Cheating Allegations

[PhantomSac]

On the 3rd video hand, if East had held Qxx K9 KJ10xx Q10x, might he have opened the bidding? With nothing else to go on, that seems to me sufficient reason to play West for ♠Q. Hence I don't think there's anything suspicious about the play of that hand.

 

The hands themselves are not being used as evidence of cheating AFAIK. His play was normal. Just like the hand where he led a heart from Kxx was pretty normal (Boye made the same lead himself).

 

I dont find it normal to peek at my opponents hand while going to the bathroom and then to come back and do all this weird left arm stuff while you know your left hand opponent has the SQ. But thats just me. There are lots of youtube videos of them, how many other times do you see those mannerisms (left elbow on the table, then left hand scratching your ear, then left indext finger on your mouth while your left elbow remains visible to the other side of the screen)?

[PhantomSac]

 

The other thing is that I am not convinced pulling on the jumper means "bad break in trumps". Rather, I suspect it shows a singleton and Fisher may even have been improvising in using it as Dummy. But perhaps Boye has more to come on the code itself...

 

I mean Boye leaked to Norweigan press (in the same article where he said he is hiding out in a secret house after talking to police) that pulling the sweater means...

 

I assume he has more than one hand to prove that.

[inquiry]

Are you serious? You didn't watch the videos very well.

 

Louk showed Lotan his hand on board 1 before dummy came down. So that is how Lotan knew that he had a stiff trump. That is on video and not disputable, whether he signalled Ron or not is unclear but Lotan knew Louks trump holding.

 

 

Assuming sweater pull says bad trump split, no need to show if it is east or West. A "normal" 4-1 with East having 4 is discovered after winning and trump in dummy (West shows out). So no need to even "mention" bad trump split. This assumes 5 ♥ showed heart King and trump Queen, which it should.

 

 

 

[BunnyGo]

As Bridgewinners is down, I can only see the videos and commentary here. Is the idea that these hands are indicative of signaling they do in other similar situations? If so, then that's really damning, but as a massive fidgeter myself, I'm sure that I've "signaled" things by scratching or twitching or who knows what. Partners of mine have been known to ask me what song I could possibly be dancing to as dummy.

 

I'm just saying that I find these hands to be interesting, but not damning in and of themselves (and yes, there is a lot more evidence, but this was supposed to be the queen). As there seem to be specific allegations as to how they signal (as in, it is physical, not secreted micro electronics--probably with the tray, and probably with the sweater or other twitching), then I hope someone will be providing analysis a la "the doctors".

 

I understand that it can be hard or even impossible to detect methods, and that it isn't always necessary, but as the alleged methods are caught on tape, it seems like somebody should be able to find them.

[PhantomSac]

Still got a few cards to turn over before we see the royal :P

 

But from his site he did say:

 

"We will keep adding:

 

Video clips

Testimonies/reactions from third parties

Suspect boards

Detailed descriptions of the cheating methods"

 

He also told the Norweigan press some of the ways they cheat (via google translate):

 

" I sit on the videos that I shall present later. Some examples about that one player moves on the chair and that means they must play hearts. Other examples show that a player leaving in the sweater, which probably concerns that trump sitting askew. Yes, this can show the all-time scandal in Bridgeport history, says Brogeland."

 

The whole point is that it should not be necessary to know how, and that the Larry Cohen idea of just using hands without the knowledge of how will stop this earlier and is equally effective. Boye has made it pretty clear he has figured out the how in this case, the problem is moving forward how to stop this much much faster. It looks like the ACBL is going to enact measures to do so (but obv it had nothing to do with what Boye did!). It also looks like the IBF has convened a special committee (but obv that had nothing to do with how Boye did this). If they ban F-S then the ACBL doesnt even need to do it's own investigation they can just follow the IBF ruling.

