IAC Forums
Organised Chaos! => IAC Matters => Topic started by: sallyally on April 29, 2017, 07:24:50 PM
-
In response to Pam's request regarding membership in IAC - First of all let me say that I have thoroughly enjoyed being an IAC member. My favourite thing to do on BBO is play in tourneys. Unfortunately the majority of them on IAC are in the daytime and since bridge is recreational for me I preferr to play evenings. Not only that I like 8 pm eastern but could manage 7 or 9. What a pain in the neck a member like me can be!
Team games are also high on my list. Arranging team members is difficult but easier now that there is a set time for games.
My regular partner and I do play in the club one night a week. This however, is a set game and we normally don't need anyone to spare. Trying to find a pickup game when there is no guarantee you will find one or if you do that it will last without people going in and out and waiting for someone else to sit is frustrating.
Teaching sessions are something I will try to fit in - if they fit me. Sorry Oliver, but at this point in my life I don't want to learn precision. It's struggle enough to try to get 2/1 right. Weak nt is not on for the partnership I have. Also daytime teaching is beyond me on a regular basis.
I am not trying to be negative in my comments. I do hope other members chime in with their thoughts if only to help Pam get a feel for what is happening. I have met many people through IAC. In particular the team games foster making friends. It is my sincere hope that the club will continue. I am sorry I don't have solutions. Perhaps an even larger membership would help.
-
Hi All,
Understand and appreciate your comments. Louise, thanks.
It doesn't matter to me that most of IAC have no interest in Precision. Precision is NOT for everyone. I say myself during the course I run that you really need to have a thorough grounding in any one of the "natural" bidding systems (eg: 2/1, Std American, Acol, SEF, Forum D etc etc etc) before you can hope to tackle precision with any degree of confidence. "Classic" Wei Precision is a fairly natural system, but it is a fundamental shift in bidding philosophy. OCP, which is what I teach, is a million miles away from Std systems like the above or Wei Precision, and it's definitely NOT for the faint-hearted, LOL. That's why I try to tell people in the announcements that I do whether a given teaching session is Precision-specific or one with a more general application.
-
Very nice to hear your opinion Sally. If more players were interested in USA evening time, I am sure we would be able get a TD to run trnys. If they only would speak up and ask what is their prefference.
Many more also enjoy teams, and for sure soon new series will start.
As for teaching, lesson's subjects and time of sessions are chosen by the teacher, not much we can do but accept their good will give us free lessons at whatever hour is most appropriate for them.
-
Thanks for your post! You and Joy have been faithful supporters since the beginning, and your involvement has been very much appreciated. We might try another evening tourney midweek, but even Dulci's tourney on Sunday evening is struggling, as is the one on Saturday morning. Both of those were doing well until a few months ago when participation started to drop off, for no obvious reason.
The business of getting tables going in the club is something I wonder if best left until the fall now? Summer is short and people tend to be out and about or so it seems, having hosted tables might well be worth another try, but the question is when.
One thing I should make clear is that we don't expect members to be involved with everything we do..it would be nice but isn't realistic, but if even 90% of the members were involved even just once a week with SOMETHING... playing in the club or a tourney or going to a class, we would have a phenomenally successful club. Perhaps we should implement something like that, as a requirement for continuing membership, with allowances made for people who are moving or ill or on holidays or whatever and negotiate that with us.
-
one thing that I do think has had an impact is the changeover. The web version is definitely more complicated to move through, and not being able to see who is kibbing at the table without searching out buttons to click and refreshing all the time is a problem. I certainly find the web version just much less fun to play on, and wondering if that is true of a number of our longtime membership. Quite a lot of the time members don't seem to be playing anywhere, just kibbing.
There's nothing more I can think of we can do to help with that.
-
I guess that's enough responses that I don't have to feel like I'm the only one paying any attention, so...
I was one of the first few members of what was originally the 2/1 club, in the dear old days of ChinaMike, DocHelm, ChasP and others...the intent was to screen out beginners and Goren players, so we could find a game with relatively high standard, with a definite emphasis on 2/1. I objected to the name change, especially since there was already an "IAC" in the Public area, but stayed with it throughout. My goal is still the same, though: for the club to be a place to peek into, find a game with at least intermediate level players; NOT to sign up for tournaments and/or team matches. I used to rail against those folks intruding on a nice game to seduce some of our players into some meaningless (to me) team match, sometimes breaking up a game to do so. More recently, there is almost never a game forming in IAC...either it is used as a staging area for team/tourney matches, or there is a pre-arranged game at which casual entry is unwelcome. That, plus the pernicious invasion of Precision (Sorry, Oliver...just my opinion: I won't play it, nor against it unless P and I have discussed a defense) has made it all but impossible to find a game in the club. I still make the club my first destination when I log in, and continue to look for a casual game there, but failing that I just wander off into other rooms.
-
"The pernicious invasion of Precision" - what a wonderful phrase. You make it sound like Precision is some Johnny-come-lately.
Precision Club has been around since the late 1960's, some years prior to 2/1, which wasn't even mooted (by Soloway, Swanson and the Walshes) until some time in the 1970's, and not fully described until later still (separately) by Max Hardy and Mike Lawrence. 2/1 is popular in North America, but much less widely used elsewhere in the World, whereas Precision has had worldwide adherents ever since its introduction and has spawned countless variations and developments (of which OCP is just one).
Trying to promote a Club where you only want to play against people who play the same system as you do is a somewhat insular and not a little pathetic, don't you think? It's a bit like having a Golf Club where women aren't welcome or where you're only allowed to use one particular make of Clubs and shots where you fade the ball to the right are banned! :)
I like to play OCP because I developed it from standard Super-Precision and have lived with it since the early 1980's, but I'll also happily play 2/1, Standard American, Acol etc. I don't care what system Opps are playing and find it really refreshing to come up against anything that's new. Quite apart from anything else, I'm always receptive to ideas different from my own, because (a) Their ideas may well be better than my own, (b) Variety is the spice of life, and (c) Coming up against new stuff is how people generally learn. I've been playing this game for well over 50 years now, much of it at a pretty high level of competition, but I still learn things about the game all the time.
I feel it's a shame if people cocoon themselves within their own comfort zone and resist anything new or different, because that really does tend to stifle new ideas and may well ultimately kill what they're trying to preserve (typical ACBL and ECU mentality, unfortunately). Thankfully most of the world is not like that.
