BBO should change to get rid of tempovariation cheating

[LinusO]

There is a big problem in Bridge on BBO that people use the tempo to convey a message.

Which often means I have a problem and people can draw conclusions because of that, which is problematic both in the bidding and play according to the current bridgelaws.

 

So I propose the following change to the BBO software:

 

Both in the bidding and in the play: When it is your turn to play you get to see all three cards at once or all three bids at once.

And not like now when you can clearly see whose turn it is to play and bid.

This change will get rid of tempocheaters and people who vary their tempo,

but has no intention of cheating, but it is still forbidden to think in some cases like with a singleton.

[sfi]

For me that would be a real step backwards. I use BBO to play practice matches with people I know. It's easy to check with the person who needs to act when there is a delay, but would be hard to do if you can't tell that. And we aren't concerned about anyone in the game varying tempo for that purpose.

 

Obviously, we're in a different scenario than the one you talk about. But the proposed solution wouldn't work well for everyone.

[1eyedjack]

The suggestion has merit, but so does sfi's objection.

 

It would also slow down the game a bit. If (as now) the other bids are fed to you in real time you can start to process them as soon as the information is received, so that by the time that it is your turn to act any call or play other than that of RHO will have received some consideration. Each individual action may only be slowed down fractionally, but the cumulative effect of slowing EVERY action could turn out more irritating than the disease that it is trying to cure.

 

Furthermore, if you wish to seek clarification from both opponents as to the meaning of one of their actions, that would only be possible if the opponent in question is aware of the action being queried.

 

So there are three downsides, and it is not as if the same remedies for BIT are not theoretically available on BBO just as in F2F, under the current arrangements. It just requires the will to enforce them.

 

FWIW, I do not label BIT as cheating on BBO any more than in F2F. BIT happens. It does not require mischievous motivation, and I personally doubt that many players use it culpably that way.

 

Perhaps this should be in the Software Suggestions forum?

[steve2005]

Like Jack said.

Also, while hesitations are a problem, you can't tell if the reason for the hesitation was connection problems, the person got a phone call or had to deal with a domestic emergency.

[barmar]

This has been suggested many times over the years. We're not interested in doing it.

[barmar]

For me that would be a real step backwards. I use BBO to play practice matches with people I know. It's easy to check with the person who needs to act when there is a delay, but would be hard to do if you can't tell that. And we aren't concerned about anyone in the game varying tempo for that purpose.

If we did it, it would probably be a table/tourney option, so when you're playing games with friends you could turn it off.

 

But unless we get into the business of hosting major tournaments (i.e. the kinds of events that use screens when played f2f), we're unlikely to do this.

[nige1]

This has been suggested many times over the years. We're not interested in doing it.

Seems reasonable :)

[nige1]

Furthermore, if you wish to seek clarification from both opponents as to the meaning of one of their actions, that would only be possible if the opponent in question is aware of the action being queried.

When you want to ask LHO about RHO's action?

[1eyedjack]

When you want to ask LHO about RHO's action?

Yes that is what I had in mind, and of course vice versa. This is the least important of the objections, though, (IMO)

[barmar]

In online bridge we generally alert and explain our own bids, rather than asking one opponent about the other opponent's actions.

[ladydoc]

I think its a non issue , with online bridge and so many regions involved in the mix with different connection speeds. Just enjoy the fact that you have the opportunity to play in this environment and leave it at that. Its a game, and really, the whole world isn't out to get you!

[sfi]

If we did it, it would probably be a table/tourney option, so when you're playing games with friends you could turn it off.

 

Seems reasonable, and I'd have no issue with that. One of the advantages of BBO is that it meets the needs of many different groups within the bridge community.

[1eyedjack]

In online bridge we generally alert and explain our own bids, rather than asking one opponent about the other opponent's actions.

That is the default, for sure. And provided that you always encounter opponents who are equally as ethical as the other and never have misunderstandings. no doubt the need for a fall-back option would never arise.

