[mike777]

Good
Expert
National
WC
Rest are intermediate or lower, not complicated, smile


I don't know all the details but apparently in three years or so at the ACBL Nationals all platinum and Titanium points

Getting rid of red and gold events at nationals
All national events, details pending.

[johnu]

mike777, on 2026-February-24, 19:13, said:

Good
Expert
National
WC
Rest are intermediate or lower, not complicated, smile


I don't know all the details but apparently in three years or so at the ACBL Nationals all platinum and Titanium points

Getting rid of red and gold events at nationals
All national events, details pending.

What ACBL is proposing is to get rid of regionally rated games, and only have national championships. AFAIK, there will still be gold and red points available for masterpoint restricted games, eg 0-300, 0-750 etc. Not sure where Titanium points come into the equation. Maybe for high overall finishes in restricted games? Section wins???

[jillybean]

Are they proposing removing Regional tournaments and running only Nationals and Sectionals?

[awm]

jillybean, on 2026-February-25, 07:07, said:

Are they proposing removing Regional tournaments and running only Nationals and Sectionals?

No, this refers only to regionally-rated events at NABCs. The problem is that the nationals are running a huge number of parallel events (national events, regional events, beginner/intermediate events, etc). Since attendance has been declining, this means each event is pretty small, and running so many means a lot of space and overhead costs.

The proposal is to significantly reduce the number of events running at NABCs by holding only events which are "unique to nationals" (basically the NABC events) and not having a concurrent regional tournament. This will hopefully allow the ACBL to book smaller/cheaper facilities while increasing the size of the "interesting" events (note that these are not just the NABC+ "championship" events but also limited events like the Red Ribbon Pairs or the Mini-Spingolds). While this might cause some further drop in NABC attendance from the (relatively few) people who just wanted to play regional pairs, these folks have other options (attend regionals) and the overall impact on total tournament attendance might be positive, especially if ACBL can concurrently lower the costs of NABCs.

[mycroft]

I will admit I have been priced out (among other things) of the NABCs that I am not required to attend. But when I was not, my partner and I's style was "play the national event. If we qualify, great. If not, either play a side game, or a regional pairs (usually when there was a two-session "Fast pairs"), or go tourist; then come back for the next big game. No regional events? Oh well, I guess...

I think that removing the regional events will be an issue for the ones who would go "to see the stars", and maybe to play one or two big (or 6/10K) events plus "some bridge". I understand why they're doing it (usual caveat applies, this time IN BIG LETTERS). I think we didn't have to go all one-or-the-other (but we didn't *not* have to either, again, usual caveat applies). It was weird to see 8 brackets of KO/RR, a two-section open, a two-section GR, a two-section NLM/299er, a regional side game, *and* all the events only played at NABCs, I will admit.

I hope this might actually improve regional attendance for the people who can play 6 days at their "local" regional for the cost of 3 days playing regional events at the NABC.

[mike777]

This is only a proposal right now.
It is a few years away.

[akwoo]

mike777, on 2026-February-24, 19:13, said:

Good
Expert
National
WC
Rest are intermediate or lower, not complicated, smile

Once again - your rating system is useless - and borderline insulting - to 90% of ACBL members.

Let me propose the following:

Out-of-our-league: You expect to make the second day of a national event playing with peers.
Master: You usually finish above 50% in an open regional event playing with peers.
Expert: You usually finish above 50% in a mid-flight regional event playing with peers.
Advanced: You usually finish above 50% in an open sectional event playing with peers.
Intermediate: You usually finish above 50% in a beginner game playing with peers.
Novice: Below that.

[pescetom]

mike777, on 2026-February-24, 10:23, said:

It sounds about right to rate more than 95 percent of dues paying bridge and chess players are intermediate level or lower

Intermediate is an achievement level

Intermediate is not an achievement (unless you consider any level an achievement) but a consequence of not being able to achieve Advanced in due time. It's the destiny of the majority of bridge players once beginner has expired.

awm, on 2026-February-24, 08:33, said:

I'd modify Mike777's rule a bit and just ask:

What is the strongest event where you'd expect to finish above average?

