represented us and we won easily (unanimously, in fact) before the A&C Committee and also when presented to the BOD it was just about unanimously vacated (with one dissenting vote). It took 16 months off my life, believe me, but I wasn’t letting those cocky animals get away with such a miscarriage of justice. Our AWMW was history.
However, the story doesn’t end there. There were other miscues. Jane and I were never read our rights prior to the hearing (not that we would have withdrawn our appeal — not on your life!); the reports in the Daily Bulletin were incorrect; but the most interesting of all was the after-shock that the BOARD OF DIRECTORS voted that AWMW’s can no longer be challenged. It made them look so bad, it was time to eliminate such human rights. So, (1) If you can’t protest your innocence in an appeal; and (2) You cannot appeal an AWMW; THEN .. (3) It leaves you no choice but to go into a court of law to seek justice. Is this what the ACBL is all about??
Oh yes, one last thing – Rick Beye, then CTD, accidentally on purpose omitted our case from the last Case Book to be printed live so the public could not see the embarrassing position of the Appeal Committee, although I forced them to print it on the internet along with the others. In addition to the actual case, the Case Book includes the analyses of the reviewing panel. Amazingly, all but one of the appeals gurus, thought we had been injured without cause and obviously were against the AWMW as well. The Appeals Committees are in dire need of alteration, revision, revamping, etc. Whatever they are doing — something else (anything else) would be an improvement.
5. Another issue is ZERO TOLERANCE. After the blog I wrote explaining what happened at our regular Las Vegas
Sectional on October 22nd entitled THE BASTARDIZATION OF BRIDGE (with several follow ups) (and still no official word from the league as of today, December 14th), I think it is time to seriously consider all the improper actions of the directing staffs and set up a ZERO TOLERANCE STRUCTURE for them as well. You know what they say about ‘what’s sauce for the goose …………………….” They must be better trained and educated to the proper rulings in all different situations, speak with respect to the members who pay their salaries and learn to get it right every now and then. The situation we experienced over six weeks ago (with the right hand not knowing what the left was doing) was a sequel to Shakespeare’s Comedy of Errors and despite several letters from Tournament Chairman, Tom Shulman; Pam Stratton, one of the victims; Bobby and myself, no one at the ACBL cared enough to want to respond. No wonder. What can they say? Just another screw up!
6. The catering of Appeal Committees to the experts is rather sickening. Somehow, the big mahoffs always seem to win their appeal by powerful intimidation. Often the members are such wimps and don’t want to appear stupid by challenging the top experts. Another reason for their submission and dropping of the appeal has to do with sponsorship. Today almost all top players are professionals. If you were sitting on the AC (and were a pro as well), if you voted against them, what do you think your chances would be of being recommended to a sponsor if the big guys were not available. Forget it!!!!
7. One of the greatest indignities involves the Hall of Fame Nominating Committee listing names of mediocre paying sponsors who had been drawn to the finish line by dogsled with five others at the helm. Thank heavens for small favors because for the first time in a while, I see no sponsors’ names, who have less than world class playing credentials, on the slate for next year. A step in the right direction. Finally a positive note.
8. Another grievance with the HOF is the presence of known bridge cheats, acknowledged by the ACBL, who adorn the list of honorees. These include people who have been brought before a Conduct and Ethics Committee, proven and judged guilty, and told to stop playing together (without the embarrassment of releasing the story to the public). However, unlike the recent Heisman Awards, their names still appear among the list of Bridge Immortals. Heavens, Pete Rose who on a daily basis bet on baseball (including his home team) was an angel, compared to these lowlifes.
A quick reference to the exalted Blue Team and the Bermuda Foot Soldiers would seem appropriate, but that is old hat and I believe everyone gets the gist. They all fall into the same macabre category and I am still hoping for deathbed confessions from those still alive.
9. Catering to the wealthy seems to get my dander up. Did you know a few years ago, a rich sponsor engaged a bridge player doubling as an attorney to see if he could change the date (and locale) of one of the Trials because she and her spouse were planning to entertain at their estate and the Trials would cause a conflict. As a result, the Trials were moved to some obscure spot, where the nearest airport was an hour away and the farther one was an hour and a half from the site. Consider the cab expense and inconvenience; there was one restaurant open for breakfast and lunch which closed following lunch and one adequate dinner facility on the premises within walking distance. Therefore, rather than be held captive, you had to rent a car or find a cab (rather difficult in a tiny tourist town) to be able to locate an eatery rather than the confinement to the site. To me the effort to change the site and dates were the height of selfishness and self aggrandizement. Of course, since there was a Regional going on at the same time, it was wonderful for the local organizers and it brought more people to the tournament because as soon as a team got knocked out instead of changing their plane reservations, they stayed and played in the next day’s regional event. The fact that many people had to fly from the West Coast to Sturbridge, MA (via Hartford or Logan International) did not seem to concern the planners and the inconvenience was outweighed by accommodating the wealthy sponsor, the lawyer and the local people running the Regional. Site selection should have zeroed in on the comfort and convenience of the Trials Contestants – no more – no less. Once again, a rather selfish move by many peering in from the outside.
10. Last, but hardly least, is the pilfering of money from a dead man by either the ACBL or the EF (Educational Foundation). Take your choice. The victim was PETER PENDER and his total bequest was a hefty $77,500 – nothing to sneeze at. Here is the scenario and you can judge for yourself:
Peter was a Philadelphian before he migrated to the West Coast. Both Norman and I were close to Peter as was Bobby. It was no secret Peter was dying of AIDS and together with Becky Rogers, Bobby convinced Peter to ‘remember the ACBL.’ Wanting to have his name perpetuated by his friends and associates, Peter (who died in 1990) arranged two separate sums of money to be left to the ACBL/EF. It is suspected because of the tax consequences, the money was handled by the EF — but certainly both ACBL and EF should have served as watchdogs to make sure the money was spent as Peter intended and that THE NAME OF PETER PENDER was COMMEMORATED BY HIS FRIENDS AND FANS FOR YEARS TO COME.
IT IS 20 YEARS LATER AND HERE IS THE STATUS:
(a) THE $27,500 specifically bequeathed to the Juniors was for the purpose of having replica trophies made, inscribed and distributed every second year to the winners of the Junior Bridge Trials held at twenty-four month intervals. The group included the six winners, the coach and captain and was to be presented to them. It began back in 1991 and according to confirmation by CEO Jay Baum, it was honored until about 1995 leaving 15 years where it fell by the wayside. As soon as Jay learned of the lethargy of those in charge, he had someone research the winners, have the trophies made and brought them up to date — with the promise he would make it current. Had it not been for my prying, the $28,300 (having gathered more moss than interest in all these years) remained in the account but now some has been spent according to Peter’s intention — with two more Junior Events to be reckoned with. I have faith Jay will follow it up.
b) The piece de resistance is yet to come. The $50,000 was talked about and agreed by Peter to be used for the changing of the name and the improvement of the current Vugraph renaming it the Pendergraph, keeping Peter’s name before the public. Though he died in 1990, no record in the account is shown before 1992 as getting the project off the ground. Why the delay? No one can say. Fred Gitelman, cyberspace genius, was commissioned to develop an improved program which would be called The Pendergraph. Fred was paid, did his job and made great improvements to the project. No one has any beef with Fred. However, the amounts of money and the sources paid were astronomical. Though, for some reason (probably the greatly successful BBO), the Pendergraph flew into cyberspace never to be heard again after about 2000. That did not deter those who were suppose to be minding the store to use money (about $10,000 for various and sundry products from about 2002 to 2005) which had nothing to do with the vanished Pendergraph. There is now $10,700 left (bearing in mind that the $50,000 should have accrued much interest in a twenty-year period).
Obviously, no one was there minding the store to protect Peter’s wishes and money. According to Peter Rank, not only ACBL counsel, but a dear friend of Peter’s, when questioned about who was in charge, I learned about the money being turned over to the EF (for tax purposes stated above) but that the ACBL and EF are totally separate entities and neither has any connection with, or jurisdiction over, the other. THEN, PRAY TELL, WHO WAS SUPPOSED TO BE ISSUING THE ORDERS FOR THE MONEY DISBURSEMENT FOR THE VARIOUS EXPENSES????. The EF says they paid whatever ACBL instructed them to pay out and the ACBL (via Peter Rank) denies it. It’s the old story of pointing fingers in different directions suggesting "they went thataway!"
