Two nicks, one player Should we be concerned about blatant cheating
#1
Posted 2016-December-02, 10:37
Goodness knows what this person gets out of this activity. It seems to me like buying a book of crosswords and filling them in after looking up all the answers. Anyway, this person continues playing forty or fifty boards a day despite being reported to BBO Abuse many times. Should I care? Should anyone care? Apart from giving their oppo unmerited bad score (although most don't hang around for more than three or four boards) the random scores that they generate affects all others playing those boards.
Any thoughts?
#2
Posted 2016-December-02, 10:54
#3
Posted 2016-December-02, 11:30
It's a pity that abuse@BBO don't give any feedback. I've sent in a few E-mails in my time (not always about suspected cheating), but never got a peep out of them as to whether any action was taken. I appreciate that there is an online privacy factor, but this only adds to one's frustration.
#4
Posted 2016-December-02, 11:53
Assuming that somebody is actually reviewing hands, sending followup emails should take much less time than analyzing a single hand. Whistleblowers may get discouraged at the lack of response and decide it's not worth the effort to report additional miscreants.
#5
Posted 2016-December-02, 12:17
#6
Posted 2016-December-02, 14:07
The upshot is: you are your own enforcement service. Use your blacklist.
And yes, I have observed probable cheating in several cases over the years.
-gwnn
#7
Posted 2016-December-02, 15:39
GrahamJson, on 2016-December-02, 12:17, said:
Quote
A ticket has been opened regarding your issue.
You will receive additional emails as we take action.
The second, human reply, I strongly suspect is yet another copy-and-paste job: it's a bit more personalised, but nevertheless it almost invariably goes as follows: word for word:
Quote
Thank you for writing and especially thank you for making BBO your personal online Bridge Club.
This is fine as far as it goes - but a bit anodyne don't you think? Yes I know the abuse team probably have a lot of complaints to deal with, day after day .... but personally I'd like a bit more than that.
#8
Posted 2016-December-07, 18:15
#9
Posted 2016-December-08, 11:41
onoway, on 2016-December-07, 18:15, said:
I agree with you, but in this case it could not be clearer. For example opening 1S on a singleton, partner raises on three and you end up in 3NT, making on a non spade lead. Or opening 1S on A Jxxxx Axxxx Jx and rebidding 2C over partner's 1NT response, keeping oppo out of their 4S contract. In fact oppo bid 2NT which goes one off when partner leads a diamond. And these aren't exceptions, almost every board is like this. How about opening 1H on KJxxx X QJx Jxxx and rebidding 2S over partner's 1NT response. This is passed out and makes exactly, partner having Axxx Qxx Kxx xxx. Oppo somehow did not find their heart fit.
#10
Posted 2016-December-11, 13:20
GrahamJson, on 2016-December-08, 11:41, said:
Clearly, if not a cheat, the opening bid is a psych. But psyching is not illegal - at least not in the casual play areas - provided it's not part of an undisclosed agreement.
Let's assume that opener's was a psych, and there was no secret agreement. If playing 4CM, partner might respond 1♠ but 1NT is not entirely wrong. Then opener - apparently - reverses into 2♠ - again psyching. Partner may decide that, even with the reverse and a ♠ fit, their flat 9 points is not enough for game, they obviously prefer ♠ to ♥ .... so they pass. The fact that the opponents were thus prevented from bidding ♥ was unlucky for them, but isn't solid evidence of cheating.
But this is not to say that cheating doesn't happen. I'm sure it does. But before making accusations, you need to have cast-iron evidence in every example you bring up.
#11
Posted 2016-December-11, 14:19
661_Pete, on 2016-December-11, 13:20, said:
Clearly, if not a cheat, the opening bid is a psych. But psyching is not illegal - at least not in the casual play areas - provided it's not part of an undisclosed agreement.
