[barmar]

gnasher, on 2012-March-10, 07:04, said:

The prohibition on improper communication can't be enforced either, but we still prohibit it. I don't think this is any different.

The difference is that investigators can infer improper communication, based on unusual actions taken by the players. Individual cases are not conclusive, but a history of such actions may strain credibility if nothing nefarious is taking place.

But memory and calculation aids are practically impossible to detect remotely, since they're not likely to result in remarkable actions.

[Scarabin]

Returning to bridge at my age, and after a lapse of about 30 years, I find that I have too many lapses of concentration to count suits etc. I wrote a program ( a sort of expanded version of Bridge Master's suit count) to count and record/synthesize suit lengths, honors in the unseen hands. I use it when playing Bridge Master, Reese classics, etc. and here cheating is not an issue.

Without this program I would probably embarrass other players on BBO, with it I'd probably be a touch slow but it appears also cheating? I must admit it probably enables me to play a bit better than I remember playing in the early 1980's.

I hasten to say I have never used the program online.

[blackshoe]

Using it in actual games would be a violation of Law 40C3a.

[aguahombre]

For many reasons, some don't condsider play on-line to be "actual games".

[bluecalm]

I recommend you this hand I played today: http ://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?myhand=M-26193417-1331489034

To find out how to cheat in style !

I don't know what opps said after this one but there were a lot of words and all in Turkish.
You really need to be careful with cheating accusations as you could easily find many hands like that played by honest players who just lucked out, especially if they are weak and do many random things (like us).
I think reporting/detecting/investigating cheating in online bridge is futile effort, at least in settigns where full names and other personal details are unknown.
Once we have some kind of verification process and tournaments for verified players then it would make more sense.

[barmar]

I don't think anyone would be able to detect you using your counting program -- most players are able to count suits and keep track of the missing honors, and decent people can keep track of all the spots as well, so your play with it wouldn't look too unusual. Only someone who knew that you normally have trouble doing this would be able to tell when you're using it.

The same thing goes for looking at your own CC -- remembering your agreements is expected, so no one would be able to tell the difference between you using your memory and peeking.

Cheating gets suspected when players do strange things that happen to work out, and a pattern of this acts as confirmation.

[SimonFa]

bluecalm, on 2012-March-11, 15:32, said:

I recommend you this hand I played today: http ://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?myhand=M-26193417-1331489034

To find out how to cheat in style !

I don't know what opps said after this one but there were a lot of words and all in Turkish.
You really need to be careful with cheating accusations as you could easily find many hands like that played by honest players who just lucked out, especially if they are weak and do many random things (like us).
I think reporting/detecting/investigating cheating in online bridge is futile effort, at least in settigns where full names and other personal details are unknown.
Once we have some kind of verification process and tournaments for verified players then it would make more sense.

I have 2 monitors on my PC and keep a Google translate window open in one of them. Most of the time its the typical bickering you get between partners and sometimes it looks like a pair is practicing and discussing what bids mean/meant. If its the MBC I don't really care, let them practice if have found a semi competent player I am happy to continue.

[HighLow21]

bluecalm, on 2012-March-11, 15:32, said:

<snip>

To find out how to cheat in style !

<snip>

Nevermind. Barry nailed it --> we're not talking about a single hand or two that demonstrates that an error was made and happens to work out. We're talking about a pattern of unbelievably fortunate calls that are well outside the norm. Once or twice it's quite probably good luck. Five or ten times in a 20 hand session? It's cheating.

[Vampyr]

As aids to play are impossible to detect, I think it is fair to say that there will always be people using them. But anyway, people who mind cheating on BBO can just play Farmville instead. If they really prefer to play bridge they can:

• Attend a local duplicate or rubber bridge club
  
• Join a local league
  
• Go to a tournament
  
• Invite 3 friends over and play some rubbers, or 7 friends and have a team match.
  
• et cetera

[Scarabin]

Thanks for your help.

[fuburules3]

barmar, on 2012-March-10, 14:12, said:

We do that when the qualifying rounds of the ACBL Collegiate Championship are done online.

Is this a recent development? This never happened when I played in it (and pretty sure didn't happen last year)

[inquiry]

fuburules3, on 2012-March-12, 00:25, said:

Is this a recent development? This never happened when I played in it (and pretty sure didn't happen last year)

The college thing was played onlline, not sure how the conditions of contest were. But for example, here is the cc for the usbf under 21 event that was played on line usbf u21 cc

[barmar]

fuburules3, on 2012-March-12, 00:25, said:

Is this a recent development? This never happened when I played in it (and pretty sure didn't happen last year)

I was one of the monitors for the MIT team a year ago.

[mr1303]

On this whole cheating thing, sometimes, when playing in the main bridge club, if I'm playing with a new parter I sometimes have a convention card open in front of me.

Whilst it is technically against the rules, I'm not hugely bothered. 1) I don't care if opponents discuss their system during the bidding and play of a hand (and freely invite this if I'm playing something complicated).

