[FrancesHinden]

I like this:

Quote

Intentionally change a score or any information that could result in awarding incorrect masterpoints

It implies that if I intentionally change a score which could not result in incorrect masterpoints, there's no penalty?

[qwery_hi]

hackenbush, on Mar 12 2009, 03:19 AM, said:

Presumably, coffee doesn't grant you information you're not entitled too.

But a low-cut top does.

[babalu1997]

rogerclee, on Mar 10 2009, 04:45 PM, said:

FrancesHinden, on Mar 10 2009, 09:47 AM, said:

I played a session once with a female junior who had a rather low-cut top with an imposing cleavage. She said it gained her loads of matchpoints because oppo weren't concentrating on the bridge.

I can confirm that this works.

how low are your tops roger?
can i borrow them?

[barmar]

jdonn, on Mar 13 2009, 10:40 AM, said:

Well obviously the point of all of this is they will punish who they feel like, and ignore most of the rest. This way they make almost any behavior punishable just in case it suits them in a particular case.

They just want to make sure that they can find excuses to keep reprimanding Blubaugh.

[peachy]

hrothgar, on Mar 13 2009, 10:09 AM, said:

On the bright side, there's nothing in there about making political statements when you're up on a podium...

There soon will be, I think I read some agenda or motion to that effect somewhere "reliable".

[jmcw]

jmc, on Mar 9 2009, 11:09 PM, said:

I think that a cofee cup also greatly enhances one's ability to cheat.  Not only can one time their sips, non-sips, or cup adjustments, they could also turn the cup in many ways.  Perhaps removal of the lid at certain points could be an indicator.  Playing behind screens?  Maybe a friendly kib walks over and says, "Hi.  I just bought you a frapomochalate."  The secret message being that a tricky slam is possible on board 21.

If people are worried about one signaling with a phone call or IM, I'd think they'd be just as worried about adding a new cheating prop to the table. 

Determined cheats can not be stopped by allowing or denying certain items at the table.

jmc

<the above is all said a bit tongue in cheak>

Could Upside Down cup signals could be the next rage. Latte discards?

[JoAnneM]

I do know that a male wearing gym shorts with no underwear and his "you know what" hanging out under the table is a "no-no".

Seen by me at the San Francisco NABC, and since I didn't want to avoid looking at that table the entire session (I was n/s sitting at a nearby table) I reported it.

[slothy]

barmar, on Mar 10 2009, 05:02 PM, said:

On the other hand, isn't there a (possibly apocryphal) story of a bridge expert whose concentration was so absolute that he didn't notice when a nude woman walked by the table?

Unfortunately, barmar, that story was not apocryphal. Unfortunately ( or fortunately, depending on your perspective ) the person sitting at the table when the nude woman walked by was me

(i did, however, severely reprimand my ex mother-in-law later, telling her that she should restrict her desire to walk naked in public to the privacy of her nudist asylum)

The only reason that i didnt notice a woman in this state of undress was nothing to do with the hand in question (it was a simple trivial hand involving a backwash squeeze with an intricate preparatory elimination) but the fact was my gaze was fixated on two rather raunchy buxom blondes who were sat opposite me smothering each other with (semi-skimmed) cream and licking it off the other in a, i must say, rather ubersexual fashion.

The opps denied having anything to do with having my ex mother-in-law stroll casually by OR with the 2 ladies in question. I, of course, reserve judgement.

Alex