A cheating scandal in the world of professional bridge • Hacker News Board

Re: A cheating scandal in the world of professional bridge

#21

Post by aidenn0 » Thu, Mar 03, 2016, 11:38 PM UTC

paulcole wrote: post #5

"No one would try to memorize all the percentages" As someone who studied and memorized 20,000+ words to improve my tournament Scrabble play, this made me laugh. If knowing the numbers is truly advantageous, there's likely to be a subset of competitors willing to work to get that edge. Maybe bridge is different, but the games I've been serious about (Scrabble and poker) both rewarded a significant amount of focused s…

My mom was competitive at the regional level, not national nor world, and she carried around a ~10 page typewritten document with all the bidding and lead conventions she had with her current partner, and study it while I was at various after-school activities.

Because in duplicate bridge you are scored not on your absolute result, but on your result relative to people who played the same hands as you, the tinyest edge is magnified.

The basic card-splitting rules are known even to the most rank beginners in duplicate, and there are definitely players who know the percentages as well as any poker player. In a way it's actually easier, as you know where half the cards are as soon as the first lead is made.

Re: A cheating scandal in the world of professional bridge

#22

Post by eru » Thu, Mar 03, 2016, 11:40 PM UTC

ergothus wrote: post #17

mcguire wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was dragged to a bridge class by my girlfriend several years ago, and it was fascinating. The thing that struck me most was that you could lose the game during the play, but you could only win the game during the bidding. Unfortunately, because I'm an antisocial rat bastard, I never kept up with playing or tried to join the club.

One of the unfortunate side effects of learning bridge is the tendency to sneer at games like Spades as being "bridge-lite"

Try Mü. It's a German style trick taking game, somewhat comparable to Bridge, but can be enjoyed at a more casual level, too.

Re: A cheating scandal in the world of professional bridge

#23

Post by na85 » Thu, Mar 03, 2016, 11:43 PM UTC

eru wrote: post #19

na85 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't. It's a game that is fundamentally flawed at the base level, just like blackjack. The fact that both these games outlaw certain thought processes , be that counting cards in your head or acting on your partner's hesitation, shows that they've been shoehorned into something they're not.

It just shows that bridge can not really be played cut-throat competitively with humans face-to-face. (Social play is fine and fun.) Adding intermediation (either other humans or computers) removes most of the problems.

>Adding intermediation (either other humans or computers) removes most of the problems.

Perhaps, but that just reinforces the notion that the game is fundamentally broken. If a card game works better on computers, then it's not really much of a card game, is it?

Re: A cheating scandal in the world of professional bridge

#24

Post by aidenn0 » Thu, Mar 03, 2016, 11:44 PM UTC

sharkjacobs wrote: post #10

I enjoy bridge, but high level competitive bridge sounds like a nightmare. "Expert poker players often take advantage of a skill they call table feel: an ability to read the facial expressions and other unconscious “tells” exhibited by their opponents. Bridge players rely on table feel, too, but in bridge not all tells can be exploited legally by all players. If one of my opponents hesitates during the bidding or the…

It's actually fairly easy for a few reasons:

1) Anybody playing at even a remotely competitive level has their bid and play conventions so well down that answering the question "what would I have played had I not seen my partner hesitate?" is not hard.

2) Varying your tempo will get the director called to the table regardless of whether or not it conveys information; playing at a steady rate is part of the game.

3) It has actually been fairly easy to identify cheaters for the past decade or so (since hand records have been computerized), they are the ones who regularly succeed when making the wrong decision (from the odds point of view). The ACBL just didn't want to run the analysis because they don't want to get sued.

Re: A cheating scandal in the world of professional bridge

#25

Post by na85 » Thu, Mar 03, 2016, 11:45 PM UTC

dec0dedab0de wrote: post #18

na85 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't. It's a game that is fundamentally flawed at the base level, just like blackjack. The fact that both these games outlaw certain thought processes , be that counting cards in your head or acting on your partner's hesitation, shows that they've been shoehorned into something they're not.

counting cards is legal in Atlantic City, but if they suspect you of it they'll shuffle every hand or not let you change the size of your bet.

>counting cards is legal in Atlantic City, but if they suspect you of it they'll shuffle every hand or not let you change the size of your bet.

The fact that there's something to "suspect you of" is the whole problem. Doing the same (counting cards) in poker is explicitly encouraged, and the ability to know what cards remain in the deck is highly prized.

