Help
So many interesting situations. If only I could overhear the discussions between JL and BH. Of particular interest would be the hands where they sat in the same seat and chose differently ---not the results, but the thought processes.
This partnership will emerge as awsome; and what we already know about JL will become obvious to the World, soon.
USBC 2012
#61
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 12,029
- Joined: 2009-February-21
- Gender:Male
- Location:St. George, UT
Posted 2012-May-04, 19:48
"Bidding Spades to show spades can work well." (Kenberg)
#62
- 2011 Poster of The Year winner
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 6,002
- Joined: 2010-July-08
- Gender:Male
Posted 2012-May-05, 02:54
I have not really talked to BH lol. He was the enemy, and I played all 6 sets that I was in against Meckwell (just like last year). We shook hands and said well played, gl, whatever after the match...it's not like we can discuss hands since he has to play the finals.
I played all day yesterday with a fever and 2 nights ago. I think I destroyed my body/did not help it get better since I was just pounding more caffeine in the form of espresso and red bull, and running on caffeine and adrenaline. Now I can't sleep and am a little bit delirious and am alternating between hot and cold.
This was a weird tournament emotionally. As was posted in this thread, our team changed last minute. Gavin and Kran at the beginning of the tournament had an accident on 2N p 3C, one thought they played puppet and one didn't. That is how raw their partnership was, because Gavin wasn't even on a team until 1 or 2 days before the event, and Gav and Kran have rarely played together. Kevin and I used to be a regular partnership, but since he plays with Dan Zagorin we had to simplify much of our system since neither of us remembered it much. Hemant and Reese knew their stuff but are still a relatively new partnership.
All of that indicates to me that winning long matches is a lot more about psychology, and a lot less about partnerships and systems. This trials was called the "lame duck" trials, because the Fleisher team and Nickell team are breaking up after this, as well as a partnership in each of their teams. The point being, it was considered that they won't play as well as usual, ready to move on to new things. I suggested that I thought Nickell would not be lame duck, because their team is too determined to do well and play in world championships. Anyone who has not met Meckstroth will have no idea how intensely competitive he is about EVERYTHING related to bridge. Same with Hamman. It is clear they both want their legacy to be BEST PLAYER EVER. IMO, that has been their competitive advantage over such a long period of time, and that is why they have stayed at the top for so long. Sure, they are great players, but they also just have the burning desire to do well.
I thought that the Fleisher team would be lame duck, and they were, losing pretty handily to clee which was obv a huge upset.
Our team had great chemistry, and a burning desire to win, and a feeling that we were going to win, even if somehow we shouldn't. When we were down 100, we were sure we would come back and win. And we reached a point where we might have won, down 40 with 15 boards and momentum is nothing to sneeze at. Meckwell are freaking amazing in that spot though, and it showed...we were swinging hard at the end because we had nothing go our way. But we had a shot. The nickell team used to be known for winning from ANY spot, if they needed to win a dogfight, if they needed a huge comeback, if they needed to hold a big lead after losing some of it. In the round before, they played the spector team that had half of the team that won the trials the year before, and they were down 50 early. And they came back.
Having that competitive drive, and that positive outlook, requires good team chemistry. Team chemistry is just massively underrated. If our random team could reach the semi finals and make a comeback of 100 imps against a team like Nickell, when we had no partnerships and were certainly outmatched talent wise, and likewise our random team the year before that had Joe and me which was a non partnership WIN the whole thing, there is something more going on imo, there is not enough of a luck element in playing 4 120 board matches to explain it all with randomness.
This should show that having a pairs trials or something of that nature would be a horrible way to pick a team.
I am really looking forward to the finals tomorrow. Nickell vs Diamond is the stuff legends are made of.
I played all day yesterday with a fever and 2 nights ago. I think I destroyed my body/did not help it get better since I was just pounding more caffeine in the form of espresso and red bull, and running on caffeine and adrenaline. Now I can't sleep and am a little bit delirious and am alternating between hot and cold.
