Elinescu-Wladow were stupid. You haven't found the smart cheats...

[gwnn]

Sorry if I thought you were tabbing the halo effect as national pride. Anyway, people who think what these two did reflects on Germany are (in your words) silly or worse.

 

If I were Dutch I would be proud; my national pride transcends what some people in my country have done.

What does "sorry if I thought..." mean? Did you or did you not misread my post and are you or are you not sorry? Anyway, I replied to the quoted part of rhm's post when he said that he abhors any emotional connection to Germany. I replied higher in my post on the halo effect. I'm not Dutch, I have two passports (Romanian and Hungarian), and I am not proud of anything my ancestors or compatriots did, because I had nothing to do with them. I am also not ashamed by the heinous acts done by some of them.

[jdeegan]

I don't think that is true. According to Wikipedia (quoting Truscott), they were banned individually from world championships until 1968 (i.e. appr three years) and banned as a pair thereafter. While this is a very mild sentence compared to what B-L and E-W got, maybe this is partly because WBF had less say over other things than World championships back then.

 

Btw they were found not guilty in England.

 

I'm just paraphrasing as best I can after 50 years what Oswald Jacoby told me at the time. Their whole scheme was built around a new and strange (for that era) bidding system called the Little Major invented by Reese. It involved finger signals to convey the number of hearts held which fixed a serious flaw in their system.

 

Reese claimed he did it because the Italian Blue Team was cheating. His punishment was more severe than I remember, but it did not extend to lifetime banishment which some believed might have killed him. He was no spring chicken at that time. The less said about his partner, the better.

[billw55]

Reese claimed he did it because the Italian Blue Team was cheating.

Wait, what? I thought he always claimed he was innocent.

 

I have heard of other claims that some of the Italians cheated, but have no way of judging such claims.

 

 

[billw55]

It is in English, Bill. I find it hard to post a link as I am posting from my phone, but it was on the Italian Fedn bridge web site.

Well, that certainly makes it easier for me. I found this, which says only that the original ruling is upheld.

 

edit: also found this one, which discusses the evidence. These judges seem quite convinced and I see no reason to second guess them.

[Zelandakh]

I'm just paraphrasing as best I can after 50 years what Oswald Jacoby told me at the time. Their whole scheme was built around a new and strange (for that era) bidding system called the Little Major invented by Reese. It involved finger signals to convey the number of hearts held which fixed a serious flaw in their system.

 

Reese claimed he did it because the Italian Blue Team was cheating. His punishment was more severe than I remember, but it did not extend to lifetime banishment which some believed might have killed him. He was no spring chicken at that time. The less said about his partner, the better.

I guess you are confused with the time. Reese is reported to have invented Little Major as a warning for where bidding systems would go if the regulators did not crack down on artificiality. It was only a response to the cheating of the Italians if you consider developing an artificial bidding system cheating. Also, while Reese played LM with Flint in Buenos Aires, Schapiro refused and they played Acol.

 

Neither admitted to cheating on the record. After Schapiro's death, someone did come forward to claim that there had been an admission of the hand signals, not to gain an advantage but rather as part of Reese wanting to write an expose of how easy it would be to cheat in top level competition. Obviously noone can verify this account.

 

You might want to refresh your memory somewhat before your next post on the subject, which is naturally quite contentious.

[nige1]

As I understand this happened in the first segment, where to my knowledge there was no video taped yet. It was the last board of the set.

Selected tapes were presented as evidence but I thought all segments were video-taped. If so, I'm sure investigators have preserved them, in the interests of fairness.

 

Please provide a link to the Cavendish records and videos.

[Cascade]

This should be enough to convict them, assuming it was proven beyond reasonable doubt. The trick is first to figure out that a pair is likely cheating. Then to figure out how. Finally, to observe and gather evidence.

 

No, it most definitely should not be enough.

 

Most importantly one has to have evidence and give the other side an opportunity to mount a defence against the evidence.

[jdeegan]

No, it most definitely should not be enough.

 

Most importantly one has to have evidence and give the other side an opportunity to mount a defence against the evidence.

