Avansert søk


Where were the journalists?


Av Christian Vennerød
publisert i dag på bridgewinners.com

Why is the bridge press as impotent as WBF?

A modern society depends on the investigating reporter and the free press to uncover secret and unsound practices. In politics. In business. In culture. But unfortunately not in bridge.

Why did no journalist ask the right questions BBB (Before Boye Brogeland)?

I am not saying that the ordinary bridge columnists in the newspapers should have figured out that something was rotten in the bridge community. But where were the editors of the bridge magazines and their reporters? To be precise: where were Mark Horton, Jeff Rubens and their analysts? They were on the crime site. For years. They followed closely most matches at high level: the Bermuda Bowls, the European Championships, the American championships, the Cavendish, etc ….

They sent reporters to follow the play, but no reporter thought that it was a good idea to ask questions to the players who made incredible leads with fabulously lucky results. To put it bluntly: they simply reported that Fisher led a small club from Axx and then the contract when down: “Plus 12 Imps to Israel.” They saw that Nunes misplayed contracts as declarer, but was dramatically more precise in the much more difficult game of defending. But they did not ask each other in the editorial rooms: how is this miracle possible? And they did not ask Fisher and Nunes: How did you figure it out?

Issue after issue of the Bridge World and championship Bulletins were printed with what today looks like a screaming lack of obvious questions to the cheaters.

Why do we pay for magazines and bulletins who only report good news? Who only report “all the news that’s fit to print” - according to the WBF? Who report little more than what we all saw on BBO? Why do we read articles from journalists who are too afraid to ask questions?

I have been an editor and a journalist most of my life (specializing in personal finance and politics). I know that in the bone marrow of every decent newspaperman lies one continuous, big question: what is it that does not smell right today? What is really going on – behind the smoke screen of propaganda, marketing and politically correct blablabla? Why do bridge journalists seem to lack this instinct?

Did the bridge editors and journalists go to bed every night at 9 o’ clock, so that they did not overhear the frustrated rumors about cheating, thrown out in the air at the bar at night during the championships? No, of course they heard them, as we all did. But why were they not curious enough to try to find out if the rumor was true? Are they journalists or part of a propaganda machine?

Christian Vennerød

___________________________________________________________________

Damene kan det også


Dette spillet er fra Venice Cup mellom USA og Kina.

Hjerter ni ut til esset og spar knekt i vri. Ikke umulig å finne mot det bordet, men småfint likevel. I veteran var 7 av 8 bord i 3NT fra øst, alle med hjerter ut. Tre av bordene fant ikke skiften.
___________________________________________________________

Klubbmesterskapet Kveld 2

Klubbmesterskapet kveld 2 ble vunnet av Helge Stanghelle-Gerd M Harding med 59,3% På andre fulgte Bjørn E Rydland-Geir H Bonsaksen 56% og Halgeir Jakobsen-Martinus Birkelund med 56%

I sammendraget etter to kvelder har Halgeir Jakobsen og Martinus Birkelund tatt en klar ledelse med 123,7.

Se alle resultatene under les mer.....

 

Ny nyhetsartikkel

Torleif og odd egil toppa i kveld

Ylva & Jarno

Ylva Helen Kvikstad - Jarno Mikael Johnsen vant 2. kveld av Høstsingelen. Vi gratulerer!

RESULTAT

Ny nyhetsartikkel

Jeg tror/håper at problemet med blindparet er løst og at resultatene stemmer. Fint om dere sjekker og evt gir tilbakemelding.

Ny nyhetsartikkel

Beklager, det er slett ikke i orden, oversitten ble borte fra resultatlista, men det ligger fremdeles en pass i scorelistene. Ikke ring ennå:) jeg skal se om jeg får fikset det.

spillekveld 13 oktober

Gratulerer med seieren til Allan og Ove foran Svein og John.

Sammenlagt Sluttresultat Høst 1

 

1 Odd Inge Hovd 305,90 % 63,70 % 63,50 % 61,90 % 59,40 % 57,40 %
2 Jørn Roar Almaas 297,60 % 63,50 % 61,90 % 59,40 % 57,40 % 55,40 %
3 John Endre Pettersen 274,80 % 65,90 % 56,30 % 55,60 % 50,60 % 46,40 %
3 Jan Stallvik 274,80 % 65,90 % 56,30 % 55,60 % 50,60 % 46,40 %
5 Audun Haugerø 269,30 % 62,50 % 55,60 % 54,20 % 49,60 % 47,40 %
5 Helge Fossbakk 269,30 % 62,50 % 55,60 % 54,20 % 49,60 % 47,40 %
7 Paul Husby 263,70 % 57,30 % 54,10 % 51,90 % 51,80 % 48,60 %
7 Odd Stormo 263,70 % 57,30 % 54,10 % 51,90 % 51,80 % 48,60 %
9 Knut Arnet Schanche 263,60 % 55,70 % 55,60 % 53,00 % 52,40 % 46,90 %
9 Kjell Nilsen 263,60 % 55,70 % 55,60 % 53,00 % 52,40 % 46,90 %
11 John Wiklem 260,60 % 58,90 % 54,20 % 51,00 % 50,70 % 45,80 %
11 Kjell Rønningsen 260,60 % 58,90 % 54,20 % 51,00 % 50,70 % 45,80 %
13 Atle Grande 249,30 % 54,20 % 53,60 % 51,90 % 45,20 % 44,40 %
14 Arne Weisser 247,50 % 53,00 % 50,50 % 49,30 % 49,10 % 45,60 %
15 Viggo Rødsjø 242,80 % 57,30 % 48,50 % 47,40 % 45,60 % 44,00 %
15 Tore Døsvik 242,80 % 57,30 % 48,50 % 47,40 % 45,60 % 44,00 %
17 Stig Husby 240,00 % 53,00 % 48,80 % 47,40 % 45,90 % 44,90 %
17 Jan J. Fjeld 240,00 % 53,00 % 48,80 % 47,40 % 45,90 % 44,90 %
19 Jens Nilsen 238,10 % 54,20 % 53,60 % 45,20 % 44,40 % 40,70 %
20 Roar Hansen 233,70 % 53,00 % 49,30 % 45,60 % 45,20 % 40,60 %
21 Kari Almaas 196,10 % 55,20 % 52,20 % 46,80 % 41,90 % 0,00 %
21 Harald Ophaug 196,10 % 55,20 % 52,20 % 46,80 % 41,90 % 0,00 %
23 Oddfinn Johansen 144,70 % 51,50 % 48,40 % 44,80 % 0,00 % 0,00 %
23 Jan I. Reitan 144,70 % 51,50 % 48,40 % 44,80 % 0,00 % 0,00 %
25 Truls Solem 99,60 % 50,50 % 49,10 % 0,00 % 0,00 % 0,00 %
26 Kjell Leiseth 85,80 % 45,20 % 40,60 % 0,00 % 0,00 % 0,00 %
27 Brynjar Brodersen 63,70 % 63,70 % 0,00 % 0,00 % 0,00 % 0,00 %
28 Einar Gjestad 51,90 % 51,90 % 0,00 % 0,00 % 0,00 % 0,00 %
29 Kjell Øyvind Arntzen 31,90 % 31,90 % 0,00 % 0,00 % 0,00 % 0,00 %

Ny nyhetsartikkel

Nå kan dere kontrollere. Pass er tatt vekk og resultatene ble mye forandret. Kortfila viser fordelinga, under den står en analyse som sier hvor mange stikk som egentlig skulle vært tatt i spillet. Den kan være verdt å studere.