January 12th, 2010 ~ Judy Kay-Wolff ~ 28 Comments 
During these uncertain times in which we are living, Bobby and I often debate between ourselves on the topic of crime and punishment — whether it be at the bridge table, in real life or in sports. I believe women think differently than men and I would like to get the public’s opinion. What are the readers’ thoughts concerning the severity and degree of guilt for some of the following headline-making deeds — and the appropriate manner of recognizing (or forgiving) these various acts of treachery and/or embarrassment which the subjects have inflicted upon either themselves, their families, their victims or the public?
1. Blatant pre-arranged cheating at the bridge table.
2. Frequent unethical conduct via telltale hesitations, intonations or latent body movements.
3. Michael Vick’s part in the training of innocent dogs to fight to their death for the entertainment of others.
4. Bernie’s Madoff’s successful scheme to bilk millions of dollars from trusting investors.
5. Alleged deceit of baseball idols like Barry Bonds, Jose Canseco, Roger Clemens, Mark McGwire, Rafael Palmiero, Alex Rodriguez, et al. involving the use of steroids and other strength enhancing drugs. By the way, I saw the names of the individuals broken down into categories of “admitted users” and “suspected users” and the lists were endless — but where there’s smoke, there’s usually fire.
6. The descent of Tiger Woods from golf icon to the broken-toothed, bruised-face target of the paparazzi and every ‘rag’ and cyberspace gossip site because of his exposed indiscretions.
What a delightful world we live in — and to think — we have not even touched upon leadership, our economy or terrorism!
January 9th, 2010 ~ Judy Kay-Wolff ~ 3 Comments
Let me direct today’s pet peeve toward “committees,” a necessary segment of any enterprise, which encompasses so many venues.
Every sport has their governing organization. In the subject case, it is the ACBL and its offshoots. No entity can run efficiently without being dissected into bodies which have certain areas of expertise. Some are well endowed. Others are not. Please understand — there are many good people who work for the League in Memphis but they are totally separate and apart from such bodies as the International Team Trials Committee, Conditions of Contest Committee, Appeals Committee, Credentials Committee, Laws Commission, The Directorial Staff and my personal favorite, The United States Bridge Federation. The main bone of contention is that there are too many conflicts of interest, personal agendas and convenient unholy alliances (husband/wife; sponsor/pro) which do not serve the common interest of the game at large — but ofttimes those involved strive to satisfy their own personal objectives. It is not so easy to get recruits as the normal perks are usually merely free entries in some cases — but with our pathetic economy and soaring entry fees — free plays are often incentive enough to lure some aspiring individuals into these jobs which connote knowledge and power — in the absence of more qualified draftees. Incidentally, free plays are a fairly recent innovation and were not always a way of committee life. Also, bear in mind, most ACBL high-echelon committees (The Laws Commission, etc.) are by appointment only and require approval. Others acquire members by the offering of one’s services to the group as they feel they have something to contribute, want to voice their opinions and be kept in the loop.
Let’s get down to specifics: Perhaps the underlying problems are the strictures and guidelines of the ‘selection process’ — attributable to the people behind the appointments. Why have unqualified sponsors at times been sitting on these boards (either as a regular or interim member) making decisions affecting our imposing role in world bridge. I am specifically alluding to the United States Bridge Federation (USBF). Some members were totally unqualified and the appointment was more as a type of “recognition.” Also — should they (as a sponsor) have a say as to what percentage of the time a sponsor is “required to play.” Should they be voting on whether seeding points won by foreign professionals playing on a team during the Reisinger, Spingold or Vanderbilt be counted toward the Trials, and if so, how many? Should they be voting on the amount of monetary subsidy designated for the teams representing the country (especially the amateur/non professional ones who have won the right)? A sponsor, one way or another, picks up the tab of their professional team — sometimes even going so far to employ their own private jets. Obviously money is no object, so it matters not to them personally what the agreed upon per diem is for those independent players who participate on unsponsored teams and must bear the brunt of most of the costs.
