Inter-club bridge: literally bridging the gap between club and county
Hi all, my first post here*
I think we're missing a trick in Lincolnshire :# . We do little to encourage** inter-club bridge **(and there is virtually none played) and then wonder why club players don't flock to county-run events. In effect "county events" are non-team, inter-club events run by the county, but they have unintentionally engendered fear and lack of interest in players who have no background in playing competitive bridge already of that type.
_Q. How vibrant is inter-club bridge in other counties? Does this positively impact county-run events?_
Over the past year I've noticed that there is a large gap between club and county generally. Most clubs have a County rep and they generally do a good job of keeping communication between county committee and clubs, particularly on county run events. This much I'm sure is very common amongst CBAs. However a significant majority of AC (affiliated club) members do not play in "county events" and virtually no-one from UC clubs does. Further the club chairmen/women seldom meet together as a group (if ever!) to discuss the future of bridge in the county, what they are doing well, what they can learn from each other, how to collaborate for mutual interest, etc.
_Q. How much interaction between the CBA and its ACs and UCs are there in English counties?_
This insularity in Lincolnshire is, I suspect, one of the root causes why the unique situation that bridge finds itself in (maybe like lawn bowls?) is one that is not being developed successfully in this country, despite best efforts and huge amounts of time and effort from a minority of players that are admins and helpers up and down the country.
Kind regards,
Kiat Huang
- I'm co-opted onto the Lincolnshire CBA but these views are my own and not necessarily of all, or any of the, LCBA.
Comments
Hi from Gloucestershire
We have a decent amount of inter-club bridge going on in the county, but it seems quite disconnected with involvement in county events. Like many counties we have seen a decline in attendance at county events, for decades now. The causes are myriad - the top and next to top players have a lot of other opportunities, there is a smaller proportion of the bridge playing population at that competitive place in the spectrum, and there are more time distractions for everyone.
In terms of interactions with clubs we do not distinguish between Affiliated and Unaffiliated, and we feed them something at least once a month but get little response. We are now embarking on creating a Value Proposition for the county/ebu and intend to use this to understand how better to as approach clubs and discuss what we can do to mutual benefit.
Patrick
Hi Patricks
How have you progressed with the "Value Proposition"? Have any ideas come through which might help other Counties? If no progress, no problems but I am interested in any "new" directions taken up.
CMOT_Dibbler
Hi from Worcestershire
Based at least partly on a conversation and idea from the Midland County Working Group, we initated an Inter-Club League about five years ago, We only run it over about 3-4 sessions a year but it has been well-received and successful. Consequently we added a "Simple Systems" Division last year to which we admitted non-affiliated clubs to join with teams from our affiliated clubs. That worked well as well and we're hoping that we will increase the number of teams in it this year.
A spin-off from the Simple Systems Division is that we hope to be able to understand non-affiliated clubs better and, as Patrick says above, this will help us to develop a Value Proposition for them.