CHEATING in BBO ACBL tourneys

[nancylh]

Hi all, I am a new forum user, but not new to BBO. :)

 

My pet peeve is rudeness & unwarranted criticism at the table, and I have sent in chat logs after warning nasty people, or immediately if the offense was grievous. BBO has been very responsive to this problem, so I have warm feelings for the staff regarding nastiness control.

 

CHEATING however, is a different problem. It is not as common and is not always recognized by the victims. Online bridge is the perfect medium for cheating, if you can afford 2 computers, or have a cooperative friend.

 

Successful repetitive cheaters who are prominent in wins, forums, & other forms of recognition NEED TO BE STOPPED by BBO. If not stopped, the ethical atmosphere in ACBL tourneys is polluted, and players get the feeling that BBO approves "anything goes" as long as you are not obviously offensive at the table. That who wins & how they win is not important to BBO. That perhaps all BBO cares about is how many people use the site & pay for services.

 

ACBL tourneys have traditionally been live tourneys where cheating is much easier to detect. Even great players have been caught, one in Fla. about 20 years ago for giving physical signals for specific leads on occasion.

 

This posting is to ask if others are interested in having unethical BBO winners penalized or banned. It is also to request that BBO take action when consistent cheating, ESPECIALLY BY PROMINENT PLAYERS, has been shown to them.

 

Forums is great! nancylh

[Free]

Ofcourse everyone wants to ban cheaters. There's only 1 huge problem: how can you prove they cheat? For example, most people automaticly have MSN. This doesn't mean they use it, but they might. Spying on their chat logs is a violation of privacy, so that's not a solution. The only 'proof' you have is when certain pairs somehow find the best possible bidding and play on a miraculous way, but then perhaps they're just Fantoni and Nunes... :rolleyes:

 

I'd love to see all cheating go away from BBO, and as long as they don't introduce a ranking mechanism cheating will always be reduced to a minimum because people don't win anything from it. Imo cheating is quite rare on BBO, but perhaps in acbl tourneys it's different (never played in one). I would certainly support your quest to remove all cheaters, as long as no innocent people get punished.

[Mr. Dodgy]

I too have recently been made aware of what seems to be quite compelling and rather shocking evidence of cheating in ACBL tourneys, and agree that the ACBL and/or BBO should be investigating this very seriously.

[hrothgar]

Comment 1:

 

You fail to demonstrate any compelling reason why BBO management should assume responsibility for controlling cheating on the site. Each additional service that BBO provides increases costs. BBO could add some kind of Witchmaster General, however, this would impact their ability to provide a free bridge site.

 

There is a concept in management known as "Core Competency". Core competency describes a specific area of focus in which in which a organization holds a comparative advantage. For example, you can argue that Dell's core competency is related to the efficiency of its supply chain. Its interesting to apply to concept to BBO. I would argue that BBO's core competency is related to technical criteria like writing code. I don't see much evidence that Fred / Uday have any special expertise in dealing with cheating or even that they have any interest is doing so.

 

With this said and done, BBO has partnered with a variety of third party service providers. Organizations like the ACBL are social in nature. Their core competency is VERY much related to their ability to provide personal services to their members. For example, the ACBL maintains a ratings system based on master points. The ACBL provides a consistent regulatory structure regarding conventions. Finally, the ACBL has existing infrastructure to investigate complaints regarding cheating.

 

In short: If you have a problem with cheating during ACBL tournaments, take it up with the ACBL. Hopefully, they'll do something for you. If they don't, then there are a LOT of other clubs out there where you can play. The EBU, BBO Italia, SkyClub, BBO Land all offer competing services. Ultimately, voting with your feet is the most powerful message that you can provide.

 

Comment 2:

 

Posting claims that you have "shocking" evidence regarding cheating doesn't mean diddly-squat. I've seen plenty of these claims over the years. Typically, the most shocking element is the woefully poor/biased quality of the evidence. If you really feel strongly about this case, create your own webpage, name names, and document your case. If you aren't willing to do this, don't expect people to pay much attention to your claims...

 

As for the BBO forums. I'm perfectly happy to discuss mechanisms to to detect cheating in the abstract. Its an interesting theoretical problem. I've seen a lot of good discussion generated about topics like statistical significance and the ethics of seeding pre-generated "trap" hands into tournaments.