I know from personal experience in Sao Paulo, the ‘amateur teams’ traveled on their own dime and their daily stipend was nowhere near what it actually cost. It is a disgrace in a country like the United States that any team which has earned the right to represent the nation is not entirely subsidized for their basic expenses (not necessarily first class or for lavish restaurants — or to include their spouse or significant other) — just covering their own personal basic expenses of the trip. It is little enough to ask — having earned the honor to represent one’s country! Perhaps the appointment of sponsors to this committee might be with the optimistic goal that they may cough up some money of which the organization is badly in need. However, with all the big bucks directed toward perks, expense accounts, charitable contributions, etc — one must not forget that charity usually begins at home! Somehow — somewhere — either the ACBL or USBF must find resources to reimburse the expenses of those non-professionals who have earned the right to represent the U.S. Besides, there are many young, upcoming players who do not play professionally and could not afford to foot the bill even if they made one of the U. S. teams. The last thing we would want to do is discourage the younger generation from plying their craft because of lack of funding in the event of winning the Trials.
Conversely, should professionals be sitting on this Board and making similar decisions? They have a vested interest in protecting their sponsor’s interest — especially about minimum playing time, Trials seeding points for playing with foreign professionals, etc. They could care less about “amateur/non sponsored teams” and the cost issues. As they say …. let their mothers worry! The International Team Trials Committee works hand in hand with the USBF and there are conflicts of interest there as well. Some members of the ITTC serve in a dual role — as a respected, recognized expert and also a wealthy successful full or part-time sponsor who alone or in partnership with another, helps subsidize the team. Should they have any say or influence on this decision-making committee on any of these issues. Hell, no. But the word RECUSAL is a very dirty word in bridge circles. Everyone wants to stick their two cents in — whether or not they have moral responsibilities to consider — especially if it has a bearing on them (or their spouses). However, they are shameless to express an opinion or cast a vote. In fact, a couple of years ago, a well known member of the USBF (whose wife had pending contractual professional arrangements with a sponsor who was negatively involved in an embarrassing, controversial case being reviewed by the group) first recused himself (rightfully) and then when the going got tough “unrecused himself” (wrongly) coincidentally resulting in a favorable decision for his wife’s future sponsor.
At one time, when the USBF was first formed, probably to avoid racial or other discriminatory issues, “token” persons were appointed to the Committee. Their characters were never an issue but on many subjects they were out to lunch (and eternally humbled to have been chosen — thus easily influenced with the resultant groveling at the feet of those responsible for their appointment). I am reminded of an incident when Bobby (who was friendly with a lovely gentleman on the USBF many years ago) questioned him after a certain abominable proposal was passed if he had voted for it. Unashamed, he replied, “Yes!” “I’m shocked. How could you?” Bobby inquired. The answer — “But Bobby, you don’t understand. They told me to do it.” Are these the people who should be conducting internal affairs and influencing America’s position on the world bridge scene?
More next week ….
January 7th, 2010 ~ Judy Kay-Wolff ~ 3 Comments
Thanks to bridgeblogging.com, thousands of readers are privileged to survey the various newspaper bridge columns that they would not ordinarily be able to enjoy because they are not carried by their hometown press. Amazing — the benefits we have all derived with the introduction of cyberspace — for whatever purpose suits us.
I must confess, however, I yearn for the days of Alan Truscott’s daily, yes daily (including Sunday’s) column in the New York Times. The newspaper industry was thriving and the bridge community cried out for it to be presented every day! Of course, there was always a lot of action to report about in and around New York alone — but many bridge players all over the country had New York Times subscriptions — some merely to keep up with the current bridge goings-on.
The Kays were among them. Norman and I were just married and living in a high rise. At 7 a.m. every morning, when we would hear the thud of the newspaper being tossed against our front entrance, we would both make a bee-line for the door to see who would retrieve it first. One would think Norman, being a broker and a sports fanatic, would be interested in the stock market closings or the late evening scores, but I used to have to wrestle him for the Bridge Section. Alan was a unique writer, quick on the uptake, extremely well-rounded, always did his homework and produced an entertaining column — managing quite often to ad a personal touch to the featured hand. Perhaps I am biased because he always gave Norman great press and on occasion I’d even see my own name in lights. In fact, I recently came across the January 15, 2005 column which he dedicated to some, shall we say, “unusual combinations” (and I am not alluding to card combinations).
This is the prelude to the hand Alan wrote up in which Bobby and I successfully defended some innocuous 4H contract and by accident I helped to beat it for down five. I don’t recall the hand (and sometimes I can’t even remember what I had for breakfast — or if I have eaten at all), but the clever article was reminiscent of the old game of Musical Chairs and he capitalized on the theme. It was captioned:
BRIDGE; Changing Partners When the Game is Marriage.
