Richard Pavlicek
ama...@yahoo.com.mx
quit this activity :(((.
The reason is very serious ilness of his Wife.
We as rec.games.bridge "members" can propose that we will be HIGHLY
satisfied if his quiz will appear once in 3 months instead of monthly.
Please support this proposal!!
pumpk...@hotmail.com
With respect, while I fully agree that Richard's quizzes are nec plus
ultra, your proposal seems misguided. Given the circumstances, RGB'ers
should respect Richard's clearly stated intentions and allow him to
devote himself to caring for his wife without feeling any pressure to
curtail such time because a substantial number of complete strangers
happen to miss his bridge quizzes.
I'd be delighted if Richard eventually sees fit to resume his quizzes,
but that is a call that he, and he alone should be making without any
outside pressure.
Cheers.
Nick
Tim DeLaney
I couldn't agree more.
Tim
Ian Payn
"Tim DeLaney" <delaney...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:1153121694.3...@35g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
++++At the risk of being an EtherBore, I agree.
Sandy E. Barnes
news:1153113362.7...@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
***
We should be passing along our sorrow for Richard, and only this.
Sandy Barnes
***
Gerben Dirksen
"Sandy E. Barnes" <sandyba...@comcast.net> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:aemdnbYsHLZ6zSbZ...@comcast.com...
That and thanks for the many years he has provided us with these contests.
Gerben
Brian Baresch
>>
>> Sandy Barnes
>> ***
>
>That and thanks for the many years he has provided us with these contests.
And not just the contests; his Web site has plenty of interesting and
instructional information. I still recall a deal illustrating an
automatic squeeze that finally allowed even me to understand it well
enough to use at the table.
(A few months later, a nearly identical deal -- just the suits
switched around, basically -- came up in a tournament, and I played
for the squeeze as Mr. Pavlicek's example illustrated rather than the
obvious finesse. Naturally, the finesse worked and the squeeze didn't.
I sent Mr. Pavlicek an e-mail with the story, and he replied that "an
expert is someone who, given a choice between a squeeze and a finesse,
always chooses the squeeze.")
He's done a lot for us, always with grace and generosity. The least we
can do is return the favor.
--
Brian P. Baresch
Fort Worth, Texas, USA
Professional editing and proofreading
If you're going through hell, keep going. --Winston Churchill
John Blubaugh
I would be more interested in supporting Richard and Mable. They are
both among the most delightful people I have met in bridge as is their
son. Best thoughts to you all and prayers for Mable.
JB
ted
Amen
Bill Jacobs
news:44bb5168.0@entanet:
Ditto. It's not appropriate to make such a request.
Cheers ... Bill.
ama...@yahoo.com.mx
This last Amen is quite convincing. But only quite (however opinion of
my wife is that it is a definitive amen...).
I'm a scientist (statistician) and I see also some interesting
scientific problems in bridge. We have sometimes in science situations
that are very similar to the one Richard Pavlicek has. A great
scientist has to limit his/her activity for certain personal reason(s).
If it is only limiting and not quitting scientific activities, a
certain rational reasoning can (or even should) be performed even if it
is (or can be) morally doubtful.
Assume scientist was active in areas A, B, C and D. Now he/she can
continue research only in 2 of those areas. Scientific community can
suggest in which area his/her limited effort can be most welcome.
Richard was very good player, very good teacher, very good writer (an
article in Bridge Today, in which he proofs that for certain hand BOTH
sides should play and win the SAME contract 3 spades, is a real diamond
of bridge writing), very good developer of his web-site and very good
organizer of bidding and playing/defending quizzes. Among those
briliant activities most original and most assisting the world bridge
community was exactly the last one. We have the right (or may be even
obligation) to tell him about it. If we really think that
playing/defending quizzes are very important, even if participants
should wait 2 months for His analysis, we should express our will. Even
if this is morally doubtful.
My amen.
Andrzej Matuszewski
Bill Jacobs
news:1153200731....@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com:
Sounds very scientific Andrzej, but not very thoughtful of the human
condition. You should desist with the whole distasteful idea of asking
Richard to do anything at all.
Cheers ... Bill
John R. Mayne
Bill Jacobs wrote:
> "ama...@yahoo.com.mx" <ama...@yahoo.com.mx> wrote in
> news:1153200731....@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com:
>
> > ted wrote:
> >> John Blubaugh wrote:
> >> > ama...@yahoo.com.mx wrote:
> >> > > Richard who runs highest quality free quiz declared that is going
> >> > > to quit this activity :(((.
