October 2012 - 7

Letters to the Editor

Later on, I demonstrated the program at a Boston tournament, where
I was allowed to enter data from
the pickup slips after the directors
had entered them on the recaps. My
results were unofficial, but their accuracy and speed earned a trial in a
sectional in Lexington MA. The debut
was so successful that its second outing was at the 1977 Summer NABC in
Chicago. In quick succession, it was
used at NABCs in Atlanta and Toronto
and at the World Pair Olympiad in
New Orleans.
Those were the days before personal computers, and the scoring
program ran on remote computing
systems (First Data Corporation's
"timesharing" mainframes) using
acoustic modems over telephone
lines.
The cost of installing lines at
tournament sites was, I believe, the
reason the ACBL stopped using it.
Although it greatly reduced the need
for scorers, the installation cost made
it essentially the same cost as manual
scoring. General use in tournaments
had to await the advent of personal
computers, which could be taken to a
tournament site. The Manhasset (New
York) Bridge Club, however, used my
program for several years.
I congratulate Lopushinsky for having anticipated the market niche and
for developing a system for bridge
clubs, as opposed to my system for
tournaments. It is only fair, however,
to acknowledge that he built on a
well-established proof of concept.
RICHARD N. FREEDMAN
North Billerica MA

Bar code bother
To the Editor:
In Philadelphia, I enjoyed playing at
my first NABC in about 25 years, and
I noticed many good changes in the
administration of the game.
One change I dislike is the cards
with large bar codes. On one deal, my
right-hand opponent put down
a dummy that included the
K Q 10 8 5 4. With the black bar

codes and the resulting density of
black on the table, I kept "seeing"
seven clubs rather than six.
I am a cognitive scientist, and at
the end of the round, I mentioned to
my partner that I bet I could do some
research with these cards that would
show how the bar codes interfere
with playing - making it more confusing and difficult.
My idea is that in bridge, the color
black conveys information, so black
bar codes create the sense that there
are more black cards and more blackcard strength than actually exists.
Yes, that sense can be overridden by
deliberate reasoning, but such care
takes extra mental energy.
My partner, a neuroscientist, agreed
and suggested that perhaps the bar
codes could be in green - a noninformation-bearing color. My RHO
then added that they should be made
invisible, and he added that such technology exists.
My RHO, in case you are wondering,
was Bill Gates. So ... please?
BOBBIE SPELLMAN
Charlottesville VA
You will be pleased to know that
ACBL's duplicating machines no longer need bar codes to read the cards.

Days of fun
To the Editor:
Philadelphia was my first NABC. I
attended my first ACBL tournament in
2008 and have really been hooked, but
the NABC exceeded expectations. It
was a masterpiece of organization.
During my career in engineering,
I attended many large meetings and
conventions. None of them was put
on with the skill shown by the ACBL
and the many volunteers involved.
There were days of unalloyed fun for
bridge players.
Not even my insufficient 2 bid following a 4 preempt could dampen
my enthusiasm. Anyone who has
not attended an NABC should do so
ASAP. Thanks to all those volunteers.
BARRY BUEHLER
East Lyme CT

Impose restrictions
To the Editor:
Inasmuch as it has been made more
difficult to achieve Life Master status,
I have a suggestion about regional
tournament events that are marketed
as offering non-LMs an opportunity for the elusive gold points. I am
specifically referencing the so-called
Gold Rush Pairs for players with
fewer than 750 masterpoints.
It has been my observation that
many participants in these events are
at the higher end of the point ranges
and have all the gold points they need.
I recommend that these events be
restricted to players with fewer than
750 masterpoints who have not yet
become Life Masters.
THOMAS MILKO
Birmingham AL

Bad apple
To the Editor:
It only takes one bad apple to spoil
our wonderful game for everyone. At
the recent Paducah Regional, a nonLife Master asked if it was permissible
to forfeit a round rather than have
to play against someone who was
disagreeable.
Several others commented about
the same player, whose apparent
favorite act of intimidation - besides
making offensive comments about the
opponents' quality of play - was to
call the director if a left-hand opponent didn't wait a full 10 seconds to
make a call after a jump bid.
I hope the "bad apple" reads this
and is motivated to change.
RAY ANDERSEN
Newburgh IN

➤
Letters to the editor are welcome
by regular mail, email editor@acbl.
org or fax 662-253-3187. Brevity is considered a virtue, as is subject matter with
relevance to a majority of ACBL members.
Unsigned letters are not considered for
publication, so please include your name
and hometown. Letters may be edited.
All letters will receive a response.
October 2012 Bridge Bulletin

7
Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of October 2012