Blackjack is just not a very well-designed game.

Re: A cheating scandal in the world of professional bridge

#26

Post by eric_h » Fri, Mar 04, 2016, 12:34 AM UTC

rbonvall wrote: post #11

ganeumann wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like the longer articles in the New Yorker. The charm of articles like that is becoming familiar with a milieu, not the notional theme of the article. Learning about a small but dedicated subculture by reading an interesting story is more interesting than just knowing the facts about a professional contract bridge cheating scandal. This tl;dr thing makes sense in articles about technical subjects when all you reall…

I agree. What the actual cheating technique was is the least interesting part of the story.

I disagree - I think the variety of cheating techniques (not covered by GGP's tl;dr) was interesting, especially given the monikers. I found the Coughing Doctors and the Italian Foot Soldiers to be quite amusing

[Edit: fixed OBOB on the reference to a higher level post]

Re: A cheating scandal in the world of professional bridge

#27

Post by anamexis » Fri, Mar 04, 2016, 12:43 AM UTC

eru wrote: post #22

ergothus wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the unfortunate side effects of learning bridge is the tendency to sneer at games like Spades as being "bridge-lite"

Try Mü. It's a German style trick taking game, somewhat comparable to Bridge, but can be enjoyed at a more casual level, too.

I am a huge fan of Tichu, which is also a more casual Bridge-like game.

Re: A cheating scandal in the world of professional bridge

#28

Post by eric_h » Fri, Mar 04, 2016, 12:44 AM UTC

dec0dedab0de wrote: post #18

na85 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't. It's a game that is fundamentally flawed at the base level, just like blackjack. The fact that both these games outlaw certain thought processes , be that counting cards in your head or acting on your partner's hesitation, shows that they've been shoehorned into something they're not.

counting cards is legal in Atlantic City, but if they suspect you of it they'll shuffle every hand or not let you change the size of your bet.

I may be picking a nit, but counting cards is legal in all casinos in the US. You are not breaking a law by counting cards, but the the casino has the right to stop providing you its service if you are, or if they even think you are (right up there with "No shirt, no shoes, no service").

Perhaps you mean that casinos in Atlantic City actually will not kick you out if they suspect you're counting cards, or they're bound by some law to allow you to keep playing?

If counting cards were actually illegal, we'd be a lot further along on our way to Orwell's 1984. You can't outlaw thought (yet).

Re: A cheating scandal in the world of professional bridge

#29

Post by k_sze » Fri, Mar 04, 2016, 12:49 AM UTC

I have never played bridge so my opinion is of a complete outsider's. You can also see me as the devil's advocate.

What if we just accepted "cheating" to be part of the game? Such that every team is allowed to devise their own way to communicate in subtle manners (barring the use of electronic devices). And so part of the game would be to figure out the opposing team's code. There is really no way to prevent communication when you have physical presence. If you really want to prevent communications, sit them in separate rooms and make them play through computer terminals.

Catcher signals are used in baseball, we don't call that cheating.

And to bring up another analogy. Remember how in the anime Naruto, the kids have to take a paper exam to advance? The questions in that paper were hopelessly difficult for the candidates, and it turned out that the real exam was for them to attempt cheating without being obvious.

And please don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that what Fisher and Schwartz did was ok. They were clearly violating the existing rules. What I'm saying that trying to enforce a rule forbidding communications when you have physical presence is an exercise in futility. It's just that maybe we should consider changing the rules or how the game is played.

Re: A cheating scandal in the world of professional bridge

#30

Post by laxatives » Fri, Mar 04, 2016, 12:58 AM UTC

sharkjacobs wrote: post #10

I enjoy bridge, but high level competitive bridge sounds like a nightmare. "Expert poker players often take advantage of a skill they call table feel: an ability to read the facial expressions and other unconscious “tells” exhibited by their opponents. Bridge players rely on table feel, too, but in bridge not all tells can be exploited legally by all players. If one of my opponents hesitates during the bidding or the…

Seems very arbitrary. There's a very similar card game in Spain called Truco (and in Italy called Briscola). Truco accepts communication and even bluffing as a core component. There are very standard system for hidden communication, like a wink representating a particular strong card and pursing the lips means another. Because these are so well known, its common to either wait for the right moment to share info, or intentionally share incorrect values to confuse your opponent. At the end of the round, there's an opportunity to bluff and call "BS", increasing the stakes at every hand. Its a very similar game, but accepting implicit communication changes it completely.