Life In 19x19

I have not played bridge in many, many years but used to play in the clubs 3 or 4 nights a week until I discovered go. The university go club was almost exclusively the domain of male students and so I was surprised to find that when I started to play in the local clubs and in the team leagues the majority were women. However, I do not recall that the better players were women, with one exception. Almost every session was won by either my partner and me or by a very stern couple of older women. At tournaments it seems that the majority were male. This was in Britain. When I came to the US I played in clubs a bit at first and do not remember a gender bias either way. I never played a tournament in the US. So my anecdotal evidence does not seem to support Bill's claim.

DrStraw wrote:I have not played bridge in many, many years but used to play in the clubs 3 or 4 nights a week until I discovered go. The university go club was almost exclusively the domain of male students and so I was surprised to find that when I started to play in the local clubs and in the team leagues the majority were women. However, I do not recall that the better players were women, with one exception. Almost every session was won by either my partner and me or by a very stern couple of older women. At tournaments it seems that the majority were male. This was in Britain. When I came to the US I played in clubs a bit at first and do not remember a gender bias either way. I never played a tournament in the US. So my anecdotal evidence does not seem to support Bill's claim.

Just to be clear, I was talking about the average level of play. I am not claiming that men do not dominate the top levels of play. I do think that testosterone plays an important role in competitiveness. Was Benito Garozzo better than Helen Sobel? I think so. But that kind of question does not even arise in chess or go.

Bill Spight wrote:Hmmm. We may be seeing a difference in cultures between the US and Europe. Even in the US, if you looked only at tournament bridge you could get the impression that men are generally better than women.

Ah, yes, I have not played a single hand of social (rubber) bridge since I was about eight years old or so. I was thinking and talking about duplicate bridge all the time. At least in Finland (and probably throughout continental Europe, but I may be wrong here) social bridge is virtually non-existent (in non-duplicate form; one could argue that going to a bridge club for the weekly pairs tournament is social and not tournament bridge).

In tournament (duplicate) bridge circles the consensus was that the players of social (non-duplicate) bridge are not so skilled as the duplicate players. This, again, may be entirely different in the US.

tj86430 wrote:

Bill Spight wrote:Hmmm. We may be seeing a difference in cultures between the US and Europe. Even in the US, if you looked only at tournament bridge you could get the impression that men are generally better than women.

Ah, yes, I have not played a single hand of social (rubber) bridge since I was about eight years old or so. I was thinking and talking about duplicate bridge all the time. At least in Finland (and probably throughout continental Europe, but I may be wrong here) social bridge is virtually non-existent (in non-duplicate form; one could argue that going to a bridge club for the weekly pairs tournament is social and not tournament bridge).

Yes, local duplicates are pretty social in the US. (Although I remember a gray-haired lady who played a real cut-throat game. She really wanted to earn her 100 master points per year. )

In tournament (duplicate) bridge circles the consensus was that the players of social (non-duplicate) bridge are not so skilled as the duplicate players. This, again, may be entirely different in the US.

Aside from the better rubber bridge clubs, that was so when I was playing.

tj86430 wrote:Signature space for rent.

How much would you charge for "tj86430 is the most inspiring poster on this forum".

How much would you charge for "tj86430 has no idea what he is talking about".

Do you require payment in real money, or will you accept fiat?

Whatever he offers, I'll double it for "Fiat money is real money, duh."

DrStraw wrote:

tj86430 wrote:Signature space for rent.

Do you require payment in real money, or will you accept fiat?

I'll take any fiat you don't want.

DrStraw wrote:

tj86430 wrote:Signature space for rent.

How much would you charge for "tj86430 is the most inspiring poster on this forum".

How much would you charge for "tj86430 has no idea what he is talking about".

Do you require payment in real money, or will you accept fiat?

You can always make an offer

DrStraw wrote: Do you require payment in real money, or will you accept fiat?

What makes money "real"? (what do you think makes some money real and some money not real?)

Why might you think "a share in large stone disks with holes through the center" is either less real than "gold" or less fiat than "a right to collect a debt"? What about cowrie shells?

Gold (or other "real money") is no less "social convention" than any other sort. It is the social agreement that whatever is exchanged as money has value that makes it so.

Mike Novack wrote:

DrStraw wrote: Do you require payment in real money, or will you accept fiat?

What makes money "real"? (what do you think makes some money real and some money not real?)

Why might you think "a share in large stone disks with holes through the center" is either less real than "gold" or less fiat than "a right to collect a debt"? What about cowrie shells?

Gold (or other "real money") is no less "social convention" than any other sort. It is the social agreement that whatever is exchanged as money has value that makes it so.

I think this is not a good place to discuss such a topic, but I would be happy to debate it in another off topic thread if you wish.

This link shows the latest milestone for women in chess:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-32618139

Separately, I have been working on go in the 1930s recently, and I discovered that I had not properly appreciated the achievements of Suzuki Hideko.

There were no titles then so career highlights are more subdued than nowadays, but she stayed in the top echelon of the Oteai for several years with some decent results - the modern equivalent might be staying in the Honinbo League.

She had an interesting (and often unlucky) life in other ways. Like her teacher, she dressed and behaved like a boy till she reached 1-dan. She helped teach Kitani. She reached the then high grade of 4-dan. She had one pupil you might know - Kano Yoshinori. She was divorced by Suzuki Tamejiro because she would stay up late studying instead of going to bed. She died prematurely when struck by a train, unable to see the tramlines because of her umbrella. All in all I think she made as much of a mark among the men as Rui Naiwei.

Here is a game of hers defeating one of the big lions of the time in 1929: