![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
jackAt the end of post pizza we played Bridge, for me the first time in many many years. It was pretty fun, the play style is about as casual as I like it, and the play level close enough to mine that I can reasonably follow about what's going on.
I think the problem when I first learnt bridge was I was taught very large amounts of things at about the same time, and couldn't tell the defference between a rule and a convention, or maxims applicable 90% of the time and maxims applicable 10% of the time. And too swamped by information to concentrate on common sense ways to play
It's a common phenomenon of going too fast and introducing solutions before problems, of introducing large numbers of rules of thumb before the student can see when or why they're applicable, and so they grasp none of them intuitively, deaded their own reasoning, and randomly use whichever they can remember.
Sometimes it's a flaw in the teaching, teaching someone differentiation before they've been stumped by problems it's necessary for. Sometimes it's natural, teaching someone electronics before they know enough physics to be able to build all the components -- they shouldn't need to, I only want to because I'm perfectionist like that.
Sometimes it's because someone is further behind than you thought, teaching someone who doesn't socialise well all the normal conventions can swamp them, but if they operate on "be honest" and "be nice", and learn tact when they're ready to grasp it they'll get there eventually :) Sometimes it's absolutely ideal: teaching a martial art you really do instill all the reflexes long before someone understands exactly why.
But playing with very simple, natural conventions, and some common sense during play, I find it feels like I do have some intuition for what's right afterall. Now practice and learning might actually help :)
To put it another way
I've been on both sides, in Bridge, and other varied incidents in games, maths, life. Someone quite naturally offers good advice like "At the end, when you played the SX, you should have played the Sy because [explanation]."
But often, the advice you *should* give is "At the start of the game, you should see if you're likely to make any tricks in S and if so how it might be possible."
In fact, the beginner had lost track in S before that point, so the advice is useless, because they didn't understand it so won't remember it.
In fact
At home I drew out a random hand and studied how each I'd play it. It somehow made much more sense than it did eight years ago :) And having an idea of how the hand is going to play out as a whole makes bidding entirely more intuitive :)
I think the problem when I first learnt bridge was I was taught very large amounts of things at about the same time, and couldn't tell the defference between a rule and a convention, or maxims applicable 90% of the time and maxims applicable 10% of the time. And too swamped by information to concentrate on common sense ways to play
It's a common phenomenon of going too fast and introducing solutions before problems, of introducing large numbers of rules of thumb before the student can see when or why they're applicable, and so they grasp none of them intuitively, deaded their own reasoning, and randomly use whichever they can remember.
Sometimes it's a flaw in the teaching, teaching someone differentiation before they've been stumped by problems it's necessary for. Sometimes it's natural, teaching someone electronics before they know enough physics to be able to build all the components -- they shouldn't need to, I only want to because I'm perfectionist like that.
Sometimes it's because someone is further behind than you thought, teaching someone who doesn't socialise well all the normal conventions can swamp them, but if they operate on "be honest" and "be nice", and learn tact when they're ready to grasp it they'll get there eventually :) Sometimes it's absolutely ideal: teaching a martial art you really do instill all the reflexes long before someone understands exactly why.
But playing with very simple, natural conventions, and some common sense during play, I find it feels like I do have some intuition for what's right afterall. Now practice and learning might actually help :)
To put it another way
I've been on both sides, in Bridge, and other varied incidents in games, maths, life. Someone quite naturally offers good advice like "At the end, when you played the SX, you should have played the Sy because [explanation]."
But often, the advice you *should* give is "At the start of the game, you should see if you're likely to make any tricks in S and if so how it might be possible."
In fact, the beginner had lost track in S before that point, so the advice is useless, because they didn't understand it so won't remember it.
In fact
At home I drew out a random hand and studied how each I'd play it. It somehow made much more sense than it did eight years ago :) And having an idea of how the hand is going to play out as a whole makes bidding entirely more intuitive :)
no subject
Date: 2006-10-17 01:15 pm (UTC)That's an unexpected verification of something I was thinking a couple of days ago. Thanks!
no subject
Date: 2006-10-17 01:33 pm (UTC)