[captyogi]

Obviously I am happy to take the word of world class players that leading a club from Kxx QTxx Kxx Jxx against 1NT-p-p-p is absurd but would someone care to explain why? I personally would choose a heart but I rather prefer leading from Jxx to leading from Kxx.

but would someone care to explain why?

 

Inky Pinky Ponky, ....... ..... ...... ..... ......,

....... ......... .........,

Cx

[BunnyGo]

I love the latest bridgewinners message:

 

"Due to recent events (*), we are getting a lot of traffic. This has caused our site to become unstable.

 

We are actively working on this, and hope to be back online in the next few hours.

 

(*)Steve bid blackwood with a void again and Bobby hired some hackers"

[MrAce]

I love the latest bridgewinners message:

 

"Due to recent events (*), we are getting a lot of traffic. This has caused our site to become unstable.

 

We are actively working on this, and hope to be back online in the next few hours.

 

(*)Steve bid blackwood with a void again and Bobby hired some hackers"

 

I loved the previous one. At least it was asking a suit combination about how to take 4 tricks. I am still trying to solve it...

[captyogi]

As I recall, I first started beating the horse back during the Tenerife scandal.

 

FWIW, I am starting to think that the record keeping might be more important than the physical separation.

I really admire the work that Boye, Kit, and the like are doing. One thing that is striking is how dependent this is on Vugraph records.

 

I can't help but believe that better record keeping would make life a whole lot better.

 

Who knows... Video technology is getting a lot better. Maybe something can be done if we have a video camera for every table, along with some software than can translate the video feed into a Portable Bridge Notation file or a vugraph feed.

 

quote

= = = = =

 

One thing that is striking is how dependent this is on Vugraph records.

 

I can't help but believe that better record keeping would make life a whole lot better.

 

= = = = =

 

You are bang on Traget.

 

It is very very important, specially when you have to go through archives.

 

I had sent once one appended e mail to BBO Support

 

 

quote

 

Pune

 

11-Aapr-2014

 

 

Dear Sir,

 

 

I wanted to study the Vu Graph of hands played in recently concluded Justice J.M.Lal Memorial Championship on 6th Apr, 2014.

 

However I find the records are haphazard ( player’s name are incorrect, sometimes player from other team is playing in opponent team,

 

Also Bidding sequence and deals appeared to have been altered, as few deal I watched, which are not there.

 

 

I request you to instruct to Vu Graph operators to upload deals accurately and as they were bid and played with all columns completed and not leaving blank.

 

= = = = =

unquote

 

I got following reply

 

quote

= = = = = =

Hi Yogesh,

 

Please contact Buddy Shah, he organizes most of the broadcasts for India. I am

not sure if this particular event was organized by Buddy, but even if it wasn't

he probably knows who the organizer was and will be able to help with vugraph

operator instruction.

= = = = =

unquote

 

I got busy with other important things in my life and did not pursue the matter further.

 

However, BBO must Instruct Vu Graf Operators, Each and Every Detail of Vu Graf Broadcast is Uploaded Accurately.

[Antrax]

Too many replies to keep track of, I apologize if someone already posted this.

Not sure if it's been announced in English anywhere, but I saw the IBF announce they're creating a "special committee" to look over this case. Not sure what its jurisdiction would be, though - probably they could ban them from play in Israel which isn't exactly earth-shattering for them, I would imagine.

[PhantomSac]

If the ACBL takes the view that they will trust the IBF findings and go with that they may be banned by the ACBL in that case. And the ebl and or wbf would almost certainly bar them as they are not in good standing with their nbo

[blackshoe]

Yes, but if Israel bans them from playing, other NBOs/Zonal Authorities might do the same. As might the WBF.

[MrAce]

For future imo every NBO must be forced to report all convicted cheaters to WBF and EBL. For example Israel may have set the bar for 5th offense to ban for good when it comes to cheating (i am making it up) and that is fine as long as they play in Israel, some other country may set the bar to 3. Most countries that I know may not even allow 2nd chance. All their own business. But WBF-EBL should know it and they should set their bar on their own criteria when it comes to eligibility in international events. As long as NBOs report it, it is easy to prevent a lot of potential risk before the event.

