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

[jallerton]

After all this time, if you go to the home page of the European Bridge League website , you can still see a picture of the "winners" on the 2013 World Seniors Bowl final with their medals. Not much point in stripping people of their medals if the Zone still leaves their photo on its website!

[MrAce]

After all this time, if you go to the home page of the European Bridge League website , you can still see a picture of the "winners" on the 2013 World Seniors Bowl final with their medals. Not much point in stripping people of their medals if the Zone still leaves their photo on its website!

 

You know how lazy people are to update their site. But if you meant they do not recognize the decision of WBF, then it is totally different thing that I did not know.

[jallerton]

I agree that many websites have obsolete pages on rarely viewed of their websites.

 

But I would expect someone from the EBL to have looked at their own home page at some point during the last seven months and to reccognise that it's more than a little insensitive to be highlighting the achievement of this particular team (whether they agree with the decision or not).

[Cthulhu D]

I'm honestly surprised no-one has used an electronic device to cheat. That would the easiest way to do so. That hardest part would be getting the signal from the computer to you. LEDs in the glasses is high risk. People have used vibrations but that might be too loud for bridge.

[Vampyr]

Well, in this case, it was the North American Team. The fact that, that year, all three pairs were U.S. doesn't change that.

 

LOL

[billw55]

I'm honestly surprised no-one has used an electronic device to cheat.

I'm not so sure.

[GreenMan]

I'm honestly surprised no-one has used an electronic device to cheat. That would the easiest way to do so. That hardest part would be getting the signal from the computer to you. LEDs in the glasses is high risk. People have used vibrations but that might be too loud for bridge.

 

It's tricky because you'd need both an invisible transmission method and a source of information. If partners are communicating at the table, then both the sender and the receiver are in full view of their opponents, so the degree of difficulty is high. Vibration devices in the shoes, for instance, may be visible or audible.

 

In-ear receivers have been pretty small for some time, but even there you still need an accomplice to send you the information. That means either someone with a view of the table, or someone with access to hand records or watching on vugraph. The latter may well have been done. I wouldn't be surprised to see or hear of wireless jamming devices in the playing areas at some point.

[aguahombre]

How about wireless devices that sabotage one's eardrums or give a player a hotfoot? Relax, Homeland Security...I am ignorant and harmless.

[Cthulhu D]

It's tricky because you'd need both an invisible transmission method and a source of information. If partners are communicating at the table, then both the sender and the receiver are in full view of their opponents, so the degree of difficulty is high. Vibration devices in the shoes, for instance, may be visible or audible.

 

In-ear receivers have been pretty small for some time, but even there you still need an accomplice to send you the information. That means either someone with a view of the table, or someone with access to hand records or watching on vugraph. The latter may well have been done. I wouldn't be surprised to see or hear of wireless jamming devices in the playing areas at some point.

 

Invisible transmission is easy - Bluetooth or WiFi. If you thought you could wear an ear piece without detection, cheating would be super easy. Shoe computer, basic Morse code. Or you could simply communicate heart length very easily.

 

Wireless Jamming devices are illegal in most countries.

[mycroft]

I have said for many years that a 3rd-class expert, with access to the hand, could turn a 2nd-class expert into a 1st-class expert with 1 bit of information on every hand (say, 1 means "be brilliant" and 0 means "don't be brilliant"). And yes, a pendant that warms up in response to a wireless signal (bluetooth seems range-limited) seems innocuous enough - until people start noticing the burn on the neck after it overloads, I guess.

[Cthulhu D]

I have said for many years that a 3rd-class expert, with access to the hand, could turn a 2nd-class expert into a 1st-class expert with 1 bit of information on every hand (say, 1 means "be brilliant" and 0 means "don't be brilliant"). And yes, a pendant that warms up in response to a wireless signal (bluetooth seems range-limited) seems innocuous enough - until people start noticing the burn on the neck after it overloads, I guess.

 

That would be tricky against fast players due to the heating/cooling cycle taking a while.

 

I suggested bluetooth because your partner could communicate about your hand. Vugraph should obviously be broadcast on a 2 to 7 minute delay to solve these issues.

[lamford]

I'm honestly surprised no-one has used an electronic device to cheat. That would the easiest way to do so. That hardest part would be getting the signal from the computer to you. LEDs in the glasses is high risk. People have used vibrations but that might be too loud for bridge.

I thought standard methods were to use a pulse transmitter within range of the playing area, such as those on http://www.spyshop.co.uk/uhf-transmitters Transmission range of the top stuff is up to a mile. If you only need to receive a pulse the size of the receiver is smaller than a cent. A binary system with one receiver in each pocket is the most efficient I am told. And I am also told they are silent. The event does not need to be on Vugraph. All that is needed is that the transmitter has played or seen the board before the receiver. I also understand that this type of equipment is often used by professional blackjack players to communicate (counts etc) within casinos, legally except in Las Vegas.

 

Is that not what the CC requires when it asks about "Signalling methods"? I think the approach is classified as an encrypted signal when it is received by a defender, as it is based on information not available to the declarer. Bizarrely, I do not think the receiver is breaching any Laws if a) he gets the information before he takes his cards out of the board - Law 16A1(d) and b) he deliberately gets the information, as Law 16C1 only covers information he accidentally gets! Why that word "accidentally" is there is beyond me.

[Cthulhu D]

The problem is the noise of vibration - it harder to hear in a casino during a busy period than the quite in a bridge tournament. Not an insurmountable obstacle though.

 

I'd be cautious about third man transmission - how does he get to the boards?

[blackshoe]

I wouldn't be surprised to see or hear of wireless jamming devices in the playing areas at some point.

Such a device might well jam legitimate wireless signals as well, rendering bridgepads or whatever useless.

[Cthulhu D]

Such a device might well jam legitimate wireless signals as well, rendering bridgepads or whatever useless.

 

Emergency responder calls.... Jammers are banned for non governmental use basically everywhere.

[lamford]

I'd be cautious about third man transmission - how does he get to the boards?

Doh ... He played or saw the board before the players in question, either in the other room or in the same tournament. And I think a second man transmission is enough. If you want to fix a soccer match you bribe the goalkeeper, not the two full backs.

 

If something's hard to do, then it's not worth doing - Homer Simpson

[blackshoe]

Emergency responder calls.... Jammers are banned for non governmental use basically everywhere.

Emergency responder calls would be on a different frequency.

[BillHiggin]

Emergency responder calls would be on a different frequency.

 

Actually, the cheater devices ought to be using spread spectrum technology (as used for wi-fi, bluetooth and other such wireless applications). They could be essentially right on top of the emergency frequencies and still function (and be relatively immune to most jamming).

Spread spectrum technology involves either using multiple frequencies or jumping around a set of frequencies. If you do not know the "jumping" algorithm, it is difficult to even detect the transmissions and error correcting codes can deal with the occasional hits on fixed frequency signals. The fixed frequency signals will seem to suffer a very small noise level increase, but otherwise be unaffected. If we know the frequency hop algorithm, we can detect and we can jam the signal (by matching its pattern) and such a jammer would also be difficult to detect by a third party (i.e. the agency enforcing the jammer ban). Advancing technology is creating some new issues!