“Those at the top of the bridge rankings and their connections sometimes surprise us by marrying each other when not in the first flush of youth.”
“In England, Jane Juan, a world champion, married Tony Priday, a European Team Champion. Sally Sowter Horton, a world champion, married Raymond Brock, a world champion runner-up.”
“On this side of the Atlantic, Betty Sheinwold married Edgar Kaplan, who with her former husband. Alfred Sheinwold, invented the Kaplan-Sheinwold System. Much more recently another of Kaplan’s partners, Sidney Lazard, married Betsey Wolff. And a year ago the world champion, Bobby Wolff, former husband of Betsey, married Judy Kay, widow of Kaplan’s longtime partner, Norman Kay.”
Got it straight????
January 5th, 2010 ~ Judy Kay-Wolff ~ 8 Comments
This is not the same majestic game to which I was introduced some fifty years ago. Although modernization of technology and a multitude of clever innovations have vastly improved the presentation and communication to the public, I still find many quirks in “the system” that distress me. In effect, the dignity of the game and accompanying pride is rapidly dwindling and IMHO, the following are some of the causes.
The glut (and ever increasing number) of masterpoints flooding the market is a major factor. If you want to be realistic, you’ll admit they have become a joke and though they bolster one’s ego, the avalanche of points up for grabs and excuses for their issuance have debased their value. I remember the excitement of looking forward to Masterpoint Night (once a month) when the whole city gathered at a bridge club above a local movie theater near my home to see if they could garner the top spot and be awarded one whole masterpoint. We normally amassed them in fractions and when enough were accumulated, we mailed them to the ACBL (then in Greenwich, CT) and usually the next postcard from the League would reflect their entrance into the member’s bridge vault. Believe me, back then, it was a big deal!!! Today, you just look on your computer or await your Monthly Bulletin to view your accomplishments in living color. In fact, I laugh about the times when I had delayed registering a host of accumulated fractional slips but found comfort in sending them certified mail (RRR) to assure their safe arrival. How times have changed — with the proclamation of ‘special games,’ triple points and other gimmicks to catch your eye!
I remember many years ago that a fairly well-known player was discovered getting his sticky fingers on (and forging) masterpoint slips (inserting his name and manufacturing some number of points won). However, when caught, he was brought to task and appeared before a committee but the softies ‘let him off easy’ because they didn’t want to infringe upon his ability to earn a livelihood from the game. How’s that for integrity? Eventually, he was found guilty of something else sleazy and the powers that be eventually lowered the boom.
And, what about the issuance of club points (usually in the ‘C’ stratum) to people who come in First with well-below average scores. I find it disturbing to reward 40% games with master point recognition. Now we are stooping to award disgustingly poor performances because they placed well ahead of the other underachievers in their category. Something about the nauseating plethora of points available at the drop of a hat undermines their value and importance. However, the benefactors are the club owners/directors/managers as well as the sponsoring organization — the ACBL. By cheapening the value of these meaningless pieces of paper, they have found a way to keep the game going and built up their own treasury in the process. I don’t blame the club personnel as they are just rolling with the punches to keep up with the competition. The whole concept destroys the pride of true achievement in this once fabulous game. The League has made masterpoints many members’ god!
Now lets turn to On Line Bridge. The computer age has introduced a method of communication and play to performers throughout the world. It is incredibly wonderful for the elderly (I should talk), shut-ins, people without access to easy transportation or merely participants who enjoy the relaxation of playing at home without the normal dress code and no desire to socialize with friends or strangers. Besides, there are no exorbitant card fees (as exist in some metropolitan areas), no travel time and no parking problems. On Line Bridge has a multitude of advantages and is a sensational opportunity for both old and new partnerships to practice or for John Q. Public to just pass the time of day by picking up a random partner on line. I believe Internet Bridge is one of the most brilliant, ingenious creations of our age and certainly has accomplished linking bridge players together from all over the universe — similar in fashion to the rather novel idea of bridge blogging.