-
In a vacuum, I agree...I'm the guy who nearly got kicked out of an NABC for trying to play a universal transfer system with a pet partner; who constantly rails against certain tourney hosts who post things like "no Multi" and "no psyches" in the tourney rules; and enjoys pushing the envelope of whatever rules get imposed by the PTB. I just have a "thing" about big club systems. FWIW, I would welcome EEHA, forcing pass systems, the Little Major, Paleo-goren, or whatever...but only when I have a chance to discuss defenses against them with partner. When big clubbers land in the middle of a tourney, or even a casual game, when we mostly play with pickup partners, groping with counters is impossible. Of course, that applies to any regular partnership, especially those who have a full convention card. With a couple of pet partners, I greatly enjoy playing against big club systems; but not when we have to freelance against it. Too often (IMHO), the gains of playing a big club are entirely the result of opponents who pass in a daze because they don't understand how to make things work against it
As to the insular nature of an all-2/1 club, yeah, I guess...I believe the intent, originally, was at least partially to provide a place for players making the transition from sayc to 2/1, and playing against the same system doubles the learning opportunities. I fully recognize that is no longer a goal of the club
-
Maybe the question to address is "What is the purpose/goal of the IAC?"
On the home page it states 'This is the website for the BBO Intermediate / Advanced Club, a private Teaching club on Bridgebase Online.'
Mike's take "the intent was to screen out beginners and Goren players, so we could find a game with relatively high standard, with a definite emphasis on 2/1." "My goal is still the same, though: for the club to be a place to peek into, find a game with at least intermediate level players; NOT to sign up for tournaments and/or team matches."
Personally, I joined for the teaching sessions. I knew I could not play at more than a beginner level at the time, but I hoped to learn and advance through the offerings of the club.
I liked the idea of having hosted tables at a specific day and time. A calendar was put up on the website showing scheduled sessions. I offered to host a session on Saturday mornings. Most mornings I closed it down after 10-15 minutes as nobody showed up. (Though maybe at the time I was recognized as a weak player which scared everyone off.)
So not sure what to suggest.
-
It's a problem, Babs and there is no easy answer to it. As I said near the top of this thread, I think one of the major issues is a lack of teaching sessions. We simply do not have enough teachers delivering the variety of teaching sessions we used to have. When I started teaching in IAC the teaching sessions were thick on the ground and you had to "book a slot" with Charles so that he could make sure your slot didn't overlap or encroach on someone else's.
That's no longer an issue, remotely, but things have been looking up recently and we do now have 5 teaching sessions being delivered over the course of each week. It would be interesting to know how the numbers are holding up for those. Mine stay fairly steady, not normally less than 15-20, and that's a viable and encouraging number. Maybe some of the teachers who have downed tools were discouraged by falling numbers - I don't know.
The other alternative is that they decided teaching Bridge for free was not as attractive as giving private lessons for payment. I can't fault anyone who takes that stance, although my own view has always been that Bridge has given me a lifetime of enjoyment and I really don't mind putting something back into the game
-
As to the insular nature of an all-2/1 club, yeah, I guess...I believe the intent, originally, was at least partially to provide a place for players making the transition from sayc to 2/1, and playing against the same system doubles the learning opportunities. I fully recognize that is no longer a goal of the club
The thing is this: If you go and play in a duplicate at a local Bridge Club or head off to a Pairs Congress, you are generally going to be playing against a number of different systems, pairs playing conventions you're not familiar with, etc. That's part of the game. If everyone in in your "world" is doing the same thing in the same way, life gets very boring and nothing ever changes or develops. Progress doesn't happen. We'd all still be playing Culbertson.
In my view the aim of the Club ought to be to give people the opportunity to improve and develop their Bridge skills in a friendly and supportive environment and to encourage them to learn new stuff, new skills, new techniques and new approaches to the game. All the Tourneys, Teams Matches, Ladders etc help to keep people involved with the Club and obviously the more you play the more you learn, especially if you're coming up against unfamiliar systems and conventions, but it's the teaching sessions which primarily address that aim, in my view.
-
Originally teaching sessions were regarded as a bonus and an important adjunct in the goal of providing a pleasant place for members to play and advance their skills. It was actually originally called a 2/1 club but we had some fairly major issues with problem people who were removed from the club for consistently obnoxious behaviour but who kept slithering back in until we finally figured out how to ban them permanently. At that time, to mark a new start, so to speak, the club was renamed. This happened probably only about 2 months or so after the initial start, and the new name was a hopeful reflection of who the club was focussed toward serving.
It was intended to be a place for both more advanced players as well as strong intermediate players to escape the problems of Main as well as a place for intermediates to continue to improve their game after they had mastered what BIL had to offer. Unlike BIL though, we never had an upper level "cap" on skill level, so we could offer the advanced opportunity to improve their game as well.
The goal was never to limit the club to one system, but by default the focus rested on the system that most advanced players were using, arbitrarilly determined to be 2/1. Both Rona and Charles at that time played 2/1, Charles has since switched to Oliver's Precision system I believe. But the goal was always to try to make the club a place where people could log into and find a decent game. We've had spasms of success with this but the efforts were indeed short circuited by people trolling in the club for random team matches or being called to do in BIL what they had been doing for us, when BIL adopted our "hosted table" system. Both hurt us badly.
What happens now, too often, is that people may set up a table and shout for players, possibly not realizing that such shouts don't actually get beyond the room unless made by the IAC ID. When players don't show up almost instantly, the hosts leave. We need more people to BRING people to play in the club, friends who will at least start out a table, and for players to invite other friends to come play. If someone is playing and knows they are going to be leaving, it's helpful if they look to find friends who aren't playing and ask them to come replace them, this will often keep a table going very successfully.
It's bewildering to think that members have no friends online so immediately shout for players and almost as quickly leave the table if nobody shows up. Especially since the enforced web version, it often takes people a while to get anywhere, and it is EXTREMELY frustrating to answer a call and find the table has vanished. If I call for a player and the host closes the table without waiting a reasonable time for someone to answer, I won't ask for players for that person again.
It's a bit frustrating to see 7 kibs at a table and another table with two players pleading for people to join and none of the kibs respond. This also happens fairly frequently.
We get a number of people who show up to teaching sessions but it is almost always a struggle to get them to participate, to do more than kib. Often there can be around 30 kibs and there aren't enough players to fill the table three times, often even twice is a struggle; players who do volunteer often have to be reseated. This is another example of how passive/ uninvolved members are now.
One thing that HAS happened over the past year is that the level of play has gone up and often more advanced players are protective of their status and unwilling to "make mistakes" or be subject to correction in "public". When we had more weak intermediates playing, getting participants was easier. Also, a number of "advanced" players..which is a highly relative term, react with scorn and hostility to anything suggesting they may not have all the nuances of the game entirely under control. Of course, none of these people will risk the courage of their convictions at the table themselves, but privately mutter resentful epithets about the teacher not following the rules as they understand them, one such recently gifting me with the information that the internationally successful teacher was " an idiot" .
