[mikeh]

Elianna, on Mar 9 2008, 10:29 PM, said:

And not just the under 35s, either.

If it were just the under 35's that were the issue, it would be a non-issue.. I mean, 3 or 4 people out of a 1000 players in a typical 250 table movement?

[foo]

hrothgar, on Mar 13 2008, 11:23 AM, said:

foo, on Mar 13 2008, 05:50 PM, said:

The real solution is to duplicate the security measures casinos use as much as is needed.  ATM, the costs involved would indicate that NABCs and International events should get this level of security.  As costs decrease, we can look forward to seeing it in Regionals as well.

1. Casinos own their own facilities. They typically run gaming operations 24x7.

The ACBL rents rooms from hotels. Nationals run 7-10 days, with 3 or so sessions a day. The cost dynamics are completely different

2. Casinos have lots of skin in the game. If a player at a casino is being cheated they will typically have a large financial stake in the system. For example, if someone cheats at Blackjack they are taking money directly from the casino.

The ACBL doesn't have much skin in the game. In theory, the organization has a vested interest in ensuring the integrity of the game. However, the consequences from cheating aren;t nearly as immediate.

The ACBL has just as much skin in the game as the casinos do. Cheating can and will destroy organized Bridge if not prevented as much as possible and prosecuted as vigorously as possible when it does occur.

Within the context of tournament Bridge, cheating is a Capital Crime akin to Murder.

Those who cheat and can be proven to have done so beyond reasonable doubt should be "executed". That is, thrown out of organized Bridge forever.

No second chances. No exceptions.

But to enforce that standard we have to be able to uphold the needed standard of proof.

And that means hidden cameras or other electronic recording devices everywhere it makes sense and is feasible.

[jdonn]

foo, on Mar 13 2008, 12:14 PM, said:

You have no idea what you are talking about with regards the 3rd.

That's a bold statement considering I didn't say anything about it except that it's a ridiculous reason to put hidden cameras all over. Are you worried about getting kidnapped when you go to bridge tournaments right now? This is getting too far off topic anyway, I still think it's an ok idea except expensive and difficult to implement and maintain. There are other things I'd rather see sooner anyway.

[mike777]

Staying home for most of these players may very well be the best option for many people if they must, must have a cell/device phone during a top class bridge session. The wrong perception is just to much of a concern.

If people are going to die or your company is going out of business if you do not answer your phone within 2-3 hours, perhaps it may be best to skip that session.

[uday]

This cell phone/laptop ban will be an irritation at the next NABC. Would be good if there was a process in place to get an exemption from the ban...

[jillybean]

uday, on Mar 13 2008, 01:34 PM, said:

This cell phone/laptop ban will be an irritation at the next NABC. Would be good if there was a process in place to get an exemption from the ban...

Have Jan carry it for you

JanM, on Mar 12 2008, 02:30 PM, said:

Cellphones are not being allowed in the Vanderbilt playing rooms today (I have 2 in my pocket right now). No one has complained.

[TimG]

From Jonathan Steinberg's Detroit report:

"These devices are not permitted near the playing area, even if they are turned off. If implementation of the new policy goes well, I expect that it will be extended to regionally-rated events in 2009."

[jtfanclub]

jdonn, on Mar 13 2008, 03:01 PM, said:

Are you worried about getting kidnapped when you go to bridge tournaments right now

Depends...am I getting there via bus?

Seriously, there is no way that I'd travel to an NABC without a cell phone, and if I don't stay at the site and I use public transportation then I am damn well taking a cell phone with me. If the ACBL wants to have lockers where I can keep my cell phone, fine, I'll use them. If not, then there really isn't another option.

Did you know if you sign up at the partnership desk, that they insist on getting your cell number?

[Trinidad]

jtfanclub, on Mar 26 2008, 07:48 AM, said:

jdonn, on Mar 13 2008, 03:01 PM, said:

Are you worried about getting kidnapped when you go to bridge tournaments right now

Depends...am I getting there via bus?

Seriously, there is no way that I'd travel to an NABC without a cell phone, and if I don't stay at the site and I use public transportation then I am damn well taking a cell phone with me. If the ACBL wants to have lockers where I can keep my cell phone, fine, I'll use them. If not, then there really isn't another option.

Did you know if you sign up at the partnership desk, that they insist on getting your cell number?

Seems entirely reasonable to me.

However, most people who find their partners through the partnership desk do not play in the (high level) events where cell phones are banned.

Besides that, there can't possibly be any thing wrong in saying: 'My cell phone number is xxx, but I can't be reached from x to y since I will be playing in the Vanderbilt.

This whole matter is about what you consider more important when you are at a high level birdge tournament: The possibility to be reached extremely easily by cell phone or the possibility to play serious bridge in which case it will be somewhat harder to reach you (but still very possible, if it is about serious business).

