[blml] [Fwd: severely limited importance]

[Sven Pran]

> On Behalf Of Jeff Easterson
> "Tolerance is the realisation that it isn't worthwhile to get excited
> about something"  Helmut Qualtinger
> 
> Duplicate bridge is based on certain fundamental concepts insuring
> equality.  Some are: each player/pair is vulnerable or not vulnerable
> the (roughly) same amount of hands, each player sits in the 1st position
> the same amount of times, and the same amount of times as he is second,
> third or fourth to call.  These premises are so fundamental that we
> rarely even think about them.
> 
> In most of the clubs in which I play or direct the usual movement is a
> mitchell with two boards per round.  Either complete (for example 13
> tables, 26 bds.) or incomplete (17 tables, 34 bds. but each pair plays
> only 26).  I daresay this is valid for the great majority of club games.
> 
> In some of these clubs there are a few pairs in which one of the players
> is much stronger than the other and definitely the dominant player of
> the pair.  These pairs have learned to always play EW.  In a typical
> mitchell (example 13 tables) the same player on EW is first hand for the
> first seven tables played (even amount of tables slightly changes this
> but a clever EW pair can counteract this) and then third hand for the
> last six.  It is usually possible for them to change positions after the
> seventh round and no one notices.  (Illegal of course, but rarely
> noticed or enforced.)
> In an incomplete mitchell (17 tables as above) one player is first hand
> for the first nine rounds, and third for only four rounds, even if they
> don't bother to change positions.
> Can this be remedied?  Yes, quite easily.  When placing the bds. on the
> tables work with "double-sets" of tables.  That is: table 1, bds. 1 &2;
> table 2, bds. 5 & 6; table 3, bds. 3 & 4; table 4, bds. 7 & 8.  And
> further in this way.
> 
> For what it's worth, JE

Why not simply try something else than Mitchell?

I have noticed that outside Scandinavia Mitchell still seems to be the
predominant schedule used. We very seldom use it, not for the reasons
discussed above but simply because we in most cases consider even Howell
much better than Mitchell unless we have two distinct flights to be seated
in the separate directions. (Yes I know about arrow switching, we detest
it!)

But the normal schedule for pair events here in Norway these days seems to
be barometer, either round robin or Swiss pairs. Players love it and I
believe it has raised the quality of our events tremendously from the time
when traditional Howell or Mitchell were the "only" schedules used.

I do know that I may stir up traditional feelings ("we have always done it
this way"), but give it a try. I dare say it is well worth the effort.

Regards Sven