[hrothgar]

I decided to move this over to a new thread
The cheating discussion is long enough as is...

Luis stated

>Just to add my vision I think that online bridge can never reach the level of >seriousness of face to face bridge. I really think NCBOs should refrain from >running tournaments giving points for online play.

>First of all you can't prevent cheating. And second it's not the same game, >there're differences in the proceedings and regulations that make f2f and online >bridge incompatible.

I argue that electronic playing environments will be used for all "serious" tournaments in the near future. I envision that events like the Olympiad will continue to be held in a single physical location (Rhodes, Istanbul, Montreal), however, a network of personal computers or terminals will substitute for "physical" cards.

From my perspective, electronic playing environments offer too many advantages.

Electronic playing environments actually offer much better security than face to face play so long as even organizers can "control" the environment. A combination of physical proctors and electronic monitoring software "sniffing" for unauthorized protocols offers very strong security.

The electronic playing environment allows event organizers to provide a wide variety of value added services. Imagine being able to have a VuGraph that encompassed every single board being played in the Bermuda Bowl or the Vanderbilt. Imagine having a database containing every bid made / every card played for an entire Bermuda Bowl. Imagine if an appeals committe had objective information regarding the length of a hesitation or a precise record regarding the way an explanation was phrased.

The electronic playing environment will eliminate a variety of problems associated with the physical duplication of cards, fouled movements, and manual scoring. Larry Cohen's Bridge World articles provide interesting (albight annecdotal evidence) that these types problems are encountered even in "major" events.

The electronic playing environment provides vastly superior mechanisms for full disclosure of methods while avoid UI.

[inquiry]

Your vision of electronic bridge, however, would be different from on-line bridge.. the only similiarities is the use of computers....

[luis]

Of course I disagree. There's no way, I repeat no way to prevent cheating using an electronic environment, if the players are at their homes you can't run a serious torunament, that's a fact. Some quixotic pair / team will win the competition blasting through Meckwell , Zia and the good players. You can put a webcam filming the players you can do whatever you want and there will be a way to for cheaters to succeed and say "hey we defeated the world champions!".
Besides this if a small team of great unknown players win the competition everybody will accuse them of cheating and a false accusation is even worst than cheating itself.

You can use sniffers, radars, whatever you want and a player can still make a cell phone call to his pd and talk about the hand, they can send a pager, they can be next to each other and talk etc etc.
So your "strong" security is the same as nothing and only works to make things harder for players.

Furthermore electronic environments eliminate the "sporty" facet of bridge, seating at the table and interacting with people is part of the game. You must be able to talk to your pd during breaks, pat him in the back, buy drinks, talk to your teammates, run across the place with +1660 in a scorecard, hit your head against a wall for a missguessed queen, find other players and talk to them about the hands, where to dinner, etc etc. It's hard to put it in words but everybody who has played competitive bridge will be able to tell you that online bridge is not even close the excitement and the fun that face 2 face bridge is.
If you are in City-X playing the Bermuda Bowl you are in City-X playing the Bermuda Bowl and that is not the same and will never be the same as being at your home playing the online bermuda bowl or whatever you want to name it. In fact I don't care about any online tournament and its results but found the face to face Bermuda Bowl final as exciting as the SuperBowl.

[hrothgar]

inquiry, on Mar 22 2004, 09:57 PM, said:

Your vision of electronic bridge, however, would be different from on-line bridge.. the only similiarities is the use of computers....

I've never seen Fred's code base:

With this said and done, I suspect (hope) that a large amount of code re-use would be possible.

Ideally, you want a situation where the end users are able to practice online using the same user interface that would be used for the tournament "proper". In a similar fashion, you want to be able to leverage any/all enhancements in the GUI to support the great unwashed masses.

[hrothgar]

luis, on Mar 22 2004, 10:00 PM, said:

Of course I disagree. There's no way, I repeat no way to prevent cheating using an electronic environment, if the players are at their homes you can't run a serious torunament, that's a fact. Some quixotic pair / team will win the competition blasting through Meckwell , Zia and the good players. You can put a webcam filming the players you can do whatever you want and there will be a way to for cheaters to succeed and say "hey we defeated the world champions!".

Luis:

What part of the following do you not understand:

The Bermuda Bowl would continue to be held in a centralized location: All player will continue to travel to Istanbul or where-ever.

The event would take place in a large hall, in much the same way that occurs today. Physical proctors would circulate through the hall monitoring play.

All the computers would linked together over a LAN installed and controlled by the event organizers. Network monitoring software would be installed on this LAN.

