Is the Competitive Bridge World Rife with Cheaters?
March 9, 2016 4:58 AM   Subscribe

Billionaires, partying until the early morning, and Internet sleuthing: A recent scandal that rocked the world of high stakes contract bridge has it all.
posted by reenum (68 comments total) 15 users marked this as a favorite
 
Crossword puzzles, bridge - is there nothing my mom liked that's sacred anymore?

If there's a quilting scandal next week I swear to god
posted by dismas at 5:13 AM on March 9, 2016 [38 favorites]




God damnit
posted by dismas at 5:36 AM on March 9, 2016 [52 favorites]


Dirty Hands (from last week's New Yorker).
posted by Paul Slade at 5:37 AM on March 9, 2016 [3 favorites]


At least Omar Sharif isn't alive to see this.
posted by Bulgaroktonos at 5:41 AM on March 9, 2016 [9 favorites]


It would be a bigger scandal if it was discovered that contract bridge was just a made-up game with deliberately nonsensical rules and shared as an in-joke between old people, just like I always suspected when I was around for bridge night at my grandparents' house.
posted by Strange Interlude at 5:46 AM on March 9, 2016 [42 favorites]


What an interesting exception to Betteridge's Law. If the headline is "Is the competitive _____ world rife with cheaters?" the answer is almost certainly yes.
posted by Faint of Butt at 5:54 AM on March 9, 2016 [15 favorites]


Roald Dahl wrote a typically sour short story about cheating in Bridge over 60 years ago.
posted by fearfulsymmetry at 5:55 AM on March 9, 2016 [7 favorites]


Well, I for one am glad that the ultra-rich are using all of their pillaged wealth for such worthwhile pursuits as funding all of this bullshit.
posted by Mitrovarr at 5:58 AM on March 9, 2016 [1 favorite]


I am amazed that the anti-cheating regime is so much more complicated than the actual game.
posted by Etrigan at 6:04 AM on March 9, 2016 [3 favorites]


So, like in many professional sports, you have lots of money changing hands and plenty of opportunity for hard to detect or at least deniable cheating. I am shocked, SHOCKED to discover this leads to rampant cheating.
posted by Dr Dracator at 6:10 AM on March 9, 2016


It would be a bigger scandal if it was discovered that contract bridge was just a made-up game with deliberately nonsensical rules and shared as an in-joke between old people, just like I always suspected when I was around for bridge night at my grandparents' house.

"2 No Trump."
"Ah, the Ol' Mornington Crescent Gambit!"
posted by leotrotsky at 6:13 AM on March 9, 2016 [10 favorites]


Ian Fleming also wrote a good bridge cheating episode. Goldfinger (I think) used his silver cigaratte case as a reflective surface so that he could see the cards as he dealt them. Four no trump!
posted by Major Tom at 6:16 AM on March 9, 2016 [1 favorite]


What's funny is that I was under the impression that competitive poker was sucking the life out of competitive bridge; all the best bridge players were jumping ship to poker as the average skill level was much lower and the payoffs much higher.
posted by leotrotsky at 6:16 AM on March 9, 2016


Video of how Schwartz and Fisher used the tray to signal.
posted by Mchelly at 6:19 AM on March 9, 2016 [6 favorites]


It would be a bigger scandal if it was discovered that contract bridge was just a made-up game with deliberately nonsensical rules and shared as an in-joke between old people, just like I always suspected when I was around for bridge night at my grandparents' house.

Like if Joey, Chandler and Ross grew old and played Cups?
posted by like_neon at 6:28 AM on March 9, 2016 [1 favorite]


Slate's Hang up and Listen had a pretty spirited discussion on this scandal this past Monday. The segment starts around 40:30.
posted by mmascolino at 6:30 AM on March 9, 2016


Ian Fleming also wrote a good bridge cheating episode. Goldfinger (I think) used his silver cigaratte case as a reflective surface so that he could see the cards as he dealt them. Four no trump!

The posted Vanity Fair article starts with an illustration of the Hugo Drax game from Moonraker.
posted by zamboni at 6:32 AM on March 9, 2016 [2 favorites]


Ian Fleming also wrote a good bridge cheating episode. Goldfinger (I think) used his silver cigaratte case as a reflective surface so that he could see the cards as he dealt them. Four no trump!