However, from my perch, the most exciting pleasure derived is watching important matches on BBO. The comments are not always necessarily on target — but often clever and amusing. I often wonder what (or who) passes on the qualifications of a commentator. Perhaps I am just spoiled and remember the early days of the Vugraph* where an array of celebrities adorned the podium at the nationals and world championships with microphones — such as Ron Anderson, Edgar Kaplan, Mike Ledeen, Eric Murray and a guy named Bobby Wolff (plus several others) who were truly great professional analysts. (* Incidentally, a point of interest which continues to disturb me: Peter Pender, one of our leading bridge personalities, died long before his time in 1990 while in his mid-fifties. Through the urging of some close bridge buddies, he agreed to make a healthy bequest to the ACBL for which it was agreed to rename the vugraph “The Pendergraph.” However, I haven’t heard that term in years. Shouldn’t the ACBL follow through with what they promised Peter during his lifetime? I think it is the ACBL’s moral, if not legal, responsibility to do so. This is not hearsay, I assure you. Bobby was one of the ACBL’s spokesmen when the arrangement with Peter was made!
Back to On Line competition (particularly where championships are being determined) — the primary problem that troubles me (and many others) is the absence of total security (almost impossible to obtain and even harder to sustain) to protect the safety of the operation as there are a multitude of manners (some very creative) in which to illegally communicate with the contestants. I am sure you are familiar with many of those scenarios as most are public knowledge. The encouraging news is that the coordinators are earnest in their awareness and efforts and are constantly and feverishly working on the solution. Unfortunately, devious individuals try to find a way to circumvent the roadblock and throw a monkey wrench into the preventatives. Since I do very little traveling these days, I am a big proponent of viewing major On LIne contests on my little laptop and look forward to the day the problem is permanently resolved.
Before we leave the subject, something else bugs me — and that is earning points for playing on line while it is common knowledge that many partners (though obviously comprising a small minority of the thousands who avail themselves of the facility) can be sitting at computers side by side or in a nearby room — and certainly there is no denying that in this modern day and age everyone has the use of the Graham Bell or a cell phone. This negates the assurance of a ‘kosher’ contest. I have never played on line but I do know at one time masterpoints were being issued despite the many complaints from astute observers although I am not cognizant of the prevailing policy. I imagine over the course of time hosts of players were victims of such atrocities as lucky leads, brilliant switches and downright amazing jumps to what always turns out to be the best contract. It is difficult to moderate or adjudicate such fortuitous moves, but I suppose it is something with which players who choose to compete must contend. That element of “luck” goes with the territory!
It’s been a long weekend. Sunday I watched my beloved Eagles get trounced by Bobby’s Cowboys — but, in fact, “there’s always next week.” More to follow. Sadly, I’m afraid I am just getting started.
December 30th, 2009 ~ Judy Kay-Wolff ~ 12 Comments
One of the greatest pleasures of my bridge career was kibitzing and being all ears as hands were discussed by the experts of the day. I had been playing for a few years (though it really was far from the game I know today) but most of my time was well spent at Norman’s side as he competed. Norman was always fortunate to be included on formidable teams (originally Edgar and the New York contingent until 1960) when he was asked to join the “Big Team” partnered with Sidney Silodor — and included Becker, Crawford, Rapee, Roth, Stone, et al for three short years until Sidney’s death in 1963 (two weeks prior to our wedding). He played in the interim with a few top players but it was just not the same and he was still grieving the loss of his dear friend Sidney. A year later, Bob Jordan played matchmaker and got Norman and Edgar back together, a partnership and love affair that ended when Edgar died in 1997 (a few months after winning the Dallas NABC open teams with a last minute tack-on of a fifth and sixth to the original four man team — Brian Glubock and Geir Helgimo who had never played together until that fateful weekend). In fact, part of the condition of Geir’s acceptance was that he had to be “off” the last session and catch his scheduled flight back home. No argument — done deal! After their very popular victory (especially because of the public knowledge of Edgar’s impending death after a grueling three year illness), Norman innocently, but in all sincerity, commented to Edgar in the privacy of his suite, “You really played great,” to which Edgar immediately retorted. “Norman, I have cancer of the colon — not the brain.” Edgar was both articulate and prolific and though it is over twelve years since his death, I can still hear his voice and envision him as it was just yesterday. Knowing, enjoying and loving Edgar was one of the highlights of my life.
