|
|
FG - I was born in 1965 in Toronto in Canada, and I lived in this city until 2002 (date on which I left to Las Végas). I am married in Sheri Winestock, which was also my partner since the creation of Bridge Bases Inc. in 1990. We do not have children, but we have a dog named Magic (a mixture of German shepherd and Labrador retriever). I studied data processing at the University of Toronto during 4 years, but I was interested more and more in the bridge at the same time, what makes that be hard to concentrate at the school. I did not obtain a diploma and I decided that, instead of redoubling to make a success of my examinations, I was going to try to earn my living. I worked during 3 years as programmer for a company of software in Toronto and I realized that work impassioned me much more than the studies. I met Sheri for this period and it convinced me that us should create a company of software of bridge. Although our company pained during the first years, Sheri and me were really enthousiamés as well by work as we made as by the control of our own destinies. For this period, more and more of world bought computers and my performances as player also started by having an impact on our sales. Although I doubted that we will be one nouveau riches day by our work, we carry out a very comfortable life and I hope that that will continue. I am considered myself very lucky to be able to do exactly the work which I want and to be able to carry out a beautiful life. Moreover, I have a marvellous wife, I like the life in Las Vegas and, I can play in the major bridge tournaments in the whole world. One in another, the life is really beautiful! RL - You are known to be a great champion of bridge (American or Canadian?) and we would like to know some a little more about your course. Do we tell how you discovered the bridge?FG - I had two friends qu college who were two brothers and their parents had learned how to them to play bridge. They had found a third player in nore school, but they needed a fourth. As they knew that I liked the computers, they thought that I was to like the bridge as well and they learned how to me to play. They were right! I fell immediately in love with this play. RL - Why and how you decided to build your professional career around the bridge? How do you exert your trade of bridge player? For you, the bridge is a trade or a play? FG - To conceive to earn my living while playing bridge always attracted me, since I like much this play. However, I was never inclined to become a professional player full-time (because, I did not think that I would like that), nor an author (too much difficult to earn its living well). Until I meet Sheri, it did not appear to to me that the bridge would be my profession, but it saw the potential to combine my talents of bridge player and programmer and suggested creating our own company. Before this moment, the bridge was for me simply a pleasure, but now it is at the same time my work and my pleasure. Sometimes I play as a professional, now, only in the major tournaments (telq that the ACBL Nationals). That is gravitational, because I am able to play with my usual partner, Brad MOSS, in strong teams and to gain in the same money time much. I would wish to lay out of more than time to play purely bridge for the pleasure, but I fear to be too occupied these times to have much time for that. Perhaps that will change in a few years… RL - You thus created the Bridge company Bases Inc. , in 2001, to develop your educational softwares to with it. Can you speak to us about this activity. FG - In fact, Bridge Bases Inc. was created in 1990. Our initial goal was to develop a strong program to play the bridge, but after two years of test, I learned that this objective took very a long time to reach. We thus turned our attention towards the creation of educational softwares of bridge. This type of software is much easier to develop and, at that time, nobody other worked in this field. Our first educational product, Master Bridge, were delivered in 1992, in the form of a program DOS. It was a large success and new versions of this program were very well sold since. Bridge Master was translated into a dozen languages (including French - it is available in your Webridge Shop). Since Master Bridge, we created approximately 25 other educational CD for the bridge. The majority of them were pressed on a product created by famous authors such as Larry COHEN, Eddie KANTAR and Mike LAWRENCE. I started to work on BBO at at the end of 2001 and I passed the essence of my time on this program. It is resulted from it a fall from rate in the creation of CD-Rom these last years. However, the existing CD-Roms continued to be sold well and we have a partner in the Netherlands who did an excellent work by creating new CD-Roms based on our software without much assistance of our share. RL - You developed an exceptional software: Bridge Master 2000? 