henrysun909@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> On May 5, 6:00 am, Jürgen R. <jurg...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> Yes, of course you will play the system that you know best, and
> if the difference in system produces wild swings, the score is
> simply less of a measure of skill and more like playing
> roulette than it would be of both played the same system.
> This can't be helped, unfortunately.
>
> ****************
>
> Sorry to disagree, but that's one of the most ignorant comments about
> bridge that I've ever read.
That seems overly harsh. I don't agree with Jürgen, but I can see his
point.
> When the US teams in the 1950's were winning champion****ps based on
> Goren and then the Italians started winning champion****ps based on
> artificial club systems, were they playing roulette?
>
> When in 1970 and 1971, the Taiwanese teams in the Bermuda Bowl
> actually got to the semi-finals twice using Precision, at the time an
> unheard of combination of strong club, 5 card majors, weak 1nt, and
> some simple asking bids, was that playing roulette?
>
> How about the run of the sponsored Precision team in the US, which won
> Spingolds in 1970 and 1971 and the Vanderbilt in 1972? Were they
> playing Roulette by using a non-standard system?
No - and you and Jürgen both know it. They were playing _advanced_
systems,
that better enabled them to reach the right contract. That's not at all
the same as choosing to play a different system simply to generate some
game swings - which appears to be what you're suggesting. otoh, when you
have only one pair in our two local clubs playing Acol, it's a fairly safe
bet that they're winning some boards purely because of the confusion it's
causing for their opponents. This isn't roulette, but it also isn't a
bonus you'd get if you were playing Meckwell.
So I agree with you that playing an unusual system will give you an edge -
at club level - but I doubt it will gain you anything, in the long run,
against experts.
|
