Diary of a Bridge Pro, #10

 Hi All,
  Louisville is now history - another NABC in the books. Many of us prefer to call these tournaments “Nationals”. Either way, Louisville was a life-changing tournament for me.
  When I arrived at the playing site in Louisville, I enjoyed a convergence - as I described last week in Blog #1, I ran into Richard Oshlag, almost immediately upon arriving at the venue. The Fast Pairs in Toronto has been named for him - he’s won it twice already, and been an ace “computer guy” for the league for literally decades. So while most events are named for deceased bridge personalities, in Richard’s case they made an exception.
  Personally, I love fast-paced events - I find bridge is a much better game when played fast.
  Minutes after I ran into Richard, the Maiers told me about the Baron-Barclay program for bloggers, Those two encounters happening within minutes of each other, that struck me as a convergence.
  I took that as a sign - the universe telling me: "You should do this."
  *****
  Another convergence occurred when I played against Paulo Brum, the Brazilian - American bridge expert now living in Ohio.
  Paulo and I had discussed meeting in Louisville, but the universe was taking no chances, so I faced him for two boards in the pair game. He is 25 years past his junior days (still a young guy by bridge standards), with immense drive - perfect for what I’m trying to build.
  The blog and the agency launched simultaneously, I ran a similar agency, matching pros and clients forty years ago, when I was first out of college. During lockdown, with live bridge dead and online bridge the only game in town, I resurrected the agency idea and put it into practice once more. 
    As for blogs, I’d always thought that would be a good medium for me, it just took me until now to actually start writing and posting one. I tried something similar for Jay Whipple at a Florida regional, I’m thinking it may have been Daytona Beach, 2019 - I wrote a bulletin-board style column for the online DB there, under the byline “Roshi Wilsonovich”.
  *****

  Here’s a deal from my Saturday in Louisville, Board 23 - Working Title:

  The Point Count is Your Friend - 
Or - ,Take the Game, Discuss the Slam

 This deal is from the first Saturday in Louisville. I was in Louisville without games - Saturday I scavenged a game with Ellis Feigenbaum, now of Laguna Beach, California. Shortly after we made the date, the Icelandic Viking Girl confronted me with an offer - more of a demand, really - that I play with one of her clients that day. The offer was appealing, and there was a fair fee attached, but I begged off anyway - I’d already told Ellie I’d play..

  Since then I had a long exchange with Paul Lewis about the ethics of switching out on games - it is a wide-spread and somewhat controversial practice among pros. The broad understanding generally is that either player can cancel “if either of us gets work”. That’s the code for others, not for me - I find that the animosity created by switching out of dates far outweighs the benefit of the immediate income (don’t expect that line of thought to carry much weight with your landlord or credit card company).

  I explained the situation as best I could to Disa’s disappointed client, a slender and elegant southern doyenne, as Ellie and I plodded through our dystopian day. Consider Board 23 from the first session:

  In First Position, Vulnerable against Not, I held Axxx, QJTx, xx, Axx - WBS Doctrine (dogma?) advocates that one opens some 11 point hands vulnerable, and most 11 point hands not vulnerable. This hand is drowning in “positive adjustment factors” - the concentration of heart honors (QJTx), the Ace to Jack ratio - (2 to 1), 4-4 in the majors - to me, my hand was a mandatory One Club Opening.

  Now let’s swing around to partner’s side of the table: Opposite my One Club Opening, Ellie held: Kx, Ax, KQJ9xx, Kxx - He bid 1D, naturally. I’d be happy to discuss the merits of a strong jump shift to 2D - (Summary: Lots of Merit). Ellie wasn’t sure how I’d treat 2D (I’m not sure either, but without discussion I think I’d have to treat it as strong, but who knows?), so he simply bid 1 Diamond. 

  I find it ironic that after zillions of hours spent developing systems far more elaborate than anything that might have been imagined by the founders of contract, almost 100 years ago, there is now no consensus on the most basic sequences - like 1C - (Pass)- 2D, for instance.

  Instead, there’s just bad bidding, like Ellie and I executed here.

  Over Ellie’s One Diamond, I bid 1NT - I have no objection to a hypothetical 1 Heart rebid, with my 4-4-2-3 shape, but I was, from the outset, playing damage control.

  It didn’t work.

  Ellie now leapt to 4C, asking for aces, and committed to 6NT. Automatic (and well-deserved) zero.

  Here’s my thinking: After 1C - 1D - 1NT, as responder, I’d count my points (I’d actually have counted them before I responded 1 Diamond). 

  Raw Point Count: 16 -
  Points For Length six card diamond suit): 3 or 4 
  Negative for isolated honors in the other three suits: - 1
  Adjusted Point Count: 19
  Opener’s Range: 11+ - 14
  Our Team’s Total: 30 to 33
  Adjusted Points Required for NT Slam: 33/34
  Points Required for Slam With Fit: 32

  *****

  To a novice such a calculation might seem cumbersome or even overwhelming. To an experienced player: (and Ellie and I have probably been at bridge close to 100 years, between us, so we are nothing if not experienced):-that sort of calculation should take mere moments, ten seconds at the absolute most.

  So we conclude, after 1C - 1D - 1NT - ?

  Top Bid: 

  3NT: 100
  4NT: 70
  3D (If you’re sure it’s forcing): 60
  2D: (for you many TWCB devotees among the readership: 120 - 60 for the bid, and 60 because your client may love using the convention) 
  4C: Ace-asking, the bid chosen at the table: 20

  Executive Summary: The Point Count is Your Friend - use it!
  
  *****
   I wonder at times, why launch this blog? Why launch WBS, my bridge pro agency? Of course there are the natural motivations, the human drive for wealth, power, and conventional success. As Gladwell asserts, each of us is a product of the time and place we’re born to. I’m not exempt from those human desires, for money and recognition.

  But I have higher purposes as well: For too long bridge customers have been saddled with most mediocre service. Of hundreds or even thousands of pros operating nationwide, at most a dozen of them are truly first-rate. Some are great players but abusive partners - others are supportive and pleasant partners but from hunger as players.

  More still are weak in both departments.

  I too can improve in both departments, and other departments as well - on an ongoing basis, I strive to do so.

  Still, it requires no absence of humility (sorry for the double negative) for me to recognize that I’m good at this - playing pro with clients. The market confirms that for me on an ongoing basis - my regional rates are the highest in the industry, and I can work quite a bit, if I choose to.

  In some respects, I look at our bridge world and I feel that we are mired in mediocrity. Much like the rest of the contemporary world. Maybe it has always been this way, hard to say. This syndrome of rampant mediocrity seems more widespread today than in previous decades - What  do you thinK/ 

  I'm reminded of the institutional, corporate inertia which supermarket executive Parker Posey had to confront in Price Check - check out this one, Parker’s introduction to  her corporate charges at their Long Island headquarters.

  Thought for the Day: We don’t get to choose the era we live in.