Page 0053


April 2016 English Bridge


In a time of austerity, should the

EBU examine its subsidy of the

England teams? The high and

increasing costs of national

competitions drive tournament

players away and most of the

England players can, I'm sure,

well afford to pay their own

expenses. I believe there are

others of a similar standard who

would be willing to take their

place and play for free. The EBU

could also seek sponsorship

which would be available if these

international events had any

serious public interest. By all

means have a limited hardship

fund which players can apply for

and if possible continue to

support the juniors in the

interests of the future of bridge.

Paul Chapman


Many of your members will feel

vindicated by the announcement

in the Feb issue regarding the

opt-out for hosts. When the NGS

system was introduced there was

concern it would discourage

members from arranging both

occasional partnerships, and

from helping new and less

experienced players because of

the adverse impact on their NGS

rating. The EBU response was

dismissive! - but now recognises

the facts that have emerged via

clubs up and down the country -

and the damage already done.

However, moving on, if

unfamiliarity for the host is

justification for opt-out it is

surely indefensible to deny the

same dispensation to ordinary

members when arranging casual

partnerships so long as both

players agree. Unquestionably

this will benefit the EBU in

developing bridge at grass roots

level as newer players are

encouraged to play with more

experienced members. F Vickers

The option for hosts to choose not

to have their results graded has

been there from the beginning.

Having played myself as a host for

several years without ever

choosing to opt out, my experience

is that players' concerns in this

regard are unjustified - my NGS

was just as likely to go up as down

when I played with unknown

partners. There is no intention to

remove the option as long as it is

not abused, but nor is there any

likelihood of extending it.

Gordon Rainsford


In January I played in the Sim

Pairs event, as I usually do, and

asked how the additional money

raised was used and by whom.

Nobody could give me an


Could you please tell me how

much is raised, how it is used

and who determines how it is to

be used.

Maurice Watkins

The two SIMS in May and

September, which were EBU Sims,

are now run for the benefit of EBED

and all monies raised after expenses

go to the charity. The next EBED

SIM is to raise money for Dementia

Research (see page 37). There are

four SIMS which were run by BGB

until 2012 and are now run by the

EBU with funds distributed, in

proportion to entry, to the national

organisations. Funds raised after

taking into account expenses are

available for spending as the board

decides. Generally this is on items

that would have to be funded

another way if there were not SIM

pairs income.there are other specific

SIMS such as the Bridge England

SIMS which raised money for Junior

Internationals this year, specifically

the new U16 category. The total

amount raised after expenses was

about £55k in 2014/15. Detail can

be seen on the published financial

statements on the website.

Jeremy Dhondy - EBU Chairman


In February's issue, the photo of

the presentation of the Tony

Berry Trophy has a third figure

lurking in the corner. It's my

belief that it is Paul Bowyer in

disguise wearing a neck-tie. Can

this be true?

Nick Daniels

Yes, guilty as charged. The disguise is

a cunning one and Nick did well to

see through it. My wife deemed my

usual attire (a rugby shirt and old

trousers) inappropriate for a visit to

the House of Lords. Naturally, as a

married man, I did what I was told

and rooted out a jacket and tie from

the back of an old wardrobe.

I shall try photo-bombing the

next Tony Berry award presentation

and see if anyone notices that. competition . . .

Paul Bowyer

Send your letters to the editor,

Lou Hobhouse, Raggett House, Bowdens, TA10 0DD, or e-mail

(please include your postal address)

The editor reserves the right to condense letters. Publication does not mean the

EBU agrees with the views expressed or that the comments are factually correct.




  1. Page 0001
  2. Page 0002
  3. Page 0003
  4. Page 0004
  5. Page 0005
  6. Page 0006
  7. Page 0007
  8. Page 0008
  9. Page 0009
  10. Page 0010
  11. Page 0011
  12. Page 0012
  13. Page 0013
  14. Page 0014
  15. Page 0015
  16. Page 0016
  17. Page 0017
  18. Page 0018
  19. Page 0019
  20. Page 0020
  21. Page 0021
  22. Page 0022
  23. Page 0023
  24. Page 0024
  25. Page 0025
  26. Page 0026
  27. Page 0027
  28. Page 0028
  29. Page 0029
  30. Page 0030
  31. Page 0031
  32. Page 0032
  33. Page 0033
  34. Page 0034
  35. Page 0035
  36. Page 0036
  37. Page 0037
  38. Page 0038
  39. Page 0039
  40. Page 0022
  41. Page 0041
  42. Page 0042
  43. Page 0043
  44. Page 0044
  45. Page 0045
  46. Page 0046
  47. Page 0047
  48. Page 0048
  49. Page 0049
  50. Page 0050
  51. Page 0051
  52. Page 0052
  53. Page 0053
  54. Page 0054
  55. Page 0055
  56. Page 0056
  57. Page 0057
  58. Page 0058
  59. Page 0059
  60. Page 0060
  61. Page 0061
  62. Page 0062
  63. Page 0063
  64. Page 0064
  65. Page 0065
  66. Page 0066
  67. Page 0067
  68. Page 0068
  69. Page 0069
  70. Page 0070
  71. Page 0071
  72. Page 0072