In the early years of our marriage, I rarely played, seeming to derive more pleasure (and less aggravation) from watching the big boys. One pair of Norman’s regular teammates were no doubt the best duo to ever descend from Canada — Sami Kehela and Eric Murray. Not only were they sensational players individually and a top partnership but they treated each other with admiration and respect — though there was quite a bit of humorous banter back and forth during discussions of hands. Also, I remember many a time, after the evening session, where Eric would hold everyone captive (willingly) in Edgar’s suite until the wee hours of the morning — relating one hilarious tale after another — and no one could tell a story better than Eric Rutherford Murray.
After Edgar’s death, Norman and I still stayed in contact with Eric and that so-called ‘contact’ with Eric served a very practical use for me, who for twenty years was running a baseball card business. I was dealing with a Canadian card company who had committed to sell me ten cases of a certain product which I pre-sold at a pretty good profit. I later received notice from them that because of great demand and reduced production, my order would be halved. I contacted Eric immediately, who by coincidence was a very effective and successful barrister, and an hour later I got a call from the Manager of the card company stating that all ten cases were en route to me as we spoke. Eric refused to accept a fee for helping a damsel in distress but settled for a date in an Open Pairs with Norman as cancellation of my debt.
Norman is gone nearly eight years but I always had a warm relationship with Eric (who was also a good friend of Bobby) and I routinely checked in with him around the holiday season. Incidentally, It was Eric who honored Bobby by writing the Foreword to The Lone Wolff so I had occasion to speak to him more frequently (especially because of Bobby’s hearing problems). I looked at the calendar the other day and picked up the phone to call Eric who now lives in his country home on an estate with a beautiful pond and lots of birds. His lovely wife, Helen (a successful attorney also) passed on in 2007 after a very long illness and it has been a rough number of years for Eric — but you would never know it by the exuberance of his tone when he picked up the phone and recognized my voice. I am sure we share the same wonderful memories of his teammates and their many successes in days of yore. Although Eric is primarily retired from ‘serious’ bridge for many years (though he did qualify to play for Canada in Shanghai, declining the trip), he does still play a little — but usually only if drafted for some local team games. I can personally assure you his mind is still unbelievable and his sense of humor better than ever.
Do you remember the famous telegram he sent to the American Captain, Alfie Sheinwold, in Bermuda when the Foot Soldiers’ alleged cheating incident was being examined by a Committee for tapping each other’s toes under the table (before foot screens)? It was read aloud to a roaring audience:
Dear Mr. Sheinwold:
I would like to volunteer for the North American Team. I play a reasonable game of bridge and take a size 14 shoe.
Sincerely,
Eric R. Murray
Naturally, our conversation drifted back to the world championships. Though Eric is now 81, he vividly recalled an experience which still haunts him. It is 38 years later and he is now able to laugh about how outrageous it was! Bobby well remembers the incident but I will relate it through Eric’s eyes and you judge for yourself. It occurred in the 1972 Bal Harbour Olympiad in the Round Robin. Eric had the session off and was Vugraph Commentator while Bobby was in the audience just enjoying Eric’s remarks and watching the hands on the screen. The last hand arrived and this was the actual auction (a real classic) in a match which featured Germany against the ‘exalted’ Italian Blue Team.
The German North opened 3D, East (Giorgio Belladonna) doubled, South passed and it was up to the West hand, Walter Avarelli (pardon me, Judge Avarelli) who held the following hand: 94 AQ109743 10743 VOID. Holding the hand just presented, Judge Avarelli PASSED with the result minus 800 for Germany while in the other room, the normal 4H contract was reached (down one for minus 100 for Germany) — a total of plus 900 for the Blue Team, As Eric recounts it, he met Benito alighting from the elevator as he had not played that session (and in those days there was no BBO) so Benito was totally unaware of the hand or the results.
Eric recalled to me the conversation going something like …..”Hi, Benito.” I’ve got a bidding hand for you. May I ask what you would do?” He replied, “Sure,” whereupon Eric gave Benito Avarelli’s West hand with seven hearts to the AQ109XXX (as above) and related the auction. “What do you do over the double?” Benito smiled, shrugged and said “4H.” “What is your second choice?” “I don’t have a second choice.” “What if someone made you have one?” “5H, I guess.” What is your third choice?” “6H, but that is ridiculous.” “What is this all about?” asked Garozzo. Eric continued, “Walter passed.” “Walter passed Giorgio’s double???” “Yes.” “What was the result?” inquired Benito. “+800.” Benito quickly replied to the effect — “You know, after thinking about it, he is probably right.” INDEED HE WAS!
