Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Cornelia Yoder
1 2 3 4 ... 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 ... 57 58 59 60
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In this case, I agree wholeheartedly with Boye and his approach. The “public transparency” was necessary once to get the ball moving, but now I think handling the problems through appropriate channels should be tried again.

As for “consistency”, there is absolutely nothing about consistency that makes it mandatory. I dread trying to force consistency where it isn't needed - that alone can kill innovation, progress, and creativity.
Nov. 1, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
wrong place
Nov. 1, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“Til lags åt alle kan ingen gjera” I believe we would say, “No one can please everyone”.
Nov. 1, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Robert, that is some excellent advice and insight into this problem, thank you for posting it.

I can think of a way to test a null hypothesis. We have something like 14 videos from the EBTC alone. Suppose we make a list of the gestures in question, and simply count the number of times each occurs in each of the videos.

Then assume the video with the lowest counts is the one case where they decided not to cheat (perhaps against friends, or because the opponents knew, or etc) and use that as a baseline for the null hypothesis.

Defining the gestures to count and the situational factors (bidding, on defense, etc) would need to be done with care, but I'll bet that there will be one video which has significantly lower counts than all the rest.

This might also give a lot of insight into which gestures are the meaningful signaling ones. Gestures which occur with the same count in every video are probably not signals. Ones which occur frequently in 13 out of 14 but never in the 14th will be the signals.
Nov. 1, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Interesting. I'd say the opposite, “I don't need your attitude, I can figure out where every honor is very easily. I just need your count.”

Do you suppose that I am just as capable? Perhaps B wants attitude and Z wants count. Hand signals would be a great way to circumvent the rule that all signals have to be the same in both directions.
Oct. 31, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
OR, we could just simply do away with gender-based events entirely, and let people compete as people instead of as male or female.
Oct. 31, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Interesting. You want to clean up the game and promote a positive image by concealing tax fraud?
Oct. 31, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Nicolas, I strongly resent your implication that because I was the one who first called attention to the unusual five finger gesture, that I somehow cannot be objective.

You are managing to insult everyone that is trying to work on this problem. May I humbly suggest that you learn how to study the data that you have so brilliantly collected and leave the rest of us alone?
Oct. 30, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Now that's a good thought, Carl! Why don't you take a look at the finger signals and compare them to the control points. Also watch the other signals such as scratching (face, chest, groin) and knuckle rapping. Maybe you can make the tie-in!
Oct. 30, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Nicolas, there is a huge difference in resting five fingertips on the table once in an entire session, and placing your hand tight flat against the tabletop with fingers spread and then quickly withdrawing it several times in a session.
Oct. 30, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm confused, Carl. You think it's moronic to want to know the length of your partner's longest suit? I guess I must be a moron, too, because that would be huge info for me.
Oct. 29, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Why do we need correlation to a specific suit? Partner can easily figure that out.

And I believe all the times for this have already been published, along with lots of other data related to finger count signals, bid gaps, and miscellaneous scratchings.

I know some of the signals for suits have been published here, including dummy touching and opening lead touching.
Oct. 29, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Not being able to earn money at your chosen profession is not and should not be a factor of any kind here. If you cannot earn money at your chosen profession, then either you are not good at it, or you have done something to cause that situation, and in either case, you better get a different profession.

Just because I have “chosen” my profession to be a star basketball player doesn't mean anyone else in the world is responsible for whether I can earn money at it.

Just because I have “chosen” my profession to be a star bridge player doesn't mean anyone else in the world is required to hire me, to play with me, or to give me access to their website.

Cheers for Eugene, and down with anyone who claims any rights just because they have “chosen” to want them.
Oct. 26, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
One thing that might be worth examining is how frequent these fidgety nervous habits are used during auctions vs during play when the screen is open.

Another related thing might be to see if they occur with the same frequency and regularity in all the different matches.

If BZ were cheating and decided for some reason not to cheat in a particular match, it might be very noticeable that certain of these movements were not observed there.
Oct. 25, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think we are spending a bit too much time, energy, and argument on statistics. No statistics are going to really nail these guys in a bridge organization, let alone a court of law.