Rik

[jtfanclub]

Trinidad, on Mar 26 2008, 08:57 AM, said:

Seems entirely reasonable to me.

However, most people who find their partners through the partnership desk do not play in the (high level) events where cell phones are banned.

It's not just players that are the issue.

So I go to the Nationals, and I go to the pick up desk, and I get a partner, and I turn off my phone. No problem.

Then I go play the game with the turned off phone in my pocket, no problem.

The game finishes, and I want to watch the end of the Vanderbilt round. Now what? If they have lockers, fine. If they're going to have the directors collect a gigantic pile of cell phones from all the kibitzers in the Vanderbilt area, not fine. I'm going into this assuming that I am an honest person that wants to obey the letter of the law. But how can the law be enforced for something like this? What am I supposed to do, hide the cell phone in a potted plant while I watch the Vanderbilt?

It doesn't make any sense to ban cell phones from kibbitzers anyways. A kibbitzer has a thousand ways to cheat without using a cell phone. Heck, since the hands aren't even played at the same time, you could just watch in the closed room, tell somebody outside the room, and have that person run to the open room and give the magic signal (or maybe just showing up is the magic signal). If none of the players have cell phones, and any kibbitzer with a cell that goes off is escorted out of the playing area permanently, how does having a cell phone even help you cheat?

I think the best part will be the bathrooms. What are they going to do, have a person standing in front of the bathroom demanding cell phones of the people who enter? What if they're just motel guests and not bridge players? Will the bathrooms be Vanderbilt Players only and the 299ers will just have to hold it? Or will the bathrooms have to be evacuated every time a Vanderbilt player wants to use the potty?

[mycroft]

What I have heard of is "the events where the ban is in place are on floor X, or within these confines; within these confines, the ban is in place, whether you are there for the event or not".

It should be interesting if I decide to come in (as I have in the past), and use my Palm Zire as my scoresheet. Sure, it's capable of "receiving and transmitting communications", but only if I stick it on a big cradle, corded to a computer. It's even pre-IR.

You think they'd believe me?

re: kibitzers. Again, I ask: on how many hands would one bit of information ("on the decision you'll have to make, take the mildly anti-percentage play") be incredibly useful? Clearly, you couldn't use it with "take the 5% play" or people would notice quickly; but if it were a choice between "finesse or drop" or "finesse or squeeze" or "safety play or not", the kinds of things that are almost always arguable either way, or automatic unless you're tired and forget to think - and you can explain that you took the safety play on board N+8 because you realized after the play that you forgot to do it on board N and it shook you...

I would say a one-bit "be careful here" trigger, twice in a session, should be enough to swing a match between two moderately comparable teams.

Text messaging is unnecessary. I don't have to tell Expert "Trumps break badly, you'll really need to take care of your entries and play safe", all I need to do is say "be careful here". And I can say that with one ring on vibrate. 90% of the time, partner will know what "be careful here" means.

[mycroft]

I agree that ensuring a storage system, even if it's supplied by Baron Barclay or the like, is going to be essential if this is to be moved to the Regionally-rated games.

If it is not, I see nothing wrong with saying "if there is a chance that you really will have to be contacted during a session, you shouldn't be playing in the Vanderbilt; play the A/X pairs instead. You can play the Spingold in the summer, after (the baby's born/the crisis is over/you're not in your home city and being 'on call' is less reasonable/whatever)" Of course, recent events show that there are those who *really really needed to be contacted* that still choose to play the Vanderbilt. Oh well.

[mike777]

This is sure a funny thread to read. Now people need cell phones if they ride the public bus or subway, wow. Not having some electronic device on a certain floor or partial floor seems to be a near death experience.

Now I understand when I went to the club yesterday and at every other table people were pulling out their cell phones or at the movie last night people had to keep checking them to make sure no one has died, I guess.


As for the kibitzer comments, yes it is true having family members kibitz the other table at top class events has raised issues. Also there are discussions to limit movements of the players and monitor the players. Yes, even if that meant just going to the bathroom this has raised issues at top class events in the past.

[jdonn]

mike777, on Mar 26 2008, 01:09 PM, said:

This is sure a funny thread to read. Now people need cell phones if they ride the public bus or subway, wow. Not having some electronic device on a certain floor or partial floor seems to be a near death experience.

Finally you understand!

[awm]

This ban just seems like a witch hunt.

Have there been any cheating cases involving cell phones? Certainly not high-profile ones.

Is it possible to use a cell phone to cheat? Sure, there are lots of creative ways to cheat.