And every NBO, if their player gets caught in any WBF or EBL event should get a mandatory 1 year punishment. If there is negligence than 2+ years.

This way NBOs will feel the necessity to keep an eye on their players much better than they do now.

[Antrax]

If the ACBL takes the view that they will trust the IBF findings and go with that they may be banned by the ACBL in that case.

In all honesty, if I were the ACBL I wouldn't have done that. It's just too likely the committee will be biased. There were whispers in Hebrew too, which were firmly quashed and accused of blaming someone for something they'd done 10+ years ago when they were young and foolish.

[gnasher]

The hands themselves are not being used as evidence of cheating AFAIK. His play was normal.

Yes, I know. I did emphasise that I was talking about the play.

 

Sorry, I just wanted to talk about bridge for a minute.

 

[MrAce]

I do not think BW is down due to traffic. They may as well be cyber attacked.

[Mbodell]

In all honesty, if I were the ACBL I wouldn't have done that. It's just too likely the committee will be biased. There were whispers in Hebrew too, which were firmly quashed and accused of blaming someone for something they'd done 10+ years ago when they were young and foolish.

 

I think it depends on the verdict. If a home country convicts them, you can just use that (and there was some board motion about banning/suspending foreign players when they were banned by their home country - I think that discussion came up starting around the Norway suspension for reporting on the match that didn't happen). If the home country doesn't convict them, then you may want to convict them yourself (or at least try them yourself). A couple of the famous cheating cases in history had/have the home country of the players denying the cheating.

[PhantomSac]

Yes, I know. I did emphasise that I was talking about the play.

 

Sorry, I just wanted to talk about bridge for a minute.

 

pfft what were you thinking!

[gnasher]

The line chosen by Lindqvist in the other room looks better; winning the club, ruffing two diamonds and two clubs, and then playing ace and another heart; but he had some bidding from EW. When East won, he was endplayed, and if he is not, you can still find the queen of spades. But then, if you know where the queen of spades is ...

Lindqvist's line works only if clubs are 6-3. If Schwartz had played that line on an uncontested auction, that would have made it onto Boye's shortlist.

 

Without any help from the bidding, you might play something like Lindqvist's line, but taking a trump finesse instead of playing ace and another: ♣A, ♦ ruff, ♣ ruff, ♦A, ♦ ruff, ♣ ruff, trump finesse. If that loses to a singleton king, he's endplayed; otherwise you still have your other chances.

 

And nobody seems to have commented on the jump to 6S on board 4, which looks far too optimistic to me, unless you somehow know it is cold.

Someone mentioned it on Bridgewinners.

 

 

This is xxx KJ x AKJ9xxx after (4♦) 4♠ (5♦) at Game All - Fischer bid 6♠. I think it's reasonable to bid slam, but I would try 6♣ instead of 6♠, on the grounds that a club finesse is more likely to work than a spade finesse.

 

It's yet another example of their getting a guess right that they couldn't always get right, but it's nothing compared with the famous Dublin 2012 set.

[mgoetze]

I loved the previous one. At least it was asking a suit combination about how to take 4 tricks. I am still trying to solve it...

The secret is to draw trump first...

[rhm]

Are you serious? You didn't watch the videos very well.

 

Louk showed Lotan his hand on board 1 before dummy came down. So that is how Lotan knew that he had a stiff trump. That is on video and not disputable, whether he signalled Ron or not is unclear but Lotan knew Louks trump holding.

True.

But maybe there is a simpler explanation.

I think running the ♦T was percentage.

The odds change when a good player leads the ♣A against this bidding.

Opening leader knew declarer had clubs and he had no indication that a solid spade suit would come down in dummy. In fact it was unlikely given that Fisher did not bid the cold 6♠.

