[gnasher]

 billw55, on 2015-August-31, 06:54, said:

I wonder what Boye's state of mind was going in to these events with FS on the team.

Isn't that obvious? He didn't believe the rumours, so he had no reason not to play with them. In fact, if he thought they were being unfairly treated, that would be a reason to play with them, to show solidarity.

[mikeh]

 cherdano, on 2015-August-31, 14:33, said:

So the play in the animated GIF I posted is from the first match by RS that I looked at: partner leads the lowest ♦ spot against 1NT, a balanced dummy comes down with JTx, and RS covers dummy's honor with Qxxx. Could you imagine a player of your level making this mistake in an important match?

I would hope not, but I am sure that I have done equally foolish things in the past. Btw, while I fully understand why low is the percentage play on most hands, I can think of layouts, especially at imps, where the Q is correct, tho I can't think of a plausible example at the one level .

Anyway, everybody makes plays that in hindsight are below their normal standard of play. One of the problems with a retrospective analysis of hands is that we tend to seize upon errors and magnify them to fit our preconceptions.

[billw55]

And why do people keep talking about trials? This isn't a criminal case. This is a decision of a private organization, whether or not to sanction two of its members, or allow them to participate in its events. Said organizations can use whatever internal administrative process they have for that, and I very much doubt that ever involves a trial.

Or are people thinking that FS will sue BB for libel and/or slander? At this point it doesn't look like that would work out very well for them.

[billw55]

 gnasher, on 2015-August-31, 14:56, said:

Isn't that obvious? He didn't believe the rumours, so he had no reason not to play with them. In fact, if he thought they were being unfairly treated, that would be a reason to play with them, to show solidarity.

While that is certainly plausible, I hesitate to use "obvious" in such situations. People do a lot of things for a lot of reasons.

[billw55]

 mikeh, on 2015-August-31, 14:57, said:

Anyway, everybody makes plays that in hindsight are below their normal standard of play. One of the problems with a retrospective analysis of hands is that we tend to seize upon errors and magnify them to fit our preconceptions.

True enough. The difference is, when many experts are observing many hands where these "errors" are made, that consistently work out well. If all they are is errors, then we should be able find a similar (objectively, greater) number of examples where a bad result was obtained. If these can be found, let's consider them.

[mikeh]

 billw55, on 2015-August-31, 15:00, said:

And why do people keep talking about trials? This isn't a criminal case. This is a decision of a private organization, whether or not to sanction two of its members, or allow them to participate in its events. Said organizations can use whatever internal administrative process they have for that, and I very much doubt that ever involves a trial.

Or are people thinking that FS will sue BB for libel and/or slander? At this point it doesn't look like that would work out very well for them.

I was a member of our ACBL District Judicial committee for years, tho fortunately never had to sit on a case. I was counsel on such a case 25 years ago, and even at the District level the accused was entitled to counsel. I cannot imagine a US based organization, with the ability to impact earnings powers, not affording what the Americans like to refer to as 'due process' and what we in the Commonwealth (referring I think to related but slightly different concepts) call the principles of natural justice.

If these guys are up on charges, especially if not arising from measures taken by a TD at a tournament, my understanding, based on perhaps out of date experience, is that they will be entitled to a formal hearing. Of course, if they are confronted with overwhelming evidence, they may instead try to negotiate a deal or just skulk away. We can hope.


edit: re the libel issue. Different countries have different rules, some very different. Here in Canada, on the evidence so far presented I'd rather be acting for FS than for Brogeland, BW, or any of the others who have gone public. Not that there would be any jurisdiction here. And no, this isn't an offer to act for them I hope, and frankly expect, that the more evidence that comes to light, or that would be found in the context of a lawsuit, the more that would change (in terms of who would be likely to win). Here, the damages could be massive...not just compensation for the loss of what I imagine is a very lucrative career, but also even punitive damages for 'malice'. You have to remember that what is acceptable in the public mind as 'proof' isn't at all the same as what is acceptable in a courtroom.

[ggwhiz]

 mikeh, on 2015-August-31, 15:24, said:

I was a member of our ACBL District Judicial committee for years, tho fortunately never had to sit on a case.

The last part of this sentence is exactly why BB felt it necessary to go public. BTW, he's now living in a secret location due to death threats.

fisher and Schwartz have announce their intention to file suit and may well be able to cherry pick their jurisdiction.

Oh and all the action crashed Bridgewinners forcing a furiously fast upgrade to their system.

[PhantomSac]

lol if you think it's just the traffic bringing them down. they are being attacked for sure.

This really is like a Hollywood movie

[kuhchung]

I am telling all of my non bridge friends about the details as it unfolds. They want some justice!

