Re: Cherishing Novices

In message <d779a153-6edc-45da-a836-5286eef50919@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, henrysun909@xxxxxxxxx writes
On Jul 31, 1:55 am, Dave Flower <DavJFlo...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
At a time when the numbers of players is falling, it is vital that
clubs retain new players.

Just as novice drivers are not given their first driving lesson in a
city centre at rush hour, so perhaps we should make it easier for
nivice bridge players.

Here is a, perhaps radical, suggestion that might help.

Introduce a 'Novice' status with the following features:
- It is entirely voluntary; new players are never obliged to take it
- The novice would be obliged to play whatever the local 'simple
system' is
- Opponents would volunteer to play the same system
- Opponents would voluntarily 'keep it simple'. No psyches, 'tactical
bids' or false cards.
- The status would only be available for a few sessions.

Does anyone have any ideas for an 'improver' status ?

Finally, would posters remember that they are a biased sample. Players
who were turned off bridge the first time they visited a bridge club
do not contribute to rgb.

Comments and suggestions invited.

Dave Flower

This is an interesting idea. In a club setting, I would have no
objection to this as long as it was limited to (say) Mon evening and
Thurs afternoon games, i.e., was not universally available.

But I do foresee problems.

First, attendence will, I think, drop over time as players choose not
to play the game with novice restricted rules.

Second, the pool of partners available for people who opt for novice
status will also, I think, drop over time as players choose not to
play with novices who elect this status.

I would recommend to you what I consider to be two superior
alternatives:

First, a 'novice table' in large enough games where two pairs of
novices are stationary, play the same boards as everyone else, but
keep a private score only (that is, their scores are not included in
the matchpointing) with a reduced fee.

I can see very little appeal in this.

Which would my partner and I rather do? Play in a serious duplicate event and come last, or sit at a special table and play against another weak pair, and be assigned meaningless numbers of MPs? It's a no-brainer, we would go for the first option. The novice table idea compares poorly with staying at home and playing social bridge.

Nick

Second, a weekly "pro-am' where more experienced players partner with
less experienced players so that the playing field is more level.

Henrysun909

--
Nick Wedd nick@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Cherishing Novices
    ... The novice would be obliged to play whatever the local 'simple ... to mix this in with a more-or-less serious game, ... worst players in the room on any given night, but I think an idea like ...
    (rec.games.bridge)
  • Re: Cherishing Novices
    ... clubs retain new players. ... nivice bridge players. ... Introduce a 'Novice' status with the following features: ... I expect that most people have played several hundred hands at home before they enter a formal duplicate event. ...
    (rec.games.bridge)
  • Re: Cherishing Novices
    ... clubs retain new players. ... Introduce a 'Novice' status with the following features: ... The novice would be obliged to play whatever the local 'simple ... In a club setting, I would have no ...
    (rec.games.bridge)
  • Re: Cherishing Novices
    ... clubs retain new players. ... Introduce a 'Novice' status with the following features: ... Opponents would volunteer to play the same system ... drivers to accomodate a neophyte driving around the city centre(yes, ...
    (rec.games.bridge)
  • Re: Cherishing Novices
    ... clubs retain new players. ... nivice bridge players. ... Introduce a 'Novice' status with the following features: ... The novice would be obliged to play whatever the local 'simple ...
    (rec.games.bridge)