[rbforster]

I want to compete in the North American Open Pairs for my district (NYC). Where can I find out the schedule of what week(s) one has to compete in order to qualify for the next round? I've tried a bunch of searching online but only found a few things at specific clubs, but nothing that says "week X is the last week to qualify" or "week Y or Z will be the qualifying weeks" or anything useful like that.

Does anyone happen to know this, or know where to look for this? Thanks

[rogerclee]

In District 23 at least, clubs just schedule their own days for you to qualify in the first round, so the dates are sort of sporadic, and you have to check with individual clubs to see what their days are. We have a master schedule available on the district website that lists all the qualifying dates for the club level.

Some districts have unit level qualification and some don't (I think). Anyway, we do, and there are usually two of those to choose from in order to qualify for the district finals.

[TimG]

Seems inexcusable for District 24 not to list the dates for the District level event on their website.

[pclayton]

With a little digging, you should be able to find out when the District had the District final for '08.

In D22, our club qualifying is around July - August, our Unit games are September - November and the District Final is at the Palm Springs Regional the 3rd week of December. Its been like this for about four years now.

Contact one of the big clubs in NYC and ask when they have their qualifying. Maybe Justin knows?

[JoAnneM]

Go to www.acbl.org click on Unit and Districts, click on Districts. There will be a map of the Districts, click on District 24. It will bring up a list of the officers. Click on the NAOP Coordinator and send him/her an email.

Jo Anne

[rogerclee]

JoAnneM, on Jun 25 2008, 05:06 PM, said:

Go to www.acbl.org click on Unit and Districts, click on Districts. There will be a map of the Districts, click on District 24. It will bring up a list of the officers. Click on the NAOP Coordinator and send him/her an email.

Jo Anne

Wow, best idea ever. I have to admit I never would've thought of this.

[TimG]

JoAnneM, on Jun 25 2008, 07:06 PM, said:

Go to www.acbl.org click on Unit and Districts, click on Districts. There will be a map of the Districts, click on District 24. It will bring up a list of the officers. Click on the NAOP Coordinator and send him/her an email.

Jo Anne

You'll want to be in touch with gnyba.org, their list of officers is at:

http://www.gnyba.org/about.html

Club qualifying runs from June through August. I'm pretty sure that D24 is one of the Districts that also holds Unit qualifying, but someone from the list of officers ought to be able to help you.

Tim

[rbforster]

JoAnneM, on Jun 25 2008, 07:06 PM, said:

Go to www.acbl.org  click on Unit and Districts, click on Districts.  There will be a map of the Districts, click on District 24.  It will bring up a list of the officers.  Click on the NAOP Coordinator and send him/her an email.

Jo Anne

Thanks! I'll report back what I hear.

I had looked at the Greater NY bridge association's site, which lists many tournament related things past and present but nothing about NAOP.

[TimG]

From David Moss:

"There will be a district final only this year. B's in Long Island on Oct 26 and A's &C's in NYC on Nov 9"

So, qualify at a club, then no Unit level event, just straight to the District event.

Tim

[rbforster]

Thanks Tim. I heard back from the NAOP rep and apparently the clubs set their own schedules for the qualifying games so I have to talk to them directly.

[TimG]

Rob F, on Jun 26 2008, 07:12 AM, said:

Thanks Tim.  I heard back from the NAOP rep and apparently the clubs set their own schedules for the qualifying games so I have to talk to them directly.

That is true. It used to be that they could run one qualifying game (per regular weekly session) in each of June, July and August. Since these games award more masterpoints, lots of clubs take advantage and run games as often as they can. Other clubs, not liking the increased sanction fee associated with the game, run one or two and leave it at that.

In all of Maine, there will be two NAP qualifying games at the club level held in the evening. That's it for all of Maine for the whole June, July and August qualifying months. I imagine you'll have more options in NYC!

[pclayton]

TimG, on Jun 26 2008, 04:31 AM, said:

Rob F, on Jun 26 2008, 07:12 AM, said:

Thanks Tim.  I heard back from the NAOP rep and apparently the clubs set their own schedules for the qualifying games so I have to talk to them directly.

That is true. It used to be that they could run one qualifying game (per regular weekly session) in each of June, July and August. Since these games award more masterpoints, lots of clubs take advantage and run games as often as they can. Other clubs, not liking the increased sanction fee associated with the game, run one or two and leave it at that.

In all of Maine, there will be two NAP qualifying games at the club level held in the evening. That's it for all of Maine for the whole June, July and August qualifying months. I imagine you'll have more options in NYC!

There was like one or two unit games for D22. We missed the one of local ones and were faced with driving to Santa Maria (200 miles away) to qualify. Luckily, there were enough other locals the Balboa Unit was pressured into having a game.

Personally, I think all Units should be forced to hold a unit qualifier for NAP's and GNT's.

[TimG]

pclayton, on Jun 26 2008, 10:46 AM, said:

Personally, I think all Units should be forced to hold a unit qualifier for NAP's and GNT's.

I think it is a District option whether to hold Unit qualifiers or not. District 25 used to hold unit qualifiers, but they were poorly attended in the smaller units, so rather than force those who live away from the bigger units to travel twice (once for Unit qualifying and once for District qualifying) D25 opted out of the Unit phase.

I think forcing units to hold a game is a bad idea. If I play in the event this year, I will likely be the only person from my unit to play at the District level. It seems wrong to force my unit to hold a game just so I can play.

Back when D25 held unit qualifying for the GNT, it was not uncommon for only one Flight A team to show up in a particular Unit. The solution was for them to pay their entry fee and then go home. I suppose you could do the same for NAP if your unit doesn't hold a game or if not enough players show up to hold a qualifying event in your flight.

