Join Bridge Winners
B/Z observations

Having created the test about being able to read the B/Z signals, I decidd it was finally time for me to take the test myself.  I have put in many hours watching the videos, for B/Z and others, and I believe I am pretty proficient about understanding what I am seeing.  I ran through each of the videos at least 3 times -- once watching only Z, once watching only B, and once watching both of them.  If there was any critical point in the video, I would pause and/or run it at 1/4 speed until I was absolutely sure about what I had seen.  I was confident that if Nicolas's observations were accurate I would have no difficult matching them on at least 23 of the 26 deals, probably better.

The results were very disappointing.  I matched his observations on only 19 of the deals. 

I am going to go through every deal on which there was a potential discrepancy, and describe exactly what I am seeing.  I will first give the deal number from my list, then the actual deal number from Nicolas's list (they are different, since I did the deals in a different order in order to avoid bias).  I will then give the link to the deal, my observations, Nicolas's observations, and my explanation of what I am seeing.

Kit:  2

Nic:  7

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vy5ma-3u-Ew&t=74m55s

Kit:  Yes    5

Nic:  Yes    5

The lead was a club.  B had 5 hearts and 2 clubs.  This would mean that the observation should have been YES  --  if they had been signaling according to the code.  Nicolas accurately pointed out that on this hand B had given the 5-finger signal before Z gave the trigger signal, so the trigger signal shouldn't count and the proper observation should have been NO   5.  That would have been consistent with B's hand.  I accept that reasoning, but we will have to retain this reasoning if this sequence occurs on other hands.

 

 

Kit:  3

Nic:  26

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vy5ma-3u-Ew&t=93m0s

 Kit:  No    --

 Nic:  No    n/a

This was the only hand where the observation was listed as n/a in the table.  The opening lead was a heart and B had 5 hearts, so when I made the answer table I put in NO  5, since that would be what I would have expected from looking at B's hand.  As it turns out it is very clear that B did not give a signal.  Nicolas realized this, and changed the table to No  --  which is what it should have been.  This particular deal is a clear false positive (which doesn't necessarily mean Nicolas's hypothesis is wrong).  So everybody should have gotten this one "wrong".

 

 

Kit:  4

Nic:  22

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h8EFcFY_Ovk&t=18m40s

Kit:  No   5

Nic:  No   --

Take a look here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h8EFcFY_Ovk&t=19m16s

I am seeing B give a definite 5-finger signal.  Nicolas has it as no signal.

The issue is a question of timing.  The signal occurs about 37 seconds after the screen goes up.  It could be argued that there is no signal given after this long.  I would accept that, but would then have to recheck the videos to see if any of the other signals occurred after this long.  When asked Nicolas did not give a time frame, so on each hand I watched until the first card was called from dummy as third hand would then be playing probably pretty quickly and it would be impossible to give the trigger.

It should be noted that this deal was a potential false positive for my 5-card suit hypothesis also.

 

 

Kit:  8

Nic:  9

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hlS7C62DWeo&t=8m50s

Kit: No   --

Nic: Yes --

The issue here is whether or not Z touched or moved the card led to give the trigger.  Usually there was no question about this.  Here, however, it was close.  The potential touch occurs a couple of seconds after the screen goes up.  My eye saw that he didn't quite touch the card.  Nicolas's eye says that he did for an instant.  He definitely did not move the card, as he clearly does on the other hands where he gives the trigger signal.

 

 

Kit:  13

Nic:  17

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0Q1TDXA1lQ&t=67m45s

Kit:  No    5

Nic:  No   --

Look at:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0Q1TDXA1lQ&t=68m21s

Once again it is an issue of amount of time lapsed.  The 5-finger signal looks pretty clear to me.  It occurs about 37 seconds after the screen goes up.  This deal was another potential false positive in my 5-card suit hypothesis.

 

 

Kit:  17

Nic:  16

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbC6yG2KWvI&t=55m11s

Kit:  No   4

Nic:  No   --

Look at:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbC6yG2KWvI&t=55m24s

My eye sees B giving a 4-finger signal.  Nicolas's observation is that there is no signal.

 

 

Kit:  21

Nic;  3

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BBzUNnzfU0M&t=112m35s

Kit:  Yes  4

Nic:  Yes  5

I am seeing a 4-finger signal.  Nicolas is seeing a 5-finger signal.

 

 

Kit:  26

Nic:  10

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eda-EC0--OQ&t=138m56s

Kit:  No   5

Nic:  No   --

Look at:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eda-EC0--OQ&t=139m34s

I see B giving a 5-finger signal.  Nicolas does not.  This does occur about 38 seconds after the screen comes up.

 

It is important to know if others missed on the same hands that I missed.  If the misses are scattered, that would indicate that Nicolas's observations are probably accurate and I am in error.  But if other readers are missing on the same hands, that indicates that we are right and Nicolas's observations are wrong.  If several of Nicolas's observations are wrong, that makes his hypothesis less secure.  Hopefully readers will make a quick comment about which hands they got wrong so we can see if we are missing on the same hands.

The reader should not take my word about this material.  He should not take Nicolas's word about this material.  The evidence is there to be seen in the videos and the hands.  The reader should examine this evidence and draw his own conclusions.

77 Comments
Getting Comments... loading...
.

Bottom Home Top