Statistics are ok for mining through the data, but what is needed is to pin down exactly what BZ are signaling and how. That nailed FS, that nailed FN, and apparently nailed PS.

Let's nail BZ the same way – by figuring out what and how they are signaling. It can be done, we just haven't done it yet. So it's a little harder for a couple of reasons, but it can be done and that's the place to spend more time and energy.

Let me recap what we know….

Balicki gives finger signals, showing various numbers of fingers in gestures that are quick, deliberate, and distinct.

Both touch cards in ways that seem unnatural or unnecessary.

Balicki scratches himself when playing (but rarely during the auctions) in distinct, repeated places (cheek while bending his head way down, chest, groin).

Balicki makes several other hand movements or placements that are repeated and distinct (loosely curled fist on table, rapping with his knuckles on the table, elbow on the table, touching or moving dummy cards)

Zmudzinski makes leads in unusual places, far out into the table, right or left, or directly in front of him (remind you of anyone with initials FS?)

Zmudzinski frequently moves his opening lead into a new place on the table.

Bids of both are spaced in distinctly varying spacings.

Balicki frequently writes on his personal score/notepad multiple times for a hand, before and after the screen is raised.

Zmudzinski rests his hand on the table is several distinct and repeated ways (one finger touching the table, four or three fingers curled, four fingertips on table)

(feel free to add more if I missed any)

All of these things, and more, could be and probably are part of the signal system.

In addition, gestures, movements, and placings are different for Balicki and Zmudzinski, so the signaling is either one-way or each direction is different.

We have tons of hypotheses to consider. We have two awesome focal points – Nicholas with his fabulous job of data collection and organization, and Kit with his extremely strong scientific approach to hypothesis testing and evaluation.

Getting the signals sorted out is proving tough, but I think not impossible. Nicholas needs volunteers to mine the data in a robust scientific way for hypotheses that can be tested and don't rely on a small number of hands or reverse force-fitting. Kit needs volunteers to help test hypotheses. Jump in and volunteer to help in whatever way you are best at.

(Corrected the spelling of Zmudzinski to end in “i” but I don't think that how I spell or misspell his name is really much of a factor in uncovering his alleged cheating methods :)
Oct. 25, 2015
Cornelia Yoder edited this comment Oct. 25, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Why do people think bridge is about who to blame for a bad result? No system is perfect, no partner is perfect, and running back to say “51% of BW thinks you were wrong, pard” is about as destructive to the partner as I could invent.
Oct. 23, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Why isn't there a KEEP IT option??????
Oct. 23, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Years ago, my partner was in 7N off an ace. Fortunately the opening lead was not the suit of the missing A, so my partner managed to run 13 tricks in the other three suits.

At the end of the hand, the opening leader said, “I guess I should have led my ace.”
Oct. 22, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I have never even read a post by this Dean guy, but when I saw this paragraph, it was clear immediately why he should never ever be allowed to post on the internet anywhere.


“I did it just with the intention to protect bridge, hoping I can help making it a more enjoyable and cleaner game, trying to handle abusers and troublemakers in the proper way (unfortunately, ignoring them and their actions is hardly the best option, although this is what most people do).”


This paragraph is the most telling one amongst all his crap. It clearly shows a megalomaniac who quite sincerely believes it is his duty and right to PROTECT BRIDGE from the comments and opinions posted here on BW (and probably everywhere else in his life), that it is his job to personally HANDLE those he(!) believes are the abusers and troublemakers, and that the PROPER WAY to do this is to abuse them instead.

This guy must poison his entire life.
Oct. 22, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“Imaginative, sophomoric, juvenile, narcissistic, etc and I didn't use any of the appropriate adjectives that Cornelia used.”

LOL and I was just showing off my vocabulary in a more polite but unimaginative way :):)
Oct. 21, 2015
1 2 3 4 ... 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 ... 57 58 59 60
.

Bottom Home Top