ChCh's chance

[sanst]

Optimist

 

Try instead to face the real world.

I’m afraid that in the real world we will see the change to online bridge for major events pretty soon. With some precautions, as pescetom wrote, the advantages are obvious. Cheating like there has been the last decades would be impossible. Another advantage is that you can have a bigger audience, which might bring in some money. And the costs would be much less than now. Players and officials traveling around the world isn’t particularly cheap and neither are the venues and the accommodations.

From what I read about the Alt Invitational tournament’s that are being played now, the top players rather enjoy it. Of course self-kibitzing, like Nowosadzki did, should be made impossible.

[pran]

I’m afraid that in the real world we will see the change to online bridge for major events pretty soon. With some precautions, as pescetom wrote, the advantages are obvious. Cheating like there has been the last decades would be impossible. Another advantage is that you can have a bigger audience, which might bring in some money. And the costs would be much less than now. Players and officials traveling around the world isn’t particularly cheap and neither are the venues and the accommodations.

From what I read about the Alt Invitational tournament’s that are being played now, the top players rather enjoy it. Of course self-kibitzing, like Nowosadzki did, should be made impossible.

Is there any way in the real world you can prevent a person from having more than one pc available and active at the same time?

(I can easily have more than three, each with a different IP address and different user identity.

 

The only practical way I can imagine to really prevent from such cheating is to only allow logons by players participating in the event and only one single logon by each such player.

In addition there must be some way of preventing any participant from using any communication device (like telephone or radio) for whatever purpose during the event.

[Vampyr]

I’m afraid that in the real world we will see the change to online bridge for major events pretty soon. With some precautions, as pescetom wrote, the advantages are obvious. Cheating like there has been the last decades would be impossible. Another advantage is that you can have a bigger audience, which might bring in some money. And the costs would be much less than now. Players and officials traveling around the world isn’t particularly cheap and neither are the venues and the accommodations.

From what I read about the Alt Invitational tournament’s that are being played now, the top players rather enjoy it. Of course self-kibitzing, like Nowosadzki did, should be made impossible.

 

If the social element is eliminated, I think bridge will die out. If there is no travelling to tournaments to see old friends and make new ones, bridge will become just another video game/time-waster, and people will play only when they are bored and don’t have something fun to do with real people. Perhaps for world championships, which involve an ever-increasing number of ages and genders, and the NBOs pay all the costs, playing online could work. But it seems to me that there will be a choice between no audience and cheating. Unless the players could be in a supervised room; the events could then be combined with a normal tournament. Time differences would be a bitch though.

[pescetom]

Is there any way in the real world you can prevent a person from having more than one pc available and active at the same time?

(I can easily have more than three, each with a different IP address and different user identity.

 

The only practical way I can imagine to really prevent from such cheating is to only allow logons by players participating in the event and only one single logon by each such player.

In addition there must be some way of preventing any participant from using any communication device (like telephone or radio) for whatever purpose during the event.

 

Is there any way in the real world you can prevent lamford from actuating his devilish scheme in face to face play? :)

Electronic play OTOH could easily hide such tempo variations.

 

If you are reading rather than ranting you will have noticed that for serious competitive play one can easily control what devices the player has access to (essentially just the tablet locked into play).

[pescetom]

If the social element is eliminated, I think bridge will die out. If there is no travelling to tournaments to see old friends and make new ones, bridge will become just another video game/time-waster, and people will play only when they are bored and don’t have something fun to do with real people. Perhaps for world championships, which involve an ever-increasing number of ages and genders, and the NBOs pay all the costs, playing online could work. But it seems to me that there will be a choice between no audience and cheating. Unless the players could be in a supervised room; the events could then be combined with a normal tournament. Time differences would be a bitch though.

 

The players will certainly be in supervised rooms, the question is whether they travel or not. What might be sad is if they only socialise directly with companions (and officials) rather than opponents.

 

It will be certainly be more compelling for spectators: time lapse transmission will help the commentators hit the target and make the video less tedious/embarassing (even a world champion loses appeal during a tank).

[blackshoe]

Cheating like there has been the last decades would be impossible.

Optimist. "The difficult we do immediately. The impossible takes a little longer." B-)

[pran]

Is there any way in the real world you can prevent lamford from actuating his devilish scheme in face to face play? :)

Electronic play OTOH could easily hide such tempo variations.

 

If you are reading rather than ranting you will have noticed that for serious competitive play one can easily control what devices the player has access to (essentially just the tablet locked into play).

Only if he is continuously supervised.

(Right now I have a second computer available next to me and there is no way anybody can tell if I am also using that one simultaneously with this one.)