Neither passivity nor a defensive aggression is encouraging in terms of looking for more teachers.
If a teacher is only ever going to offer 1+1=2 then we may as well defer to BIL.
The above comments don't apply to Precision sessions because I really have no idea what goes on there. Besides that, it is still relatively new to most of us and it is also much more complex to learn than 2/1 or Sayc, if only because of the heavy emphasis on artificial bids. So strongly emphasizing the basics would be extremely important. For those members playing 2/1 or Sayc, they are supposed to know the basics before they join IAC.
However, none of this explains the sudden and fairly dramatic drop in tourney involvement, certainly the enforced switch to the web version had a marked impact but it isn't recovering and surely by now it should have been. And I am truly at a loss to explain the 600 or so people who complained about not being able to access the club and asked for reinstatement but are never seen anywhere near either the club or any club events. Nor have they responded to requests as to why they want to belong, what they want the club to offer, or how it could fit their bridge time better.
-
I have had a few suggestions offered, one being that we limit the tourneys to 5 hands, which I am totally against doing for any number of reasons, and the second being that we open the tourneys to non members and invite them all to join the club.
It may seem as though I am being uncooperative but we DID open the tourneys for about 3 months when the numbers dropped so unexpectedly and suddenly. and we DID get several requests for membership, which were accepted. What these people want, though, is the sort of membership I have with a public club running tourneys, something to do when nothing else is available, and in which I participate maybe 4 or 5 times a year. This is not helpful, and really, what it the point of being a private club and running open tourneys? I also got some complaints about it at the time from members, because when running an open tourney there is often going to be the odd abusive player showing up and those people upset everyone else at the table, not just the victim, even when they are immediately booted. There is also the issue of trying to cope with multiple runners, even with the completion rate set very high, since most tourneys were run with a single director. Finding 5 subs at a time is NOT fun.
The hosted tables I think might be worth pursuing again but unsure if going into the summer is the right time to try this. If people want to give it a go, we can certainly try it again.
One suggestion was that anyone who didn't have at least one MP or isn't known to participate somehow be dropped from the membership. This is appealing but the problem I can't see a solution for is the tracking of people playing in the club. We can certainly track people who attend teaching sessions or play in tourneys or team matches, but what about those who just play? We are absolutely NOT dropping the people who play in the club but don't attend teaching sessions etc. and how do we know who they are unless we are there at the time?
But if we could limit the membership to people who ARE involved somehow, then we could serve those people better with a whole lot less frustration all around. I would rather have a club of 100 members who are involved than 3000 members who aren't. THEN we could focus on only adding members who are sponsored by active members, and we could also have an interim membership requiring a minimum amount of participation for some period of time. I tried this about 2 years ago with little success, unfortunately often the applicant would fulfill the obligations for the month and then disappear. And it took a whole lot of time to monitor.
Part of the problem was because at the time we had some very weak players who lurked in the club and pounced when the new member opened a table, so it was often pretty sad bridge, understandably not appealing to a strong advanced player.
-
Hi All,
Yes, Pam, I'm not addressing what the Club was originally set up to be, but simply how it was when I started teaching here (at the same time when I was also teaching in BIL). Back then there were significantly more teaching sessions being delivered than is the case now.
I don't have an answer. Indeed I don't think there is a simple answer. Teachers need to volunteer their services - they can't be press-ganged into it. We've tried the Teams Series and the Teams and Pairs Ladders (and can set them going again any time we like). You've tried the hosted tables, tourneys, ad hoc Teams games and other ideas, but over a period of time, the activity in the Club has simply declined. As you point out, the onset of summer is always going to be a quiet period for Bridge activity, so now may not be the best time for new ventures.
Lastly, it's interesting that less than 30 of our members have bothered to even register on this Forum, and that 90% of the messages on here have been posted by just 4 of us (ie: most of those 27 are just lurking).
-
The other alternative is that they decided teaching Bridge for free was not as attractive as giving private lessons for payment. I can't fault anyone who takes that stance, although my own view has always been that Bridge has given me a lifetime of enjoyment and I really don't mind putting something back into the game
How nice words, Oliver ! TY and thanks all other teachers !H
I am one of those that came in for lessons - I would never had learned bridge if it wasn't for IAC.
When a friend challenged me to learn the game, he showed me bbo and suggested I join IAC and BIL. BBO learning software was the beginning and then I started reading all I could find on net, and imagine how lost i was to choose WHAT to learn, and whom to "trust". Finally when I could understand what 1NT was, I joined the 2 clubs, BIL on trial period of 3 months. At that time there was only 1 lesson running at hours I am normally in, in both BIL and IAC. In Bil teacher was SO slow, and spoke SO bad english, I couldn't understand 1/5 of what they said. My trial there was finished and I had no wish to become its member.
But in IAC, I found Shep. She opened whole new world to me. I'd sit there, quiet as mice and just swallow with eyes all she wrote. I couldn't follow Hondo's lessons as they were in odd hours, but thanks to Kia I religiously watched and saved movies of his lessons.
Now at Oliver's class I am having such wonderful time. It's fantastic mental exercise, combined with great humor, place where to meet good players and even better persons. And what ultimate joy it is when u finally make a correct bid LOL!
I will likely never be a great player, but I now adore this game, and want to give back little what IAC gave to me. So, do count on me to help in any way I can :)
-
I agree, Sanya. Losing Shep was definitely a big blow to the Club.
-
Unfortunately for us she decided the time had come for her to retire, so she stopped teaching altogether. We can only be extremely grateful for the years she offered her time every week in IAC.
-
I have been off on vacation. I didn't take a computer. I used my cell phone, reluctantly, when I had to. We were back in childhood haunts of Minneapolis-St. Paul, and then we went up north where a couple of childhood friends live, one on Bass lake, one on Cross Lake. I'm back, so a few words.
There is something of an identity crisis in IAC. I joined to play bridge. I would not join an expert club because I am not an expert. Nor am I a beginner. I can run a successful squeeze, I can also make some embarrassing mistakes. So Intermediate/Advanced sounded promising. I had found that if I just joined a game in the main area people came, people went, many had very inflated views of their abilities, I rarely saw the same person twice and it could get a bit weird.
I'm not big on lessons. I took "The Complete Book of Bols Bridge Tips" with me on our excursion to Minnesota although I can't say I read much of it. When I did, I concentrated on the Defensive Tips. I believe in studying bridge but, my opinion, that's what books are for.
