I think this is interesting; I just sent off a tournament flier to the American Contract Bridge League.
They sent it back saying they wanted this and that change. The changes are rather insignificant and required too but that is not the interesting point.
What is interesting that they would review fliers.
From what I have seen from Chess Organizers is that if the USCF did the same thing; there would be a lot Chess Organizers needing hospitalization (stroke or breakdowns) or the USCF would be sued by about thousand people. But I could have that wrong
The USCF doesn’t review fliers, it does review TLAs, especially for things like Grand Prix and Junior Grand Prix events where there are some specific conditions that must be met to be eligible.
If there’s a breakdown of ACBL members by age on their website, I didn’t spot it. They do have some pages that talk about their youth bridge programs.
However, I believe the USCF and the ACBL have had discussions several times in the past regarding the greater success of our youth programs compared to theirs.
Although ACBL is trying. And sometimes do quite well.
Most Bridge Players are probably over 65. It is sort of retirement game in the USA. That actually has advantages. For example in the SE USA both Chess and Bridge are not really popular but Bridge tournaments with consistency outdraw Chess tournaments. That is mostly demographic differences.
However as already noted many college students, in the past, did play Bridge. I think Bridge (and Chess) would be useful to youths.
Michael, do you have access to statistics on the age of bridge players, or is that just your gut feeling on their average age?
I have often wondered why it is that the younger generation (like my two sons, who are 23 and 33) seem to prefer adventure board and card games to classic games like chess and bridge. My older son is very active in a gaming group in PA, but as far as I know they don’t play either chess or bridge at their monthly parties.
I really think it has to do with the element of chance in those games. The better player will USUALLY win, but a lesser skilled player can win if the dice/cards are right.
There is essentially NO element of chance in chess (other than in pairings, perhaps.)
Duplicate bridge, which is what ACBL focuses on, is about how to make the best possible contract from a specific hand of bridge, which is a combination of proper bidding and proper play.
I also think that’s why Texas Hold 'Em poker is so popular in casinos and on TV. Joe Nobody might not beat Doyle Brunson in a long tournament, but nearly every hand CAN be won by the player with the weaker starting cards.
(the above is statement about retirees not demographics per se)
Below is some actual Demographics. I don’t know how accurate.
“ACBL member demographics for 2008: 50% male, 50% female; 63% between the ages of 60 and 75; 20% college graduates and 45% have graduate or professional degrees; 56% have incomes of $100,000 or greater.”
Note that the term “Duplicate” refers to other players playing the same board. In that sense Duplicate Bridge is very different from other cards (including Rubber Bridge). It is a skill game. You are competing against other players playing the same cards and the same direction.
Note too that believe or not there are people who were or are trying establish Duplicate Poker and even advertising in ACBL Bulletin (the magazine of the ACBL)
I think ACBL and USCF should try to swap skill sets. I think Chess can be good for old people and Bridge for young people. Or at least it is worth exploring
Close. The opponents you are currently against will have different skill levels so there is a difference when your scores are compared against others playing in your direction. For example, if your opponents bid like idiots and play even worse, they deserve to finish on the bottom for that hand, but you got a top on that hand just for sitting down. In the course of a session the idiots (and experts) will be passed around so the final scores should indeed reflect the skill level.