pigpenz Posted October 12, 2020 Report Share Posted October 12, 2020 read this over on BridgeWinners and there was a link to ACBL hearings on suspicious activity. https://www.acbl.org/conduct-and-ethics/under-discipline/ethical-oversight-hearing-reports/ it was interesting almost all have occurred since we started more online activity during covid crisis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pescetom Posted October 12, 2020 Report Share Posted October 12, 2020 Kudos to ACBL for at least taking some action when others (like Polish federation) consider BBO cheating too trivial to punish even when the culprit owns up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AL78 Posted October 12, 2020 Report Share Posted October 12, 2020 Well it is easier to cheat online. Online activity can bring out the worst in people. I noticed many of the names on the list in that link look like married couples. I know one or two people at my club suspect cheating goes on by those pairs who live together. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Douglas43 Posted October 14, 2020 Report Share Posted October 14, 2020 The English Bridge Union encourages reports of suspicion and has set up a panel to investigate allegations. Information is on the EBU website at https://www.ebu.co.uk/node/3898 and https://www.ebu.co.uk/node/3903 In August it announced: "As reported in this month’s English Bridge an EBU Disciplinary Committee recently considered charges against [name given in original] under paragraph 3.2(iv) of the EBU Disciplinary Rules, for unfair or dishonest play and imposed a sanction on him of a two-year ban from participation in EBU competitions. This arose from a number of online sessions on the Bridgebase Online (BBO) platform between March and June 2020 where he was aware of the layout of the hands when playing. This was achieved by ‘self-kibitzing’: when playing under one BBO username, he was watching the sessions logged in under a different username, and could thereby see all four hands." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vampyr Posted October 14, 2020 Report Share Posted October 14, 2020 read this over on BridgeWinners and there was a link to ACBL hearings on suspicious activity. https://www.acbl.org/conduct-and-ethics/under-discipline/ethical-oversight-hearing-reports/ it was interesting almost all have occurred since we started more online activity during covid crisis. Well, yes. In live play cheating is virtually always collusive. How would you or your partners react if asked to create a system of cheating? But in BBO you can do it by yourself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pescetom Posted October 14, 2020 Report Share Posted October 14, 2020 In August it announced: "As reported in this month’s English Bridge an EBU Disciplinary Committee recently considered charges against [name given in original] under paragraph 3.2(iv) of the EBU Disciplinary Rules, for unfair or dishonest play and imposed a sanction on him of a two-year ban from participation in EBU competitions. This arose from a number of online sessions on the Bridgebase Online (BBO) platform between March and June 2020 where he was aware of the layout of the hands when playing. This was achieved by ‘self-kibitzing’: when playing under one BBO username, he was watching the sessions logged in under a different username, and could thereby see all four hands." It seems ingenuous of EBU to permit kibitzing of sessions, however. Or is there some bug/bypass that enables self-kibitzing even when the Director has specified no kibitzing for the tournament? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pescetom Posted October 14, 2020 Report Share Posted October 14, 2020 Well, yes. In live play cheating is virtually always collusive. How would you or your partners react if asked to create a system of cheating? But in BBO you can do it by yourself. I agree that collusive cheating requires considerably more determination and premeditation, plus the hurdle that partner must also be so aligned. I don't agree that in live play cheating is virtually always collusive, however. Precisely because there are many people prepared to cheat alone but not collusively I think the former type of cheating is predominant. Luckily I have not encountered (or at least recognised) many pairs cheating collusively, unless you count much coffee-housing under that term: but I have a fair list of individuals who will frequently enter the wrong score to their advantage, listen for the contract and score at another table, etc. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mycroft Posted October 14, 2020 Report Share Posted October 14, 2020 I would suggest that most cheating IRL is not collusive. deliberate coffeehousingdeliberate use of UI from partner, knowing (having been penalized for the same use before) that it's not legalcold-decking or otherwise manipulating deals (Okay, this is ACBL-only, nobody else deals cards any more)gaining access to hand recordsattempting to overhear tables, or the "check scorecards while going for coffee" gambit... I don't know where you put "deliberate passing of UI, expecting partner to get it" like staring at partner when giving a signal partner is supposed to notice, or looking at partner expectantly when playing a card looking for confirmation they're still on the right track, or variations in bidding, or... I think a lot of that is deliberate on the player's part and "not noticed" on partner's; I'm sure they haven't discussed it. Much as I hate it, I don't consider WeaSeL (over preempts, or over unAnnounced NTs) to be cheating. For me, it has to be deliberate, and knowledgeable of its wrongness; as I frequently say, WeaSeL is one of the few conventions that works better if the players don't know they're playing it - they just act and react correctly naturally. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barmar Posted October 16, 2020 Report Share Posted October 16, 2020 it was interesting almost all have occurred since we started more online activity during covid crisis.What's so interesting about that? The amount of online play has increased dramatically. And before this, the national bridge organizations had almost no interest in investigating online cheating or sanctioning players who were caught. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pigpenz Posted October 19, 2020 Author Report Share Posted October 19, 2020 whats so interesting about that, what a relevant remark BARMAR Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gordontd Posted October 19, 2020 Report Share Posted October 19, 2020 It seems ingenuous of EBU to permit kibitzing of sessions, however.We don't. Some of our clubs do though and some people setting up their own matches for leagues do even though it is against the regulations. Note that in the case reported, none of the games he played were run by the EBU. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pescetom Posted October 19, 2020 Report Share Posted October 19, 2020 We don't. Some of our clubs do though and some people setting up their own matches for leagues do even though it is against the regulations. Note that in the case reported, none of the games he played were run by the EBU. Thanks for the clarification, it did seem odd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackshoe Posted October 24, 2020 Report Share Posted October 24, 2020 "In live play." Are all the people who play on bbo dead? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.