And hand records. I very much believe in going over hand records. The purpose is to find where I could have done better, partner can worry about himself.
As for tournaments, I am just as happy, probably happier, playing a number of hands with a partner and two opponents. I started playing bridge when my first child was a baby. We had no money, our friends had no money, we would have another couple over, stuff the kids in a room, break open a pack of cards. And probably a beer. The daughter is now 55, so I am speaking of more than a few years back.
I was hoping for something with this general spirit. Hard to do online, I think.
Others have other hopes for the club, and so nothing seems to jell.
Incidentally, if anyone happens to get to St. Paul I most highly recommend the Charlotte Partridge Ordway Japanese Garden. Since 1957. or thereabouts, St. Paul has been a sister city with Nagasaki, and this beautiful garden evolved out of this relationship.
See http://www.comozooconservatory.org/attractions/gardens/japanesegarden/#/info
-
A quick add-on.
I got home about halfway through the DaveG lesson, watched the last half, and then some of us played for a while. After maybe 16 boards I had to leave, I'll skip the reasons, but I enjoyed the game.
I mention this because there is an air of defeat about the club. There was the usual problem of agreements. Nobody much knew what anyone else meant by their bids. Well, that's not great. But we still had a game and I am more interested in the pay than the bidding anyway.
So agreements would be nice, but we had a decent game. I might post a couple of hands, but not right now.
-
It's very difficult not to feel defeated when we have 900 members and cannot get more than 30 of them out to anything, usually fewer. It's not that they are not online, they just aren't involved with IAC, some apparently would rather kib or play with bots.
That's their choice, clearly, but then why are they members? They can't even be involved enough to tell us. Or they say it's because the times are wrong but when we put on events at the time they say they wanted they still don't play with us. Why did 600+ people scream bloody murder when BBO dropped their memberships? It's beyond me to explain why they even noticed much less care.
They won't tell us why they want to be members, they won't tell us what drives them to spend their bridge time elsewhere so we can try to adapt. It leads to a feeling of defeat when people offer their time to direct or teach and nobody shows up. It is even more depressing when IAC members play in BIL instead of IAC, if they belong in BIL then why are they members of IAC? We struggle to get people to play in teaching sessions, but members will apparently eagerly sit in teaching sessions in BIL. Sometimes it's even the same teacher at the same time of day and everyone sitting at the table in BIL is an IAC member, as well as half the kibs. One day I dropped in and there were only two people NOT IAC members, the teacher and one other.
So sometimes it feels like swimming in molasses in the dark having no sense of what direction to go to reach anywhere at all.
-
Surely there is a momentum problem. Oliver's Precision group has the momentum. They get a large crowd for the lessons and then they have play and discuss at other times, also well attended I think. The rest of us are a collection of individuals, but not really a group. Or so it seems.
Yesterday I got home in time to catch the last half of DaveG's lesson. The four volunteer players were leaving the table. Since I was a late show I assumed others were scheduled but nobody was, and nobody was volunteering, so I did. Or I guess I was the second to do so. Anyway, we got four of us. The first hand had a number of interesting features, as most hands do. I was dealer, I had a 4=3=2=4 shape and a 12 count. I opened 1C. Left hand opponent bid 2D, preemptive, passed back to me.My diamonds were K9. Yuk. But a nice hand for discussion. Since my hand was not much to start with and my diamond K now looked badly placed, I passed. Partner's shape was, I believe, 3=3=4=3. What would he, or what should he, have done if I had re-opened with a double? His diamonds were A8xx and we can beat 2D. I am not so sure we could if he had A7xx. Maybe, I would have to think about it. [Edit: Yes, I am pretty sure we can. I put the hand up in sleight of hand.] The hand will make 1NT our way, at least if played from partner's side, but I am not sure anyone can make 2 of anything. I have not checked it out.
My point is that there could be a lot of discussion on this hand and on many hands. But that has not really caught on as an idea. It has with the Oliver Precision folks but not otherwise.
Maybe it comes to this: A lot of people just want to sit down and play a few hands. There is usually an open table at, say, the WP Refugees. (I don't actually know what they are refugees from.) So they go there. It's a momentum thing.
Here is one way the club might fill a need: Non-Precision people need practice playing against Precision. Precision people perhaps need practice playing against non-Precision people. There are a lot of both types in the club. It's an opportunity.
Watching the USBC I saw this Precision problem arise:
1C(16+)-(1D, natural overcall)-1NT(6-8 hcps or something like that)-(4D, natural, preemptive). The Precision pair knows a lot about their strength, they know little or nothing about their shape. Well, they can probably figure neither of them holds a lot of diamonds. It's largely a guess as to what to do. They got it wrong. Sometimes things go wrong, That's life. And that's bridge.
-
Hi All,
Pam
There is an inevitable and considerable overlap between IAC and BIL. BIL's membership includes Intermediate players and maybe even some relatively advanced players who stay attached to BIL out of loyalty. IAC's membership also includes intermediate players, and possibly some of the upper end of the beginners who are improving rapidly and want to keep that momentum going.
I share your frustration, because I don't know exactly where the problem lies. I have my suspicions, which I've already voiced further up this thread, but I doubt that's the only issue. IAC is better organised than any other Club with the possible exception of BIL. That's perhaps what you would expect from the two main "teaching" Clubs on BBO. On the other hand, you go into the Acol Club most evenings and there are a considerable number of tables full of people happily playing Bridge. Not much in the way of organisation, no lessons, no competitions that I'm aware of, just a shared liking for a very simple and natural bidding system.
Ken
Momentum. Not 100% sure that's the right word to use in connection with OCP. Precision in general and OCP in particular are a minority market, no question, because they probably don't suit the majority of people (for a variety of perfectly good reasons). On the other hand, it's massive fun to play. There's also something indefinably cool about occasionally being able to actually write down partner's hand before the bidding even finishes :) . That's something most bidding systems are unable to deliver. With most systems, you know the broad strokes with a little detail rather than knowing all of the critical points about partner's hand before deciding where to play.
I think the other advantage OCP may have is that it's more of a comprehensive and complete system than 2/1. I've witnessed a few discussions between 2/1 players and the discussions mostly seem to centre on what other conventions you play rather than 2/1 itself, which is essentially Standard American with a Forcing 1NT response to 1 !H or 1 !S , 2/1 responses being game-forcing. Most people will also assume inverted Minor suit raises and New Minor Forcing, but most 2/1 system discussions I witness seem to be about whether you play Bergen raises or Drury (ie: add-ons), or which brand of Blackwood you favour, etc etc. Similarly Acol is an approach/forcing system, but with 4-card Majors and a 12-14 1NT, but otherwise very similar to Std American. I never really sat down and learned Acol, Std American or 2/1. I grew up with completely natural bidding (few, if any conventions) and lived through the true development of approach/forcing bidding (which current versions of all of those systems are examples of). The core differences between Acol, Std American and 2/1 are actually fairly small when you really get down to it (system, not add-on conventions).
