Swiss Pairs

[niftyneville]

We hold two annual Championship Pairs Events at our club - one over 3 sessions and the second a one day event that has traditionally been played as a Match Point Duplicate event of 2 sessions.  This year we have decided to play this second event as a Swiss Teams - 24 Pairs have entered and I plan to play 7 eight board matches. Do you feel this is appropriate and fair?

[MIP]

I assume that you mean Swiss pairs where you say Swiss Teams. There is no administrative reason why you should not do this and the Swiss draw will not fall over in 7 matches. In terms of a club championship it is both appropriate and fair. Some people dislike Swiss Pairs because of the element of luck in regard to which direction you are sitting when the cards happen to go one way in a match but that's no reason not to do it.

Make sure that you have the appropriate stationery for scoring (unless you use electronic scorers) and that, whatever happens, you have an even number of pairs.

[niftyneville]

Yes I did mean Swiss Pairs! Sorry for the typo. We will definitely have an even number of pairs.

[Paul Sherman]

Just a quick note on what Mike said: "Some people dislike Swiss Pairs because of the element of luck in regard to which direction you are sitting when the cards happen to go one way in a match but that's no reason not to do it."

The same could be said for the Howell movement but that's no reason to downgrade Howells. Swiss Pairs is one of my favourite types of events and I'm sure I'm not alone. You will have an enjoyable time running it and the participants will equally enjoy it. Good luck with it.

[MIP]

There's a difference. In a Howell movement you are still competing against all other pairs who hold the same cards. In a Swiss pairs if you happen to sit the wrong way and your opponents manage to bid a slam or a couple of tight games you must lose that match. Nevertheless I too still play in Swiss pairs.

[bluejak]

The experience in England is simple: Swiss Pairs is the most popular form of the game.

An interesting question, however, is how you are going to score it.  All Swiss Pairs in the British Isles is scored by matchpoints, which seems right for a club championship that was previously a MP pairs.  However, I discovered when i was in Australia that Swiss Pairs there was usually done by imps.

I believe for a club championship that MPs would be more popular unless your club has regular imp games anyway.

Scoring is the obvious problem with Swiss Pairs.  If you do intend to use MPs I recommend getting Jeff Smith's program.  It is completely free, and can be downloaded from http://homepages.nildram.co.uk/~jasmith/

[bluejak]

There's a difference. In a Howell movement you are still competing against all other pairs who hold the same cards. In a Swiss pairs if you happen to sit the wrong way and your opponents manage to bid a slam or a couple of tight games you must lose that match. Nevertheless I too still play in Swiss pairs.

I don't really understand this.  If you are playing an ordinary evening and over a few boards your opponents bid a slam or a couple of tight games it is unfortunate for you in the same way.  Furthermore, you are competing with all the pairs playing your way in a Swiss Pairs. Perhaps you should interfere more on bad hands?

It occurs to me that this comment is based on the whole problem with imp pairs, namely that a couple of bad boards at game/slam level have a disproportionate effect?  But that is nothing to do with Swiss Pairs: that is the form of scoring.  The solution is simple: play MP Swiss Pairs - see last post.

[Paul Sherman]

It's also a question of where you're playing the Swiss Pairs. In the Last Train, for example, which is one of the feature events of the Canberra Summer Festival, all the boards are duplicated so if you are sitting NS, all the NS-s will have your hands and ditto the EW-s, just like in a Howell. I guess not all Swiss Pairs have duplicated hands but the better ones do and it makes the event a lot fairer too.

I will slightly disagree with David on scoring Swiss Pairs as MPs. Almost all the Swiss Pairs in Australia are scored as imps (I don't know any that aren't) and in a way that is a good thing. Imps is real bridge whereas matchpoints is a mad grab for tops at any cost. I'd rather play it as imps with safety plays etc. than risk going 4 off trying to get that one overtrick. To me, the winner at MPs would just indicate the best pairs player but at imps it would indicate the best bridge player. However, that's just my opinion.

[bluejak]

I cannot believe anyone can run a Swiss Pairs without duplicated boards!  :(

The reason I suggest MPs is because that is what the average player will like.  Sure, some good players will prefer the imps approach, but for popularity you want MPs.

[Paul Sherman]

I cannot believe anyone can run a Swiss Pairs without duplicated boards! 

Me either, but this is the point in comparing them to Howells. All other pairs will be facing the same fate of having a slam or a couple of tight games bid against them, except you won't be playing the whole field, so perhaps a 3/4 Howell would be a better comparison.

The reason I suggest MPs is because that is what the average player will like.  Sure, some good players will prefer the imps approach, but for popularity you want MPs.

Point taken, and it's a good point. But that's one side of the coin. The other side is that some (smaller) clubs don't run teams events, be it due to lack of numbers or the inexperience of local directors to run small teams movements. However, the players don't mind a change now and then and your options are either a teams event or an Individual. The latter is widely avoided in Australia with directors running for the hills at the thought of running one, with few exceptions (of which I am one). The reasons are obvious and inexperienced (at Individuals) directors come close to having a nervous breakdown after running one. That leaves the teams event and the imp scoring. My own experience is that the majority of players - especially in small clubs - much prefer the imps to MPs because this brings down a peg or two the "cardsharks" in the club who are pairs specialists and always make one more overtrick then the rest of the field. With overtricks losing much of their value at imps, this levels the playing field (at least in their eyes) for players who play bridge and not pairs at duplicate. In all these small clubs you see lol-s (little old ladies) who count their tricks in front of them, to see how many more they need to make their contracts. It doesn't register to some of them that making your 9 tricks in 3NT counts for nought if everyone makes 10; they are playing BRIDGE, not PAIRS. Echoes of their partners' "Well done, Myrtle!" abound even as they write the 400 on the scoresheet, just below the stacks of 430-s, 460-s and 490-s. To these people, who are effectively the bread-and-butter of most small clubs, imp scoring is a breath of fresh air and a scoresheet showing a 1-imp loss on every one of the 8 boards, losing the match by 16-14 or 17-13 VPs certainly looks much better than a pairs result sheet, showing 12th out of 12 with 39%. The defence rests   :)