[DrTodd13]

Lots of comments on the previous posts here.

1) Look at what DeBeers did with diamonds in the movies 50, 60, 70
years ago. DeBeers payed hollywood to make diamond engagement
rings a big part of certain movies and the next thing you know, everybody
wants a diamond ring. This has continued until this day. That is the power
of marketing. As much as I hate DeBeers, maybe ACBL should buy some
of their marketing team to help us. This goes along with the Anna K.
suggestion. Yes, Bill G plays but who wants to be like Bill G aside from the
money? Have a blockbuster movie with famous actors that somehow
revolves around bridge and you'll have an instant resurgence. Getting
"cool" celebrities to play the game and advertise that fact would help but
do we have the money for such extravagence?

2) Let's not talk about Meckstroth's or Wolff's motives. Let's look at results.
It is pretty clear now that the strategy of GCC in nearly every event along with
the current ACBL marketing scheme is not working. If we tried relaxing
system restrictions and things got better then we could say that what
Meckstroth and Wolff did was bad for the game. In general though, I think
their role is overstated. The ACBL should be running unlimited system
events when the tournament is large enough. If you can get enough kids
interested then junior events would also be a good idea. Personally, I've
almost quit playing bridge in real life because of system restrictions. That is
not the norm but if ACBL wants to retain people like me then they have to
do something.

3) We need to get bridge into the schools. Not only is it fun but it is a great learning tool. And another thing, as a society we need to slow down. From my
perspective, families are running themselves ragged with too many activities. All of the young kids I've run across at bridge tourneys are there because they wanted to learn after seeing their parents or grandparents play. How can kids
see these people play if they don't have any free time? So, bridge could be a family activity once kids get a certain age. This is one of the reasons that many
people that learn when they are young give it up until their kids are out of the house. I'm sure in a few years I'll have little Dr. Todd Jr. on my lap helping kick some butt on BBO. It would surprise me if he wouldn't show interest in the game after a while.

[Free]

Maybe reversed psychology could help. If parents tell all their kids to play bridge, they won't simply because the parents told them. BUT if parents forbid to play bridge (!!!) they will show interest, because forbidden things have more attraction

[tigerboy]

I think that most national bridge organisations could learn a lot from the Scandinavian ruling bodies who always seem to have a huge percentage of their total population playing the game.
The number of conventions allowed is irrelevant and most, surely, are not in favour of restriction, but there is a need for skilled marketing personnel to promote the game. The burgeoning of internet bridge is surely good news for recruitment as long as a germ of interest can somehow be engendered, particularly among the younger element when the ability to learn quickly is at its peak.

[Gerben47]

Wow... What a thread has this become. I was away for a while so I have to catch up.

First of all on the article where Meckwell are not portrayed very positively. I don't think he was protecting his client, it's just that he thought the opening bid was not allowed in this particular event. Either he was right or he wasn't. Anyway, the fault was with the director who should not have allowed such a discussion. But it must be hard for a director to tell one of the greatest players of all time to shut up.

The other director who said that if he was called again that the team would be kicked out of the tournament should be taken away his directing licence in my opinion.

Now for the real topic.

When I started I was very young (11 or so) and at some point my partner and I started to play in a local bridge club. Many welcomed us, but some didn't. They didn't like kids in their club, and even more so if they are above them in the ranking. That didn't scare me away though, bridge is just too much fun. It might scare away others, though.

Another part is letting kids know that other kids are playing this game as well, and not just "nerds". They are trying in the USA, I know that, as I have been to one of their junior camps. Now the trick is to reach those who don't play. There are enough kids who are interested, even though most are not.

It's simply not true that kids in Europe don't play those same mindless computer games. They do. That's not the difference. I'm not sure what is...

[irdoz]

This thread makes interesting reading. A few thoughts of my own to pollute this thread....

Computer games are not mindless. I've played many. Go to some RPG onllne sites and youll find over 50,000 people playing at any one time (mostly under 25 year olds) with thriving 'virtual communities' associated with them. Many so called mindless computer games offer significant intellectual challenges... I only say this not because I think they compare to bridge - but because unless you understand their attraction you'll never understand how to market bridge to the next generation.

IMHO bridge thrived in the past because it was marketed well, there was not as many alternatives, it was a social activity that could be played by extended families and social groups (something that rarely seems to happen in my culture now anyway), and it blended well with the dominant cultural values and mores of the time.