I can't even begin to describe OCP in a couple of sentences. It takes me over a year to teach the basic OCP course and it probably takes most people 2 or 3 times through that course before they're really comfortable with the system. That investment of time and effort is probably what creates the enthusiasm OCP practitioners have for the system and make them want to sit around and discuss it (so it's a form of brand loyalty rather than momentum LOL).
Generally
On the other hand, I find it hard to engender the same degree of enthusiasm for play-related issues such as counting the hand, trump control, assumptions, or techniques such as end-plays, squeezes etc, because they aren't quite as "sexy" as Asking Bids, enquiry sequences and the like. Their enthusiasm is for the bidding system rather than other wider issues (to their detriment, of course).
I would be delighted if I could persuade people to invest a fraction of the time they put into bidding into really concentrating on religiously counting every hand, trying to become aware of what's happening and what the ful implications of the bidding and early play are. That really would improve their bridge out of all recognition compared to learning a different bidding system or some fancy new gadget. That take relentless effort and concentration, however, and most people can't or aren't prepared to invest that much into their game.
I've rambled on enough for now. :)
-
Part of what helps the ACOL club is the relative scarcity of people who play the system so it's a place where they can go and find someone who plays their system. That said, even the ACOL club struggled for a number of years to get enough people to maintain the club, or so admins have told me.
They were the originators of the idea of hosted tables, which we tried in IAC at their suggestion and had some success until a mix of events scuttled them. There is some interest in trying those again in the fall.
They do run tourneys and for a while were also running team matches, whether those are ongoing I don't know. One thing I've noticed is that it tends to be more social than IAC is, we tend to have very nice members but they cluster in clumps and those clumps tend not to interact much. Thus we get tables with a group playing and a clump of kibs sitting watching rather than playing, as many of our members are fussy about the people who play at their table and apparently would rather kib than take a chance that a player "not up to their standard" might sit.
I know that attitude ( which usually is very clear to the unfortunate who sits, if only because of a grim silence or an exaggerated patient pointing out of errors) is part of why some members play in BIL. The players are polite but the chill is palpable. sigh
How to deal with that is a question, if indeed even possible. I do think the friendly atmosphere has contributed to the success of the ACOL club, as well as the hard work of the admins to capitalize on it. The few times I've been in the ACOL club there has often been chat between tables ( haven't been in the club since the changeover to the web version, so no idea if still the same) which gives the impression they are all friends. No doubt that's not entirely true, but that was the atmosphere. How to achieve that ??
-
People have different goals, no question about it. I just put up a hand on the Sleight of Hand Forum, and made a count. I have put up 14 hands that I thought were interesting. Oliver has often responded, but there are very few other responses. Of course people do not have to be interested in the same hands that I am interested in, but nobody else has put up some other hand that interests them either.
What can I say? I thought having an IAC forum for discussing hands would be a good idea. Apparently not.
As to Acol: From its name, it is a draw for those who wish to play Acol. Players such as myself, players who do not know Acol, naturally do not go there. Perhaps "Intermediate/Advanced Club" is less precise in intent than "Acol Club". When I bring up http://iac.pigpen.org.uk/ it says "This is the website for the BBO Intermediate / Advanced Club, a private Teaching club on Bridgebase Online." I had not thought of this as a teaching club when I joined. My thinking was more "Well, I am advanced, I am not an expert, this sounds right for me."
This thread addresses the question "What is IAC?" The answer my friend is still blowing in the wind. I hope we find it.
-
I woke this morning thinking of several more examples to illustrate my point, but then I realized that at heart it is very simple. The way I think about bridge does not match well with the guidance people are hoping for in IAC. I just see it differently. There are people who give audio lessons but it simply would not suit me.
-
I’m a long way behind the times in commenting on this thread, which will not surprise my friends. Nevertheless, perhaps this will be of interest.
I joined the IAC because I wanted to play with people who would understand why my play was slow (sometimes glacially so). This is because one step to being an advanced player is to learn to do all the necessary counting – on defence as well as while declaring. So, the folk in the IAC are either intermediates in the same boat as me or advanced players who have been on a previous sailing. By and large everyone I have played with in the IAC has been very pleasant and understanding.
I thoroughly enjoyed the lessons ran by Jeremy and Oliver on Precision. Indeed, I remain interested in using OCP. However, for me lessons on declarer and defensive play are not economical as I am a freakish bookworm. Reading Eddie Kantar’s Modern Bridge Defence and Advanced Bridge Defence was a revelation, particularly. Incidentally, I have notes written over the years on declarer play and defence, which include example hands. I’ve not added all the stuff on endplays and squeezes yet, but the pdf of the notes is only 500 KB (so far).
I go through the hands that I have played. This is jolly useful to spot persistent problems: I am terribly bad at spotting hands that ought to be cross-ruffed, for example. Making as many errors as I do, means I have little time to consider other hands. Nonetheless, I ought to look at hands that Ken and others post.
The two times I play each week - Monday and Thursday evenings UK time – have, and still often do, coincide with lessons in the IAC. I think it is rude to the teacher to advertise for players among people attending a lesson. I refrain from doing that and play with my partners (also IAC members) elsewhere.
This has been a long post, so time for a suggestion. When the IAC ran a calendar of players who expected to play in the club, I and my partners joined it - just so other members would know 2 people would be in the IAC at a particular time each week. That worked well from memory, although we did get criticised on the evenings we didn’t turn up: I am particularly busy during the cricket season. Perhaps having a calendar on the IAC site/forum which partnerships or singletons could pin notes to might be worth considering? Members who intend to play and those who would like to play at certain times during the week or fortnight ahead could pin notes. That would also allow players who sometimes miss slots to give some notice. I would be happy to help administer it or help in any other way which meant more play in the IAC.
Dick
-
Interesting ideas there Dick, lets await what OliverC says about making such page on IAC site. And lets be patient as he is very busy lately.
You do not need to explain why you prefer play compared to certain lessons, many do. Just as many love tournaments and other never play in them, but like teams. The problem is that most active members use same "prime time" and there we gotta have trnys, lessons and also play in the club. But they are not ncessarely coliding, for example on Sunday 2100 UTC we have a tournament and OCP practice in the club. Very few members have hard time deciding which to attend, from reasons I said above.