Eric’s concluding words to me were — “If this is not an indictment, I don’t know what is!” Enough said!
December 24th, 2009 ~ Judy Kay-Wolff ~ 17 Comments
Regarding a blog I initiated on November 29, 2009, I added a comment (#19) quoting a poem sent to me by a good humored friend. Perhaps (because of the holiday shutdown OR because of the subject matter), I received a reply “Your Comment is Awaiting Moderation.” I would prefer to assume it is because of the Christmas shutdown rather than a funny reference to a subject widely discussed universally for the last month. The following is what is “awaiting moderation”.
If you happen to be a “Tiger” fan, just skip to the next blog — but if you appreciate the holiday mood in humorous rhyme, this one is pretty good!
Twas the night of Thanksgiving and out of the house
Tiger Woods came a flyin’, chased by his spouse.
She wielded a nine iron and wasn’t too merry,
Cause a bimbo’s phone number was in his Blackberry.
He’d been cheatin’ on Elin, and the story progressed.
Woman after woman stepped up and confessed..
He’d been cheatin’ with Holly, and Jaimee, and Cori,
With Joselyn, and Kalika. The world had the story..
From the top of the Tour to the basement of blues,
Tiger’s sad sordid tale was all over the news.
With hostesses, waitresses, he had lots of sex,
When not in their pants, he was sendin’ them texts.
Despite all his cryin’ and beggin’ and pleadin’,
Tiger’s wife went investin’ — a new home in Sweden .
And I heard her exclaim from her white Escalade,
“If you’re gettin’ laid then I’m gettin’ paid.”
She’s not pouting, in fact, she is of jolly good cheer,
Her pre-nup made Christmas come early this year.
December 23rd, 2009 ~ Judy Kay-Wolff ~ 2 Comments
This morning at breakfast, I was discussing with Bobby MEMPHIS MOJO’s intriguing article on Charles Schulz, world renown creator of Peanuts, Charlie Brown, et al. I had no idea Schulz had any involvement with bridge (other than what I had just read) until Bobby smiled, perked up and related the following story:
The U. S. had not won a world championship since 1954 and here it was 1970 and the rising Dallas Aces were flying to Stockholm to represent the U. S. The Aces were the brainchild of Ira Corn, influential Texas businessman who conceived the idea of the first professional bridge team in the world. By coincidence, one of Corn’s public relations people was an intelligent, aggressive woman named Jean Carpenter (who earlier had been married to Charles Schulz). Jean arranged for the team to stop over in New York en route to Sweden for some very exciting national fanfare. The team, clad in their traditional orange jackets were seated at a bridge table in the background of the screen as Ira, big as life (and he was indeed no lightweight), was being interviewed by none other than Barbara Walters on The Today Show. It was quite exciting to have bridge recognized on National TV.
Fate (or luck) prevailed and the Dallas Aces (Billy Eisenberg/Bobby Goldman; Bob Hamman/Mike Lawrence; and Jim Jacoby/Bobby Wolff) miraculously returned home with the Gold. It made such banner headlines that two of the winning team members (Jimmy and Bobby) were invited to fly directly to the nation’s capitol to appear on a celebrated televised Interview Talk Show which had been arranged by Jim Wood, quite active and well known in Washington bridge circles who knew the ‘right’ people.
There were two separate half-hour segments to the show — but no doubt the triumphant Aces had to take second billing — as the other guest was none other than Christine Jorgensen. Yes … The Christine Jorgensen. For those of you too young to remember, she (?) was the first person to have experienced and publicized “sex reassignment surgery” as Wikipedia adeptly describes it. (By the way, Bobby met and spoke with her and added she was positively charming)!