[luke warm]

yeah, what he said...

[Mr. Dodgy]

I am not shocked that cheating occurs - it is rampant on other games sites, and I'm confident that there is probably always going to be some element of it here on BBO. What shocked me was the fact that I am -passingly - familiar with someone I feel is justifiably accused cheat. I am surprised that they would do such a thing. If anyone who cheats should happen to read this post I would ask them not to sully BBO - and themselves - any further.

 

I do not play ACBL tourneys. Not, at least, often enough nor seriously enough to really care about the final result beyond being able to enjoy the game and trying to do my dismal best. I have various reasons for not doing so, not least of which is the frequency with which I see comments in these very forums which question the standard of their administration.

 

The ACBL generates revenue through charging players for the privelige of playing in their tourneys. I beleive they have a moral as well as commercial responsibliity to ensure their patrons are getting value for their money and should actively take all reasonable steps to eliminate any players from defrauding others. The same applies to BBO.

[hrothgar]

The ACBL generates revenue through charging players for the privelige of playing in their tourneys. I beleive they have a moral as well as commercial responsibliity to ensure their patrons are getting value for their money and should actively take all reasonable steps to eliminate any players from defrauding others. The same applies to BBO.

Your ISP generates revenue when you play in BBO tournaments. Do there have a moral imperative to police these events? What about the company that manufactured your PC?

 

BBO does not sponsor these events. I don't see how they have any moral / commericial responsibility. The best analogy that I can provide is one that Fred posted here long ago: BBO is a landlord. BBO owns a building which people can use to set up a bridge club. BBO's is in the business of maintaining the building. However, they don't run the actual clubs.

 

As long as we're discussing morality: I have a big problem with back channel discussions regarding cheating. Players get slandered behind their back with no opportunity to confront their accusers.

 

If you believe that someone is cheating, have the balls to name names and show evidence. If you're not willing to do this, then stop the innuendo.

[pigpenz]

the responsibility falls not on BBO, but on the ACBL...they can bar kibbing but that will only take care of one problem. If pairs are in collussion they can still use irc, msm, talk to each by phone etc.

 

Fred could probably do some programming where BBO would automatically take over you computer like some dos based games used to but then people would be screaming cause they couldnt do several things at once. :rolleyes:

 

Its sort of like steroid use in baseball! Its not congresses job to clean up baseballs mess its baseballs mess to clean up.

[Mr. Dodgy]

My ISP generates revenue by providing me with internet access - which do they quite satisfactorily.

 

And BBO does have responsibility:

 

http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?sho...ic=10948&st=0

[pigpenz]

My ISP generates revenue by providing me with internet access - which do they quite satisfactorily.

 

And BBO does have responsibility:

 

http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?sho...ic=10948&st=0

i dont see the connection between this and original post?

ISP provides you with access and its up to you to obey the laws of your country for internet usuage....or here in USA suffer the consequences of the FBI. :(

 

Having used these boards before as an administrator I know that everytime you log on your dns xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx is recorded. BBO can do that too I am sure but is it their duty to be the cheat police on top of everything else. You can only eliminate certain forms of cheating and never eliminate them all. :(

[Canuckstan]

First post here. My intro to online bridge was two years ago at pogo but the cheating and temper tantrums eventually drove me away -- that plus a growing preference for duplicate over rubber. At Pogo, it was clear people took their ratings very seriously and also that some were willing to cheat in order to boost their scores -- invariably at someone else's expense.

 

It makes no sense to me: they are only cheating themselves -- cheating themselves of the satisfaction and challenge of playing an honest game -- and generally harming this wonderful game.

 

Sadly, cheating at online bridge is just another manifestation of declining moral standards in all walks of life, everywhere. Likely, it can never be completely eliminated. It is important not to take ratings over seriously. That's why I prefer to play just non-rated regular games here at BBO. When ratings are at stake, it creates a whole extra level of possible nastiness, some of which may involve cheating. Who needs it? For 99.9% of us it is, after all, just a game.

[kenberg]

I will give you my own take on this.

