|
Post by linkster on Mar 27, 2024 15:13:47 GMT -5
Yes it is. Because they never want the right call made, they want the call that helps them or their team, and the truth is irrelevant. When was the last time a basketball player told a ref that they did run into a player and that the foul should have been called on them? Silly, right? The player would be benched by their coach for being honest. In most sports players are trained by coaches in how to miss-lead the rules officials and that in and of itself is cheating. This is what kids learn from sports; winning is everything and the ends justify the means. Well technically, if you foul, you are cheating. You're going against the rules. I think there's a difference between violating a rule and cheating. Cheating is intentionally breaking a rule with premeditated intent to hide the fact. At least that's the difference to me. If I hit a tee shot and find it out of bounds then I have violated a rule. If I'm alone and I kick the ball back in-bounds I am cheating.
|
|
|
Post by swash on Mar 27, 2024 16:07:04 GMT -5
High level bridge tournaments, including online competitions, have also been plagued by cheating controversies in recent years. Even since the infamous Italian Blue Team scandal a long time ago. Counting hearts by the number and direction of fingers holding a hand. Wish I had thought of that! Bridge begs for cheating. In fact, there are many books on the legal forms of telling your partner what cards you do and do not hold. I was okay at bridge, but for me the excitement is mostly in the playing of the cards. I am less interested in trying to become an expert in the nine circles of bidding hell.
|
|
|
Post by bulkey on Mar 27, 2024 16:11:44 GMT -5
Even since the infamous Italian Blue Team scandal a long time ago. Counting hearts by the number and direction of fingers holding a hand. Wish I had thought of that! Bridge begs for cheating. In fact, there are many books on the legal forms of telling your partner what cards you do and do not hold. I was okay at bridge, but for me the excitement is mostly in the playing of the cards. I am less interested in trying to become an expert in the nine circles of bidding hell. Sure, but that's not cheating. You have to tell the other players ahead of time what conventions you're playing so that they have an equal opportunity of processing the same information as you and your partner are exchanging. If instead you deviate from those conventions, (say play "short club" when you're telling the other team you're playing, say, Stayman) that is punishable. I haven't played serious bridge since my first semester in college, when I almost flunked out because of it (but I was never good anyway).
|
|
|
Post by swash on Mar 27, 2024 17:32:41 GMT -5
Bridge begs for cheating. In fact, there are many books on the legal forms of telling your partner what cards you do and do not hold. I was okay at bridge, but for me the excitement is mostly in the playing of the cards. I am less interested in trying to become an expert in the nine circles of bidding hell. Sure, but that's not cheating. You have to tell the other players ahead of time what conventions you're playing so that they have an equal opportunity of processing the same information as you and your partner are exchanging. If instead you deviate from those conventions, (say play "short club" when you're telling the other team you're playing, say, Stayman) that is punishable. I haven't played serious bridge since my first semester in college, when I almost flunked out because of it (but I was never good anyway). That's the point... we're supposed to figure out what everyone has and still be able to take the critical tricks.... Kinda set up for finding novel ways to share more info with your partner than your opponents. Many of the best teams are great specifically because they can tell when their partner is taking a flier or has a spoiler card. That's fair and applauded, but only if those signals are subtle enough that the partner may not even be aware of them. I liked the round robin game when everyone plays the same hands to see who can make the most of the play itself. But I couldn't keep track of enough cards and suits anymore to play anything other than a casual few hands
|
|
|
Post by yetanotherwilliams on Mar 27, 2024 18:20:54 GMT -5
High level bridge tournaments, including online competitions, have also been plagued by cheating controversies in recent years. Even since the infamous Italian Blue Team scandal a long time ago. Counting hearts by the number and direction of fingers holding a hand. Wish I had thought of that! Actually the Heart/finger scandal was directed at Terence Reese and Boris Schapiro, two of the UK's all-time greats, at a world championship event in Buenos Aires in 1965. They never admitted guilt, but their reputations were badly tarnished. Later on there were some accusations against the Squadra Azzurra (Blue Team), which had had a UConn-like dynasty at the top of the bridge world for about fifteen years. Probably the most credible of the indictments came in 1975 (a few years after the American Dallas Aces team had interrupted the Italians incredible run). The so-called "foot-tapping scandal" accused a not-too-famous Italian pair of exchanging signals by tapping their shoes in some manner. But the honor of the all-time great Italian players - especially Belladonna, Forquet, and Garrozzo - who had anchored the Blue Team for many years in the late 50's and 60's was never really called into question until just a few years ago when an Australian expert published a book called "Under the Table" in which he alleged that their whole team had cheated for many years. He pointed out numerous cases when an Italian great had made a bid or a lead that seemed illogical (to some) but worked out brilliantly (as if the player had known which cards his partner held). It was the bridge equivalent of claiming that Williams and Musial and Mays and Aaron had all used steroids (or some illegal practice or substance) to achieve their magnificent records. Each of the great Italians had also made countless brilliant plays over the years with other partners (actor Omar Sharif was one world class partner) so perhaps the Aussie's book was a hit job. More recently a top Norwegian player accused an extremely successful young Israeli pair of brazen cheating, and when the pair denied the charges, he went to the trouble of creating a documentary to make his case, and the bridge community banned the pair for a time, I believe, although they may have been reinstated subsequently. Online play, which skyrocketed in popularity during the Covid years, has led to all sorts of accusations in both chess and bridge. It's a sad state of affairs in both wonderful games.
