What’s uncertain is how much longer this kind of bridge club can survive. Below age 60, bridge players are far scarcer. . .
The American Contract Bridge League, a nonprofit that promotes the game and holds tournaments, has about 165,000 members, down from 175,000 in the late 1990s. The average age has risen to around 71 from 58 in the same period.
See my original post on narrower, deeper, older.
Back in 1932 Bertrand Russell wrote: “The pleasures of urban populations have become mainly passive: seeing cinemas, watching football matches, listening to the radio, and so on. This results from the fact that their active energies are fully taken up with work; if they had more leisure, they would again enjoy pleasures in which they took an active part.”
In mentally demanding activities like Israeli folk dancing and bridge perhaps the “older” is a result of this fatigue from work week demands. The passive behavior described by Russell has been supplanted to some degree by physically demanding but still mentally disengaged activities like cycling, running, etc with the decrease in the physical demands of labor. Yet, the general absence of free time among the working population would seem to account for at least part of the incidence of narrower, deeper, older.
Video games are mentally active, not passive, and many millions of young people are spending lots of time doing that, often “together” online (e.g., Fortnite). There is a surprisingly large and related passive element too, of people watching expert players play games at the highest level of skill, but most of those spectators also play themselves. There is a correlation between cognitive ability and game success, though the emphasis is more on mental quickness and agility than on strategic decision-making, which is the kind of ‘smarts’ one looks for in athletes, like neurological reflex speeds.
To some extent, these new games have displaced the old games, and one could say that bridge simply has declining popularity. But there is something else going on, in that the “modern herding cats problem” which is that scheduling and getting friends together in close proximity to do anything seems to be much, much more difficult these days.
On Bridge itself, our local papers stopped carrying the syndicated Bridge columns this year.
Kling is right that this is a real cultural trend. This seems like this is probably a good thing. If less people want to pursue classical hobbies, and choose other activities with their time, well that’s probably for the best.
Spent a week on a cruise ship with the inlaws. The cruise line is popular with a wealthier older demographic. Bridge was advertised but only one person showed up. Their club is down to 3-4 tables. Fewer in the summer. I suppose we can blame Boomers for the demise?
I played for a time in my 20s. I have ne desire to plat today. Though I do play mah jong with them.
To be good at bridge requires one to be good at communicating with your partner, so that your bids are giving accurate information, in ranges, about the values of your cards and how many tricks, in which suits, you and your teammate can reliably take.
I can hardly think of any game where the 2 person partnership requires so much long term communication.
Compared to doubles tennis, for instance, there is likely to be a far bigger degradation in play by switching partners at bridge, rather than switching tennis partners.
For a couple of years, before they divorced, my parents did play bridge with other couples. I also learned to play, but never liked it as much as Hearts for instance. I’m pretty sure card games in general are getting less popular, except for poker and other card-betting games. My wife is far more interested in Settlers of Cataan rather than cards, for instance.
I’m surprised that millennials have not picked up on bridge in the same way that they seem fascinated with record players, old crooners, Barry Goldwater glasses, and flip digit clocks.
I always comment whenever Arnold Kling blogs about bridge 🙂
I think bridge just isn’t a sexy game because there’s not a lot of prize money involved. That, plus the complexity of playing the game well (narrower, deeper, older) makes introducing new players difficult.
I am relatively young and have been completely smitten by bridge since I was 20 years old. All of my friends who I introduce it to acknowledge that it is actually a good game. A few of them even stick with it 🙂
From what I understand, chess and poker popularity were also dwindling until massive prize money came around (Bobby Fischer demanding 1million USD in his World Chess Championship match) and of course the Moneymaker boom in poker. Maybe if bridge had such a thing…
Or maybe if we made bridge illegal. That might work.