That was Gin Rummy (in the film... Canasta in the novel). However in the novel version of Moonraker Hugo Drax cheats at Bridge... Fleming drawing inspiration from the Royal baccarat scandal

And on preview what zamboni said
posted by fearfulsymmetry at 6:36 AM on March 9, 2016 [2 favorites]


Wheee! I'm a bridge player (a pretty decent one, who plays in the division with all the pros in my club), and this has been the talk of the bridge world since last summer. I'm still amazed at how they thought they could pull it off. NOBODY wins that much. Literally the month before it all really came to light, the ACBL magazine had a big fawning article about their team and how well they were doing, full of smug quotes from the pair.

It will be interesting to see how changes are made with the big competitions. I personally wouldn't like to see what some have suggested, with the big stakes games moving to being played online, with players in different rooms. Part of bridge is being able to sit there with the tension and concentrate.
posted by gaspode at 6:38 AM on March 9, 2016 [5 favorites]


Videos showing the methods used by Fisher/Schwartz, Fantoni/Nunes, and Elinescu/Wladow
posted by eriko at 6:43 AM on March 9, 2016 [3 favorites]


Wheee! I'm a bridge player (a pretty decent one, who plays in the division with all the pros in my club)

O.K., so I'm trying to put together some couple friends to learn to play bridge. Any advice on the best way to get people up to speed?
posted by leotrotsky at 6:57 AM on March 9, 2016


Video of how Schwartz and Fisher used the tray to signal.

Oops. Completely missed that you'd already posted that. Apologies.
posted by eriko at 6:57 AM on March 9, 2016


Can anyone find the video of the Fisher/Schwartz-Piekarek/Smirnov game mentioned in the New Yorker article?
I’ve watched, also on YouTube, a remarkable video in which Piekarek and Smirnov are playing Fisher and Schwartz in a tournament match, and Fisher appears to catch Smirnov trying to cheat. Smirnov places a bidding card on the bidding tray in an unusual position, and Fisher apparently obliterates the signal by shaking the tray as he slides it to the other side of the screen. Fisher smirks, then writes something on a piece of paper and shows it to Smirnov. Smirnov shrugs, glances at the video camera, and looks around the room.
posted by zamboni at 6:59 AM on March 9, 2016 [1 favorite]



It would be a bigger scandal if it was discovered that contract bridge was just a made-up game with deliberately nonsensical rules and shared as an in-joke between old people, just like I always suspected when I was around for bridge night at my grandparents' house.


Mornington Crescent
posted by randomkeystrike at 7:00 AM on March 9, 2016 [4 favorites]


O.K., so I'm trying to put together some couple friends to learn to play bridge. Any advice on the best way to get people up to speed?

hrm. Well, I learned over 20 years ago, at a club that gave lessons, so I'm not really sure what's out there right now. I would imagine a good place to start is the ACBL learning page. Looks like there is a learn to play online option, and it's using bridge base robots so should be good.
posted by gaspode at 7:05 AM on March 9, 2016 [2 favorites]


Now all bridge needs is a TV style police procedural:
"Accident? No." SHADES "This is a contract killing."
posted by happyroach at 7:27 AM on March 9, 2016 [18 favorites]


contract bridge was just a made-up game with deliberately nonsensical rules

You just reminded me of a Harry Turtledove book from a while back called In the Presence of Mine Enemies. It's an alternate history set in a world where Germany won World War II, and the lead character and his family are some of the few surviving and well-hidden Jews.

I mention it because at several points the characters play bridge. A lot. Repeatedly. They play the hell out of some bridge, and after a while it starts to sound like someone adapted Calvinball into a card game.

A small digression: Turtledove expanded the book from a short story of his, and he really should have resisted the temptation. The book kind of drags, and doesn't so much end as just stop.
posted by Mr. Bad Example at 7:34 AM on March 9, 2016 [1 favorite]


bridge - is there nothing my mom liked that's sacred anymore?

Gee, Mom, isn't that bridge built yet?
 
posted by Herodios at 7:45 AM on March 9, 2016 [4 favorites]


O.K., so I'm trying to put together some couple friends to learn to play bridge. Any advice on the best way to get people up to speed?