|
|
|
Post by yetanotherwilliams on Mar 27, 2024 18:37:34 GMT -5
Bridge begs for cheating. In fact, there are many books on the legal forms of telling your partner what cards you do and do not hold. I was okay at bridge, but for me the excitement is mostly in the playing of the cards. I am less interested in trying to become an expert in the nine circles of bidding hell. Sure, but that's not cheating. You have to tell the other players ahead of time what conventions you're playing so that they have an equal opportunity of processing the same information as you and your partner are exchanging. If instead you deviate from those conventions, (say play "short club" when you're telling the other team you're playing, say, Stayman) that is punishable. ~~~~~ There is an unfortunate trend in modern (the past half century or so) bridge in which many of the very best players play artificial or semi-artificial systems and achieve great success. As a result local or regional experts adopt these same tactics and achieve success over their rivals. But there is an ethical problem here, it seems to me. It is next to impossible for moderately experienced pairs who haven't had the time to to work out systems to counter their more sophisticated opponents to compete evenly against players who play some abstruse system with their regular partner(s) all the time. The expert players aren't cheating - and most of them will freely explain the general meaning of their partner's bid when questioned, - but it's a great advantage when your opponents have to decode your bidding structure AND make all the necessary inferences during the bidding or play of the hand. The complexities of learning all these bidding systems also turns away young people, IMO, and as the baby boom population ages and dies, there aren't nearly enough up and comers to replace them.
|
|
|
Post by bulkey on Mar 27, 2024 21:39:07 GMT -5
Even since the infamous Italian Blue Team scandal a long time ago. Counting hearts by the number and direction of fingers holding a hand. Wish I had thought of that! Actually the Heart/finger scandal was directed at Terence Reese and Boris Schapiro, two of the UK's all-time greats, at a world championship event in Buenos Aires in 1965. They never admitted guilt, but their reputations were badly tarnished. Later on there were some accusations against the Squadra Azzurra (Blue Team), which had had a UConn-like dynasty at the top of the bridge world for about fifteen years. Probably the most credible of the indictments came in 1975 (a few years after the American Dallas Aces team had interrupted the Italians incredible run). The so-called "foot-tapping scandal" accused a not-too-famous Italian pair of exchanging signals by tapping their shoes in some manner. But the honor of the all-time great Italian players - especially Belladonna, Forquet, and Garrozzo - who had anchored the Blue Team for many years in the late 50's and 60's was never really called into question until just a few years ago when an Australian expert published a book called "Under the Table" in which he alleged that their whole team had cheated for many years. He pointed out numerous cases when an Italian great had made a bid or a lead that seemed illogical (to some) but worked out brilliantly (as if the player had known which cards his partner held). It was the bridge equivalent of claiming that Williams and Musial and Mays and Aaron had all used steroids (or some illegal practice or substance) to achieve their magnificent records. Each of the great Italians had also made countless brilliant plays over the years with other partners (actor Omar Sharif was one world class partner) so perhaps the Aussie's book was a hit job. More recently a top Norwegian player accused an extremely successful young Israeli pair of brazen cheating, and when the pair denied the charges, he went to the trouble of creating a documentary to make his case, and the bridge community banned the pair for a time, I believe, although they may have been reinstated subsequently. Online play, which skyrocketed in popularity during the Covid years, has led to all sorts of accusations in both chess and bridge. It's a sad state of affairs in both wonderful games. I'm sure you're right that I wrongly attributed the hearts counting to the Italian Blue team. And I probably did backdate the scandal against Belladonna and company. I'm not sure, though, that enlisting other partners, like Sharif, necessarily precludes cheating: one might argue that still making brilliant plays with a new partner is a lot easier if the partnership enjoyed a confidential understanding. Sharif was a great player, but why believe he was necessarily an honest one? After all, he broke Barbra's heart!