For time being, untill we set such info on iac page, make as friends people that can use bboiac name to send call for players, and if there is no lesson running there is no reason why they should not. They are: onoway, OliverC, Ian84, ggriffin0, yleexotee, BabsG and me.
-
Very interesting idea, Dick. Exactly what did you have in mind? Two possible formats spring to mind:
(1) Grouped by Days
Using this method, pairs or individuals would post their interest in playing at a particular time on particular days of the week, but not on specific dates. so all the expressions of interest relating to, for example, Fridays would be grouped in one section of the page, sorted by the approximate time, but without mentioning specific Fridays. This would work better for generating regular pockets of play each week, I suspect.
(2) Calendar Format
This would operate like a calendar, in which pairs and individuals would post their interest in playing at specific times on specific dates. We could, perhaps, allow them to specify every Friday at 3pm, for example, and get the Calendar to populate every Friday with their post. This method would allow more flexibility, in that pairs could say "I want to play this Friday, but not next Friday".
Either method would seem to be achievable. It's really a matter of which kind of format we feel would be more advantageous.
As Sanya says, I am very busy at the moment, not least because I am back working full-time, so my spare time for "other stuff" is drastically limited compared to how it's been for most of the last 10 years since I retired from the Police. I'm not sure how fast I can guarantee to complete such a project, therefore, but at least let's get the general discussion underway.
-
Oliver, I suppose I was thinking about having a calendar for the month ahead. However, it might be wise to opt for something simpler to begin with to see if there is the demand for advertising slots when members intend to play in the IAC. So how about your first suggestion, which sounds simpler than the second to implement and, as you say, might start up some regular sessions? Individuals/pairs could annotate their time slots with "usually" or "often" if necessary.
-
Okay, I'll have a bash some time (hopefully fairly soon) when I find some time for development stuff. :) I'll report in here when I've got something for you guys to have a look at.
-
Okay, first rough bash at this is up there on the site, see the "Play Calendar" link in the Learn Submenu. Please have a play and fill up some slots so we can have a better idea whether this format will work okay. You must be logged into the site to create or edit records, however.
Times and Days
Please remember that when you're look at the Calendar, times will be shown in your own local time (assuming that your Time Zone and Daylight Savings are registered correctly in your Site Profile). When you are creating or editing a record, however, times must be expressed in terms of Universal Co-ordinated Time (UTC), which is not subject to Daylights Savings, and all Time Zones are expressed as an offset from UTC.
For example, Eastern Daylight Time is UTC -4. British Summer Time is UTC +1.
Days not Rolling over or Rolling Back
One disadvantage to this method of displaying records, is that times that cross Midnight will not cause the day to "roll over":
For example if you're in New York and want to set up a time slot of 10pm (EDT) on Thursdays, that's 2am on Friday in UTC terms, because you're 4 hours behind UTC, but there is no easy or elegant method by which I can cause the day to "roll over" to Friday for people who are in Europe, Africa or Asia if you specify Thursday, or for the day to "roll back" to Thursday for people in the USA, South America or Canada if you specify Friday. Some people, therefore, are going to see the "wrong" day if the time is on a different day from you in UTC terms, whatever you do.
This is because we're not dealing with actual dates here, so the normal method of doing date arithmetic that is employed throughout the IAC site will not work here. Sorry about that, but there isn't a huge amount I can do about that without writing a load of code which will slow the page down considerably (and which I don't currently have the time to do).
-
Maybe I am doing something wrong [Yep, I was. See the post below) but here is what happened. I figured I would schedule myself from 9-10 AM EDT tomorrow, Monday morning. So I should enter this as 1-2 PM, right? I did, but it scheduled me for 13:00 to 14 :00. That's 1-2. I thought it was going to take the entered 1PM-2PM and subtract 4 to get 9AM to 10AM for the display.
I gather I am misunderstanding something. Anyway, I was just experimenting and I erased it but in case this helps anyone else I thought I would mention it.
-
No that is exactly how it should work, Ken: 9am EDT is 1pm UTC at present.
It would be helpful if a few people would try it (even just show that it's a test record rather than a serious one) and leave the record there even if it appears not to be working correctly for you. I have coded this page in a slightly different way to the way the rest of the site works because, as I said above, the normal way of adjusting the times for everyone doesn't work because there are no actual dates involved and I may have to tweak the code a bit.
-
Ah, wait. I checked and my time zone was not properly entered. I think it is all fine now. It now says, when I read it, that I will be online from 9 to 10 tomorrow (Tuesday). This is meant as an experiment to see how it all works, but I will try to be there.
Before I edited this post, I mentioned that I always allow for the possibility I have done something wrong. Yep, a good idea!
I'll add something for anyone else out there who maybe has not got everything in order. I do two things on BBO. I visit the Forum (both BBO and IAC), and I log on and play. Neither has required that I think much about some registration details.
If you are here on the Forum, you can click on the upper right "BBO Intermediate/Advanced". This takes you to another page where you will see a login button. The way mine was set, I had to re-login. Apparently I had a different password on this page from my IAC Forum password. At any rate, at this tab you can pull down a menu, get to your site profile, and make any needed changes.
I have done this, and various problems I was having went away..
There is a tab about Monsterpoints in the Site Profile that I don't yet understand, but that can wait.
Hmm. I notice that at the bottom of my post it gives the time of the last edit. This is 8 hours off from my EDT time. (It says 2:53, the edit was at 10:53). So something is still off. But the posting worked correctly on the Play Calendar.
I gather I have an IAC profile and a IAC Forum profile and they do not entirely match. I'll work on this.
-
The IAC Website is my creation. The database it uses is entirely separate from
The IAC Forums, which is not my creation, but written by a third party, the Simple Machines Forum (SMF), which is why is it vastly more "slick" than the IAC website.
The two do not talk to each other, which is why you have to register separately for the Forum and the Website, but since both are BBO-related, we need you to register on both using your BBO Nickname and whatever password you choose.
-
I made a test entry into calendar and it worked well, set for tuesday noon - 1300 utc.
But I did not put any subject or comment in there and edited it. Then I added the "Test only" comment and saved.
Funny is that changed my time, which I did not alter and it became 14-15 hundreds utc.
I edited again, changed times back to initial ones, saved. And it stayed as I wanted it : )
-
It makes sense in a way. When you click on edit, it figures (I guess) that you want to edit the time. Whether you do or don't, you apparently have te re-enter it. Not a huge problem.
-
I tried a test on the new calendar site but it didn't work for me. But then again I could not add myself to the partnership desk when I tried a few months ago. Everything worked before the new format was introduced, so something on my machine must not be compatible. Alas.