Let's assume that opener's was a psych, and there was no secret agreement. If playing 4CM, partner might respond 1♠ but 1NT is not entirely wrong. Then opener - apparently - reverses into 2♠ - again psyching. Partner may decide that, even with the reverse and a ♠ fit, their flat 9 points is not enough for game, they obviously prefer ♠ to ♥ .... so they pass. The fact that the opponents were thus prevented from bidding ♥ was unlucky for them, but isn't solid evidence of cheating.
But this is not to say that cheating doesn't happen. I'm sure it does. But before making accusations, you need to have cast-iron evidence in every example you bring up.
IMO, clear-cut and blatant cheating. Anybody who doesn't bid at least game with responder's hand when opener has that hand is bidding looking at opener's hand, in other words, cheating.
#12
Posted 2016-December-11, 18:39
You can report people and mark them as enemies, but another idea is to play only in for-pay competitions. The have a money account, players will have to give personal details, and will probably not want to risk a lifetime ban unless they have multiple credit cards in several different names.
#13
Posted 2016-December-12, 09:46
661_Pete, on 2016-December-11, 13:20, said:
Clearly, if not a cheat, the opening bid is a psych. But psyching is not illegal - at least not in the casual play areas - provided it's not part of an undisclosed agreement.
Let's assume that opener's was a psych, and there was no secret agreement. If playing 4CM, partner might respond 1♠ but 1NT is not entirely wrong. Then opener - apparently - reverses into 2♠ - again psyching. Partner may decide that, even with the reverse and a ♠ fit, their flat 9 points is not enough for game, they obviously prefer ♠ to ♥ .... so they pass. The fact that the opponents were thus prevented from bidding ♥ was unlucky for them, but isn't solid evidence of cheating.
But this is not to say that cheating doesn't happen. I'm sure it does. But before making accusations, you need to have cast-iron evidence in every example you bring up.
If this was a one off then you could right it off as a psych. However it happens on about 50% of their boards. E.g you hold xxxx xxx X Q10xxx. LHO opens 1D partner overcalls 1H. You raise to 2H. P bids 3C and then RHO bids 3D. So bidding has been;
(1D)-1H-(Pass)-2H
(Pass)-3C-(3D)-
You double. This is passed out and goes for 800, partner holding AQ X Kxxxxx AJxx. Again oppo miss their 54 heart fit.
I could go on; 1NT overcall on Axx xxx xxx Kxxx, a take out double of 1D on xxx xxxx Axx Jxx, a 1S opening on void QJxx AKxxx Jxxx, a 1S opening on Axx Kxx Kxx KJxx (in this case your 3C rebid is passed by partner, who holds xxxx void Qxxx Q10xxx). In every case the partner takes action that is only explicable if he can see your hand.
#14
Posted 2016-December-12, 09:52
#15
Posted 2016-December-12, 10:18
#16
Posted 2016-December-12, 15:09
It is harder if they play in free tournaments, but I dont think BBO abuse cares too much about cheating in free games.
If cheating is going on in paid tournaments (ACBL or others) you should report cheaters and supposedly abuse team will take care on it.
#17
Posted 2016-December-13, 10:42
olegru, on 2016-December-12, 15:09, said:
It's not that we don't care, but we have limited resources so cheating in tournaments gets priority.
It's also harder for us to stop them if they do this in the MBC. If we ban them, they can just create new accounts. But if they play in pay tourneys, we can block their credit card so they can't purchase BB$.
#18
Posted 2016-December-15, 07:28
#19
Posted 2016-December-21, 11:50
I'm sitting over dummy, holding a bare K in the trump suit. Dummy holds AQ10xx and my partner (as I find out later) holds Jxxx. Nothing in the bidding, nor the play up till now, has given any hint of the distribution. And my gaining the lead would not be a danger to declarer. Nevertheless, declarer leads from hand and after a longish pause goes up with the A. How would you react?
#20
Posted 2016-December-21, 14:32
He'd need to be in cahoots with a kibitzer for this to be cheating instead of a lucky guess.