Excellent Bridge

The National Bridge Championships ended yesterday, and Law Prof on the Loose was there most every day. Our best finishes included 14th out of 73 in an open team event on Wednesday (my best finish ever in an open, multi-session, Regional or National event, I believe), and 6th out of 69 in the B division of a team event on Sunday.

For some highlights of my bridge-playing exploits over the last week, see here.

Staycation

Sorry for the lack of content this week, faithful readers. As you may have noticed, I'm taking a "staycation" to play bridge at the North American Bridge Championships, which the ACBL has thoughtfully scheduled about 4 blocks from my home. Back next week with more of your favorite content.

The Ages of Bridge

As I remarked when this article came out, bridge has an image as an old person's game -- and a pretty well-deserved image it is, too. I'm considered a whippersnapper at the National Bridge Championships currently going on in Washington DC -- most of the players are in their 60s or older.

That's why it was so specially delightful to play against two young brothers in yesterday's game, and when I say young, it turns out they were nine and twelve. They were so cute! They played very fast and liked to help pass the boards from one table to the next.

And guess what -- in the first session of play, they had an excellent game. They finished at nearly 62% (non-bridge players, take my word for it, that's a very good score) and were tied for second in the overall event (out of 104 pairs participating). Hot stuff for anyone, especially for kids that age! They didn't do so well in the second session, but this pair is obviously going to go places in the world of bridge real soon.

Maybe there's hope for bridge after all -- I've been worried that the game will die out for lack of new players, but there are at least some younger folks still getting started.

Against the Best

One of the greatest things about playing bridge is that you can show up at a tournament, pay your entry fee, and literally play against the best players in the world. There's no other competitive activity I know where that happens. You can't just show up and play golf against Tiger Woods. You can't even play in the same tournament. But in bridge, you can.

Well, here at the summer North American Bridge Championships, being held right here in Washington, DC, my partner and I have already played against Zia Mahmood, whom many people regard as being the number one player in the world (althoug his official rank appears to be 15th). It was definitely a hoot to see him at our table.

And by the way . . . we beat him! Over the whole session! We finished a little above average and he and his partner . . . well, let's not publish the score. Of course, he was probably playing with a client (top players hire themselves out to play in tournaments), so his partner was probably not much of a player. But still! It was fun to play and fun to see the final score.

The Mind Game

Another of my eccentric interests (besides tax protestors) is bridge. It's a great game -- intellectual, social, and exciting all at the same time. But there is one big problem: it's out of fashion. Your image of bridge, let's face it, is that it's a game your grandmother plays. The average age of members in the official league, the ACBL (American Contract Bridge League) is 67 and rising. Players are dying faster than new players are joining the league. The league is not doing a good job of recruiting new players, particularly younger new players. I'm no longer less than half the age of most of my opponents, as was true when I joined the league, but a lot of them still have at least 20 years on me. I figure organized bridge has about another 10 years before it's all over, because there won't be any players left.

That's why I'm not sure whether this article today's NY Times is good or bad. It suggests that playing bridge regularly may help stave off the onset of dementia.

Well, that's nice, and the ACBL has actually used it before as a recruiting tool, but an article about how bridge is good for the over-90 set (really, the article is all about a study of people older than 90) is not exactly a big turn on for the 20-40 something crowd that bridge needs. I'm happy that bridge helps people, but the article just cements the image of bridge as a recreation of the old -- the very old, in fact.

Funny, my 1950s-era Emily Post says that you have to play at least a passable game of bridge or you won't get invited anywhere. Imagine. Times have changed.

The Great Bridge Scandal of 2007

Quite a story roiling the bridge world: the U.S. women's bridge team, winners of the of Venice Cup, the international women's world bridge championships, held up a sign saying "We did not vote for Bush" at the gold medal ceremony in Shanghai, during the playing the U.S. national anthem. The United States Bridge Federation, the organization that represents the U.S. in international play, wants to ban the winning team from play (including not just USBF play but American Contract Bridge League play as well) for a year. The story has already made the N.Y. Times and of course it's all the rage on the bridge newsgroup.

A little analysis: it's not actually a First Amendment matter, because there's no government involvement. The USBF is a private organization. The NFL bans players from displaying political messages during games and that doesn't violate the First Amendment. So while it seems reflexive (to Americans) to invoke the First Amendment, that's not actually the issue.

No, the issue is whether the penalty makes any sense. I do think the players were naive to imagine that people wouldn't get offended. Injecting politics into a bridge event is naturally going to raise some hackles. We all know what happened to the Dixie Chicks when they mixed an offhand political comment with music -- and that was at their own concert. And of course the 1968 Olympic incident involving Tommie Smith and John Carlos is an even closer parallel. So the team should have known they were asking for trouble.

Still, the penalty seems way over the top. It's not clear, first of all, that the USBF actually has any rule that was violated; the Federation seems to be proceeding under a general rule forbidding "conduct unbecoming a player." That's a bit of a stretch. Second, the USBF's authority to ban players from ACBL play seems mysterious. Finally, the penatly just seems far too harsh. Players may not have a right to express political messages at the awards ceremony, but, being Americans, we should let free speech be a value that informs how harshly we treat it. What kind of message are we sending to the Chinese hosts of the game with such a harsh penalty? "Yes, stamping out dissenting political messages is a great thing"?

Probably what's happening is that the UCBF is run by a bunch of humorless Republicans who can't bear to see Bush criticized and who are flexing their muscles. If I were in charge, I would give the players a talking-to and institute a rule of decorum for awards ceremonies. The players can make whatever statement they want afterwards. But for this incident, let's chill a little.