[jeffford76]

A ruling in a different event convinces me that the Sky-Blue Book is an incorrect statement of the Law. The criteria in deciding on whether there is a BIT is whether there is a variation in tempo compared with a similar situation. Given that the average time taken after 1NT-Pass-3NT on BBO is less than 2 seconds, based on timed records for the North London Club, taking 5 seconds can give UI, and I think here that it did. I would be minded to adjust to 3NT=, on a heart or club lead, which is a logical alternative to the queen of spades. I would also be suggesting that this section of the Sky-Blue Book is rewritten as a pause of less than 10 seconds can give UI, even though the SB (Sky-Blue, not Secretary Bird) book says it can't.

 

I think it is absurd to use the average length of time after a skip bid for players as a whole as an indication of the average length of time for a particular player, especially when you are going to rule against a player who is ostensibly following the regulations. I regularly pause in skip bid situations. Online in an ideal world directors would have access to the timing in similar situations for this particular player.

[lamford]

I think it is absurd to use the average length of time after a skip bid for players as a whole as an indication of the average length of time for a particular player, especially when you are going to rule against a player who is ostensibly following the regulations. I regularly pause in skip bid situations. Online in an ideal world directors would have access to the timing in similar situations for this particular player.

I was not advocating using the average length of time for players as a whole. The BBO record for each table, available to the TD which I have been a few times, contains the times taken for ALL calls, and one can look at the auction 1NT-Pass-3NT-?, and establish how long each player took individually. So that if CC's average after this specific sequence was 1.8 seconds and he took 5 seconds on this occasion, then that would be a potential breach of 73D1 and convey UI. One would need to avoid mixing apples and oranges, and the time taken after 1H-(Dble)-4H might well be different, but here varying your tempo by taking ten seconds instead of the normal five seconds also gives UI.

[pran]

I was not advocating using the average length of time for players as a whole. The BBO record for each table, available to the TD which I have been a few times, contains the times taken for ALL calls, and one can look at the auction 1NT-Pass-3NT-?, and establish how long each player took individually. So that if CC's average after this specific sequence was 1.8 seconds and he took 5 seconds on this occasion, then that would be a potential breach of 73D1 and convey UI. One would need to avoid mixing apples and oranges, and the time taken after 1H-(Dble)-4H might well be different, but here varying your tempo by taking ten seconds instead of the normal five seconds also gives UI.

For what it is worth:

I would never consider a delay of 5 seconds after a skip bid BIT and I am really surprised if any competent TD would ever do.

Whether the player in question usually thinks for 0,5 or 5 seconds before calling is in my honest opinion completely irrelevant.

[blackshoe]

Is "tempo" a constant? Does it vary from player to player? From auction to auction for the same player? Is there some absolute number or range which defines "normal" tempo?

 

What constitutes a break in tempo in a particular auction depends, it seems to me, on the auction and on the player's usual tempo in similar auctions. Regulations regarding minimum tempo, for example ten seconds after a skip bid, simply confuse the issue.

 

If a player's tempo after a skip bid is five seconds, he may:

 

1. be trying (and failing) to comply with a requirement to wait approximately ten seconds.

2. be bidding at his normal tempo for this situation (and probably ignoring a skip bid regulation).

3. be bidding significantly faster than his normal tempo for this situation.

4. be bidding significantly slower than his normal tempo for this situation.

 

It is incumbent on the director to determine which of these four possibilities is actually the case before deciding whether he will rule that a break in tempo has occurred. Failure to do so is an error. Yes, it can be hard. Hell, it can be impossible. Doesn't change the director's responsibility.

[weejonnie]

Is "tempo" a constant? Does it vary from player to player? From auction to auction for the same player? Is there some absolute number or range which defines "normal" tempo?

 

What constitutes a break in tempo in a particular auction depends, it seems to me, on the auction and on the player's usual tempo in similar auctions. Regulations regarding minimum tempo, for example ten seconds after a skip bid, simply confuse the issue.

 

If a player's tempo after a skip bid is five seconds, he may:

 

1. be trying (and failing) to comply with a requirement to wait approximately ten seconds.

2. be bidding at his normal tempo for this situation (and probably ignoring a skip bid regulation).

3. be bidding significantly faster than his normal tempo for this situation.

4. be bidding significantly slower than his normal tempo for this situation.

 

It is incumbent on the director to determine which of these four possibilities is actually the case before deciding whether he will rule that a break in tempo has occurred. Failure to do so is an error. Yes, it can be hard. Hell, it can be impossible. Doesn't change the director's responsibility.

 

Had a case on Thursday with the EBU - alleged hesitation with no reason to do so. Went to table history. 2 seconds for the player to play low on the previous trick, 18 seconds for the player to play low on the disputed trick. The player came back to me saying he had gone to the toilet. I regarded that as not being particularly careful since he could have left a message before the call of nature - or even on his return.

[blackshoe]

One thing I learned playing certain MMOs: if I'm going to be afk for some reason, I'll type "afk - bio" or the like in chat before I leave the computer.