Started doing this a little over a year ago with a group of friends. We all got books like "Bridge for Dummies" and basically just started playing. A lot of false starts and fuckups, but we're doing it for fun and aren't super competitive, and it's great.

If you've played trick-taking card games before, the only thing that's really tricky about bridge is the secret language coded into the bidding (e.g. responding 2C when your partner opened 1NT isn't saying anything about clubs), and that comes with a little studying and a lot of practice.

There are five of us (because we all have lives and someone usually can't make it any given week) and we don't have set partners, and sometimes barely even bother to keep score, so bridge purists would, I'm sure, tell us we're doing it wrong. But it's fun and social, and we get to say things like "sorry, I can't make it Tuesday because I have bridge club," which seems to blow the mind of anyone under, like, 70.
posted by dersins at 7:47 AM on March 9, 2016 [10 favorites]


Also, BridgeBase Online is a decent, free app which has helped me a lot with understanding what certain bids mean in different situations.
posted by dersins at 7:49 AM on March 9, 2016 [1 favorite]


This has reminded me, for the first time in years, of when there used to be a regular bridge column in the newspaper.
posted by not that girl at 7:51 AM on March 9, 2016 [6 favorites]


The final segment of this week's "Hang Up and Listen" podcast episode has a segment on this with David Owen, which is pretty good listening.
posted by wenestvedt at 7:54 AM on March 9, 2016 [1 favorite]


So many fascinating things in this. That there are rich people so fascinated by bridge that they will hire players, paying them a salary to play bridge, for instance. The table screens were something I hadn't seen before. Even the idea that a person could be a hot-shot international-playboy...bridge player.

Also that the cheaters exploited the only items on the table that they could still manipulate, the bidding tray and board.

Also, I'd heard of "duplicate bridge" but until today didn't know what that was.
posted by not that girl at 8:12 AM on March 9, 2016 [3 favorites]


It seems like it would be easier to just allow unlimited sign-passing between partners and make intercepting those signs part of the game, the way baseball and football teams will attempt to get an advantage by picking up on patterns in a catcher's signals to the pitcher or a quarterback's audibles.
posted by Rock Steady at 8:18 AM on March 9, 2016 [3 favorites]


That there are rich people so fascinated by bridge that they will hire players, paying them a salary to play bridge, for instance. The table screens were something I hadn't seen before. Even the idea that a person could be a hot-shot international-playboy...bridge player.

My regular partner is a pro, although I've been playing with him for 10 years, well before he was good enough to go pro. He's well known now, so I now feel self conscious if I sit down with people I don't know, bc I feel like they think I must be paying him to play. But yeah, I play against people who regularly drop $500-$1000/week on bridge partners. Insane.
posted by gaspode at 8:40 AM on March 9, 2016 [2 favorites]


Also, let 'em all take steroids, make the whole plane out of the black box, &c.
posted by Rock Steady at 8:42 AM on March 9, 2016 [4 favorites]



At least Omar Sharif isn't alive to see this.


Considering how Sharif Ali dealt with water thieves, I can only imagine what he would do to a bridge cheat.
posted by TedW at 8:45 AM on March 9, 2016 [5 favorites]


"If you've played trick-taking card games before, the only thing that's really tricky about bridge is the secret language coded into the bidding (e.g. responding 2C when your partner opened 1NT isn't saying anything about clubs), and that comes with a little studying and a lot of practice."

But that's really the game, isn't it? As I understand it, if you're any good at all you should know how to play your hand, that's not really the hard part.

Bridge is practically a way of life in my mom's family. Not so much with my mom, which is probably partly why I've never played. But my grandfather was a top national player -- maybe a grand life master -- and my grandmother was very good, too. And she was, and both of my mom's sisters are, life masters, though I don't know what levels. My older aunt is pretty far up there. She travels to tournaments all the time.

Party bridge on every social occasion and twice weekly duplicate bridge at the local bridge club was always the norm for my mom's family. (Incidentally, this is where my grandmother and my aunts got to know Stephen Donaldson, playing duplicate with him every week. I have like four or so autographed copies of his books.)

They always wanted me to play. But I'm weird about games. My family has always played pinochle, too, which I've played a lot ... and I notoriously have to re-learn the the rules and scoring every time. It's just not that important to me. I'm like this about games, generally, including video games. I'm a dilettante about games and I've always had trouble understanding why I should want to put a lot of work into a game.