 

Incidentally, on OKBridge you BOTH get the opportunity to alert bids, and it can be quite illuminating if only one chooses to do so.

[wynsten]

Variation in tempo is part of the game. You are allowed to draw inference from your opponents' hesitations in bidding or play, and your opponents are ethically forbidden from acting on such information from their partner.

 

Of course many players here do not follow those standards, occasionally because they are cheats; more often because they just don't know any better. If you think your opponents are cheating, find another table; otherwise chill - it's only a game!

[barmar]

Incidentally, on OKBridge you BOTH get the opportunity to alert bids, and it can be quite illuminating if only one chooses to do so.

That's true, although it's not clear that the Laws intend for you to know that the opponents are having a misunderstanding. You're only entitled to know their actual agreements.

[1eyedjack]

That's true, although it's not clear that the Laws intend for you to know that the opponents are having a misunderstanding. You're only entitled to know their actual agreements.

It's really not a big deal for me. If they have a misunderstanding, you have only a 50% chance of finding out their actual agreements if you only ask one of them. OK, it does not rise to 100% if you ask both, but I think it does rise.

 

In a F2F game, except in the top level with screens etc, you get to hear your partner's explanation and correct it at the appropriate time. OK, on balance it is better not to hear partner's explanation, but there is something to be said for having the best of both worlds.

[Lovera]

In online bridge we generally alert and explain our own bids, rather than asking one opponent about the other opponent's actions.

I am agree with you and this one is as i said in "6♠ at Relaxed Club" as indication(= about alert) at partner to avoid misunderstanding that are easy in bridge bidding if knowledge each other there is not usually because time is few for doing it or less at all if you played in clubs with occasional partner.However as required as a sort of "time out" that instead is more important when need to plain -and anytime can not be simple - the contract to realize. Time to think better way to play is a good thing to have positives resulting that allow you to continue to play.(Lovera)

[fourdad]

Cheaters will always find a way to cheat no matter what BBO or any of us does or says.

 

They are only cheating themselves.

 

Why waste mental energy on it?

[johnu]

For me that would be a real step backwards. I use BBO to play practice matches with people I know. It's easy to check with the person who needs to act when there is a delay, but would be hard to do if you can't tell that. And we aren't concerned about anyone in the game varying tempo for that purpose.

 

Obviously, we're in a different scenario than the one you talk about. But the proposed solution wouldn't work well for everyone.

 

Can't you send a message to the table if you don't know who is causing the delay? Or use a voice app?

[johnu]

Cheaters will always find a way to cheat no matter what BBO or any of us does or says.

 

They are only cheating themselves.

 

Why waste mental energy on it?

 

Well, they are not just cheating themselves although technically it may be using unauthorized information :rolleyes: And in some games, you are paying money to play in tournaments so I guess instead of wasting mental energy, you just shouldn't play in BBO paid tournaments.

[sfi]

Can't you send a message to the table if you don't know who is causing the delay?

 

Sure there are ways within the interface to deal with this, but they are clunky if you don't know where the delay is.

[1eyedjack]

Can't you send a message to the table if you don't know who is causing the delay? Or use a voice app?

Yes potential solutions abound. As with all suggestions and counter-suggestions of this type, it is all down to whether the cure is worse than the disease.

[barmar]

Yes potential solutions abound. As with all suggestions and counter-suggestions of this type, it is all down to whether the cure is worse than the disease.

Or, from our perspective, whether the benefit is worth the effort to implement it, and the extra clutter in the user interface to accomodate it (like table options).

 

Sometimes we implement infrequent options using special keywords in the table notes, instead of a visible option in the table settings, to avoid adding more complexity. But this means that most people won't know about it, so we have to balance complexity with memorability.

 

Nothing is as simple as it seems, there are lots of details that aren't obvious.

[btour]

You take inferences from delay at your peril. What I think would help is that the last card played does not disappear so quickly. That gives on time to see it and not have to replay the trick constantly.