JanM, on Apr 16 2008, 06:44 PM, said:
cherdano, on Apr 16 2008, 10:27 AM, said:
Hmm, is this a more cost efficient way to prevent cheating compared to using screens more often?
I haven't priced these recently, but when I did look they cost something like $700. I confess I don't know the cost of purchasing a table with screen, but I suspect it's in the same price range, and you need one for each table in play.
Which isn't to say that using screens as early as possible in major events wouldn't be a very good thing. It would. USBF uses screens throughout all of our events. And bans electronic devices. And wands some of the time. But our entry fees are significantly higher than ACBL's.
A few observations
1. The devices that you are pointing at will (probably) be able to detect a cell phone that has been turned off. However, it won't do anything to detect a cell phone that has its battery pack removed. Moreover, said battery less phone can be made operational in a matter of seconds in the cushy confines of the bathroom.
2. Let's assume for the moment that the scanners actually worked... I wouldn't say that it is trivial to custom build a system to beat the scanner. However, I wouldn't call it all that challenging either. All that you're going to do is to create an arms race.
3. My worry through this process is that the ACBL / WBF / whomever is rushing to implement expensive and inconvenient cosmetic changes that won't have any actual impact on security. I would much rather see the powers that be invest a small amount of resources to study the problem rather than buying cell phne scanners at $700 a pop... Hell, you could probably generate a lot of useful information just by creating an online forum in which various folks could discuss/debate the relavent issues. With luck, you'll get some good suggestions. Worst case, you burned a couple hundred dollars and a few hours setting the system up.
4. For what its worth, I still think that running major events using computers is inevitable.
* You don't need to invest in dealing maching, screens, what have you.
* Everyone plays the boards at the same time
* You can segregate players by direction (all the North's in one room)
* You can separate players by enough distance that electronic signalling is much easier to detect
* You don't need to scrounge viewgraph operators
* You automatically get perfect records of bidding and play which can be used for forensic analysis
* You can time every bid and play. Its easy to judge whether there was a break in tempo. You can intelligently assign delay of game penalties
This is going to happen. You might as well bite the bullet and prepare for the transition rather than trying to apply patch after patch try to compensate for a weak foundation.
Help