Meanwhile, Peter Pender did not get the bang for his buck for far less than the twenty years since the bequest. In fairness, rather than make this a legal issue, Bobby and I would prefer that the two groups make up to Peter for the reviling joint attitudes of those designated to handle the Pendergraph, restore the balance of the money to the amount of $25,000 as the Pendergraph disappeared ten years after Peter died — but the money was going out without perpetuating his name.
WHOMEVER IS RESPONSIBLE (and I am not naming names as I was not on the scene throughout this horrific disaster), I suggest we go back to the halfway mark (the year 2000) and restore the difference ($13,300) and set the books at the $25,000 mark. THEN, NAME SOMETHING MEANINGFUL AFTER PETER SO THAT HIS BEQUEST WOULD BE HONORED AND HE WOULD NOT BE FORGOTTEN. It would have been an easy solution to place over the entrance to the vugraph entrance something like: THE PENDERGRAPH THEATER FEATURING BBO. Everyone would have gotten their due and this disgusting situation would not have gotten to this stage.
Picking a dead man’s pocket is shameful and beneath the dignity of the ACBL and EF. Incidentally, I was referred to EF Secretary Gene Kales who generously supplied me with all the records, but did nothing more. However, last week he wrote that he was no longer Secretary of the EF and suggested I contact Linda Mamula, his replacement. It is one week later and I have received no reply.
Peter was wronged by the recipients. Meanwhile everyone is looking the other way. If satisfactory amends are not made, I would sooner see the money go back to the residuary heirs of the Pender Estate than be used by the non-entitled holders of the remaining money (both the Juniors and The Pendergraph).
Put yourself in the shoes of either the Chairman of the Educational Foundation or the CEO of the ACBL. Although they may not have been around at the time of the wrongdoing, they certainly have a responsibility to cut the spending, find a way to make amends, restore the misspent fund and honor Peter’s request. Twenty years later the onus falls upon their shoulders to rectify the wrongdoing of their predecessors. WHAT WOULD YOU DO IN THEIR POSITION???
I’d like to have your thoughts!!!!
December 10th, 2010 ~ Judy Kay-Wolff ~
3 Comments
When most people think of Sam Stayman, two things comes to mind: (1) The convention that bears his name; and (2) His adorable, vivacious, loveable wife Tubby (who is anything but) – whose real name is Josephine. However, I associate Sam Stayman with eggs. Read on and you will find out why.
Norman and I were married in 1963 (with 315 witnesses) — mostly bridge playing associates of Norman’s which didn’t allow for many others than immediate family and very good friends. Close second cousins did not make the cut. That did not sit well either with them or others who were excluded and many people were obviously hurt. But after all, it was held in a synagogue (not Convention Hall) and there were only so many seats and only so much money my parents could afford.
However, we came up with the solution. In 1968 we bought a lovely ranch home in Penn Valley, Pa that had a 50 foot living room/dining room. With Norman’s penchant (as a ML executive) for investing in the market, it left little to furnish that mammoth living room which was devoid of furniture. However, it certainly served its purpose one afternoon in April a year after we moved to the suburbs.
We had just attended a fabulous after-the-last session soiree at Sam and Tubby’s luxurious Penthouse in NYC. They had hired (and used before) Norman Sorg, former White House Chef, who made a luxurious presentation – earning his name The Omelet King. Norman got the brilliant idea to import him to Philly for a big hoopla (to make up with the many people who never made our wedding list). Brilliant – we had the space and at that time money was no object.
Norman had to ante-up for the production and I had a few chores of my own. The Saturday before the party, I was instructed to buy 30 dozen eggs, spinach, onions, peppers, mushrooms, olives, lox, butter, seasonings, coffee, tea, cocktails, deserts, etc, etc., etc. I supplied the goodies and The Omelet King brought the rest (his chefs, chairs, tables, cooking utensils, pots, pans, stands, dishes and silverware. Basically I needed the food and he did the rest. Sounded like a piece of cake until I woke up that Sunday morning to bring in the newspaper and found a snowstorm in progress as we already had six inches in our driveway and more on the way.
