Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Michal Rosa
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“Until Boye and co are wrong, lets give them some credit” - funny, I always thought it was the other way around. Everyone is presumed innocent until proven otherwise. So far BZ have been accused and convicted by a kangaroo court with no evidence made public.
Sept. 30, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm not going to defend Balicki or accuse him or anything either since, like most people here I don't know any details other than whispers and rumors. I would just like to point out than certain hands, famous or infamous, tend to make rounds, they are being retold in different settings, often with different players - because why not, a good story can be retold in many different ways. This post reminded me of something I've noticed 14 years ago - ♠earchin/pl.rec.gry.brydz/wilkosz$20bridge$20magicians/pl.rec.gry.brydz/t2JuZ6PyZXw/kJYuA26jR4MJ" rel="nofollow">https://groups.google.com/forum/#earchin/pl.rec.gry.brydz/wilkosz$20bridge$20magicians/pl.rec.gry.brydz/t2JuZ6PyZXw/kJYuA26jR4MJ

I won't be bothered translating it but it's about the same hand being reported in three different books. So what? If it's a good story it can be told in many different ways. I don't see how it can be used as a proof of character.
Sept. 30, 2015
Michal Rosa edited this comment Sept. 30, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't think you actually understand what “cruel an unusual” means. Banning a cheat is a standard penalty in every sport.
Sept. 25, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
A common refrain is how unprepared Americans are to play against foreign obstructive methods, such as two-suited preempts - how is a two-suited pre-empt (with one known suit) more “obstructive” than a one-suited pre-empt? Just because you are unfamiliar with something, it doesn't make it “obstructive”.
Sept. 20, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
How often? Every day. Fraud is being committed every second. And the financial system you are talking about is run on computers with very robust operating systems which have been established for over 50 years.

Any computer system can be cracked - especially one using standard, off-the-shelve components. Have you heard of CARS which have recently been hacked? Yes, cars, those big things with engines. Hackers can operate them and stop them against the will of their drivers. Fun, huh?

“Moving to iPads” is a silly knee-jerk reaction which can only back fire and will cost more in the long run. If any sort of electronic devices are to be used, they should be custom built and as limited in their functionality as possible. Think Battlestar Galactica, not the Internet of Things.
Sept. 18, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I find the design horrible. The user interface does not need to reflect anything in real life (bidding boxes) - it should be just simple and readable. The above screenshot fails on both counts.
Sept. 18, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This should be featured on the SRI-CSL-RISK forum as a perfect example of how to supposedly fix everything with technology without thinking about possible problems.

Computers break down, electronic communication can be easily compromised, etc, etc. This is overly simplistic solution that hopes to solve the problem with IT without addressing the core issues - cheating will never be stopped. The issue is not to throw money and technology at the problem - the issue is education.
Sept. 18, 2015
.

Bottom Home Top