But although I don't play, I like the idea of bridge and it rubs me a bit the wrong way to see people here or elsewhere portraying it as some boring old nonsense game played by old people. This is a very difficult game, it takes a huge amount of skill and practice to be good at it. Lots of people just play party bridge very casually, but it's really a lot more than just that.
posted by Ivan Fyodorovich at 8:49 AM on March 9, 2016 [10 favorites]


I enjoyed reading The Devils Tickets.
I'd say more, but this device sucks.
posted by Floydd at 9:09 AM on March 9, 2016


But that's really the game, isn't it?

Well, yes. That was my point.
posted by dersins at 9:25 AM on March 9, 2016


Bridge players more handsome than expected
posted by bq at 9:32 AM on March 9, 2016


But although I don't play, I like the idea of bridge and it rubs me a bit the wrong way to see people here or elsewhere portraying it as some boring old nonsense game played by old people. This is a very difficult game, it takes a huge amount of skill and practice to be good at it. Lots of people just play party bridge very casually, but it's really a lot more than just that.

Exactly. It used to take a decade or two of playing to get decent, but I found by wasting too much time online I figured out more or less what I was doing after a couple of years. But it's not just that the game is difficult. In the 1950s the best selling book lists were dominated by The Joy of Cooking, Dale Carnegie's book, and bridge books.

I'm impressed how often David Owen's articles hit home. Among other things, he's written funny, well-researched narratives on the SATs, how 1980s deregulation changed children's TV, DYI home repair, urban planning, and running a Bank of Dad. (I used the last idea to convince my kids to save in an era of sub-1-% savings accounts.) It's too bad Owen developed a golf obsession. Every article he writes for a golf magazine means (part of) one less thing of his I'd be interested in reading.
posted by morspin at 10:04 AM on March 9, 2016 [1 favorite]


And I didn't even follow the link. I thought the FPP was on the Dirty Hands article linked to earlier.
posted by morspin at 10:26 AM on March 9, 2016


My dad was active in the ACBL in the 70s–90s, but until now I wasn't even aware that there was a professional echelon of bridge. I would've assumed that was a non-starter with any game that (a) involves teams of two, (b) forbids those partners to communicate in any way outside the structure of the game, (c) nonetheless conducts its games in an environment where communication is still possible, yet (d) relies on the honor system for anything whatsoever.

In such an environment, with serious money on the line, how surprised can you actually be when it turns out that cheating has taken place? And even if they implement new half-measures (a precise square marked on the table where the card board must be played, or a rule that says the screen can't be lifted until X, Y, or Z happens), all they'll do is make the cheating subtler and harder to detect. The only thing that can be done is mentioned near the end of the article: place each player in a separate room from their partner and have them play on tablets.

Having said that: as long as this is just about rich people inventing a professional circuit for themselves and their bridge-playing friends, it's not like this is a matter for legislation. If tournament bridge were more of a spectator sport I might feel differently.
posted by savetheclocktower at 11:29 AM on March 9, 2016 [3 favorites]


If you are trying to get a group to learn bridge, make sure they first know something like Spades and get used to the trick format and simple bidding . Then fold in the weird stuff ... Bidding , dummy hand etc. All the really complex bidding conventions can wait even longer .
posted by freecellwizard at 11:54 AM on March 9, 2016 [1 favorite]


100% agree with freecellwizard. My friends and I started learning a few years ago, and ended up teaching a few more people. Universally, we found that the best way to teach people slowly, and minimally.

Start with just the rules. Just the rules, seriously. Just the rules. None of these conventions, nothing. An ace is not worth 4 points. It's just an ace. Five card majors? What are those? Just the rules.

Then, after a few hands, maybe a full night of playing (it's still a fun game!), add a little bit. Teach them how to evaluate (coarsely) a hand. Teach them High Card Points (A = 4, K = 3, Q = 2, J = 1), and if you have a better than average hand, maybe you should say something. Then play a bunch more hands like this.

Build the game up. If you understand how the game plays, it's a lot easier to motivate why long suits are generally better. It's easier to explain why you might want to do funny transfer bids or pre-empts after people have been playing for a while.