This was a weird tournament emotionally. As was posted in this thread, our team changed last minute. Gavin and Kran at the beginning of the tournament had an accident on 2N p 3C, one thought they played puppet and one didn't. That is how raw their partnership was, because Gavin wasn't even on a team until 1 or 2 days before the event, and Gav and Kran have rarely played together. Kevin and I used to be a regular partnership, but since he plays with Dan Zagorin we had to simplify much of our system since neither of us remembered it much. Hemant and Reese knew their stuff but are still a relatively new partnership.
All of that indicates to me that winning long matches is a lot more about psychology, and a lot less about partnerships and systems. This trials was called the "lame duck" trials, because the Fleisher team and Nickell team are breaking up after this, as well as a partnership in each of their teams. The point being, it was considered that they won't play as well as usual, ready to move on to new things. I suggested that I thought Nickell would not be lame duck, because their team is too determined to do well and play in world championships. Anyone who has not met Meckstroth will have no idea how intensely competitive he is about EVERYTHING related to bridge. Same with Hamman. It is clear they both want their legacy to be BEST PLAYER EVER. IMO, that has been their competitive advantage over such a long period of time, and that is why they have stayed at the top for so long. Sure, they are great players, but they also just have the burning desire to do well.
I thought that the Fleisher team would be lame duck, and they were, losing pretty handily to clee which was obv a huge upset.
Our team had great chemistry, and a burning desire to win, and a feeling that we were going to win, even if somehow we shouldn't. When we were down 100, we were sure we would come back and win. And we reached a point where we might have won, down 40 with 15 boards and momentum is nothing to sneeze at. Meckwell are freaking amazing in that spot though, and it showed...we were swinging hard at the end because we had nothing go our way. But we had a shot. The nickell team used to be known for winning from ANY spot, if they needed to win a dogfight, if they needed a huge comeback, if they needed to hold a big lead after losing some of it. In the round before, they played the spector team that had half of the team that won the trials the year before, and they were down 50 early. And they came back.
Having that competitive drive, and that positive outlook, requires good team chemistry. Team chemistry is just massively underrated. If our random team could reach the semi finals and make a comeback of 100 imps against a team like Nickell, when we had no partnerships and were certainly outmatched talent wise, and likewise our random team the year before that had Joe and me which was a non partnership WIN the whole thing, there is something more going on imo, there is not enough of a luck element in playing 4 120 board matches to explain it all with randomness.
This should show that having a pairs trials or something of that nature would be a horrible way to pick a team.
I am really looking forward to the finals tomorrow. Nickell vs Diamond is the stuff legends are made of.
blogging at http://www.justinlall.com
#63
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 16,784
- Joined: 2003-October-07
- Gender:Male
Posted 2012-May-06, 19:28
Having that competitive drive, and that positive outlook, requires good team chemistry. Team chemistry is just massively underrated.
---
This was a weird tournament emotionally. As was posted in this thread, our team changed last minute
----
Our team had great chemistry, and a burning desire to win, and a feeling that we were going to win, even if somehow we shouldn't.
---
Anyone who has not met Meckstroth will have no idea how intensely competitive he is about EVERYTHING related to bridge. Same with Hamman. It is clear they both want their legacy to be BEST PLAYER EVER. IMO, that has been their competitive advantage over such a long period of time, and that is why they have stayed at the top for so long. Sure, they are great players, but they also just have the burning desire to do well
---
So Nickell wins after having a rather poor year for them. Congrats on a great final by both teams.
---
This was a weird tournament emotionally. As was posted in this thread, our team changed last minute
----
Our team had great chemistry, and a burning desire to win, and a feeling that we were going to win, even if somehow we shouldn't.
---
Anyone who has not met Meckstroth will have no idea how intensely competitive he is about EVERYTHING related to bridge. Same with Hamman. It is clear they both want their legacy to be BEST PLAYER EVER. IMO, that has been their competitive advantage over such a long period of time, and that is why they have stayed at the top for so long. Sure, they are great players, but they also just have the burning desire to do well
---
So Nickell wins after having a rather poor year for them. Congrats on a great final by both teams.