180 give prepared with 5 levels of difficulty. I find it brilliant, bus, when one wishes rejouer one gives (a little difficult), it is rare that all the charts remain in the same place. How did you have the idea of this functionality, which does not exist in other software of bridge? FG - The idea came from an old article of the magazine Bridge World. There was a funny story in connection with a person playing bridge against a computer which moved the charts of the defenders in order to take from this person any hope to carry out her contract. I thought that it would be funny and interesting to create such a program. At that time, I did not carry out the enormous educational potential of such a program. One of the beauties of Master Bridge is that the single way of making its contract resides in a perfect play - each error which you make “being penalized” by the program by beating your contract. The real bridge is not like that. You often freed yourselves from errors because of a weak defense or a happy placement of the charts. Thus, people do not learn from the errors that they make. It is not the case in the world of Master Bridge. This program obliges you to learn. It also happens that he is a funny program to use and that, combined with its effectiveness like educational tool, helped to make a very successful commercial product of it. RL - Then, you launched your play of bridge on line (Bridge Bases Online), after site OK Bridge and other sites. What differentiates you (on the technical level) from the other plays on line? Detail we concept BBO and how consider you his evolution? FG - The initial objective of BBO was to create a place where one could buy our educational program by remote loading on Internet. I did not have any intention to create a play of bridge on line. This concept became the part “Library of the bridge” of BBO (which is a relatively negligible part of our site, which makes it possible the user to download free articles on the bridge). However, when I realized how much it was easy to write a program able to send and of recevoirdes messages on Internet, a whole new world opened with me. Consequently, that I had already developed a beautiful user interface for the bridge, that took only two weeks to me to create the essence of what now (Club of principal bridge is BBO - Hand Bridge Club; Bridgevision - Vugraph theater; Space drive with the biddings with its partner - Partnership Bidding; Forums of discussion - Rooms Cat; Room of conferences - Reading Hall; Library of bridge - Library Bridge - Space with problems of bridge to be solved - Double Dummy area). Naturally, there is much more in BBO now and my collaborator Uday Ivatury played a major part in the later development of our site. RL - Obviously, an essential difference with the other sites of play on line, it is the exemption from payment of the play on your site. But then, how do you make to get the resources essential to your company? In other words, does the sale of the educational softwares get sufficient resources to you? FG - The concept of launching a free service of bridge of great quality attracted me much and I thought that such a service would have a great potential of increase in the popularity of our play. During the major part of the history of BBO we did not generate incomes of this service. The incomes which got to us in Sheri and with me the sale of our educational CD-Roms (and also profits of my occupation in major tournaments) were much more than sufficient to comfortably live and the expenditure engaged for the maintenance and the exploitation of BBO was not very high. Now BBO itself generates significant incomes for us. Essence comes from the tournaments with 1 $ which go on our site, but we earn also money by selling software through BBO, by selling publicity and; occasionally, by making programming with the request for the “WBF” (the World Federation of Bridge) and other federations of bridge national. That can seem strange that our site is free, but it is not improbable that Sheri, Uday and me will earn much money through BBO during next years. The number of our members continues to increase, and more there are people exploiting our site, more there will be people who will wish to play in our tournaments with 1 $. In addition to that, we envisage to take other initiatives which will get incomes. I can promise, however, that BBO will continue to remain a free site. Moreover, even if we gain enough money through this project to more have to work, I like the work which I make and I plan to continue to work on the software of bridge for the remainder of my life. RL - You know that I developed, about BBO, thanks to your assistance (remember you?), a private club, Cyberclub Webridge France, which includes/understands today more than 6.000 French-speaking members. I noticed that my players were interested by their classification. This is why I developed 2 measuring instruments: the progressiometer, to measure their own progress, and the classometer to be classified compared to the other players. Why are you counters the concept of classification of the players on BBO? FG - I saw on OK Bridge how much their system of grading Lehman caused to make the players coarse and poor the ones towards the others. “I will not play with you because you would penalize my classification”, “How could you fall 3 SA? I lost 2 thousandth of point in my classification”, were the kind of remarks often heard on this site. Much more, for certain players an automatic system of evaluation is a reason to consider the cheating - Lehman is a so significant part of the social structure of OK Bridge which some players would make very to increase their value (and consequently to dope their social standing). The cheating and the coarse behavior were always a share of the bridge on line, but I thought that I could contribute to reduce these problems by keeping BBO free from systems of grading automatic. You could be interested of knowing that I receive many messsages electronic on this subject. Some of these messages come people requiring of me to include a system of grading on BBO, but I receive some much more of the style: “I was accustomed to playing on OK Bridge and I am happy that BBO does not have a system of grading - if it plait you, never introduce any on your site!”