If we wanted to dig through actual records we could quantify this further, say "above average ~75% of the time" and perhaps further restrict to partners/teammates who are not "obviously at a very different skill level."

I'd expect to be above average in a German national championship event (have proven this on several occasions) or in the early rounds of any high-level pairs event (including WBF or EBL championships, the blue ribbons or platinum pairs, etc) but NOT in the last day of the elite pairs events (WBF/EBL championships A final, platinum pairs, etc). This probably puts me towards the upper end of "expert" but not "world class" (which is how I self-rate on BBO).

But I think you can use the same mechanism for players much further from the top levels, in which case the appropriate event might be a regional tournament, a local club game, or even an beginner/intermediate game (or perhaps "never" for a real beginner to duplicate).

Fully agree with this. I would expect to finish well above average in a regional tournament and be trashed in a national championship event, which puts me exactly where I know I am compared to awm and others here

In sports which are individual and more open to mass start competition I have always measured my level and changes in it in terms of percentile result at national level, it's frustrating to have no equivalent in bridge. NGS would at least be one objective data point.

[mike777]

I certainly consider myself a low intermediate level player.

This forum and the wonderful, kind, and knowledgeable posters have patiently educated me and I thank you.

Am going to the STL nationals for a few days next week. My bridge partner has a daughter and young grandchild living there and wants to try out a few events. I am thankful she asked me and am looking forward to it.

Finding a hotel was a bit of a hassle but finally found something.
Whatever money I saved there I spent on an upgraded plane ticket. I am older and wanted the comfort.

My old old friend who was instrumental in teaching me back when I was 16 is supposed to be playing today, Wednesday, in the GNP. He talked me into coming back to the game recently.

If any of you are there next week I would love to say hello and thank you.

I hope to share some hands next week in my new adventure...

[jillybean]

awm, on 2026-February-25, 10:17, said:

No, this refers only to regionally-rated events at NABCs. The problem is that the nationals are running a huge number of parallel events (national events, regional events, beginner/intermediate events, etc). Since attendance has been declining, this means each event is pretty small, and running so many means a lot of space and overhead costs.

The proposal is to significantly reduce the number of events running at NABCs by holding only events which are "unique to nationals" (basically the NABC events) and not having a concurrent regional tournament. This will hopefully allow the ACBL to book smaller/cheaper facilities while increasing the size of the "interesting" events (note that these are not just the NABC+ "championship" events but also limited events like the Red Ribbon Pairs or the Mini-Spingolds). While this might cause some further drop in NABC attendance from the (relatively few) people who just wanted to play regional pairs, these folks have other options (attend regionals) and the overall impact on total tournament attendance might be positive, especially if ACBL can concurrently lower the costs of NABCs.

This sounds like a smart business decision, NABCs are out of reach of the majority. Hopefully the same model will be applied to Regionals, a local Rec Centre Hall would make a fine location, we don't need the Chateau at Whistler.

mike777, on 2026-February-25, 13:49, said:

This is only a proposal right now.
It is a few years away.

To cater for the hotel deals already signed? Will the ACBL be able to withstand the losses?

mike777, on 2026-February-25, 16:07, said:

Am going to the STL nationals for a few days next week.

STL 2013 was the last Nationals I attended - what a week. Have fun.

[barmar]

mycroft, on 2026-February-25, 13:28, said:

I will admit I have been priced out (among other things) of the NABCs that I am not required to attend. But when I was not, my partner and I's style was "play the national event. If we qualify, great. If not, either play a side game, or a regional pairs (usually when there was a two-session "Fast pairs"), or go tourist; then come back for the next big game. No regional events? Oh well, I guess...

I imagine they'll add "consolation" events for players who don't qualify in the national events, so there will be something for them to on the second day. They just won't have regional events running in parallel with the first days of national events.

Kind of like how pre-pandemic they started 2-day bracketed knockouts every other day, and the second day they would have compact KOs for all the losers.