December 20th, 2009 ~ Judy Kay-Wolff ~ 7 Comments
Raised in the City of Brotherly Love and never heeding Horace Greeley’s vehement recommendation, I spent most of my time along the Eastern seaboard (New York, New Jersey, Delaware) with frequent vacation flights to Florida. It was not until I became enmeshed in the bridge world in the late fifties that I became exposed (more like ‘addicted’) to the NABCs held all over the United States. I dare say I probably attended about 145 of them — but rarely left the hotel during the week. Exceptions perhaps were Niagara Falls (Buffalo), Graceland (Memphis), The Alamo (San Antonio) — but not too many more trigger my memory. When Bobby suggested we motor to Palm Desert from Las Vegas for the Regional for four days, I was intrigued to see that part of our country — totally foreign to me. What perhaps amazed me most was the number of ritzy, exclusive country and golf clubs within a three mile strip — similar to the plethora of McDonalds, Wendy’s, I-Hops, Burger Kings and other fast food joints in comparable space in The Big Apple. It was just one elegant structure after another driving down Bob Hope Drive. Being an old movie buff, I was tickled by seeing Interstate Exits named Dale Evans Drive and I eagerly looked to make sure Roy Rogers was not shunned — and of course, I was not disappointed as his Exit followed ahead shortly. We spotted the same type of deifications of the early stars such as ‘Drives” named after Ginger Rogers, Frank Sinatra and Dinah Shore (on which the Palm Desert Mission Hills complex was located) in Rancho Mirage, California.
We arrived late Monday (totally exhausted because of hitting many traffic snags) so we played only at night and the next three relaxing two-session pair events. The once irresistible excitement of the nationals has lost its allure and we have not attended one since the local Las Vegas NABC in July of 2008. Never thought either of us would see the day when a shocker like this would surface, but perhaps the inconvenience (necessary of course) of airport security lines, the toll the economy has taken on airline fares and hotels, restaurants etc. played a major role. Of course, living in LV does not necessitate the desire to look for a city more exciting to visit. We have it all here. In fact, the days have flown by so quickly , we wonder where the six years have gone since we were married. First with Norman and now Bobby — I am truly twice blessed.
Meanwhile, back at the desert — it was everything one could wish for. The architecture was lovely, rooms were tremendous and beautiful, the bathrooms luxurious, the room bridge rates rather enticing and the playing space close by (either by foot path) or “event parking” which was more of a hassle as the Regional was so well attended. And the piece de resistance — the Internet was FREE!!!!!! (Try and remember back to the last time that happened)! Many ‘big names’ showed up (playing professionally, I assume) and the snack bar between sessions was very convenient as we had little time to gallivant between the ten and three o’clock sessions. At night there were several fine terrific restaurants within driving distance (Chang’s, Fleming’s, et al.) passing Country Club Row en route to Interstate 211 with dozens of other good eating spots as well.
Everything was winding down Thursday night and as we started our final session, the proverbial @#$%! hit the fan in Round One. Bobby (playing weak NT non-vulnerable) opened 1NT. Holding QJXXX 10XXX AKX X, I bid 2C (non-forcing Stayman) to which Bobby responded 2H. Right or wrong, in my aggressive manner, I blasted to 4H. A diamond was opened and won in dummy by my DK. Bobby led a spade, my LHO followed low and Bobby rose with the K which held. He next played a diamond to the ace, followed by a club to the ace and king of clubs, pitching a diamond from dummy. After ruffing a club, when Bobby led the SQ (with my LHO following low), Bobby RUFFED and all hell broke loose!!!!! My LHO screamed at Bobby “You opened a NT with a singleton” and shrieked for the director. He even interrogated me how often that had happened before. I never had a chance to respond as the bridge police arrived. Luckily, it happened to be one of the calmest, best poised and most experienced in the business — Roger Putnam — who tried to settle Lefty down, explaining the No Trumper could make any call he wanted — though the opponent kept raving and ranting. He even told Bobby he was going to file a recorder slip on him, to which Bobby replied, “I wish you would.” Eventually, calm was restored, Bobby made the contract and the disgruntled man left the table. The opponent looked to be a hot-tempered middle Easterner and from having played against him earlier this week, it was obvious he was a very good player — just a poor loser. It was a quite unpleasant encounter and shocking that an experienced participant didn’t have any clue about the rules of the game. Bobby’s actual hand was: K Q9XX 1098 AKJXX. Playing weak NT, his judgment dictated his call.
When I arrived home, I had an email waiting for me from my close friend, Larry Cohen, who (together with his old partner, Marty-Bergen) is having a Cohen-Bergen Bridge Reunion Seminar at the Wynn in Las Vegas June 22-24 and I had asked him for some flyers to pass out at my local duplicate club. I couldn’t resist recounting the above story and this was his unsolicited reply: “The reason for 1NT, of course (as RSW well is aware) is not to be fancy or thiefy, it is because of the rebid problem after 1C P 1S.” signed/LC Great minds think alike.