-
I tried a test on the new calendar site but it didn't work for me. But then again I could not add myself to the partnership desk when I tried a few months ago. Everything worked before the new format was introduced, so something on my machine must not be compatible. Alas.
At first that's what I thought, but then I found that my site profile was not set up right. You probably already know about such things but at the login tab you can pull down a menu, open the site profile and edit it. That solved my problems. Even if this doesn't work for you, I thought I would post since it might be the cause of someone else's problem.
-
IAC site needs cookies to work well. If we cleaned cookies, it might make it work wrong, ie sort of forget we are there.
Solution is easy. Log in, open your Profile (under Welcome Babs drop box at the top), and exit, with or without any change. It should help. Pls try and let us know :)
-
Hi Sanya and Ken
Nope - nothing worked. The site will also not let me log out. How weird is that? No worries.
-
You can force a log out if you change Automatic Login to "No" first and THEN log out.
-
My computer is being temperamental. When I click on the "Add a Play Slot" button, it simply disappears. Signing in again (from the drop down menu) brings the button back, but clicking on it again makes it disappear. I've tried a couple of times but the IT is adamant that I should be frustrated
-
... ah ah , I followed Curls advice and my computer surrendered
-
I didn't mean this to turn into a blow-by-blow account, but I've tried to enter a slot 4 times, using either the tick button or the yellow box and arrow button. However nothing is posted apparently.
-
I see one Post of yours Dick, for monday 2000-2200 UTC
-
Yeah, am making progress slowly. Tried to edit it to include my partner and to change the time but that seemed to erase it. Made another entry. Will probably leave that as it is.
-
Dick, keep trying. It works, just try. Box with tick is OK. Other is cancel.
-
Apologies all. This morning I noticed that all the posts I made to the Play Calendar actuallly made it, even though I couldn't see them at the time over the weekend. I have deleted all but the one I wanted to post.
-
The other alternative is that they decided teaching Bridge for free was not as attractive as giving private lessons for payment. I can't fault anyone who takes that stance, although my own view has always been that Bridge has given me a lifetime of enjoyment and I really don't mind putting something back into the game
-
I discussed this with Maureen Hall at the BIL some years back. Maureen's view was that no teachers giving free lessons on BBO were ever out of pocket in doing so, because they pick up private students in the process. The BIL has always been very successful in finding and nurturing 'young' teachers who often begin as Teaching assistants or Mentors. And I believe that its largely down to Maureen that so many 'established' teachers began teaching there. We can only do so much with the size of the Admin team and the Teaching roster.
I assume that Oliver or Pam keep in touch with our teachers past and present. We perhaps need to utilise more our growing membership to suggest possible new teachers, and to encourage our more senior members to start to host some classes.
We desperately need to recruit more American and Canadian class hosts and TDs, so that the North American evening players are catered for, imo
-
We desperately need to recruit more American and Canadian class hosts and TDs, so that the North American evening players are catered for, imo
That is a fact, we do. There are many members, that have in profile "BIL TD", but never any offered any assistance to IAC.
-
Blame Sanya for disregarding to the NA audience. We have a running joke about that. About two years ago I was teaching both Monday night and Thursday day. Usually about 1hour before the 8pm EST lesson I was called a “traitor” for neglecting the needs of the European player :P .
All jokes aside but fwiw. I would hazard a guess that the NA/SA/Canadian player’s needs in regard to playing time and lessons are diverse and complex. Many of “us” have a local evening game, others play during the day and still others, students and retirees, are a bit more flexible than the working “stiffs” (joke of Joe’s). If there is sufficient interest, I could put together a poll to find where there is the greatest need and we could cater to that?
I would also be interested in what times are sought for our Chinese, Indian, Russian, Southeast Asian and South Pacific players (etc). Feedback on this would be greatly appreciated.
-
Blame Sanya for disregarding to the NA audience. We have a running joke about that. About two years ago I was teaching both Monday night and Thursday day. Usually about 1hour before the 8pm EST lesson I was called a “traitor” for neglecting the needs of the European player :P .
Pffftttttftftf , it's gotta be me who is guilty one ???
Not that I minded those time zones get lessons, what I minded is me losing such lesson.. heck, I never claimed I was over altruistic! ;D
OK, joke aside. Untill BBO cleaned most of our members, we had lots of chinese members, and some from Japan, Indonesia etc. I am affraid they are all gone now, except half dozen perhaps. In 725 members we maybe have 35-40 from NZ and Australia all together. We have lots of Indians and most of them assist lessons and play in trnys in what we call "prime-time". Russians and Turkish players fit there too.
That really leaves both Americas east working class + pacific coast uncovered.
Joe's is category on himself, playing from work!!
-
Many of the people who used to be members joined for the team matches, specifically the series. Certainly that was true of the Indonesian players, one of whom has gone on the earn a star! and also true of a whole lot of Turkish players. The Indonesian players were university students who graduated and got busy in other places with careers. We lost the Turkish players because of the language barrier, they had had a woman who had coordinated their memberships and kept them organized, she spoke superb English, most of her players spoke next to none. When she became no longer available nobody had the language skills or interest / ability to do what she had done for them. The Chinese players were fairly briefly involved with interclub matches, those also collapsed due to language and scheduling issues.
I suspect the best approach would be to try to find someone in those areas who a) speaks English and b) has an interest in coordinating interested players and events with us. Language barriers are a problem as people without a fairly good command of English wouldn't even know of IAC, nor understand how to join or why they should. :)
The west coast hasn't been particularly responsive in the past to efforts providing events at times designed to accommodate them. A few....but it takes more than 5 or 6 to run a tourney or team match.
-
I am an intermediate bridge player who is a better-than-average player on good days but who goes into periodic bridge slumps, usually vacation-induced, that seem to last months.
I am also a BIL member who still plays there in order to support Maureen. Without the BIL I would have stopped playing bridge a long time ago and for that, I am eternally grateful.
The IAC gives me what the BIL cannot: the opportunity to play with better players. I would like to feel the same kind of camaraderie but it can't be only the IAC that is supportive- it has to be the members.
from this forum:
Quote #1
“some very weak players who lurked in the club and pounced when the new member opened a table, so it was often pretty sad bridge, understandably not appealing to a strong advanced player.”
Quote #2
“the aim of the Club ought to be to give people the opportunity to improve and develop their Bridge skills in a friendly and supportive environment…”
Quote #2 is why I joined the IAC while quote #1 personifies why I don't enjoy the IAC like i used to.
Basically, he IAC needs to decide what its mission is. It cannot be everything to everyone.