. Naturally, I remember you and Cyberclub Webridge France (CWF2) since the first days of BBO. I was always impressed by your efforts and your success, and I do not doubt that the majority of your members are grateful work which you make. RL - One plays on BBO, in the club of principal bridge, mainly the American system of bidding SAYC, rather near to the French standard. During your many international competitions (in which you shone), you with the other systems of bidding (Polish, English, Italian, Norwegian, etc), can you had to confront you say to us if you consider a system better than another, and so yes which and why? FG - I prefer myself to play a natural system. I do not have a strong opinion on the fact of saying which system is the best, and I think that it would be very difficult to develop an argumentation convincing in this field. Much more important is to conceive judicious agreements with your partner. It does not matter to know if they are the best. As a long time as your system is not ridiculous and, in so far as you the stupid incomprehension and errors, you avoid will succeed well in this play. The choice between “naturalness” and “artificial” is really a personal business. “Natural” appears gravitational to me because I like the idea to be able to announce 4 hearts and of knowing that that does not mean anything more than: “I would like to try to gain 10 liftings with the asset heart”. I find that I tend to better play when I have this freedom and I also find that to leave the adversaries in the gnorance of the exact nature of your hand makes more difficult for them to find a defense precise. Many players, whom I respect deeply, would not agree with this assertion. I suspect that the battle between the “naturalists” and the “scientists” will never be solved, but, in my opinion, that the popularity of our play would increase if the “naturalists” had suddenly gained ground. The more artificial the advertisements become, the more people will have difficulties in learn this play. RL - And, generally, which are the international teams which you regard as best moment? Why? Thanks to the men, their sleeping partners, their federation, their system of bidding? FG - At this time precise, Italy and the U.S.A. are the two dominant countries in the field of the bridge. There are some other nations (Poland, China, Sweden and Netherlands) able to gain the Bowl Bermuda shorts or the Olympiads. The U.S.A. has more players of world class than any other country, but they they have few teams as strong as the three large Italian pairs. Italy has an additional advantage in what the American teams contain invariably a sponsor. The fact that players in Italy and in the U.S.A. are able to earn their living well while playing professionally is important in my opinion. To remain at the top requires to spend much time to play and to be well remunerated to play, this makes easier to realize. The harmony of the team and the partnership is also important and the best teams of Italy and the U.S.A. excellent in this field. RL - The team of male France did not shine these last years. According to you, who know well our champions, with what allot you this decline, who still will last a few years, time that rising generation of bridge players rises at the international level? Our players? Our system of bidding? The force of the other teams? Or another cause? FG - I have much admiration for the French bridge. During years 1990, France (and not Italy) were the only country able to introduce a team likely to have a chance reasonable to beat the U.S.A. I am not certain of what is occurred since. Perhaps part of the problems comes owing to the fact that the best players become older and, consequently, their talentsne is more what they had been and their appetite of victory decreased. Perhaps, the French style of advertisements (that it sometimes happened to me to appreciate) is ineffective against the style of the weak openings which became popular in most of the world. Perhaps, it had there personal problems between some of the best French players who made difficult to the best teams to constitute itself and with the teams to play their best potential. In any case, your country has a great number of high level players, experienced, like many young players with a strong potential. The 21è century was not good for the team of France, but that would not surprise me at the very least world only that shortly. RL - On the other hand, the team of female France shone in Estoril, by gaining Venice Cup against Germany. According to you, who know our champions well, with what allot you this success? Our players? Our system of bidding? The weakness of the other teams? Or another cause? FG - A thing that the Frenchwomen have for them is that they really behave like a team. They seem to like the ones the others and do not enter stupid conflicts or battles of ego the ones with the others. This makes easier to concentrate on what imports: to play as well as possible. While not removing anything with the other women team France (who are very of marvellous players, I think that Catherine d' Ovidio is really something of special. I was pleased to play in team with aelle in Ténérife and I saw it playing much of give on Vugraph of BBO. Few players (if however there is one) in the world of the bridge as well as play Catherine and to have a superstar in your accroit team obviously your chances to gain. RL - Thank you, Fred, to have agreed to answer my questions. |
|