 

The one person's behavior I can surely control is my own. I try my best to keep my desire to win subordinate to my desire to have the game played properly. I also try to assume the best of my fellow bridge player. I have more than once had the experience of someone telling me that he believes his opponents are cheating based on some rather bizarre bid or play that works, but where more extensive examination of hand records shows that the opponents are simply crazy and usually unsuccessful. I am not so naive as to think that cheating is non-existent, but I believe it is not nearly as rampant as some have suggested, at least not of the blatant sort. Bidding partner's hesitations is a problem throughout bridge and occurs here as well, but I understand the original poster to be addressing more direct forms of cheating. Incidentally, on a recent deal I felt that my hand entitled me to a bid even though pard thought before his pass, so as I bid I sent a private message to the opps saying "hesitation noted, I have my bid". They might disagree, they might call the director (they didn't) but I think it is important to acknowledge these situations so that it is clear that I at least believe I am bidding my cards.

 

 

I also don't, just speaking for myself, find rudness to be a great problem in the ACBL tourneys. It exists, it is not rampant. After one hand and subsequent comments in an indy my LHO sent me a message "I have you both listed in my player comments, you as pleasant, him as a jerk". I hope the former is true, the latter unfortunately appeared to be true as well.

 

Cheating needs to be handled when it occurs. I hope it will be. The players, the directors and the bbo organization all have an obvious interest in dealing with this and I don't think it has much to do with who is charging what for what.

 

Ken

[pigpenz]

yes we have talked this over before many times...especially with Bendare :(

I have even suggested that we start a web page that is a recorder where you can post comments and links to hand from MYHANDS on BBO.

 

The problem is that BBO legally has to walk on thin ice, it costs alot of money if there are accusations of cheating and they is only light proof...the burden of proof has to be overwhelming.

 

 

Bendare has sent numerous hands on certain pairs to (RAIN) abuse@bridgebase.com and some of the people I havent seen on here lately.

Maybe now that the BERMUDA BOWL is over we can get going with full disclosure being implemented for everyone....that is a major problem too. :(

 

The other day playing against a top rated BBO ACBL player the auction went:

1♠ 2NT

4♠

2nt was jacoby NT forcing spade raise

asked the opener what the bid(4♠) showed and the reply was no information.

this person plays every available game and knows what jacoby responses are .....so why no information available? Is this cheating also? To me its just as bad.

[uday]

BBO (Fred, Uday, Sheri) own and operate the BBO-ACBL club games. We are one of about 5,500 clubs in ACBL-land. ACBL-in-memphis is paid a franchise fee.

 

There is only one correct place to send accusations of cheating: abuse@bridgebase.com

 

I will not allow BBO facilities to host a public list of suspected cheaters. It is pointless to maintain a list elsewhere, since a perp can trivially change usernames.

 

Some people cheat. You can't stop it. You can't detect it. You can't lock these people out.

 

Funky new indy movements might be made cheatproof but our pair/team game is inherently defenceless in this regard.

 

 

It often takes many hours of boring work to grind thru dozens (hundreds) of hands played by a potential cheat.

 

We don't acknowledge every email to abuse@, but we read nearly all of them.

 

We spend a lot of time and money and energy trying to sort out who is cheating and who isnt. I reject the notion that it is our responsibilty to control cheating, since cheating cannot be controlled.

 

The WBF can't control it. THe ACBL can't control it. The French can't control it. The English can't control it. The Indonesians can't control it. Your bridge club can't control it. You can't control it. And guess what, we can't control it, since on top of other handicaps, our players can communicate privately without being detected

 

 

I don't think cheating is a big problem. Naturally, people are more likely to cheat when BB$ are involved, or perhaps when points are involved than in the MBC. I think.

 

 

So, don't worry about it. Don't get too worked up about it. Report suspicious actions to abuse@, along with a reference to the suspicious hands (just one won't do, unless it is a doozie). We'll knock out the blatant cases and keep an eye on the suspicious ones.

[muggle]

Right. This is not a new issue. It has been around as long as the internet has hosted games of any kind. People hack and cheat solitaire scores when they can.

 

Accept reality of online bridge that it is impossible to catch small-time cheats. Yes, it is easier to cheat online than in F2F bridge and similarly difficult to catch. The middling cheat will probably never be caught or even noticed. The winning cheat may be caught only after many months or years.