Of course you are correct. I did not mean to imply otherwise. I only went as far as to describe the equivalent of a Grand Jury hearing.

[Fluffy]

I will try to tell you what I dislike and why these boards are not so unimportant.

When this scandal broke out the first arguments brought forward was on bridge evidence, and boards like the one mentioned here played a prominent role.

The first argument comes from people who have experience against these pair and suspected they were cheating from very long ago. I had only met them once, yet I have heard of their stories many times. If you play in Germany it must had been even more evident.

[hrothgar]

 

Most importantly one has to have evidence and give the other side an opportunity to mount a defence against the evidence.

 

 

E-W were presented with multiple opportunities to mount a defense.

They chose not to use them.

[ArtK78]

E-W were presented with multiple opportunities to mount a defense.

They chose not to use them.

Exactly.

 

This matter is over. The WBF has spoken twice on the matter, and given ample opportunity to the accused to defend themselves.

[the hog]

I'm just paraphrasing as best I can after 50 years what Oswald Jacoby told me at the time. Their whole scheme was built around a new and strange (for that era) bidding system called the Little Major invented by Reese. It involved finger signals to convey the number of hearts held which fixed a serious flaw in their system.

 

Reese claimed he did it because the Italian Blue Team was cheating. His punishment was more severe than I remember, but it did not extend to lifetime banishment which some believed might have killed him. He was no spring chicken at that time. The less said about his partner, the better.

 

 

You see this is what happens when you post on matters you know nothing about. Read Zel's post below. Have you bothered to read Truscott's and Reese's books on the case before making your libellous post?

 

Further why the slur on Schapiro?What do you know about him that no one else does?

[the hog]

E-W were presented with multiple opportunities to mount a defense.

They chose not to use them.

 

 

Actually they were given two opportunities. The first was totally unreasonable, the second was acceptable.

 

It is not the end of the matter as a legal process has been started.

[nige1]

Exactly. This matter is over. The WBF has spoken twice on the matter, and given ample opportunity to the accused to defend themselves.

There are some similarities between the case of E & W and the case of R & S. The WBF spoke twice on the matter of R & S. First it referred the case to the BBL, who exonerated them. Then the WBF reversed that decision and banned them. The WBF was criticised, especially for the original WBF investigation. Accusers didn't recuse themselves (e.g. a witness against R&S was chairman). R & S were neither shown all the evidence, nor given an opportunity to prepare a defence. Reese and Truscott wrote fascinating accounts of the scandal, demonstrating how facts and gossip can be selected and biased in contradictory ways. Biographies of several top USA bridge-players contain imaginative accounts (similar to The JDeegan/Jacoby version). R & S didn't admit to cheating, although some UK contemporaries suspect they were guilty. The WBF have show little progress in such matters, in over 50 years.

[hrothgar]

The WBF have show little progress in such matters, in over 50 years.

 

I think that the WBF showed enormous progress: Most notably,

 

1. They identified a hypothesis before a major event (E+W are transmitting information via coughs using the following code)

2. They then used observers and videos to record W+E's pattern of coughs

3. They then demonstrated that the coughs were consistent with the hand records

 

It's certainly possible to recommend additional improvements, however, the WBF is streets ahead of how previous cheating scandals were handled.

 

(I think that the American team also deserves significant credit for not pulling a Mathe)

[nige1]

Exactly. This matter is over. The WBF has spoken twice on the matter, and given ample opportunity to the accused to defend themselves.

There are some similarities between the case of E & W and the case of R & S. The WBF spoke twice on the matter of R & S. First it referred the case to the BBL, who exonerated them. Then the WBF reversed that decision and banned them. The WBF was criticised -- especially for its original enquiry

 

Accusers didn't recuse themselves (e.g. a witness against R & S was chairman). R & S were neither shown all the evidence, nor given an opportunity to prepare a defence.

 

Reese and Truscott wrote fascinating accounts of the scandal, demonstrating how facts and gossip can be selected and biased in contradictory ways. Biographies of several top US bridge-players contain imaginative accounts (similar to the JDeegan/Jacoby version). R & S didn't admit to cheating, although some UK contemporaries suspect they're guilty. The WBF demonstrate little progress in such matters, over 50 years.

