Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Cornelia Yoder
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Peg, you are not being “set upon”, and even if you feel that way, it's not about you “understanding” (note the implication that you must be correct and everyone who doesn't agree is wrong).

It's about a lot of sexist people (you called them “pigs”, not Daniel and not me) who have no sense of what is going on in the world.

Today, just today alone, right on BBO, I have been called “b***h”, “dumb blonde”, “c**t”, and “meathead” (and they didn't bother using *'s), all because I booted them from my table for extremely rudeness to their partner.

I don't care about the insults, they mean nothing to me, but I do want to point out that THREE of them are directly aimed at insulting WOMEN. Not a person they were angry at, but specifically trying to insult based on gender.

So if you know this goes on and don't object, then you are colluding with people who do it. If you don't know, then stop and listen to those who do.
Oct. 8, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Strange you say that … I don't see anything anywhere in that joke that requires denigrating men ahead of time, just to set up the joke.
Oct. 8, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That's definitely true, Gonzalo. I have seen places where they put down a pass card and then in a clear second motion, move it to form a bigger gap.
Oct. 8, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I went through two EBTC videos (Israel and Latvia) and recorded the gap (wide, narrow, medium, n/a) for the second call of each of B and Z for every hand.

Then I went back and looked at the hands and bidding.

I tried to relate the gap to

1. Strength of the hand
2. Holding in the suit(s) the opponents were bidding (shortness, honors, etc)
3. Controls
4. Holding in the suit partner was bidding
5. Distribution in the majors (hearts, spades, either, both)
6. Holding in hearts, holding in spades (honors, shortness, etc)
7. Desired lead
8. Any shortness, or not
9. 5 card or longer suit, or not

In those 30 hands (two fell out because there was no second call), I could not relate the wide vs narrow to any of those things. Not one of them was consistently present or absent when the gap was wide nor when it was narrow.

I looked at the hands where BZ were bidding separately from those where they were passing. Same result.

I do not believe the gap is showing any of those things I listed, in either of the two matches I watched.
Oct. 7, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Peg, the “joke” is not about belittling women, the “joke” is about a stupid person, no gender needed. The problem is that to set up the “joke” requires belittling someone, and for some reason you maybe can explain, it's funnier (at least to some people, Kantar comes to mind) if the belittled someone is a woman. THAT is the heart of the problem.
Oct. 7, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Brian, there are a lot of definitions of “sexist”, and that is not one of them. Now the so-called “joke”, THAT is sexist.

Perhaps you should learn a bit more about it before you try to make ad hominem attacks. Those are the last resort of someone losing an argument, and you are not even good at them :)
Oct. 7, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Miohael is 1000% correct. He said it better than I could.

As a joke, it's not even funny. As a joke about bridge players, it's not funny. As a joke about men, it's not funny. As a story demeaning women, it's decidedly not funny.

Curious to me that a woman bridge player is not getting this.
Oct. 7, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Keep in mind, also, that having a void makes a hand stronger in general, so it could still just be a strength signal.
Oct. 7, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'd wager that Scotish women are a lot smarter than you seem to think, but just in case YOU don't know what a chickadee is: https://heartofthewestcoast.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/ce-img_5910.jpg

Which of course has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that you automatically assumed a sexual meaning to my name without any reason to do so.
Oct. 7, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
So even a screen name that is actually short for Chickadee (a bird and a childhood nickname) takes your mind straight to the gutter? Don't know about Scotland, but in English a “girl” is a child, not an adult woman deserving of respect.
Oct. 7, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Why are we posting misogynist humor here?
Oct. 7, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There are of course many times when you need to play a second card in a suit to complete the count signal, but what's absurd is to make comments suggesting that what I described for ONE session of bridge in my life was intended as a full signal system.

EVERY CARD IS A SIGNAL. Whether you are following suit, trying to win the trick, discarding, or leading, the card you play needs to say SOMETHING. That doesn't mean it needs to give count, only that it needs to convey some new information to partner, as I clearly stated.

Having my friend force me to play nothing but count for one session of bridge taught me in just one session to start counting the hand. There was nothing absurd about it, it worked. And it will work for Margaret and her partner if they try it for a few sessions. That doesn't mean it has to be a lifetime commitment, Christopher, and it's definitely not wasted if it helps them count.
Oct. 7, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Brian, I don't agree with that. Every card you play should be a signal of some sort. You may or may not need to play a second card as part of a count signal, but after giving count there are more things to communicate to partner. Any card you play (lead, follow suit, win, discard) should say something.
Oct. 6, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes, that was my first intro to count signals, and he simply forced me to do it. It really opened my eyes to counting a hand.

I don't suggest you adopt that as a permanent method though, just as a means to get used to counting a hand well.
Oct. 6, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
http://www.bridgebase.com/vugraph_archives/vugraph_archives.php Then type in EBTC and the name of the country in the search box.
Oct. 5, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
When you really think about it, FS were doing their thing for years, under suspicion, without anyone actually noticing the board positioning, the coughing, the peeking at screenmates hand and then elbows, all that stuff. Not sophisticated at all, yet unnoticed.

FN were positioning opening leads in two specific ways, never randomly tossing out a card, for years, under suspicion and yet no one noticed it.

BZ (well at least B) has been touching the dummy cards, and making all kinds of hand movements for years, in fact he's almost famous for it, without anyone noticing how it conveyed information.

None of these things are sophisticated, none are switching codes, none are invisible. They are all obvious, clear, consistent, open movements, and yet no one noticed. No one saw any of this in pairs that were quietly believed to be cheating. Why not?
Oct. 5, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Perfect choice! The unsung hero of this whole mess finally gets his own song! :)
Oct. 5, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You might be on the right track. I've been looking at a lot of these and it seems to me that most of the time, they are signaling about an obvious suit (led, touched, etc), but in a couple of sessions, they seemed to be signaling hearts always. It could be my imagination, or just coincidence, too.
Oct. 4, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“Has B ever made those fist-on-table or spread-fingers gestures at any other moment than just after the opening lead? ”

Spread fingers: Not in any of the 11 videos from EBTC that I have watched, not once. Only at the start of the hand when on defense.

And it's a very clear, firm move, and lasts less than a second, each time. It was so deliberate and yet so fast … that was what initially caught my attention.
Oct. 4, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
One thing I have noticed is that when the 5 open fingers flat on the table is a fast gesture, usually well under 1 second duration, it's very clearcut and also clear to tie to the number of cards he has in a suit.

Some of the others are slower and more natural, not flat on the table, so I'm thinking the relevant signals are the fast / flat on the table / fast removal ones.
Oct. 4, 2015
.

Bottom Home Top