If I'm playing a semi-formal teams match, or in a tournament (I don't play in pay tournaments since the bank charges associated with paying in dollars makes this too expensive for my liking), then I don't. But then I don't care one way or other about the score that I get online.

[barmar]

I think most people understand that minor stuff like that takes place online, and it doesn't generally affect their enjoyment of the game (in the case of peeking at your own CC, they don't even know when it's happening).

When people complain about cheating, they're usually talking about players getting out-of-band information about their partner's or opponents' hands.

[mrdct]

I realise that it's possible to self-kibitz on a mobile phone or via an internet connection other than your primary one, but how about something like an amber dot next to your name to indicate that somebody with the same IP address is either kibitzing or playing at the same table or the other table in a teams match? Of course it could be quite innocent, such as family members watching or playing with each other from different PCs on the same LAN, but I think it's fair enough to have to disclose that you are doing that.

[aguahombre]

"Spouse-TerryW, so it is obvious we don't communicate!"
That's what we use on OKB. It's in my profile.

[olegru]

Incidents happened all the time.
Players land in the majestic contracts as a result of partnership misunderstanding;
Players miscount their points to stop in the only makeable contract;
Players chose the superlucky bluffs.
And so on and so forth…
Every of this incidents could look suspicious, but does not prove anything. Any of us was in these positions. We can get lucky on a single strange board, but more often we are losing because of our mistakes.

But sometimes we can see something different:
1. Best leads in almost 100% cases.
2. Different actions in the similar positions always in a lucky match with partners hand.
3. 1 major – (2 minor) – double, double could be penalty or negative depends what they need in the current board.
4. Some actions that have no explanations other than external knowledge.
5. Excessive number of doubles and redoubles
6. Incredible stats.
These are kind of cases we are talking about.

[[[[[[

ALL THE EXAMPLES DELETED.... WHAT PART OF THE FIRST POST WHERE I DELETED SPECIFIC EXAMPLES WAS NOT CLEAR.

IF ANYONE WANTS TO GO ON A CHEATER HUNT, GO RIGHT AHEAD. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS CHEATING AND CHEATING ISSUES YOU MUST DO IT SUCH THAT THE HANDS CAN BE FOUND "EASILY" ON MYHANDS. THESE EXAMPLES, GIVEN THE OP, ARE TOO EASY TO FIND. THIS ALSO MEANS YOU CAN NOT POST ANY HANDS YOU PLAYED ON LINE THAT IS STILL AVAILABLE IN MYHANDS (ONE YOU KIBITZ, ONE YOU FIND IN YOUR CHEATER HUNT ARE OK, BUT NOT OF A PAIR THAT IS EASILY OUTED WITH LINKS IN THIS FORUM.

THE BEST THING TO DO IS TO REPORT THE ALLEGED CHEATER TO ABUSE AT BRIDGEBASE DOT COM.

]]]]]]]]]]

Vampyr, on 2012-March-08, 17:55, said:

There will always be cheaters; it is just too easy to do. Some will be too subtle to be caught.
But since online bridge is basically for practice, it seems not to be too big a disadvantage if opponents play and defend perfectly!

These people are not "too subtle to be caught."

And as for practice I am completely disagree with you. It is a big disadvantage to play against cheaters even in tearm of practice.
It is just completely different game. Look at examples above.

1. You cannot deduce anything about opponents hand based on his bids and leads, because they unrelated to his own cards.
2. No reasons to preempt
3. No reasons to bid close games

You are learning nothing playing this kind of game, just losing time and selfconfidence.

This post has been edited by inquiry: 2012-March-13, 12:53
Reason for edit: ALL THE EXAMPLES DELETED

[mgoetze]

Vampyr, on 2012-March-11, 18:30, said:

As aids to play are impossible to detect, I think it is fair to say that there will always be people using them. But anyway, people who mind cheating on BBO can just play Farmville instead. If they really prefer to play bridge they can:

• Attend a local duplicate or rubber bridge club
  
• Join a local league
  
• Go to a tournament
  
• Invite 3 friends over and play some rubbers, or 7 friends and have a team match.
  
• et cetera

I think you missed the rather obvious "chat to 3 people you know on BBO to start a table, or 7 people you know and start a team match".

[barmar]

mrdct, on 2012-March-13, 02:14, said:

I realise that it's possible to self-kibitz on a mobile phone or via an internet connection other than your primary one, but how about something like an amber dot next to your name to indicate that somebody with the same IP address is either kibitzing or playing at the same table or the other table in a teams match? Of course it could be quite innocent, such as family members watching or playing with each other from different PCs on the same LAN, but I think it's fair enough to have to disclose that you are doing that.

We might as well make it a scarlet C, since that's how people will interpret it, and most will avoid these tables. And even if people do play against them, as soon as something strange happens they'll assume the worst -- their expectations will be biased.

I prefer the innocent until proven guilty approach.