Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Art Korth
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
While it is true that New Jersey casinos cannot bar you for being a card counter, they can toss you out for being an undesirable person. And that is what they do with card counters.
Sept. 9, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This used to be a staple of Creights. However, since so many people know the rules of Creights it is sort of pointless not to reveal them now.
Sept. 8, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Cheating is an illness. And it is addictive. I doubt that any penalty will deter cheaters from continuing to cheat.

Also, cheaters who have not yet been caught believe that they will never be caught. So, again, the punishment for being caught cheating is not relevant, as cheaters don't believe that they will ever be caught.
Sept. 5, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ed: I did not say that this is the law. I said that this is a basic rule that players follow. I understand that the law is that you NEVER touch another player's cards. As a practical matter, if a player asks to see my cards I allow it and I occasionally ask to see another player's cards, and almost without exception the answer is “certainly.”

I would be surprised if this procedure, while not following the letter of the law, is followed by almost all players.
Sept. 3, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I am extremely troubled by this incident, and I await the resolution. One of the basic rules in dealing with cards at the table is that one NEVER handles another player's cards without consent and certainly not without the player being present. Even if nothing untoward was intended, MP's handling of the board without the opponents being present has the appearance of impropriety. The fact that a fouled board resulted raises the stakes substantially.

Very troubling.
Sept. 3, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Permanent expulsion is the only remedy here.

Anything less is a joke.
Sept. 3, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Perhaps because we are not the ones to judge whether the “accused” are guilty? BW is not judge and jury, nor are the posters in this thread.
Aug. 28, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Al: I think you are looking into my post for something that is not there.
Aug. 26, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
"Finally, of course, if I were to try cheating, I would randomly pick out half the boards and send signals on those. That way, I would be playing my normal, bad bridge on half the boards. Your committee says, ‘look at the spectacular success you had on board three,’ and I would say, ‘but look at the equally spectacular disaster I had on board 6. Surely, if I knew my partner’s heart holding, I would have…'”

Yes, this sounds like a way of cheating which would be more difficult to uncover and easier to justify if the player came under suspicion. But the psychology of cheating (you might call it a sickness) would eventually overcome the constraints. Once a cheater is successful at what he is doing some of the time, the urge to cheat all the time will lead to eliminating the safeguards. He believes he is invincible and will never be caught.
Aug. 26, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“As for so-called ‘Colonel Blimp’ doubles (showing four honors in the opponents' suit), when does that ever happen? Especially when the opponents open at the three or four level, or raise to that level.”

A couple of years ago at the GNT District Finals, the auction went 2 - 3 - 4 to my partner. Holding AKQJ of hearts and other stuff, he decided to bid 6, which unhappily did not succeed.

When the dummy hit, I somewhat facetiously stated “Do you think you could have beaten 4?”
Aug. 25, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That is the way Ken speaks. Paragraphs are for kids.
Aug. 25, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Joe, you have it slightly wrong.

There are three elements to libel/slander. They are:

1. A defamatory statement (a statement made which is false, which is known to be false and which impunes the reputation of the object).
2. Publication of that statement.
3. Damages.

Publication means having the statement made so that others besides just the maker and the object know about it.

Malice is a 4th element which is required only when the object is a public figure. Malice is the intention to cause harm to the object of the defamatory statement.
Aug. 25, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Jacobellis v. Ohio (1964).
Aug. 25, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Or it might be slander or libel anyway. But there might be no damages. Have you ever read QB VII by Leon Uris?
Aug. 25, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't understand the rationale behind the score change. Presumably, you bid your hand assuming that your partner had a heart suit and a reasonable hand. As for your partner, he heard you cue bid one of the opponent's suits and he bid his 4 card spade suit. What else was he supposed to do? I don't see how his 3 bid or his pass of 3NT were influenced by the UI of your mistaken alert.

As for the timing of the score correction, I do not know the specifics, but I am reasonably sure that this could happen anytime before the session concludes, not just the match.
Aug. 24, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would call the director as soon as declarer faced his cards to make a claim. When a claim is made, play ceases. If there is any problem, the TD must be called.

As for dummy's actions, I would inform the TD and see what happens. Dummy's actions would have no impact on the outcome of the hand, as I called the TD as soon as the claim was made. But clearly dummy is out of line.
Aug. 22, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This reminds me of a lot of poker bad-beat stories. I like it when other players call my bets when they have a 15-20% chance of winning. Unfortunately, sometimes those 15-20% chances come in. That is why they are called bad-beat stories.
Aug. 20, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would have thought exactly the opposite. If a change is desirable, why wait until January 2016?
Aug. 19, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The change to 3.8.1 states “effective immediately.”
Aug. 19, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Michael: Please read Item 151-03 from the Board of Directors Minutes of the New Orleans NABC posted by Bob Heller, above. Publication for suspension or expulsion was changed to publication in all cases resulting in a finding of guilt. So suspension or expulsion is no longer the criterion.
Aug. 19, 2015
.

Bottom Home Top