Have there been high profile cases of suspicious kibitzers? Meetings in restrooms or smoking areas between rounds? Sure. Are we doing anything about it? Not really. There are also many possibilities for performance enhancing drugs in bridge (I mean things like ritalin or caffeine, not anabolic steroids); are we doing anything about it? Not really.

A purse could contain all sorts of things from a cell phone to system crib sheets. Are we going to require all ladies to check their purses at the door? Heck you could fit those things in a pants pocket, are we going to require men to check their pants? Certainly we should not allow people to leave the area for smoking breaks during play? I mean, besides the possibility to communicate with other players, they could well be inhaling performance enhancing drugs. Oh wait, we have specific breaks built in to all our pairs games? Huh?

Are we really going to have secure places to check cell phones? Some cell phones cost $500 or more. And a lot of people have them. How much is checking these going to cost in terms of both money and time? And what happens the first time someone's expensive iphone or blackjack or helio is stolen from the cell phone checkin?

This just really seems like a move to screw over certain groups of people (young people, working people) on a flimsy excuse of preventing a type of cheating which probably hasn't ever happened. Cell phone reception in the playing area at most convention centers is lousy anyway.

[TimG]

awm, on Mar 26 2008, 01:26 PM, said:

This just really seems like a move to screw over certain groups of people (young people, working people) on a flimsy excuse of preventing a type of cheating which probably hasn't ever happened. Cell phone reception in the playing area at most convention centers is lousy anyway.

Wasn't the new rule at least in part prompted by rumors circulating at the SF NABC regarding a Senior event? That was my impression from what little I have heard, anyway. It being the rumor mill, it could be completely wrong.

[mike777]

"This ban just seems like a witch hunt.

Have there been any cheating cases involving cell phones? Certainly not high-profile ones.

Is it possible to use a cell phone to cheat? Sure, there are lots of creative ways to cheat.

Have there been high profile cases of suspicious kibitzers? Meetings in restrooms or smoking areas between rounds? Sure. Are we doing anything about it? Not really"


I do not know if there ever has been a proven 100%, beyond doubt of cheating in any of the above. IT seems in bridge it would be pretty hard to prove cheating. In almost every case I ever read about in books, magazines or heard from WC players, someone always claimed it was just a case of sour grapes. Heck my online partner was accused outright of cheating when he claimed last night in an online tourney......with trumps still out....and the finesse marked already in the previous play...

As you and others point out it seems even enforcing this ban is impossible and angers too many people. It will be interesting to see how many if any penalties are incurred or how long the ban lasts.....But it seems worth trying anyway......even though all of you feel it is doomed to massive failure.

btw I should note my boss makes me carry a cell phone when I travel out of town on my trips.....heck I turn it off the second I leave the office and turn it back on a week later.....I think he knows he needs to just leave a msg with the hotel clerk if he ever needs to reach me.

How you guys cannot survive 3 hours or 3 days without one is sure funny....

I lived for many many years across from Motorola world headquarters and have many old buddies who still work there....I remember when their phones were the size of a bus.....

[matmat]

mike777, on Mar 26 2008, 01:36 PM, said:

How you guys cannot survive 3 hours or 3 days without one is sure funny....

When I go out to an area that
1) is far away from home (as most events are)
2) i have friends in who do not play bridge
3) it is my only means of communication, as i don't have a lifeline nearby and pay-phones really are not practical.

I want to have my cell phone (and for the record, I *hate* the things).


IMO if there has been a case of cheating using a cell phone, this really should be documented and presented as a reason for this regulation. as it stands now it looks like the writers are doing some sort of proactive, nebulous thing that a lot of people will/do disagree with.


if you really want to ban cell phones, have a little box for them AT EACH table. just a little opaque cardboard or plastic box, lined with foam, that all four players have an eye on. that way there won't be much fear about the phones getting lost/stolen, and, in principle, if a signal is sent all 4 players will be able to tell, if at all.


of course, maybe ACBL events should take place in gymnasia. each player gets a pocket-less orange uniform with their ACBL number in big black letters on the back, and each gets a locker to put their street clothes and accessories.

[blackshoe]

I used to play with a legally blind partner. He didn't use bidding boxes. I once caught an opponent writing down the auction. When I pointed out that is illegal, she said "but I can't remember it without the bidding cards!"

Maybe we should ban pencil and paper in the playing area, too.

[matmat]

blackshoe, on Mar 26 2008, 02:12 PM, said:

I used to play with a legally blind partner. He didn't use bidding boxes. I once caught an opponent writing down the auction. When I pointed out that is illegal, she said "but I can't remember it without the bidding cards!"

Maybe we should ban pencil and paper in the playing area, too.

threadjack...

is it permissible to write down the auction at all before the opening lead(as a player?). What if you do it just to have a record of the auction for later? how about with the excuse that writing it down helps you remember it?

(in either case you have no intent to look at it during the play).