Plus ça change !
High-school nuclear physics in the 1950’s was pretty simple – atoms were made up of a nucleus of protons and neutrons, with electrons circling the nucleus. The hydrogen atom had a nucleus of one proton and one neutron, and there was one electron circling the nucleus. In many ways, bridge was like that too – you quickly learned a few rules, and then you sat down and played. But physics (and bridge) is very different now – protons and neutrons are no longer considered as fundamental particles, but rather are made up of
fermions – of which there are 12 types – up quarks, down quarks, charm quarks, strange quarks, top quarks, bottom quarks, electrons, electron neutrinos, muons, muon neutrinos, taus, tau neutrinos
bosons – of which there are 6 types – photons, W bosons, Z bosons, gluons, Higgs bosons, gravitons
In addition to this there are a number of hypothetical particles such as neutralinos, charginos, photinos, winos, zinos, Higgsinos, gluinos, gravitinos, sleptinos, sneutrinos, squarks, graviscalars, graviphotons, axions, axinos, saxions, branons, dilatons, dilatinos, X bosons, Y bosons, magnetic photons, majorons, majorana fermions, and chameleons.
Doesn’t all that make you eager to study nuclear physics?
Bridge, as I noted previously, has also changed. A bridge website I was looking at recently listed 35 types of doubles! Would learning those be any harder than learning the 43 types of particles listed above?
Some people find making bridge more complex exciting, and that’s fine for them. But does that increasing complexity make people unfamiliar with the game eager to take it up? Is seeing hundreds of bridge books on a seller’s table at at a tournament intimidating?
Not many people go into nuclear physics these days, and not many people are taking up bridge. Most of those who do take up bridge quickly become discouraged and go on to other endeavours.
As the slide of bridge into irrelevance continues, I have this awful vision of a future where the only bridge players left are a few theorists scattered around the globe, hunched over their computers playing online bridge,and gleefully cackling over the discovery of some new use for a double.
Subscribe to our feed
Bridge-related
Hi Paul:
No one ever accused you of not telling it like it is. Your comparison was compelling (and funny) .. but ‘true is true.’ Bridge is a complicated game and we all have our own quirks and nemesis. Besides, taking up bridge in later life affords many misgivings as our memories (and I speak for myself) are not what they once were. Those who were blessed with those ‘special genes” don’t suffer the average frustrations. Also .. bridge is much easier to learn and retain at a younger age and as you grow older, one must accept it for what it is and settle to enjoy whatever pleasures you may reap.
I, for one, cannot complain .. and thank heavens my life has been so enriched by not only the game but all the sensational individuals I met across the table and over the internet .. both here and abroad!!
Hi Judy,
I know that all our lives have been enriched by bridge and the people we have met while playing bridge. I’m just sad that I don’t see any light at the end of the future of bridge tunnel. There was a golden age, of which you have spoken so many times with such clarity and empathy. But I see that golden age as having slipped into silver, then into bronze, and from now on into …? The incredible bridge heroes of the past have been replaced by present-day statues with feet of clay and convention cards so filled with esoterica that nuclear physics does indeed seem simple.
Hi again Paul,
No doubt we are on the same page. Most of the stars of yore earned their respect by natural ingenuity, not relying on zillions of the new fangled conventions and crutches needed to stay on top. I can tell you from very personal experiences that neither Norman nor Bobby resorted to complicated and involved methods relying on their God-given natural ability pointing them in the right direction. In the case of Norman, my observations came via kibitzing him and Edgar for several years .. rarely touching a card myself .. yet learning all the same. My experience with Bobby was totally the opposite. He came along at a point in his life where luckily for me .. he’d been there, done that! He had nothing to prove as both his administrative record and playing achievements spoke for themselves. We were loving our move to Vegas and the exhaustion of frequent air travel was not enticing .. so (other than his high level competition and invitational events over the last dozen years) we stayed pretty much in our new locale and loved the curtailing of our earlier unceasing flights.
This enabled me to play with him at least bi-weekly in local events. I was shocked to observe how few conventions he used and how much a simple system (avoiding lots of memorization of new fangled methods) enabled me to relax without constant fear of ‘forgets’ which would have continually arisen. Sorry for the rant. but I wanted to share with you what made the game so much more enjoyable while achieving decent results (of course, with Bobby seated across from me, it didn’t hurt the scenario). The answer was a no-brainer:
KISS (Keep It Simple, Stupid)! No nuclear physics for this old lady .. and I highly recommend its absence!
Strangely enough, in non-ACBL land, people ARE taking up bridge, even though there are many more “complex”, “non-standard” bidding systems present, and none of this “general chart” garbage to deal with.
HBJ : A system card is in effect a piece of equipment a player brings to the table from which if used correctly he/she can bash the opposition all over the ball park.
However in every other sport equipment used , such as javelins , discuses, cricket bats , tennis rackets , baseball bats and golf clubs, must all comply to particular specifications in order to ensure a level playing field.
Personally, I believe governing bodies have allowed players to use highly complex bidding systems, which make nucleur physics look simple.
BOUNDARIES NEED TO BE SET.
Hi Paul,
Your idea of comparing advanced physics with the playing of bridge could be considered, well………..somewhat unusual.
However, by you having the insight to broach the subject, together with the intelligent points made by all the commentators above, it indeed is a valuable learning experience, both as to results, nostalgia, boundaries and plain common sense.
Yes, no doubt bridge as we have gotten to know it, is perhaps now in its greatest danger of extinction right here in the Western Hemisphere and while living in 2015.
Perhaps someone, somehow, somewhere, will be able to reduce the complications from crowded convention cards, horrible cheats in the Worlds midst, overstepped boundaries and other wicked witches and poisoned flowers, we all need to yearn to return to the social days of yesterday when happiness centered around playing a couple of rubbers of our favorite game among players who actually liked each other.
Never cease dreaming of what could happen if we all resort to return to what seems to have gotten lost in the shuffle, simple RESPECT for one another.
Hi Bobby,
Your thoughts, as usual, are right on – respect for one another would indeed cure a host of current ills. If bridge became fun again, where you could actually see that those playing it were having a good time doing so, then word would spread like wildfire, and the future of the “game” would be assured.