|
|
|
Post by yetanotherwilliams on Mar 27, 2024 23:15:46 GMT -5
I'm sure you're right that I wrongly attributed the hearts counting to the Italian Blue team. And I probably did backdate the scandal against Belladonna and company. I'm not sure, though, that enlisting other partners, like Sharif, necessarily precludes cheating: one might argue that still making brilliant plays with a new partner is a lot easier if the partnership enjoyed a confidential understanding. Sharif was a great player, but why believe he was necessarily an honest one? After all, he broke Barbra's heart! Unlike most top bridge players, Sharif didn't need money or fame (or women!). Why in the world would anyone risk his own reputation by approaching him with a scheme to cheat at bridge at an event where the first prize would not reach six figures? And, if someone were reckless enough to do so, why would Sharif risk his celebrity and earning power for such an insignificant prize? It doesn't make sense, at least not to me.
|
|
|
Post by bulkey on Mar 27, 2024 23:31:21 GMT -5
I'm sure you're right that I wrongly attributed the hearts counting to the Italian Blue team. And I probably did backdate the scandal against Belladonna and company. I'm not sure, though, that enlisting other partners, like Sharif, necessarily precludes cheating: one might argue that still making brilliant plays with a new partner is a lot easier if the partnership enjoyed a confidential understanding. Sharif was a great player, but why believe he was necessarily an honest one? After all, he broke Barbra's heart! Unlike most top bridge players, Sharif didn't need money or fame (or women!). Why in the world would anyone risk his own reputation by approaching him with a scheme to cheat at bridge at an event where the first prize would not reach six figures? And, if someone were reckless enough to do so, why would Sharif risk his celebrity and earning power for such an insignificant prize? It doesn't make sense, at least not to me. I'm not saying he did (though plenty of famous people cheat in various ways precisely because they are famous and believe they can get away with anything. Why did Winona Ryder shoplift $5K of merchandise (and get caught) when she was worth ~ $20M? For the thrill of it and because she thought she could.) I'm more suggesting that playing with a different partner doesn't preclude Belladonna--or anyone--from cheating with that person. On the contrary, I would be suspicious of the same brilliant play maintained when partnerships change. Just my intuition on this...
|
|
|
Post by yetanotherwilliams on Mar 27, 2024 23:40:34 GMT -5
Unlike most top bridge players, Sharif didn't need money or fame (or women!). Why in the world would anyone risk his own reputation by approaching him with a scheme to cheat at bridge at an event where the first prize would not reach six figures? And, if someone were reckless enough to do so, why would Sharif risk his celebrity and earning power for such an insignificant prize? It doesn't make sense, at least not to me. I'm not saying he did (though plenty of famous people cheat in various ways precisely because they are famous and believe they can get away with anything. Why did Winona Ryder shoplift $5K of merchandise (and get caught) when she was worth ~ $20M? For the thrill of it and because she thought she could.) I'm more suggesting that playing with a different partner doesn't preclude Belladonna--or anyone--from cheating with that person. On the contrary, I would be suspicious of the same brilliant play maintained when partnerships change. Just my intuition on this... Cheating, like many forms of criminality, in most circumstances is sort of a private choice; if you don't screw up, you might not get caught. But even the suggestion of cheating to a potential partner is fraught with danger. If they are of a mind to, they hold your hard-earned reputation in their hands ... forever. I can sort of understand, after playing with a partner for years that you might discern that their sense of ethics is not as strong as it might be, and that they might be a good candidate to approach with your crooked scheme. But approaching a casual partner, especially one who is better known and more likely to be believed than you are -- I don't see it.
|
|
|
Post by swash on Mar 28, 2024 6:09:37 GMT -5
I'm not saying he did (though plenty of famous people cheat in various ways precisely because they are famous and believe they can get away with anything. Why did Winona Ryder shoplift $5K of merchandise (and get caught) when she was worth ~ $20M? For the thrill of it and because she thought she could.) I'm more suggesting that playing with a different partner doesn't preclude Belladonna--or anyone--from cheating with that person. On the contrary, I would be suspicious of the same brilliant play maintained when partnerships change. Just my intuition on this... Cheating, like many forms of criminality, in most circumstances is sort of a private choice; if you don't screw up, you might not get caught. But even the suggestion of cheating to a potential partner is fraught with danger. If they are of a mind to, they hold your hard-earned reputation in their hands ... forever. I can sort of understand, after playing with a partner for years that you might discern that their sense of ethics is not as strong as it might be, and that they might be a good candidate to approach with your crooked scheme. But approaching a casual partner, especially one who is better known and more likely to be believed than you are -- I don't see it. Very strong points, Yetano. But, the world is full of people who make inexplicably bad, even colossally bad choices against all reasonable logic. Rose and Jordan and sports betting. Hugh Grant. Hitler turning on his eastern allies despite serious troubles to his west. ... the list is effectively endless. Can probably find a dozen in today's newspaper. Then again, the signatories to an announcement coming out of a meeting on an obscure sweltering early July day in Philadelphia were flaunting all reasonable logic, too.
|
|