If its mission is to help and support I/A players to improve, you have my vote. If you would like members to come to the IAC and open a table with the expectation that any I/A player can sit, then make that clear. FYI: There is almost nothing worse for bridge esteem than to be frozen out by the more advanced players.
When you announce that players are needed, specify that it is open to any level or only to a specific level.
To those who wish to restrict the level, when setting up a table, check “permission to play” and then put the level in the table description. Otherwise, it seems reasonable that with open seats, any member of the IAC can sit.
I would love to support the IAC the way I do the BIL.
-
I hope that all will agree that there is not one single reason why on BBO would exist BIL nº1 and BIL nº2 (or so called IAC). BIL and IAC differ lots. Yes, we do have many players that are members of both, but they are not beginners.
Let me just give few vague examples: Most BIL members will appreciate lessons on transfers, while IACers need lesson on Lebensohl. You can not expect someone who is just learning basics to understand what AngelBlue's lessons on squeezes, and any interm+ (or advanced player) will be bored to death listening to a lesson on standard carding, which beginners would find essential. There are teachers as Hoki, teaching in both clubs and very able adjust their lessons to students' needs.
When a player applies for IAC membership, they need to meet criteria posted on home page of IAC site:
FOR NEW MEMBERS: To join IAC, simply register on the site, no applications sent in bbo will be considered. Your nickname (equal here to your BBO nickname) must be at least 6 months old and you must have at least 200 logins. Also, we will check your activity in MyHands, where you need 100+ hands played per month and decent average score, so you'll match skill level of our members. If some of those criteria you do not meet, to avoid rejection, pls await couple of months and apply then.
*
Decent score above means at least close to 0, we do not ask for +2 ave imps per hand. But we will not approve someone who has -150 imps in 70 hands played in each of 2 last months. They will not help no other member improve, and "sad bridge" that you quoted will happen, which again does not benefit anyone.
Imho, IAC's aim is to have active members, and of skill that is approximate to majority. Mind we do not say equal, but approximate level. In club we have about a dozen players that are clearly much better than majority of us, as Joe, Bill, Todd, Donna, Paula, just to mention few. And another 3 dozens that are clearly much worse than majority, but still fit in just fine. In between are hundreds of "us", intermediate players with better & worse days.
It helps all other find pard for club friendly game, trny or sit in team matches, and in result there is absolutely NO need for anyone to restrict level when setting table. But that is only because we do not and can not accept for a member just every BILie that wants to play with his BIL friends that are IAC members too.
I would love to support the IAC the way I do the BIL.
When it was last time you played in IAC, Liz? Be that club friendly game, trny or a team match?
-
Over the years I have played in the IAC's team ladder, the team series, and the partnership ladders. I attend Angel Blue's classes on squeezes and played in his Dare to Declare tourneys. In answer to your question, Curls77, I believe I played in the IAC just last week and my partner and I have been trying to figure out when we can play in the team matches.
The topic is "Why I want to be a member of the IAC" but I inferred that the IAC was also trying to figure out its purpose and what would attract players to become more active. I explained that camaraderie was important to me.
I realize that playing more frequently in the IAC will not only improve my bridge but also build the camaraderie that I am seeking. So, Curls77, I look forward to seeing you in the IAC and maybe even playing together. But please be patient with me! "Sad bridge" and good bridge are relative.
-
Yet again, I got an automated text threatening to remove "inactive" members from the rolls of IAC. As one who lurks, usually invisibly (stalker problem), I'm concerned that my non-participation in tourneys and team matches will be taken as a lack of interest, leading to my removal. I'm not quite sure what steps I can take, other than giving up and playing in the team matches, that will allay the suspicions/accusations that I don't belong here. Suggestions welcome.
-
These threats to oust some of us have raised my anxiety level as well. I have been busy and not playing much, and I have no idea if it has now reached the point where I am about to be cast out. I suppose this is all being decided by some computer program so whatever will be will be.
Maybe we could first be put on probation? I don't know the criteria for being dumped so I don't know if I am near it.
-
I think the email is meant to warn those who have not participated to either participate, or let someone from IAC know not to remove them from the list.
I too have gotten the BBO email, but:
1. I joined this year
2. I have made contributions on the forums here
3. I have attended and/or participated in classes held by Dave, Arik and WOB
4. I have participated in the Dare tourney's and occasional Spur team games.
So I should not be at risk, but still received the email.
-
Right, and I imagine, or hope, that I am safe as well. I compare this with my going to the gym at the Y. Sometimes five days a week. Other times I am gone for a month. But whichever, I don't plan to quit and I don't want to be tossed out.
Assuming this is all to be done by a computer, maybe the computer could do it in two stages: Those, and only those, who would be tossed out could get a warning letter and then, a few moths later, could be dropped if they still don't participate. If it is being done by human hand I can see how that might be too much work but this is the day of the robot. I had a very friendly conversation with one of those robots just a few hours ago regarding my health insurance. They are not very flexible but if the problem is straightforward then we can get along fine.
-
Hi all and thanks for showing concern that many members might share !H
I can send email only so long, and can not explain all. I did not mean it as a threat, blame my "english" if sounded so, sorry.
*
Facts: BBO asks as to keep club under 1000 members. There are many of reasons, but at the end, we better please them & actually we want to please them. When I say "active" it means play in friendly game in the club, in IAC team or trny; assist to a lesson; watch friends play in IAC, etc. None who has done that for last year will be affected, as well as no member that's in club forever as Ken or Mike.
But pls, keep in mind that every week we get about two dozen applications, and we accept about 75% of them, that would satisfy criteria of IAC (posted on main page). But, truth is that grand majority of those people just never EVER puts foot in the club, they are just holders of club card. We are not helping them, and not only they are not helping us - they are in a way harming us. All we will try do is cut some dead weight before we reach forbidden 1000. We keep having same 300+ names active or senior enough, it will just help all if 300 never seen anywhere are simply gone and room made for players that might just become most loyal members ever.
Hope that explains warning mails.
Sanya
-
Sanya,
Thanks.
The BBO idea of keeping membership under 1000 makes some sense. But then, when combined with a steady inflow of new members, I can see how this requires some follow-up action with those who join but never do anything. No doubt there are a great many people who qualify as intermediate or advanced. This would be true in bridge, in golf, in dancing, in just about anything. So I see the problem.
I'll relax on this. I figured that if a computer kicked me off I would appeal to a human (you) to let me back in. But wait! Neither of us has proof that the other of us is human. Some of these robots are getting really clever at disguise.
Anyway, thanks, and I'll relax.
-
thanks for the response and reassurance, Sanya. My paranoia has some not-too-unreasonable roots, and I appreciate you allaying my concern.
-
!H