I am NOT suggesting that players contesting in the Bermuda Bowl will every be able to do so from the comfort of their own homes. Potentially, over time, it might be possible to distribute players across a set of physically secure sites, however, I wouldn't want to hazard a guess when this might occur.

[luis]

hrothgar, on Mar 22 2004, 07:11 PM, said:

luis, on Mar 22 2004, 10:00 PM, said:

Of course I disagree. There's no way, I repeat no way to prevent cheating using an electronic environment, if the players are at their homes you can't run a serious torunament, that's a fact. Some quixotic pair / team will win the competition blasting through Meckwell , Zia and the good players. You can put a webcam filming the players you can do whatever you want and there will be a way to for cheaters to succeed and say "hey we defeated the world champions!".

Luis:

What part of the following do you not understand:

The Bermuda Bowl would continue to be held in a centralized location: All player will continue to travel to Istanbul or where-ever.

The event would take place in a large hall, in much the same way that occurs today. Physical proctors would circulate through the hall monitoring play.

All the computers would linked together over a LAN installed and controlled by the event organizers. Network monitoring software would be installed on this LAN.

I am NOT suggesting that players contesting in the Bermuda Bowl will every be able to do so from the comfort of their own homes. Potentially, over time, it might be possible to distribute players across a set of physically secure sites, however, I wouldn't want to hazard a guess when this might occur.

This is a cards sport, you play with cards not with computers.
I understand your idea and the advantages but I wouldn't like to see them implemented.

I agree with electronic bidding boxes, you just select your bid and the "tray" will show the bids electronically, you can time each bid in case of delays or hesitations, etc.
But the players shoule be sitting at the same table with the current regulations and use cards for the play. I just like that as a part of the game.

[hrothgar]

luis, on Mar 22 2004, 10:00 PM, said:

Furthermore electronic environments eliminate the "sporty" facet of bridge, seating at the table and interacting with people is part of the game. You must be able to talk to your pd during breaks, pat him in the back, buy drinks, talk to your teammates, run across the place with +1660 in a scorecard, hit your head against a wall for a missguessed queen, find other players and talk to them about the hands, where to dinner, etc etc. It's hard to put it in words but everybody who has played competitive bridge will be able to tell you that online bridge is not even close the excitement and the fun that face 2 face bridge is.

Comment 1: Not sure what bridge is like in Argentina, however, here in the States, the "sporty" aspects of tournament bridge are largely confined to the bar after the event. With this said and done, if folks really value the social aspects of the game, they can continue to congregate in a central location. If folks prefer the convenience and cst savings associated from playing locally, we can create a tournment by linking together a large number of clubs.

Comment 2: If we are talking about "social" tournaments, I suspect that the lure of not having to duplicate hands, not having to get off ones fat ass, and not having the director drone on about the movement would be more than adequate compensation.

Comment 3: If we are talking about "serious" tournaments, personally I place the needs of the spectators ahead of the needs of the players.

[uday]

Don't neglect expense as a factor. No, not the expense of running an electronic event, the expense of flying to an event to get KO'd in person.

Hiring an NBO-approved monitor and playing in (say) an internet cafe where the monitor can keep an eye on things would be secure as well as inexpensive. It is currently (ridiculously) expensive to play in some events. There is no need to allow players to play in their undies at home - it will be sufficient to find a convenient venue with some PCs lying around.
For that matter, if i am willing to pay a monitor to come watch me play, and the monitor is NBO-approved, I dont understand why playing-at-home wouldnt work either. yes, it wil cost, but the total expense is still FAR less than actually attending a tournament in person.



Here i am, stuck in NYC, unable to attend the US NABC in Reno. THere must be hundreds of people like me - would like to compete but dont want to attend - who could arrange to enter events like the Vanderbilt if the ACBL would cooperate. All that the ACBL would need do is supply PCs for our opponents [ if they are in Reno ] and name monitors, whose expense would be borne by the people being monitored. All of Hrothgar's advantages remain. Maybe the people on-site (who did not necc. sign up to play electronic opponents ) need to be dealt with gently ( ie, better software? better user interface ? Custom Bridge-Playing hardware ? Who knows ?

It has to be true that people who can't afford to fly to fancy cities and stay in fancy hotels are currently shut out of attending WBF/ACBL events. This can't be good for us all. Allowing remote (online) entrants to participate in real-life events would be inexpensive and simple.


The core of this needs no fancy technology - we already have all we need. All we need in addition is to find a monitor we all trust, and 8 players willing to use PCs to play their opponents.

I guess I'm saying we ccould do this *now* , completely securely, if an NBO wanted to do so.