 

You have to trust the winning players are clean, because they attract observers who will notice too many odd results. In a way there is some self correction/prevention far superior to F2F bridge because it is easy to observe, look up and save results of a particular online player or pair that you suspect.

 

Still, it is up to your own ethical code, and what you consider joy and the challenge of the game to still enjoy it, despite any cheating that may be occurring and to resist temptation to cheat yourself. Do your part by reporting suspicious behavior and in time the most egregious cheats will be caught by abuse@BBO, similar to f2f bridge.

 

And if it worries and upsets you so much, avoid $ or rated games, play with those you know, and stick to F2F bridge.

[Finch]

I do not play ACBL tourneys. Not, at least, often enough nor seriously enough to really care about the final result beyond being able to enjoy the game and trying to do my dismal best. I have various reasons for not doing so, not least of which is the frequency with which I see comments in these very forums which question the standard of their administration.

For anything such as this, you will always see lots of complaints and few compliments. I wouldn't let such comments about admin put you off, because it's the way of things that if any one thing goes wrong people like to complain, but there are probably hundreds of people who had a perfectly good time and feel no need to say so.

 

Note I have never played an online tourney, and only played once in a F2F ACBL game, so this is a purely theoretical observation. For all I know they couldn't organise a ****-up in a brewery.

[glen]

...since cheating cannot be controlled.

It actually is controlled in a way. Since it costs $1 to play per person every 12 boards, and since there is no real prize money, cheating costs money.

 

One might say the cheaters can get recognition from "winning", but there are two factors against this:

 

1) There is no masterpoint awards for overall so it's impossible to collect a huge number of masterpoints via these ACBL tourneys.

2) No one notices if you do win anyway.

 

So cheating is controlled, in a way, since there is long term benefit to cheating, and it costs $ to keep cheating.

 

The other control to cheating is published hand records. After a while blatant cheaters leave so much wreckage from their hit n' runs, that it becomes obvious what's going on. Note that less than 10 boards really proves nothing - after some time one should be about to point to 40 or 50 boards where the cheating seems to be happening.

 

Thanks again to Fred, Sheri, and Uday for keeping this site free and open, and working hard to keep close to 10,000 concurrent users up and running on Saturday.

[nancylh]

Hi again,

 

Thanks for the interesting response posts, especially from uday(the wonderful BBO authority). They are informative to me for sure; I hope to others.

 

One incorrect item I noticed in a couple of responses: It is incorrect that ACBL is responsible for checking/banning cheaters. ACBL leaves the running of ACBL games, banning of ACBL members from games, monitoring cheating and monitoring unacceptable behavior entirely to the online club (in this case BBO). I found this out direct from the ACBL person in charge of clubs in Memphis about a year ago, when I contacted them regarding an offensive director in an online club, falling under the same rule they told me as other offensive/ACBL rule-breaking behavior.

 

People like to win, and like recognition. ACBL gives masterpoints which add up much faster online than playing in club games. BBO gives ranking status on profiles, and win recognition when you play the tournament. It is enough incentive for people to cheat who are comfortable cheating, especially if cheating is rarely caught. There is no difference of opinion on this forum that BBO cheating occurs.

 

I appreciate learning that if a consistent short-term pattern of obvious cheating is reported with board & hand links to BBO abuse, that the hands will be checked and punitive action taken if cheating is clear. Thank you. I will follow this course, and report only when egregious by high-ranking (in tourney) players, or when I have been personally injured by cheating and find the pattern.

 

The original post was due to several people telling me they rarely play BBO $games & especially ACBL games due to unstopped cheating by a few winning players. This was echoed here by a couple of posts.

 

Again, thanks BBO for assuring us that cheating will be stopped if we use the method uday explained (someone else suggested 10 hands in a relatively short period). nancylh

[Al_U_Card]

Well, cheating CAN be controlled. I don't cheat and I control my urge to cheat.

 

In my last F2F game, my pard bid like he wanted to make a t/o dbl, but his mannerisms said 100% penalty. I pulled and we got an avg. minus. When he said "Do you know how much we would have got if you had passed?" To which I replied, " The sequence obliged me to pull, right or wrong."

 

Am I better than most? I think not. Am I better than some? Maybe. Would Fred have"cheated" last week if he had "known" that it would have won the BB? I am sure not. Why? Good people do good things. Bad people are to be avoided and left to their own nefarious devices.