[nige1]

I think that the WBF showed enormous progress: Most notably,

 

1. They identified a hypothesis before a major event (E+W are transmitting information via coughs using the following code)

2. They then used observers and videos to record W+E's pattern of coughs

3. They then demonstrated that the coughs were consistent with the hand records

 

It's certainly possible to recommend additional improvements, however, the WBF is streets ahead of how previous cheating scandals were handled.

 

(I think that the American team also deserves significant credit for not pulling a Mathe)

Investigation techniques do seem to have been improved.

 

At Buenos Aires, most of the observers confirmed the R & S code -- but they were told what it was before they watched -- unfortunately, video evidence was unavailable.

 

We are told that the E & W code was broken in Bali and kept under wraps while preparing for confirmation at the Cavendish -- a considerable achievement. Are the Cavendish videos on-line anywhere?

[jdeegan]

 

You might want to refresh your memory somewhat before your next post on the subject, which is naturally quite contentious.

 

Gee, I thought my recollections were fairly labeled and presented as oral history. As such, they simply exist for the record. Maybe Jake and other well known players and bridge politicians from Texas were right about the cheating, and maybe they were wrong (although I seriously doubt it). Their view of those events carries more weight with me than all the written B.S. created by Reese and company after he lawyered up. He actually published a book on the topic. It is one of the few books Reese ever wrote that I never owned. Despite the scandal, he remains highly respected by everyone I know both as a bridge player and author.

[the hog]

Gee, I thought my recollections were fairly labeled and presented as oral history. As such, they simply exist for the record. Maybe Jake and other well known players and bridge politicians from Texas were right about the cheating, and maybe they were wrong (although I seriously doubt it). Their view of those events carries more weight with me than all the written B.S. created by Reese and company after he lawyered up. He actually published a book on the topic. It is one of the few books Reese ever wrote that I never owned. Despite the scandal, he remains highly respected by everyone I know both as a bridge player and author.

 

Do you even read replies to your posts? You claim his signalling was to hid a hole in the Little Major system. He did NOT PLAY LITTLE MAJOR with Schapiro. So much for your oral history!

[jdeegan]

You see this is what happens when you post on matters you know nothing about. Read Zel's post below. Have you bothered to read Truscott's and Reese's books on the case before making your libellous post?

So sue me.

 

Oops, sorry you can't sue an American for having his or her opinion about a public figure no matter how much you disagree with it. Oh well.

 

As far as non-public figures are concerned, you have to be shown to be in error. Oops, Reese was, in fact, found guilty. Oh well.

[Zelandakh]

So sue me.

 

Oops, sorry you can't sue an American for having his or her opinion about a public figure no matter how much you disagree with it. Oh well.

 

As far as non-public figures are concerned, you have to be shown to be in error. Oops, Reese was, in fact, found guilty. Oh well.

But an American can be sued for writing their opinion. Of course since neither the hog or I have been materially damaged the point is moot. But then again we do not need to sue to show that you are in error on this matter.

[the hog]

So sue me.

 

Oops, sorry you can't sue an American for having his or her opinion about a public figure no matter how much you disagree with it. Oh well.

 

As far as non-public figures are concerned, you have to be shown to be in error. Oops, Reese was, in fact, found guilty. Oh well.

 

Actually you can be sued. There is also the question of self respect in not posting libels abouth others. I guess you lack that self respect..

Reese was in fact exonerated, even more oh well!

[ArtK78]

Reese was in fact exonerated, even more oh well!

Really? By any authority other than British?

[the hog]

By the BBF, which was a much fairer investigation than the deeply flawed WBF one.

[Zelandakh]

Really? By any authority other than British?

It depends on what one believes. When R-S were reinstated it was reported in America that it was because the 3 years were sufficient. In other parts of the world it was reported that the WBF had conducted a long enquiry and found the evidence of guilt insufficient. I do not know which account is true but if the latter this was not a British authority.