There are some places like Holland and Poland where bridge still appears to be integrated into patterns of social and family life, and in Turkey, India, China and Indonesia where bridge appears to be thriving - although some (not all) of these places have huge populations and the large numbers of online players from these countries may just reflect that or it may be something about alternatives and values in those places.

While claims have been made about bridge thriving in Australia that is not my experience..I am within walking distance of three clubs and none of them seem to be doing particularly well..and there is only one night a week in one club where I am likely to find people within thirty years of my age. I learnt bridge on the Internet and started playing face to face here with someone who also learnt on the Internet. As a result we played 'americanised' bridge and 2 over 1 - and in Australia with its 'liberal system regulations' we copped a lot of grief for playing 'wierd foreign methods'.

What made bridge suitable for me was the Internet. On the net a whole lot of barriers get broken down like age, nationality, class. Going out at night to be social with a bunch of people over double my age doesn't really work for me. Jumping on my computer at 5am in the morning and playing a tournament with a partner on the other side of the world and then going to work fits better with the way my life is organised.

I have met dozens of people my age where playing a few sessions at odd hrs at their convenience fits into their lives whereas playing f2f at night doesnt.

I see online bridge as an integal part of the future of this game - and not as part of some recruiting strategy for getting new people to play face to face - while that will happen it is also the case that many people - both old and young - prefer to play on the Internet. "Real" bridge will only ever be recognised through what happens in face to face competition because of the unsolvable cheating problems endemic in online bridge. Online bridge should be recognised as a different game, played in a different media with different rules. For example, online bridge allows self-alerting. When I am queried if I have no agreement with my partner I disclose what I think my partner should know (or what I intended the bid to mean)..so often I get the firm lecture that 'your opps are not entitled to know more than yr partner' and 'if there's no agreement say so'...I think this is an example of a lack of lateral thinking, and not in the spirit of the intent of the laws.

If anything would have put me off this game it is the highly emotional contestation over alerts and disclosure and the laws in online bridge. The first tournament I played in was onlnie. I knew nothing about many aspects of the laws, and my obligations. Suddenly I found myself made to feel like a criminal because I didnt alert 2nt in an auction 1nt-2c-2d-2nt as "May not have a 4 card major'.

Directors having to deal with angst about alerts, disclosure and the rules, often rushed off their feet (I went and got qualified as a director and have directed online for over 2 years now) in an environment where many people do not communicate in english and where the only mechanism of communication is typed words when 90% of communication is non-verbal cues that don't operate online is a major challenge. So often I want to say relax, relax, relax in response to lots of online bridge behaviour...and I wish I could bring my script pad when I direct.

So one aspect in thinking about 'the future of bridge' might be articles about online bridge - about survival skills online, about how to communicate, about tolerance for cultural diversity and language differences, about the fact that ACBL laws, alerts and procedures aren't global, about how to find partners, about how to deal with some of the problematic personality types (the lecturing expert, the resulter, the implied accusations of cheating, the poor sport etc.) and some introductory guides to bridge online and tournament behaviour.

Thats enuff pollution...

[Free]

irdoz, on Jan 28 2004, 08:21 PM, said:

Computer games are not mindless. I've played many. Go to some RPG onllne sites and youll find over 50,000 people playing at any one time (mostly under 25 year olds) with thriving 'virtual communities' associated with them. Many so called mindless computer games offer significant intellectual challenges... I only say this not because I think they compare to bridge - but because unless you understand their attraction you'll never understand how to market bridge to the next generation.

I absolutely agree! Some people seem to be blind about bridge and say its for old people, other just think that computergames are totally mindless. If you have no experience in a certain topic, I think you shouldn't give your opinion about it. I play a lot of strategy games (RTS) and I can assure you that you'll lose without thinking!