 

Leave the cheaters their Fool's Paradise, as they are welcome to it. I will easily find my way to where I am going without them.

[pigpenz]

In General online games are a different beast all together.

Have you ever misclicked? When it is obvious, I have yet to see an opp say i will give you a trick in an outside suit to compensate. If so this would win the Active Ethics award of the year. ;) Have you ever seen players refuse to accept valid claims even when stated? Some are always hoping for someone to do something stupid ;)

 

What is one persons cheating is another persons logic unless so unusual that it becomes so obvious.

 

thake this hand:[hv=s=sj10785h1075dqc10654]133|100|[/hv]

 

2♣ 2♥*

4♣ you

 

*totally negative

What would you bid now with this hand?

I bid 4♥, assuming that partners bid showed hearts and club ace or shortness in clubs.

 

Now when dummy came down I had to field ten msgs from both opps on how I knew to bid 4♥. Ill leave it up to you. ;)

[Al_U_Card]

Is splintering in support of a bid that doesn't necessarily show the suit bid not unusual, to say the least, and alertable as a partnership agreement? If the bid was a transfer to S and partner splintered in support of S then I could see it ( sort of).

 

I realize that 2nd round splinters may not be alertable, but this is a bit of a stretch. Why couldn't 4C be a great club suit that invites game if the bust hand has a few trumps and some shape? (or even, gulp, Gerber.... ;) )

[pigpenz]

Is splintering in support of a bid that doesn't necessarily show the suit bid not unusual, to say the least, and alertable as a partnership agreement? If the bid was a transfer to S and partner splintered in support of S then I could see it ( sort of).

 

I realize that 2nd round splinters may not be alertable, but this is a bit of a stretch. Why couldn't 4C be a great club suit that invites game if the bust hand has a few trumps and some shape? (or even, gulp, Gerber.... :o )

thats just it, I had no idea what the bid meant? It certainly made no sense to me as I know partner knows I have no values.

 

Should I:

pass

bid 5♣

bid4♥

bid4♠

 

my thinking on this one is

pass is too unilateral

4♠ could be right

4♥ if partner has hearts he will pass if he was making a forcing heart raise or splinter and am willing to play 5♣ if it was a club suit. Interesting hand isnt it? ;)

[Al_U_Card]

At the table, I would have bid 5C with that hand (undiscussed).

[pigpenz]

At the table, I would have bid 5C with that hand (undiscussed).

ah....maybe we should make a poll for this one ;)

[kenberg]

A variety of responses

 

Al U Card's "Leave the cheater's to their fool's paradise". One hundred per cent agreement. To the extent we can rid the world of them, fine, but far more important is that we contribute to the game by our own friendly, ethical, and, to the extent it doesn't require looking foolish, trusting approach to the game.

 

As to Pig's hand: If 2C-2H is artificial, then this is a partner with whom you have had some discussion. This gives you some responsibilities as a pair to know what your bids mean. Of course it can happen that you don't, as here, and then you do as you think best. I have no problem with your choice as indeed you simply have to guess, but I think part of agreeing that 2C-2H is artificial is that you have a discussion about what happens next.

 

Here is a spot I found myself in recently. RHO opened 1C, I entered with 1NT, LHO bid 2C and partner called 2D. This is an indy. Default (and neither of us overruled the default, my profile says I assume SAYC until told differently) is BBO basic or SAYC, which means that 2D shows diamonds. I am holding four diamonds and two hearts. I bid hearts (yes, it was right, someone had to hold the suit). I hadn't decided how I would respond if the opponents asked the meaning of my 2H bid.

 

Here is another instance from long ago. I showed up at a club game without a partner and was assigned to someone that I did not know. By the seventh round or so, I knew him all too well. Somewhere around then, he opened 1H. I looked at my 20 hcps and my five card heart suit and raised to 4H. He took 10 tricks. The opponents, who apparently did know him, were sympathetic rather than upset. Betweeen rounds he congratulated me on fielding the psych. Sure. I was inclined to alert the 1H and explain "Whatever he has it cannot be a five card heart suit and 13 hcps, as from what I have seen he would no doubt open that hand with 1C".

 

But we drift from the original post. I apologize.

 

Ken