[pclayton]

TimG, on Jun 26 2008, 08:32 AM, said:

pclayton, on Jun 26 2008, 10:46 AM, said:

Personally, I think all Units should be forced to hold a unit qualifier for NAP's and GNT's.

I think it is a District option whether to hold Unit qualifiers or not. District 25 used to hold unit qualifiers, but they were poorly attended in the smaller units, so rather than force those who live away from the bigger units to travel twice (once for Unit qualifying and once for District qualifying) D25 opted out of the Unit phase.

I think forcing units to hold a game is a bad idea. If I play in the event this year, I will likely be the only person from my unit to play at the District level. It seems wrong to force my unit to hold a game just so I can play.

Back when D25 held unit qualifying for the GNT, it was not uncommon for only one Flight A team to show up in a particular Unit. The solution was for them to pay their entry fee and then go home. I suppose you could do the same for NAP if your unit doesn't hold a game or if not enough players show up to hold a qualifying event in your flight.

Thats fine is they do. Our District stopped unit qualifying for the GNTs a long time ago.

My only point is that if the District is mandating the level Unit games (dubious), then the games should be plentiful.

Frankly, what I'd like to see is to drop all of the local qualifying, but have a four session game at District. That's the best way to get the best qualified pairs.

[TimG]

pclayton, on Jun 26 2008, 11:56 AM, said:

Frankly, what I'd like to see is to drop all of the local qualifying, but have a four session game at District. That's the best way to get the best qualified pairs.

I agree that if a District opts to hold Unit qualifying, the units ought to hold an event (or some accommodation should be made for players in that unit). But, forcing units to hold a game is impractical -- what happens if 2-3 pairs show up? There are some very small units membership wise.

D25 does have a four session District qualifying game. Many players consider the Flight A Finals the premiere pair event in New England. Even if it doesn't attract more than a single section. I admit that playing in the seven table finals is fun.

[ArtK78]

It has been quite a few years since our District (District 4) had Unit qualifying games for the NAOP. Currently, there is club qualifying (which I believe is mandated by the ACBL) and a 4-session District qualifying game - 2 sessions qualifying, 2 sessions final.

The fact of the matter is that anyone who is interested can find a way to play in a club level qualifying game and qualify, and then show up at the District game. The club level qualification is minimal - 50% score or better, or any masterpoints won, and you can play as many times as you like. So the barrier to entry is not high. The District game is of fairly high quality, but not overwhelmingly so, as we have few exceptional players in our District, and even fewer who play in the NAOP and GNT on a regular basis.

The District game is set in a small town (near Allentown, PA) which is roughly equidistant from the Northernmost point in our District (Syracuse NY area), the Southermost point in our District (Southern Delaware), the Westernmost point in our District (Lancaster/York Pennsylvania) and the Easternmost point in our District (Atlantic City, NJ). So it is roughly equally inconvenient for everyone. Whether this makes any sense at all is another question, since about 85% of the membership in our District lives within 15 minutes of Philadelphia. It would seem to make sense to hold the District Finals near Philadelphia. I suspect that the turnout at the District Finals would be higher if it were held closer to Philadelphia, but then the players from the Syracuse area might complain. The fact that very few, if any, players from Syracuse attend the District Finals would not stop them from complaining.

[mycroft]

The NAP is a "grassroots" event, and people are supposed to come up from the clubs. Also, this is in fact, a reasonably big earner for the clubs (and a reasonably small earner for Memphis).

The Club games just aren't going away. Our club usually holds about 4 qual games; the unofficial policy is "we'll keep running them until everybody who wants to qualify does". That seems to be The Right Thing for all concerned.

A state that holds two qualifiers in a single club only? Not sure they're Getting It. Petition the clubs - they probably have the "people don't care about the game, or the extra masterpoints, but they do care about the extra sanction fees", and the squeaky wheels...

[TimG]

mycroft, on Jun 26 2008, 12:46 PM, said:

Also, this is in fact, a reasonably big earner for the clubs (and a reasonably small earner for Memphis).

A state that holds two qualifiers in a single club only? Not sure they're Getting It.

In my experience the club qualifying games are not big earners for the clubs. Typical is to increase the entry fee by the same as the increase in sanction fee. Attendance is not greater, in fact, some people choose to skip these special games. I'm sure they are big earners in some areas, just not around here.

Folks from around here simply have no desire to travel to the District event. So, there is little reason to hold the club games. If people were asking for the games, the club owners would offer more of them. I think they are "getting it" just about right.

[Elianna]

TimG, on Jun 26 2008, 10:00 AM, said:

mycroft, on Jun 26 2008, 12:46 PM, said:

Also, this is in fact, a reasonably big earner for the clubs (and a reasonably small earner for Memphis). 

A state that holds two qualifiers in a single club only?  Not sure they're Getting It.

In my experience the club qualifying games are not big earners for the clubs. Typical is to increase the entry fee by the same as the increase in sanction fee. Attendance is not greater, in fact, some people choose to skip these special games. I'm sure they are big earners in some areas, just not around here.

Folks from around here simply have no desire to travel to the District event. So, there is little reason to hold the club games. If people were asking for the games, the club owners would offer more of them. I think they are "getting it" just about right.

In Los Angeles (D23) some clubs have gotten around this by:

1) A separate game (in addition to the normal club game) for NAP qualifying.

2) If there aren't enough people who want to Q for NAP pay the extra card fee and then play in the main game. But not everyone pays the extra fee.

I don't really like this, as it seems to be skirting the main idea of NAPs, which is to get people from clubs involved in tournaments. This way seems to imply that the clubs think that the point of NAPs is to get people to go play in clubs.

When I lived in Lincoln, the whole club game was NAP or it wasn't, and it wasn't up to the individual player. And no one complained (except that there weren't more games). But in LA, I've heard players complaining about STaC games!