[Trpltrbl]

The_Hog, on Jan 16 2004, 06:13 PM, said:

Re Meckstroth and his motives, you may know him well, however I stand by my claim. His behaviour directed at a visiting Australian team last year when he was playing with and attempting to protect his client was disgraceful to say the least. I would point any interested parties to the following link to allow them to judge for themselves:
http://www.nswba.com...news/JDR_4B.htm

I have played against Jeff and Eric more then a few times, and they always had clients. I too was playing some not everyday openings, and after I gave them the written suggested defense they had no problem at all. I think that if you play in a tournament with certain conventions that happen to be strange in that part of the world, you should maybe find out what is and is not allowed and go from there. I read the article and it seems the team is playing a string of tournaments in ACBL country. Find out what is legal and what you need to do to make it legal. I think Jeff had every right to get mad, especially because the Aussi team made it to the finals without even haven a written defense for the 2 opening. And I am sure they had to tell all the other teams they played about it, but maybe Jeff was only one to speak his mind.
And as for the Directors, they overreacted but maybe they had gotten a few other complains about these players. Sometimes players don't confront the players but go to director and complain.

Mike


P.S. Is this the same Aussi team that played at Nationals some years ago in CA? They had same problem there too then, some of the names sound familiar.

[DrTodd13]

Don't know if anybody brought this up but the issue as I understand
it with the Australian bridge tourists was using 2♣ or 2♦ for
Ekrens where a defense for 2♦ or 2♥ respectively were already
approved. The argument of "use the already approved defense but
make the extra step that you get as a natural bid" didn't seem to hold
water. There was the tourney itself and then the systems committee.
What I find ridiculous is for 2♥ Ekrens to be allowed but not 2♦
Ekrens. Either all flavors of Ekrens should be allowed or none should
be allowed. Very few of us have first hand knowledge although mine
is probably closer than some but if I got the facts of the case wrong
then just take this as a philosophical point.

[Jlall]

Recently on the most popular poker forum I found a 2700+ post thread on bridge, and most of the posters are young people (some of them post here). I still think tapping into other games like poker and spades is a great way to attract young people to bridge. The #1 thing bridge has going for it is being the most interesting/complex card game around. Naturally that should appeal to young card players from other games.

[Hanoi5]

That is true but I think the bridge 'movie' suggestion is also important. All games have had a movie depicting the life of players (pool, poker, you name it) and the way it is played in tourneys. And also on TV, there was a CSI case of a Scrabble player killed with some letter pieces into his mouth, what about a bridge murde? those are more interesting.

[hrothgar]

Jlall, on Nov 22 2009, 01:40 PM, said:

Recently on the most popular poker forum I found a 2700+ post thread on bridge, and most of the posters are young people (some of them post here). I still think tapping into other games like poker and spades is a great way to attract young people to bridge. The #1 thing bridge has going for it is being the most interesting/complex card game around. Naturally that should appeal to young card players from other games.

Justin,

January is just around the corner...

Couldn't you have waited until the 28th to restart this thread?
It would have been ever so much more elegant.

[Jlall]

hrothgar, on Nov 22 2009, 07:04 AM, said:

Jlall, on Nov 22 2009, 01:40 PM, said:

Recently on the most popular poker forum I found a 2700+ post thread on bridge, and most of the posters are young people (some of them post here). I still think tapping into other games like poker and spades is a great way to attract young people to bridge. The #1 thing bridge has going for it is being the most interesting/complex card game around. Naturally that should appeal to young card players from other games.

Justin,

January is just around the corner...

Couldn't you have waited until the 28th to restart this thread?
It would have been ever so much more elegant.

haha I know, I was bored and just reading through all the old posts...what else is there to do when you're still up at 7 AM

[ONEferBRID]

I wasn't introduced to the game until I was in college, and became "hooked" when I took 3rd in a small tournament.
But I couldn't spare the time to study the game at that time because of obvious reasons--the need graduate and find a real job.

Then marriage... and essentially a 38 year hiatus because spouse didn't play and because of job constraints.

Enter kids and the internet..... and life had changed.

My kids put me on to the bridge sites and message boards.
I didn't realize how little I knew about the game. ( Some of you have observed that ).

One son is vastly better than me at bridge, but "hand/eye" coordination games interest him most.... in fact he has become a "professional" .

I don't think bridge will die, but eventho the group may remain smaller than we may like, I think it will be a much more improved group because of the ease of internet bridge.

A fleeting, but memorable moment for me in bridge, was kibitzing directly behind Rodwell and Meckstroth at a National in Dallas. In what other sport can you just "walk into the dugout and sit next to home run kings " ?

[georgeac]

that 2p2 forum post has been up a long time. much like this thread. i think to get more young people involved it has to be taught more in schools and universities. out of 20-30 kids maybe 2-5 will continue to play. that might not seem like a lot but its a strong enough base for it not to die completely in the future.

