Radical experimentation is simply illegal in tournament Bridge.
It was an interesting game a few decades ago when artificial systems were nominally legal, but resulted in judicial harassment. Then you had to balance the in-game advantage against the human factor.
You would not believe how nauseating the thought of playing a game like that is. It’s taking a game then removing all the parts of it that are fun. I can see why you would use those sort of rules if you were a bridge club full of old women verging on senility. They could maintain a high level of bridge performance based on heavily crystalised knowledge even though their ability to handle (and remember) novel information is shot to pieces. But why have a tournament at all players are basically primitive bots?
I think I’ll pass on that and go play some basketball instead. And use a full court press! ;)
I do believe that gender is relevant to the makeup of strereotypical bridge clubs. For reasons including but not limited to the selection effect of mere survival.
An observation that is implied in my statement that you may object is that on average women, particularly old women, are more predisposed to control via social convention than males of a similar age. The nature of human social dynamics is such that it rewards different social strategies differently.
I do believe that gender is relevant to the makeup of strereotypical bridge clubs. For reasons including but not limited to the selection effect of mere survival.
Seconding this: When I worked at the nursing home, men made up about 15% of our long-term resident population.
Also, I expect older men to be less comfortable in situations that are dominated by women than younger men are, due to cultural differences 60+ years ago.
My understanding of the game is that the fun part is trying to determine whether you have the points and suits between you to go for a minor or major slam, and then finessing those extra two or three tricks you need to actually get it. The rest is just window dressing to build tension.
You would not believe how nauseating the thought of playing a game like that is. It’s taking a game then removing all the parts of it that are fun. I can see why you would use those sort of rules if you were a bridge club full of old women verging on senility. They could maintain a high level of bridge performance based on heavily crystalised knowledge even though their ability to handle (and remember) novel information is shot to pieces. But why have a tournament at all players are basically primitive bots?
I think I’ll pass on that and go play some basketball instead. And use a full court press! ;)
Do you think gender is relevant for wanting to depend on heavily crystalized knowledge?
That doesn’t follow from my comment.
I do believe that gender is relevant to the makeup of strereotypical bridge clubs. For reasons including but not limited to the selection effect of mere survival.
An observation that is implied in my statement that you may object is that on average women, particularly old women, are more predisposed to control via social convention than males of a similar age. The nature of human social dynamics is such that it rewards different social strategies differently.
Seconding this: When I worked at the nursing home, men made up about 15% of our long-term resident population.
Also, I expect older men to be less comfortable in situations that are dominated by women than younger men are, due to cultural differences 60+ years ago.
My understanding of the game is that the fun part is trying to determine whether you have the points and suits between you to go for a minor or major slam, and then finessing those extra two or three tricks you need to actually get it. The rest is just window dressing to build tension.