At Imps the lead is suspicious. As declarer I would have bet that trumps do not break.

And Schwartz thought about this before making the crucial play.

 

In my opinion it is a courageous and world-class play.

 

But if the accusers can come up only with such hands as evidence including some where they themselves made the same lead (heart lead from Kxx) after equivalent bidding sequences I remain unconvinced.

It is a joke to even mention such boards as evidence.

The problem I have with Brogeland is, that all this surfaced after his team was eliminated after a contentious appeals decision for his former team mates Fischer-Schwartz.

He seems to have been very upset when he launched his campaign. This does not prove that his allegations are wrong, but his motives are dubious to me.

 

For example on bridgecheaters Thomas Bessis complains that Fisher passed against him a 20-22 2NT rebid with J653, 94, QJ82, 1042 in an IMPs tournament (Cavendish) and claimed no world-class player would pass, knowing they have 24-26 HCP.

 

With all respect it shows his bias.

The odds change when one hand is very weak and 20 balanced points are much more frequent than 22. You are more likely to hold 20 HCP than 21-22 HCP combined.

I deem Pass good bridge because I believe 9 tricks will not be available 40% of the time and Fisher was right.

I do not care what the world-class field did with this hand. For the record they all went down in 3NT.

If you mimic the field you will never win such tournaments.

 

Note, I am not claiming Fisher - Schwartz are clean, I simply do not know.

I want evidence.

This is not evidence.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[nullve]

on bridgecheaters Thomas Bessis complains that Fisher passed against him a 20-22 2NT rebid with J653, 94, QJ82, 1042 in an IMPs tournament (Cavendish) and claimed no world-class player would pass, knowing they have 24-26 HCP.

Maybe Fisher had read this:

 

http://bridge.thomasoandrews.com/valuations/2nt-3nt.html#z_hcp_121

[lamford]

Lindqvist's line works only if clubs are 6-3. If Schwartz had played that line on an uncontested auction, that would have made it onto Boye's shortlist.

 

Without any help from the bidding, you might play something like Lindqvist's line, but taking a trump finesse instead of playing ace and another: ♣A, ♦ ruff, ♣ ruff, ♦A, ♦ ruff, ♣ ruff, trump finesse. If that loses to a singleton king, he's endplayed; otherwise you still have your other chances.

 

 

Someone mentioned it on Bridgewinners.

 

 

This is xxx KJ x AKJ9xxx after (4♦) 4♠ (5♦) at Game All - Fischer bid 6♠. I think it's reasonable to bid slam, but I would try 6♣ instead of 6♠, on the grounds that a club finesse is more likely to work than a spade finesse.

 

It's yet another example of their getting a guess right that they couldn't always get right, but it's nothing compared with the famous Dublin 2012 set.

I agree on the first part, although it does look like the leader has QT7 of clubs or he is false-carding several times. My comparison was poor as clubs were bid in the other room, and your line is better.

 

On the second hand, a simulation suggests that 6C and 6S are against the odds, at around 41% and 38% respectively. Also they were already well ahead in the match, even by board 4. In addition, at 36:20 on the video, Schwartz folds his cards and crimps the corner slightly. If you try that with 13 cards you will hear a slight noise. A potential code is that this shows a void. If you knew the oppo diamonds were 8-4, the slam would be over 80% as you can often afford a trump loser. I could find no repeat of this crimping in the video.

[rhm]

Maybe Fisher had read this:

 

http://bridge.thomasoandrews.com/valuations/2nt-3nt.html#z_hcp_121

I did a simulation with Fisher hand and 3NT was anti-percentage even red at Imps and even if you cater for declarer's advantage in 3NT, that is the defense will not always find the best lead.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[lamford]

The odds change when a good player leads the ♣A against this bidding.

I disagree. He is equally likely to be worried that the ace of clubs will go away, or even the ace, king of clubs. If it was a guess for the queen of trumps, I might agree with you.