Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Cornelia Yoder
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This is great, and if you are in the improving business today, I'd also like to vote for a search feature in posts. Unless I'm missing something, the only thing I seem able to search for is a person's name.
Sept. 23, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Tim, you are SO wrong. Many of us consider online bridge to be the real First Class bridge!

It's the places where you have to spend thousands of dollars to go sit in uncomfortable chairs and play at prearranged times that may not fit your personal clock and risk being cheated and worrying about irregularities and opponents reading your eyes and all the rest of that stuff that is the Not Bridge.

Awarding masterpoints for online bridge has been going on for years now without any real problems.
Sept. 23, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Timo, I agree with everything you said right up to the last paragraph.

But I disagree that the current top players should be the ones to rule where the game goes.

Why should they have any more say than the second level players who might be top if they didn't have to contend with screens, body language, cheating worries, and the nuisance of physical cards?

Being part of the current in-crowd should not give you ruling power in the future of the game.
Sept. 22, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“There is nothing more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain in its success, than to take the lead in the introduction of a new order of things. Because the innovator has for enemies all those who have done well under the old conditions, and lukewarm defenders in those who may do well under the new. ”

Nicolo Machiavelli (1469-1527). The Prince.
Sept. 22, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That would be so nice, Joel. I remember once (okbridge days) when someone made a slam against me by dropping my singleton K offside missing 5 in the suit.

All others went down in that slam, and I accused the player of cheating (cheating was rampant on okb in those days).

Turned out he was a top player from S America and explained his play perfectly, he was right, it was an excellent deduction, I apologized, and I've been extremely careful of such implications ever since. Ignorance can get some of us …
Sept. 22, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I believe it was John Dean, white house counsel of Watergate infamy, who later wrote that he woke up one day and realized he was way over the line, but still couldn't remember or decide exactly when he had crossed it.
Sept. 22, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Haven't seen it here, but two different women have pointed that out to me on BBO.
Sept. 21, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Since it's so hard to go back and undo and redo, I suggest just leaving all the results in the books, and annotate each and everyone one of them with a direct note stating that the listed winner is now known to have cheated. Period. That not only solves the mess of trying to straighten them out, but it records for posterity forever exactly what happened.
Sept. 21, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There is a certain class of players, no specific names intended here, who take any opportunity to improve their scores by any legal means possible, including jumping on something innocuous to claim some penalty or adjustment.

We've all been victims of that (my own story is a good one, too, but the jerk is dead now and good riddance to him), and there is little you can do about it but put those players on your jerk list and be careful around them.

That's one reason I'm delighted to see the move toward electronic play where you simply can't revoke, drop cards, bid insufficiently, or touch something you aren't supposed to touch.
Sept. 21, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Dustin says what I was thinking also … there were some statistics posted showing FS and FN very high, then a group of 5 others with SP at the top of that group. The four other pairs in that group with SP are certainly the next likely suspects based on that criteria, and if any of them are cheating, they must be quaking in their boots right now.

Even if they don't know for sure who those statistics represented, they are likely quaking. And if they do get id'd, it's too late already to just stop cheating, so now would be the time to come forward and take the hit.

Normally, I would agree with Espen, if they get scared, they just stop for a while until the attention dissipates.

But this situation is different than normal, because they are already at risk with existing evidence just waiting to be noticed, so coming out now might just be their last chance to stay in bridge.

Sept. 21, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Seems to me that it is time to move on.

Piekarek and Smirnov (and the other pairs) are ancient history now. They won't be playing together again, and whatever penalties they endure aren't likely to be affected by more opinions posted here.

Instead, let's talk about REAL confessions, up front with no prior threat of exposure, such as the amnesty idea.

If you've been cheating and are willing to confess all, stop playing with your cheater partner, and reform totally, BEFORE anyone mentions your name here … should that be allowed and with what stipulations for redress?
Sept. 21, 2015
Cornelia Yoder edited this comment Sept. 21, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This idea reminds me of an incident when bidding boxes first came out. We had a deaf player at our club and he immediately bought a set, the first most of us had seen.

The first time he tried to use them, one of the more ugly players at the club refused outright. The director had to come and sit at that table so the player could bid verbally and then she placed the bidding card from the box for him.

It was actually hilarious to most of us, and it was the last time he tried it. I think the ridiculousness was apparent even to him.

Even someone that obstinate and reactionary was able to use the bidding boxes just fine after being forced to try them.

Verbal bids, paper cards, who cares … it's the logic of the game that matters.

Sept. 21, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I recall the first time I played with a really good player when I was new to duplicate, and he said all signals would be count, every card we played if not trying to win the trick would be a count signal.

This was completely new to me, but since I had to do it, I tried to use it. By the end of that one session, it was like a whole new world had opened up to me.

I knew what everyone had, I knew what card to save at the end of the hand, it was amazing. I spent the next year insisting that everyone I played with give nothing but count.

That was the session that turned me into a serious student of bridge.
Sept. 21, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There is a huge difference between punishing them (jail, fines, restitution, lynching, cutting off their toes, etc) and letting them come back to cheat again.

I don't care too much about punishment, I just don't want them to ever compete in bridge again, ever.
Sept. 20, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Agree with Peg, plus no one is “taking livelihood” .. they may lose this job, but there is always flipping burgers or digging ditches.

Just because someone has chosen a career playing cards doesn't mean the rest of the world has to give them a job doing it for the rest of their lives.

They'll survive just fine without bridge. And bridge will survive just fine without them.
Sept. 20, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
One of the things I think is very important and not yet stressed is that the tablet should be flat on the table (or slightly tiltable), NOT up vertically like a traditional monitor or laptop. There shouldn't be any need to recline to be comfortable any more than at a normal card table with physical cards.
Sept. 20, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
How can a full confession be considered “the least evidence”?
Sept. 20, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Diego Brenner: “I spent hours looking at the videos and I didn't see anything…”

Well, I spent hours looking at the videos and I DID see (and report) something, but so far no one will even tell me if I was right or wrong.
Sept. 20, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Heck, at the rate Boye is going, they'll be down to me soon :)
Sept. 19, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Violation, infraction, irregularity, whatever you call it, it's not permitted by the rules of bridge (see Hoyle), and where there is an opportunity to make it impossible to accidently do, it makes no sense to ignore that. No one needs to win that way.
Sept. 19, 2015
.

Bottom Home Top