Bear in mind I was no Julia Child and could barely boil eggs without burning them (although I have improved somewhat). I returned to bed, covered my head with the blankets and prayed it would subside. What would I do with 150 locals who were looking forward to this festive occasion. I did not wake Norman. What could he do? Sunday at 6:30 the phone rang. It was Norman Sorg. In a cheery voice (knowing in advance about the storm), he assured me he was on his way, was forced off the NJ Turnpike at Bordentown, but had taken the major side road and would be there between 9 and 10 a.m. He asked if I had the food. Did I ever!!!!!! Eventually by noon it stopped snowing, the roads were partially plowed (at least the main ones) and would you believe 130 of the 150 showed up to stuff their faces – and business as usual.
It was a huge success with lots of laughs and incredible cuisine and by nine o’clock, we had to start handing the people their coats and boots and send them on their way. A traumatic happening in general — but a memorable experience for the Kays and their invitees – all thanks to Sam Stayman.
December 4th, 2010 ~ Judy Kay-Wolff ~
3 Comments
No doubt Alvin Roth was one of the most intriguing and creative contributors in the annals of our game. He was credited for his many contributions to bidding theory including UNUSUAL NO TRUMP, WEAK TWO BIDS, ONE NO TRUMP FORCING and NEGATIVE DOUBLES. Al was co-inventor of the ROTH STONE SYSTEM, popular at its outset, but rarely seen on a convention card these days. It has very stringent guidelines requiring super sound opening bids as opposed to today’s style of opening with anything that walks or talks – otherwise known as go-as-you-please. From observation of results, today the majority believe in getting your jabs in first and making it harder for the enemy to compete – especially with high level opening thrusts. It is a two-sided plight. You can get crucified either way – pass and miss a game or good part score – or bid and go for a number. Remember how often you’ve been reminded … it’s a bidder’s game!
In the 60s I got to see a lot of Alvin when I married Norman as they teamed up together often with Norman partnering either Sidney Silodor (from 1960 until his death in 1963) or before and after that period across the table from Edgar a combined total of 43 years. Roth had hitched up with Tobias Stone followed by the likeable Bill Root. Roth and Stone (both with strong personalities) had a fantastic record together, though they, like Norman and Edgar, for obvious reasons, never won a world championship. Roth and Stone played together until Roth remarried and moved to Florida.
Soon afterwards Stone transported himself to Las Vegas where he actively enjoyed the table games and sports book 24/7 until his health started to decline and has become more or less a recluse because of failing vision and difficulty getting around. However, for 92 his mind and power of recall is amazing – just as sharp as a tack – and Bobby and I visit him at least once a month and bring his favorite repast –‘Subway’‘ footlongs” (w/beverage). When we arrive we always wonder when the door opens and Stoney lights up — whether it is because of the package Bobby is carrying or because of our countenance. We have never been sure. We hope he is happy to see all three of us.
From my standpoint, there were two sides to Alvin Roth. Once playing with a highly respected expert, he blurted out in a loud voice, “You have the heart of a peanut.” — but probably his most publicized outburst occurred while playing with a young women (out of whom he made a star) when he uttered some insidious sexual insult and was brought before a committee. Yet, while sitting off a session next to me in the vugraph room in Bal Harbor in the sixties, butter could have melted in his mouth. After Norman made a rather impossible hand which the panel predicted was down one (and Norman shocked them by making it), Al leaned over with a straight face and whispered, “Your husband can play a hand for me any time. Coming from such an egotistical maniac, I never forgot it. Al was a sensational player (one of the very best) – but thoroughly set in his ways, very vocal and unpredictable.
I’d like to close with an old Roth story which I have told many times before, but it will forever tickle my funny bone. Al and his partner were defending a game contract and declarer was already booked Success of the contract was solely dependent upon a two way guess for the queen of a suit. After a few moments’ thought, he led the jack from his hand toward dummy (waiting for a glitch or reaction) and sure enough his LHO flinched a second and ducked — and the jack held the trick. When declarer claimed, Roth’s befuddled partner lunged across the table and asked why he didn’t take the queen. “How could I?,” replied Roth. “You had me convinced you had it.” Again, truth or fiction? But, you must admit it makes a good story.`
Al’s record of accomplishments are miles long and was one of the most formidable opponents in the game. His list of victories and records will dazzle your mind. Check out our ACBL Encyclopedia for more information. Al Roth will always live in the memories of his peers and the record books as one of the greatest bridge geniuses of all time!!
Subscribe to our feed
Bridge-related