[cherdano]

Mike, I won't argue with your legal reasoning. It may be possible that the way Brogeland set about doing this won't help him if he gets sued for libel.

But I think the goal he had in mind was to get the relevant authorities (ACBL/IBF/EBL/WBF/...) to act. His strategy was to pass the full information on to them; and once they didn't seem to react by themselves, he added public pressure by adding tidbits of information publicly.

And his goal isn't only to get rid of F-S - I am sure thinking about this case made him realize how laughably little deterrent the current system is against potential cheats, and that he wants fundamental change.

I mean, if nothing fundamental changed, and I was someone cheating at bridge - I would probably tell myself "LOL as long as I don't do it as blatant as these guys - using all possible tools towards cheating and winning every tournament in sight - I will NEVER be caught". And that IS a problem, since most top players seem to believe that there are other top pairs that cheat, only less egregiously.

[cherdano]

 PhantomSac, on 2015-August-31, 15:48, said:

lol if you think it's just the traffic bringing them down. they are being attacked for sure.

I'd find that quite plausible - if there are 10 times as many readers reading 10 times as many comments, the load is 100 times of what it was before. Plus having more of anything seems to bring out bugs in everybody's code.
On the other hand, that last phrase may not be apply to code written by Greg H. Plus it was down Monday morning European time (i.e. middle of the night US time) - that did seem a bit odd.

[PhantomSac]

exactly, maybe I overrate greg humphreys but he seems like a baller lol. it is hard for me to believe natural traffic took them down for so long.

I mean the guy has an academy award and was baller at GOOGLE

[mgoetze]

 cherdano, on 2015-August-31, 16:11, said:

I'd find that quite plausible - if there are 10 times as many readers reading 10 times as many comments, the load is 100 times of what it was before. Plus having more of anything seems to bring out bugs in everybody's code.
On the other hand, that last phrase may not be apply to code written by Greg H. Plus it was down Monday morning European time (i.e. middle of the night US time) - that did seem a bit odd.

Right, I was fully willing to believe it was down because of natural reasons on Sunday evening, but with the problems still ongoing on Monday at noon when I would expect all the Americans to be in bed I started to think there may be more to it than that.

[broze]

Why haven't the ACBL released their videos by the way? They might have discussed that in their statement but chose not to.

[nige1]

 cherdano, on 2015-August-31, 14:33, said:

So the play in the animated GIF I posted is from the first match by RS that I looked at: partner leads the lowest ♦ spot against 1NT, a balanced dummy comes down with JTx, and RS covers dummy's honor with Qxxx. Could you imagine a player of your level making this mistake in an important match?

It's suspicious when a player is hugely successful, in spite of frequent peculiar losing blunders. But it also makes his peculiar anti-percentage winning actions less suspicious.

[cherdano]

Meanwhile, while all this is going on, The Bridge World wrote s.th. like 15 editorials on....SPORTSMANLIKE DUMPING AS THE BIGGEST PROBLEM THREATENING COMPETITIVE BRIDGE!

[Phil]

 cherdano, on 2015-August-31, 18:06, said:

Meanwhile, while all this is going on, The Bridge World wrote s.th. like 15 editorials on....SPORTSMANLIKE DUMPING AS THE BIGGEST PROBLEM THREATENING COMPETITIVE BRIDGE!

Actually this month's was about Fantunes making the weird defensive play versus the slam to get an extra under that went to the 'sports judge'.

[Vampyr]

 cherdano, on 2015-August-31, 18:06, said:

Meanwhile, while all this is going on, The Bridge World wrote s.th. like 15 editorials on....SPORTSMANLIKE DUMPING AS THE BIGGEST PROBLEM THREATENING COMPETITIVE BRIDGE!

Back in Kaplan's day the Bridge World was in favour of s.d. If the CofC allowed it. Input was the latter that they thought was the problem. Is that not the case anymore?

[captyogi]

 billw55, on 2015-August-31, 15:00, said:

And why do people keep talking about trials? This isn't a criminal case. This is a decision of a private organization, whether or not to sanction two of its members, or allow them to participate in its events. Said organizations can use whatever internal administrative process they have for that, and I very much doubt that ever involves a trial.

Or are people thinking that FS will sue BB for libel and/or slander? At this point it doesn't look like that would work out very well for them.

quote
= = = =
Or are people thinking that FS will sue BB for libel and/or slander?
= = = =
unquote

Well Well Well, that will be highly welcome by BB.
That officially opens the Pandora's Box.
If you stay in Glass House, You don't throw stone on somebody staying in Stone House.

[PhantomSac]

 Vampyr, on 2015-August-31, 19:52, said:

Back in Kaplan's day the Bridge World was in favour of s.d. If the CofC allowed it. Input was the latter that they thought was the problem. Is that not the case anymore?

yeah I don't think you got it