> >> > > The reason is very serious ilness of his Wife.
> >> > > We as rec.games.bridge "members" can propose that we will be
> >> > > HIGHLY satisfied if his quiz will appear once in 3 months instead
> >> > > of monthly. Please support this proposal!!
> >> >
> >> > I would be more interested in supporting Richard and Mable. They
> >> > are both among the most delightful people I have met in bridge as
> >> > is their son. Best thoughts to you all and prayers for Mable.
> >> >
> >> > JB
> >>
> >>
> >> Amen
> >
> > This last Amen is quite convincing. But only quite (however opinion of
> > my wife is that it is a definitive amen...).
> > I'm a scientist (statistician) and I see also some interesting
> > scientific problems in bridge. We have sometimes in science situations
> > that are very similar to the one Richard Pavlicek has. A great
> > scientist has to limit his/her activity for certain personal
> > reason(s).
We have the right (or may
> > be even obligation) to tell him about it. If we really think that
> > playing/defending quizzes are very important, even if participants
> > should wait 2 months for His analysis, we should express our will.
> > Even if this is morally doubtful.
> > My amen.
> > Andrzej Matuszewski
> >
> >
>
> Sounds very scientific Andrzej, but not very thoughtful of the human
> condition. You should desist with the whole distasteful idea of asking
> Richard to do anything at all.
I think Andrzej is, in his way, showing his appreciation for Richard's
fine work. While I, like most, think the manner of appreciation is
misdirected, I think "distasteful" is lightly too strong.
This discussion with sports icons often comes up; Michael Jordan should
play basketball because we want him to play, while Willie Mays should
quit because he's not what he was, the argument goes.
It's always been my strongly held opinion that wanting to see Michael
Jordan is entirely rational, but it's Mike's life. If he wants to go
play baseball badly, that's his absolute right, and we don't hold him
hostage to his talents. Likewise, Greg Maddux has been quoted as saying
he'll pitch until no one gives him a uniform; I say, good for him! If
he ends up as a middle reliever for the Devil Rays when he's 44, that's
what he wants to do. We don't get to live others' lives.
So we thank Richard, and we wish him the best. And if he decides to do
something in the future, lucky us. And if not, lucky us - the bridge
world got a lot from him that we can't possibly return.
--JRM
Ron Johnson
John R. Mayne wrote:
>
> It's always been my strongly held opinion that wanting to see Michael
> Jordan is entirely rational, but it's Mike's life. If he wants to go
> play baseball badly, that's his absolute right, and we don't hold him
> hostage to his talents. Likewise, Greg Maddux has been quoted as saying
> he'll pitch until no one gives him a uniform; I say, good for him! If
> he ends up as a middle reliever for the Devil Rays when he's 44, that's
> what he wants to do. We don't get to live others' lives.
A really good example of this is Rickey Henderson playing last year
for what amounts to meal money in front of a handful of spectators.
Guess the guy really likes to play baseball. It's not like he needs
the money.
>
> So we thank Richard, and we wish him the best. And if he decides to do
> something in the future, lucky us. And if not, lucky us - the bridge
> world got a lot from him that we can't possibly return.
'Zactly the way I see it.
FootballWeb
He's probably got other things on his mind right now.
However we all enjoy the quizzes, and if someone else was to make something
along the same lines, I think it would be a reasonable request for richard
to put a link to it, while he is unable to continue his own quiz.
sci stat math
Thanks you John and Ron!
Richard Pavlicek is the star. Somebody who cobines achievements and
virtues of sport star, artistic celebrity and distinguished scientist.
One can observe his class especially participating in his play/defense
quizzes. The main difficulty (for him) started while writing the
analyses (I suppose). In few days he had to formulate an ultimate
solutions and to cite most intelligent comments of participants. I
think we can wait 1 month for that!!
My personal interest in Richard's quizzes was somewhat strange from one
point but very realistic from another. Assume you face the Pavlicek's
problem in the real play. Your time is very limited. You have say 3
minutes. Most patient opponents may be give you 5 minutes. The
difficulty of Pavlicek's problems is that high, so in the interval 3-5
min you can get only an intuitive solution - that's of course my
opinion only.
It can be interesting how many Pavlicek's points you get with solutions
obtained in time shorter than 30 min for the whole set of 6 problems.
For statistical record it could be interesting if participants send
besides the final solutions their "realistic, intuitive" solutions.
Next amen
Andrzej