[CQ-Contest] Cheating (in bridge)

[N1MM]

The parallels to contesting are pretty striking. I particularly like how 
they "crowd sourced" the analysis of the videos and split the problem 
into those who could see the cheating pattern and then those who could 
analyze the hands at the same level as the players.   The posting of 
logs is the contesting equivalent of the videos.

The other parallel I see is that the cheaters he described in bridge are 
very, very good players. Just like the contesters that win contests by 
cheating are very, very good operators.  I think in both cases the 
sponsoring organizations are loathe to call out cheating without a 
"smoking gun."

I used to play a lot of bridge and even competed, albeit not terribly 
effectively, in national bridge tournaments.  I can attest that the best 
players are incredibly good. Just like in contesting.

73,
Tom - N1MM


On 3/8/2016 8:32 AM, Christian Schneider wrote:
> Hi,
> a great longread in the New Yorker about cheating in bridge. I won't 
> spoil the author's ufb work with some thoroughly crafted cliffhangers. 
> So many things sound familiar and give a fascinating insight into 
> cheating and bridge and psychology. Besides that one may think about 
> "big data" approach to power cheating in our contests, but I don't 
> think of it being realistic soon.
> So simply enjoy 
> http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/03/07/the-cheating-problem-in-professional-bridge
> Best 73, Chris DL8MBS
>
> P.S.: The number of sources quoted may be similar to that necessary to 
> fill a regular daily editon of a newspaper...
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>