[Vampyr]

A: you know, we could be doing a lot better at this game if we tried cheating

B: what a smashing idea! Let's work out the details

If we assume ( and we have to assume!) that 99.9% of bridge players are honest and want to play and to play in a clean game, how do the cheaters find themeselves with a partner who,is willing to go along with it?

[Hanoi5]

A: You know, I heard Fantoni and Nunes cheat.
B: Really!? You mean number 1 and 2 in the world ranking cheat and nothing has been done!?
A: Yep
B: Maybe we should try it...

Actually, some people I know were asking the same exact question. How can a pair get together and discuss this?

[helene_t]

Maybe it starts with the minor ethical violations, like leading fast with a singleton.

If my p tells me that he deliberately didn't return my suit because it would be unethical to do so, then I will go shopping. Until I find a p who understands my signal.

And once I have found a partner who is willing to return my suit when I lead fast, then it evolves from there. Next step is to indicate that I think the auction has ended (for example by folding up my cards) when I want p to stop bidding. Etc. At some point it will be so obvious to both of us that we dare talk to each other about it. And then we start making more subtle agreements.

[lamford]

 Vampyr, on 2015-September-20, 16:06, said:

A: you know, we could be doing a lot better at this game if we tried cheating

B: what a smashing idea! Let's work out the details

If we assume ( and we have to assume!) that 99.9% of bridge players are honest and want to play and to play in a clean game, how do the cheaters find themeselves with a partner who,is willing to go along with it?

The first step is to find someone with a compatible signalling method. I am sure that common bodily functions, belching, coughing, farting and sneezing are best, but to evade the eagle eye of Woolsey, we need to encrypt these, so we are not coughing every time we want a spade lead, or have a spade shortage. Fortunately, there is an easy way to do this with the board numbers. To belch when you want a club lead if the board is a multiple of 4 might be detected, so we need something more sophisticated. I would suggest a clever method, and the keen student might like to decrypt the following signals on board 1-16:

1 sneezing = heart
2 farting = diamond
3 coughing = heart
4 belching = club
5 sneezing = club
6 belching = diamond
7 coughing = heart
8 belching = spade
9 farting = diamond
10 sneezing = spade
11 coughing = diamond
12 belching = spade
13 farting = heart
14 coughing = heart
15 sneezing = diamond
16 farting = heart

It is important to have at least three or four tins of beans before the game for the quick fart, and also to drink a particularly gaseous drink (fizzy lemonade is fine for non-alcoholics) to get a sonerous and audible belch. A small amount of snuff is legal, and ideal for that sudden sneeze. Finally smokers can get through 10 strong cigarettes before the game, while non-smokers should eat a packet of crumbly cookies, without water, to get a nice spluttery cough.

[Fluffy]

I think Hanoi is spot on, if you think others cheat you feel the need to cut their edge.

[Jinksy]

Step 1 is to post something inquisitive about the subject on a bridge forum. Some of the people will post sincere guesses, others will make smart-arse self-referential remarks. Those are the ones you have to watch out for...

[Vampyr]

 Fluffy, on 2015-September-20, 23:42, said:

I think Hanoi is spot on, if you think others cheat you feel the need to cut their edge.

Yes, we have seen this in cycling and athletics. The difference, though, is that in those sports you don't need someone to agree to go along with it.

[nige1]

 Vampyr, on 2015-September-20, 16:06, said:

A: you know, we could be doing a lot better at this game if we tried cheating
B: what a smashing idea! Let's work out the details
If we assume ( and we have to assume!) that 99.9% of bridge players are honest and want to play and to play in a clean game, how do the cheaters find themeselves with a partner who,is willing to go along with it?

Bridge laws and regulations are complex and unclear, so it's possible to rationalize wrong-doing. The laws are geared to restoring equity rather than deterring transgression, so it is easy to slip into bad ways. Some long-serving directors have never imposed a PP or DP.

A common example is when you're in receipt of UI from partner and you use it to your advantage.

• A lot of the time, your infraction will pass without comment.
• Occasionally, however, opponents will notice and have a vague understanding of the law.
• If they're still in contention, they might call the director.
• If you're unlucky, the director might rule against you (not often because it's easier for an experienced partnership than for a director to judge what actions are suggested by UI)
• In practice, however, even then, the director is likely to award you a better score than a law-abiding player would have received.

[olegru]

2 lamford:
After especially unlucky run of the cards, room might need to be evacuated.

[barmar]

 nige1, on 2015-September-23, 00:58, said:

Bridge laws and regulations are complex and unclear, so it's possible to rationalize wrong-doing.

Yeah, how can anyone know what's right and wrong with confusing laws like this one (73B2):

Quote

The gravest possible offence is for a partnership to exchange information through prearranged methods of communication other than those sanctioned by these Laws.

[nige1]

 barmar, on 2015-September-23, 09:17, said:

Yeah, how can anyone know what's right and wrong with confusing laws like this one (73B2):

On Bridge-winners and on BBO, experts wrote that, when in receipt of UI from partner, they make the call that they would have made without UI. This is also the advice provided by the ACBL club directors' handbook

[barmar]

 nige1, on 2015-September-23, 09:24, said:

On Bridge-winners and on BBO, experts wrote that, when in receipt of UI from partner, they make the call that they would have made without UI. This is also the advice provided by the ACBL club directors' handbook

That's way different from deliberate cheating.

I've advocated that sometimes as well, because trying to figure out what the LAs are, and which are "demonstrably suggested" by the UI, is often impractical. We frequently can't agree on it in forum discussions, so how is someone supposed to know what to do at the table? The practical solution is to try ignore the UI, and gracefully accept the adjustment if the TD rules that it was inappropriate.

[gszes]

Rho opens 1c and you hold Q976 QT83 65 974 what do you do? Would you do any differently if you know lho held 3 5 KQT87432 J52? how about if you know your partner held AKJ54 KJ92 void AT63 ?? It would seem obvious to anyone NOT looking at the other cards pass would be in order but the UI would seem to indicate maybe a nice 1d bid just might bolix up the works. Is this cheating for SURE?? Who knows? but the problem stems far beyond the simple scope of signalling especially when it comes to online bridge. The only thing you can do is try and play with integrity (please try and look that word up cheaters even though the concept will be tough to understand for you) and do not play with or even associate with the obvious cheats. Heck I go so far as to tell them at the table they have become enemies but I save it for really obvious situations--like when an opp x your 6d contract and they start yammering at you at trick 2 about being stupid and greedy but it is their partner that has the setting trick (something they should not have known nothing about) that sort of thing.