[Winstonm]

You don't want young people - recycle the old ones; they're easier to beat.

[babushkka]

Jlall, on Nov 22 2009, 05:40 AM, said:

Recently on the most popular poker forum I found a 2700+ post thread on bridge, and most of the posters are young people (some of them post here). I still think tapping into other games like poker and spades is a great way to attract young people to bridge. The #1 thing bridge has going for it is being the most interesting/complex card game around. Naturally that should appeal to young card players from other games.

and others of us lurk here

The big problem as far I see it is perception Chess is seen as the most complex game there is. Poker is given a lot of tv time which makes kids love it. While bridge is seen as the old peoples game.

The complexities of bridge are just too hard to grasp when you first start. To the untrained eye it just looks like a small step up complexity wise from Spades. But what a difference the bidding and a dummy make.

The real moment I really began to fall in love with bridge is when I realized it was possible to bluff in the play, defense, and bidding. In poker you learn to bluff immediately. But in bridge it takes a long time before you can learn to pull a bluff.

I've thought about what the answer could be, but I don't think there is a simple answer. I don't see bridge dying, but I don't really see it growing either. I think it might be interesting if there was a learn to play bridge software for juniors that taught some more unusual tactics that juniors like. Learning to play bridge in school would be helpful, but that doesn't seem to happen often. It seems to me a lot of young bridge players start out because their parents taught them. Maybe the best stance ACBL can take is encouragin parents to teach their children to play.

[nige1]

The_Hog, on Jan 16 2004, 06:13 PM, said:

Re Meckstroth and his motives, you may know him well, however I stand by my claim. His behaviour directed at a visiting Australian team last year when he was playing with and attempting to protect his client was disgraceful to say the least. I would point any interested parties to the following link to allow them to judge for themselves:
http://www.nswba.com...news/JDR_4B.htm
I also refer you to comments that Richard Willey, (Hrothgar), has made regarding his dealings with him, and the intransigence shown.

The Hog's link doesn't work any more

There are many reasons that Bridge is in decline and about some of them there is little we can do...

I've known experts like Hugh Kelsey and Eric Crowhurst with impeccable behaviour but the the biographies of top players reveal that some others revel in what they call "hardball".

I've taught bridge a long time. A few former pupils have given up the game when they experience "rudeness" in a real Bridge club. This often takes the form of experienced players invoking the rules in an unpleasant way.

Such incidents are exacerbated because the rules of bridge are too sophisticated and complex for most players and directors to understand. They are over-subjective and this results in inconsistent rulings that players deem unfair.

I also agree with the BBOers who think that young, bright, and adventurous would-be players are frustrated by system-restrictions.

Unfortunately, most administrators don't regard these as problems so we can expect little change.

The best hope for Bridge is better PR. more media exposure, and more charismatic characters like Ely Culbertson, Omar Sharif, Zia Mahmood, and so on.

[aguahombre]

Winstonm, on Nov 23 2009, 05:32 PM, said:

You don't want young people - recycle the old ones; they're easier to beat.

I represent that remark.

[eyhung]

nige1, on Nov 26 2009, 03:30 PM, said:

I also agree with the BBOers who think that young, bright, and adventurous would-be players are frustrated by system-restrictions.

Poppycock. As a younger player myself who has taught several peers how to play, I never met anyone who "refused to continue to play bridge" because of system restrictions. Rudeness, yes. Too complex, yes. Too many other competing interests, yes. But too restrictive on system? Come on! Oh, I grant you there probably exists some person who has stopped playing bridge due to the "draconian regulations". But for every player who refuses to play bridge because "they won't let me play what I want to play" I will bet there are dozens who aren't interested in playing because it's too hard.

Sure, system wonks are frustrated that their systems are not allowed. I myself would like to see some changes to the current system policy in ACBL-land. But saying that would-be players are frustrated to the extent that they're not going to play bridge? Give me a break. Bridge is declining in popularity not because of system restrictions, but for many other reasons, and it is misleading to project your frustrations onto the mass of beginning bridge players.

[hrothgar]

eyhung, on Nov 27 2009, 02:26 AM, said:

Poppycock. As a younger player myself who has taught several peers how to play, I never met anyone who "refused to continue to play bridge" because of system restrictions.

I stopped playing specifically because of system restrictions