Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Arend Bayer
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
BZ31, BZ32
Oct. 3, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
And Zimmermann was in on the joke? Or was Balicki playing a joke on one of the biggest bridge sponsors, too?
Sept. 30, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Come on Josh. It's not fair he can play bridge that well _and_ use the internets.
Sept. 29, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Have a look at 49:50, too.
Sept. 26, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Of course it “should”, but I presume the WBF doesn't think it has the authority to do that (only the EBL could withdraw them, or the Polish team voluntarily of course).

General conditions of contest, 3.8:

Credentials Committee
Pursuant to the By-Laws of the WBF, the President has appointed a Credentials Committee, whose functions shall be (subject to these Conditions):
a) to determine all questions relating to the rights and eligibility of players and non-playing captains whose names have been submitted by an NBO for invitation to compete in a World Bridge Championship
b) in its discretion, to refuse to invite any player or non-playing captain whose name has been submitted for invitation by an NBO, as aforesaid, to participate in a World Bridge Championship. In any such case of refusal, no reason shall be given by the Credentials Committee.

http://www.worldbridge.org/Data/Sites/1/media/documents/regulations/generalconditionsofcontest.pdf

So don't expect the WBF to disqualify a team, nor to announce any reasons for this decision.
Sept. 26, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I wonder whether that's how F-N started. E.g. lead a singleton = I want partner to win the trick = lead vertically.
Sept. 25, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“Why do no other top pairs play fantunes twos?” David, I can't resist pointing out that the 2M openings by Wladow-Elinescu were very similar - 10-14, 6M or 5+M/4+m (except when non-vuln against vuln).
http://www.ecatsbridge.com/documents/files/WBC2013/dOrsiSeniorsTrophy/Germany/Elinescu-Wladow.pdf
Sept. 15, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If you read all posts in that thread you will notice their success as declarer was mostly based on the opponents' failures on opening lead.
Sept. 14, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Here is another scenario: say someone has discovered evidence of cheating while watching youtube videos of a European championships. What are his/her options?
Sept. 8, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I do agree the EBL should not rush to judgment. But I do wish they would have rushed to *start* an investigation, and to do so without public pressure, as soon as they received information about possible cheating.

For me, their “Breaking News” item can easily be read as saying: Boye Brogeland was right, without immense public pressure we would never have started an investigation. “Proper channels” do not work.
Sept. 7, 2015
Arend Bayer edited this comment Sept. 7, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think the lawsuit is just posturing. They know they have no future in the bridge world. But to keep some plausible deniability towards future non-bridge vict^H^H^H^Hfriends they need to be able to claim they tried to sue.
Sept. 2, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would add everyone involved in running BW. Many in their position (running an online bridge discussion forum) would have decided to block Brogeland from posting his announcements on their site. And it meant a lot of additional work for them.
Sept. 1, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Their CC says a K lead asks for count, and an A lead asks for attitude. Wouldn't it be normal to ask for count here? Dummy might have a diamond suit, so we may have to cash out immediately. Hence I would need to know whether I have two spade tricks (if not, I may have to switch to hearts at trick two).
Aug. 30, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Dear Kit,

I enjoyed your survey about the coughing doctor's a lot - it was great that you did this, and in my view your method was sound. But I think your objection here is wrong.


There are many possible statistical tests for a given hypothesis of cheating. Yours is certainly a sound one. But there are others. Say you can define an event that would happen 0.1 times per set for a pair that does not cheat, and happens 3 times per set for a pair that does cheat in the way you suspect. If this happens three times in a single set, then this is very strong statistical evidence for cheating. (In fact, by my calculations, it is about as strong evidence as your survey of the doctor's opening leads - I posted some estimates of the Bayes' factor in the comments to your posts back then.) And yet you can show the result of this test just based on a selection of hands.

I hope you reconsider your view. (In fact, if I understand your correctly, you would have the same objection to Larry Cohen's suggested method for convicting cheaters.)

-Arend
Aug. 29, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Adam, I think you could read between the lines a little more. I bet on hand one Boye is going to explain, based on cracking their cheating methods, that Schwartz knew *specifically* about the king of hearts. (And if you think this is a normal passive lead that some top players would consider - well I am sure you are wrong about that.)

Obviously hand one is not a very good support for the hypothesis “they cheated and both knew the entire hand”. But it is a very good support for the theory “North knew partner's heart holding”.
Aug. 29, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The idea that we should expect a sponsor in general, or on Jimmy Cayne in particular, to realize that someone on their team is cheating - I am not sure I have words for that suitable for a public forum.
Aug. 28, 2015
Arend Bayer edited this comment Aug. 28, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Well at least something good came out of this - Ira joined bridgewinners!
Aug. 18, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks for writing this post, Justin.
Even though I don't know Mike, I immediately wanted to believe his post- Justin's post makes that easy for me (since I trust his judgement on ethics 100%). Why did I want to believe Mike? Well, I'll always be grateful for his actions in Bali 2013. Now I hope he gets appropriate punishment for his crime - maybe a PP of 3 IMPs?
Aug. 18, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I voted ebooks. But to be truthful, I'd buy *this* book in whichever format it'll get published.
March 12, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I have just one objection to the modification - the 4th diamond played from dummy should always be 7!
Feb. 25, 2015
.

Bottom Home Top