Starting teaching with "If you have this, then do this. If they say this, then do this" is a terrible way to learn, but it's a great way to alienate (some) potential players.

Anyhow, I miss playing Bridge. Anyone in Copenhagen up for a game?
posted by vernondalhart at 12:06 PM on March 9, 2016 [2 favorites]


When I started, our mentor had all 4 of us newbies get this book and we went through it as a group. It was extremely helpful and a nice, sociable, low-stress way to get a handle on the game.

After we'd finished that, we went through it again, and then graduated to this book, which although a bit dated, definitely smoothed out the actual gameplay.

Key to all of it was a low-stress, comfortable setting where we could both think through, and talk out, what we were doing as we learned.
posted by disclaimer at 12:18 PM on March 9, 2016


Gee, Mom, isn't that bridge built yet?

No, son, and it won't be. Not until free hands on both sides of the big ditch can press the same button at the same time.
posted by enjoymoreradio at 12:38 PM on March 9, 2016 [1 favorite]


If you are trying to get a group to learn bridge, make sure they first know something like Spades and get used to the trick format and simple bidding . Then fold in the weird stuff ... Bidding , dummy hand etc. All the really complex bidding conventions can wait even longer .

My parents tried a few times to teach me & my brother. We'd start very simple - we understood the concept of tricks, and they would teach us bidding, and we'd play some hands with everyone's cards face up on the table so our parents could walk us through how to bid and actual hand, and then we would agree to try a hand where we were on our own.

That would be the inevitable moment when I was dealt a hand that would lead to me opening with something like 3 No Trump, which would bring everything to a screeching halt as my parents would need to grab my cards and confirm that, yes, I was actually making a real legitimate bid, and then everything would kind of descend into a bit of chaos. Seriously. Every time we tried to play.
posted by nubs at 1:30 PM on March 9, 2016 [1 favorite]


Three undertrumps after an opponent's discard of a Trebled Fromp is an indefensible gambit.
posted by Faint of Butt at 1:45 PM on March 9, 2016 [1 favorite]


This article looks fascinting and I understood none of it. Can someone explain enough about how bridge and the bridge world work so that I can read it and be appropriately scandalized?

So this guy turned in his teammates? Am I correct? But one teammate is actually the boss of the other teammates who he hires? And he claims to have something in his hand but doesn't? (like shouldn't it be obvious when you show your cards at the end what's in your hand? how do you lie about what's in your hand?)

Please someone explain how this is supposed to work and what these guys did, like I'm an unusually dumb 4 year old. I actually am interested and do want to get it.

Thank you.
posted by If only I had a penguin... at 2:02 PM on March 9, 2016


Wait, the teammates don't even play together?
posted by If only I had a penguin... at 2:03 PM on March 9, 2016


It's a pretty straightforward article. Come on.
posted by Joseph Gurl at 2:50 PM on March 9, 2016


er..oops...just got to the champs and cheats section that seems to explain things. My bad.
posted by If only I had a penguin... at 2:54 PM on March 9, 2016


Are we sure that the real point of the game isn't cheating itself?

It's like... come on... a Vanderbilt, who grew up in a family whose bad behaviour inspired the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, invents a game where the best way to get ahead is to send insider-trading signals as subtly as possible. If I wanted a teaching game for my offspring which aimed for "here's how you really play Wall Street, son, wink wink", it's hard to think of a better set of rules.
posted by clawsoon at 3:35 PM on March 9, 2016 [6 favorites]


Bill Rockefeller admitted to one of his neighbors, "I do business deals with my sons and I always try to cheat them to make them sharp." Now, John D. did not always like those lessons in business, but he absorbed them.

Rockefellers program transcript
posted by bukvich at 3:53 PM on March 9, 2016 [1 favorite]


Well that was really interesting. I still don't understand:

If they play in pairs, why are there 6 people on a team? In what sense is this a team? And teh sponsor isn't on the team but somehow gets the trophy winnings anyway?

Finally, what's this about bidding? If you get mega-bonus-points for winning more than you expect and losing points for not winning as much as you expect, why not just always say you only expect to win 1 or whatever?

Also, couldn't all this be solved very easily by having people play not-at-the-same-table via computer interface? Put each player in a soundproof both and be done with it.
posted by If only I had a penguin... at 5:23 PM on March 9, 2016


1. A team is composed of three duos apparently. Again, not sure how that's tricky--a Davis Cup tennis team, for instance, might have a few different doubles teams on it.

