Something occurred to me about this whole "best
player" topic. Should not the person who we ultimately
dub "the best" be the most proficient at ALL the
formats we play on? I mean, trash is mainstream enough
these days to warrant consideration as being important,
right? If not, why do James, Anthony and a whole host of
others put in all that work each year for TRASH
regionals and nationals?
Thus, I think we need to
consider NAQT, ACF, CBI and TRASH as all equally viable.
After all, the "number one" player should be able to be
dominant to some level no matter how the questions are
phrased, right? Being able to get through the way the
questions are written is often equally as important as
knowing the material anyway, I think it has been
argued.
My "one cent less than Nathan Freeburg puts in"
:),
Stan J.