I guess it all goes with the territory — but what a sour ending to a lovely four days!
December 17th, 2009 ~ Judy Kay-Wolff ~ 3 Comments
Shockingly, this has nothing to do with the game of bridge — but rather the rich enhancement of our site by Ross Taylor and his poker commentary. His writing is so profound, making his points in a fascinating manner and being refreshingly honest — win or lose. Coming from one who hardly knows a flush from a straight, I appreciate his eloquent style. His delivery is superb and I, for one, salute this incredible writer!
November 29th, 2009 ~ Judy Kay-Wolff ~ 19 Comments
This is primarily a ‘bridge’ site but because many bloggers have taken liberties and strayed from the subject, I could not resist discussing probably the most talked-about current media topic (even more intriguing to me than what is happening in San Diego). It relates to …..shall we say … the kid gloves treatment of a privileged character which has always been one of my pet peeves — especially where the law is concerned. This blog was drafted late last night which I held off posting awaiting the twice postponed explanation by Tiger to the authorities. The comments at the conclusion were added after the release of Mr. Woods’ evasive explanation this morning:
For half a century the only ‘tiger’ that ever came to my mind emanated from William Blake’s famous “Tiger, tiger, burning bright … in the forests of the night…..” It was a classic which at one time in our academic lives we were all introduced to (and perhaps forced to memorize)! Today, when someone alludes to ‘tiger’ — our thoughts unify and focus on one of the greatest sports personages of our time — the one and only TIGER WOODS. He was the most popular, admired, modest, soft-spoken model citizen at the top of everyone’s Hit Parade until early Friday — and now the barrage of questions never answered are raising a lot of doubt as to what really occurred. The reports are vague, varied, sketchy and contradictory.
No one, regardless of his or her accomplishments, should be treated like an elite character — and that appears to be the esteemed stance Tiger Woods has assumed by not ‘granting’ the police an interview (as of now) until Sunday. What gives him the privilege of deciding WHEN he will answer the multitude of questions lined up by the authorities? Since when does a private citizen (who has destroyed a fire hydrant and mutilated a neighbor’s tree in addition to damaging his own vehicle) in the wee hours of the morning DICTATE THE SHOTS? What if someone had been taking a late night walk with his pet? He could have been injured, permanently maimed or killed. What? What? What? He has one helluva legal and PR team to stave off the police and his adoring (?) public this long.
Had it been some obscure John Doe, he would have been hauled off to the station, advised to seek counsel, given a breathalyzer test, grilled by the police and then a decision made whether to keep or release him. However, in Tiger’s case (according to many of the reports being bandied about), he was taken to the local hospital, treated and released — strong enough to be returned to his home … but too weak to speak to the authorities. The conversations of the 911 call will allegedly not be made public until tomorrow (unless they change their mind). End of story — until Tiger decides to tell his version (if he ever comes clean). Many of the rags are alluding to ‘another woman.’ Who knows? If so, that is an internal problem and part of his personal life (between Tiger and Elin) — but whatever it was that caused him to leave the house after 2 a.m. involves a damaged automobile, property destruction and a 911 call — makes it the business of the police, the neighbor with damaged property and possibly the insurance company. Why the delay and all the secrecy? How long does it take them to get their story in order???? Whatever happened — happened. Why is the truth being withheld? What’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander — but perhaps not for the tiger.
When Tiger was found in the street with bruises and blood on his lips (though according to reports, no traces of it on the steering wheel, dashboard or windshield), it is rather indicative of the fact that the injuries were sustained inside the home. There are too many pertinent questions left unanswered (and ignored in Tiger’s cagey Internet statement pleading for privacy) — assuming the full responsibility, referring to it as a personal issue — and leaving it at that! If it is not incumbent upon the Law to pursue the circumstances (strange though it seems), it is not up to the public to press the issue? At this point, we are left to draw our own conclusions.
The sixty-four dollar question remains: What caused Tiger’s bruised and bleeding lips? We could make an educated guess — but in any event, he should consider himself a lucky man–having his lips as the focal point of the attack rather than his wrists.
|
Subscribe to our feed
Bridge-related