2. Winning bid selects trump, and only the team that wins trump has to meet or exceed its bid.

3. As for the computer interface, well, that's mentioned in the article as a future development.

I still think it's kind of weird how much trouble you're having with this piece, but maybe you're just really curious about bridge. In that case, there are plenty of resources available out there. Have fun--it's a great game!
posted by Joseph Gurl at 6:43 PM on March 9, 2016


If only I had a penguin..., there are two main ways to play competitive bridge.

One way, you play the same hands as a bunch of other people, and your goal is to bid and score better than everyone else playing your direction. And there are some quirks in the scoring that isn't quite linear; for example, a contract of 1 Spade making 4 scores lower than 4 Spades making 4. This type is played in pairs.

In the other type, you have a team of 4+ people, and your partnership sits NS, your teammate pair plays WE, and you both play the same hands, from the point of view of your directions. That's how you can have more than 2 people on a team in a partnership game. You could switch out in different rounds in this type.
posted by that girl at 7:38 PM on March 9, 2016 [1 favorite]


I'm really curious about everything. It's one of my defining features. And I have no idea about the tennis thing. (Though it occurs to me that I'm not actually not that curious about tennis, so I guess I lied just now).

I wouldn't say I'm having trouble with the article (at least not after I got past the introductory section that they put before the explanation for some reason). I would more say that I want to know more. The whole curiousity thing and all.
posted by If only I had a penguin... at 8:20 PM on March 9, 2016


Also, BridgeBase Online is a decent, free app

My dad showed me this app, and I can't recommend it. My plan was to try to learn a decent amount about bidding once and for all.

But I had one of my worst internet experiences in recent memory on there and noped out. I had someone tell me to "kill [my]self, Canadian fucking idiot" for bidding whatever, and a lot of other aggressive behavior made worse by nationalism and language barriers... well I lost a bit more faith in humanity yet because of that app. The people who use it are Trump voters, I swear to god. You can intuit a lot about correlations between age, demographics and "politics" with the BridgeBase app, it's the strangest thing.

In conclusion and in summary, this relates to the FPP because it is about The Behavior of Bridge Players.
posted by sylvanshine at 9:44 PM on March 9, 2016


My dad showed me this app, and I can't recommend it.

Oh, don't play against humans if you're just starting out. Anonymous internet humans are the fucking worst. You can select "Play anonymously" (or something like that) and play hands just with the bot. That's the best way to learn the stuff.
posted by dersins at 9:47 PM on March 9, 2016 [1 favorite]


So is euchre the dumb and quick version of bridge? I used to play a lot of euchre and the game that's described sounds very familiar.
posted by Area Man at 6:54 AM on March 10, 2016


So is euchre the dumb and quick version of bridge? I used to play a lot of euchre and the game that's described sounds very familiar.

Euchre is more like contract bridge's easy-going great uncle. There's a huge number of trick-taking games - for a vague idea of how they're related, see this somewhat nebulous family tree.

Anyone for a game of 500?
posted by zamboni at 8:52 AM on March 10, 2016 [1 favorite]


And this David Owen nugget on stereotyping online bridge players from http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2007/09/17/turning-tricks:
(Nonscientific observations based on several years’ experience: the rudest players are men from countries where women who commit adultery face imprisonment or worse....)
From my experience the players he's referring to equate sitting dummy with having their good family name permanently defouled. And +1 on what a nearby commenter reported: the level of discourse often reminds me of the bad old days on comp.sys.vms, even with death threats over multiple interpretations of man pages. But then you can say that about many other places on the web.
posted by morspin at 5:34 PM on March 10, 2016


If they rotated which positions on the table meant which suits (like a mini-Enigma rotor), it would have been nearly impossible to catch them.
posted by Hello Dad, I'm in Jail at 8:49 PM on March 10, 2016


When I was growing up, my family was always partial to double-deck partnership pinochle. Good game, for sure, but it's no bridge.
posted by Joseph Gurl at 3:04 PM on March 11, 2016


« Older The Quest For The Real-Life Treasures of Atari’s...   |   No wool, no vikings Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments