Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Glyfair" data-source="post: 2895988" data-attributes="member: 53">I can see that, but that's a personal decision based on your own POV, not an absolute.I see the same arguments on bridge teams.&nbsp; Some championship bridge players play for the challenge, and choose the best players on their team.&nbsp; Some choose their teams based on friendship.&nbsp; Some get paid to pay on the team by a sponsor (Bill Gates, for example, has a top pro as his regular partner).&nbsp; Many do all of the above.Their are a lot of casual bridge players who feels it breaks the spirit of the game to pay for a partner or teammates.&nbsp; On the other hand, most sponsors feel it gives them the best play experience to pay for the best.&nbsp; They can focus on their own game instead of having to worry about their partner's own weaknesses.&nbsp; They can play against the best and do well enough that they can learn from it.Are any wrong for how they choose to play the game?&nbsp; I don't think so (at least among the variations above).&nbsp; If you feel it would cheapen the experience to pay someone to run a game don't.&nbsp; But don't begrudge those who would do so and those who would pay to have a better experience.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Glyfair, post: 2895988, member: 53"] I can see that, but that's a personal decision based on your own POV, not an absolute. I see the same arguments on bridge teams. Some championship bridge players play for the challenge, and choose the best players on their team. Some choose their teams based on friendship. Some get paid to pay on the team by a sponsor (Bill Gates, for example, has a top pro as his regular partner). Many do all of the above. Their are a lot of casual bridge players who feels it breaks the spirit of the game to pay for a partner or teammates. On the other hand, most sponsors feel it gives them the best play experience to pay for the best. They can focus on their own game instead of having to worry about their partner's own weaknesses. They can play against the best and do well enough that they can learn from it. Are any wrong for how they choose to play the game? I don't think so (at least among the variations above). If you feel it would cheapen the experience to pay someone to run a game don't. But don't begrudge those who would do so and those who would pay to have a better experience. [/QUOTE]

Verification