I'm working myself up Next time i talk to my contact at the ACBL, I'll ask him what he thinks of all this. He is generally very pro-tech, so I'm eager to see what he has to say.

[hrothgar]

luis, on Mar 22 2004, 10:14 PM, said:

This is a cards sport, you play with cards not with computers.
I understand your idea and the advantages but I wouldn't like to see them implemented.

This is a "mind" sport: Cards and Computers Displays are just abstract tools.

If I had to guess, I'd say that we are rapidly approaching the point at which the predominant way that people play "cards" is via a computer terminal.

[luis]

hrothgar, on Mar 22 2004, 07:22 PM, said:

luis, on Mar 22 2004, 10:14 PM, said:

This is a cards sport, you play with cards not with computers.
I understand your idea and the advantages but I wouldn't like to see them implemented.

This is a "mind" sport: Cards and Computers Displays are just abstract tools.

If I had to guess, I'd say that we are rapidly approaching the point at which the predominant way that people play "cards" is via a computer terminal.

Card games are card games. Try to play online poker :-)) Impossible.

And even when bridge has not as many psichological facets as poker there're many and expert bridge players make use of them at their own risk as a part of the game. For example is part of the game to bid a thin 3NT because you know one of the opponents is upset with his pd, you know that a squeezed may be developing when an opponent is in pain trying to find a discard, etc etc etc. Do you play in the same way against a 15 year old kid and against a 77 year old senior? If you say yes I don't believe you. Do you bid the same agains Meckwell or a housband-wife combination ?

[hrothgar]

Hi Uday

I hope that you don’t mind my “butting” in, however, here is some unsolicited advice. I’m sure that it’s worth every penny that you paid for it…

First comment: For the moment, everyone posting on this topic is essentially engaged in idle speculation. Nothing substitutes for raw data. My key goal going into any such discussion would be to get the ACBL to sanction a trial program. The trial would initially be conducted at local clubs before moving to Regionals/Sectionals/Nations. The “goal” behind the trial product is to solicit feedback from end users as well as stability testing.

Second comment: In order for the ACBL to be interested in this type of project, you need to be able to demonstrate value to the ACBL. Ultimately, this means increasing revenue or decreasing costs.

Third comment: Be prepared for two different conversations. One focused on “professional” events such as the Bermuda Bowl. The second surrounding social events [Side games. The Blue Ribbon Pairs, that sort of thing]

[JRG]

I had Uday's problem when I was playing bridge. I was only able to travel to a couple of tournaments that were more that a short car-ride away. The expense can be a real deterrent.

[keylime]

Haven't they before at hi-level events at the World's used touch screen technology? Someone correct me if I'm thinking "in the future".

[McBruce]

I think that in the ACBL at least, we are 10-15 years from the point where a significant portion of our membership is young enough to wish to compete seriously by computer. The first hurdle is maintaining the membership as the 50% of us over the age of 65 begin to leave for various reasons.

But I agree that if begun now it might prove to be a new way to market bridge in that future. I think that the finals need to be played with actual cards though. Table presence is a big part of the game. I played a few years back in a District Final of the Grand National Teams (not the top flight, as you'll see!), after my partner and I had practiced online for several weeks, without playing at a club. The first auction by the opponents was a clear misfit, and at the four level, one of the opponents put his cards face down on the table and rested his forehead upon them for about three minutes as he decided which suit to give us 1100 in.

But the money raised from entries in a computer event might be split between sanctions, monitors fees, and a pool to get the finalists to the place where the final was to be held. As more and more bridge players become computer savvy, this method may replace and outflank the current grass-roots events. So if you own a bridge club, you might want to start thinking about running a Web cafe nearby. It might come in handy someday!

[the hog]

"I think that the finals need to be played with actual cards though."

This is the problem; to adopt the above makes a mockery of the game. You cannot change the format of the contest once the finals are reached; it becomes a totally different game. Either play the whole lot by computer or none of it. Personally I don't think it will happen in for at least 20 years - if bridge is still even around by then.

[doofik]

Not to add oil to fire but the future of events such as Bermuda Bowl played via net might be closer than you think. Take a look at first page of Friday's bulletin from Reno, where ACBL has decided not to send a team to Istanbul citing lack of security. So now the question is when will the US follow the rest of the world in giving cash prizes to x number of top finishers. I guess it will have to to "stay in the game".

Jola

[inquiry]

I prefer to play with cards.. I prefer to see my opponents... playing on a computer makes the game much more mathematical.. you don't see if the opponents are arguing as they come to table (good time to strike, they may be down or they may be pusing). You don't get a real table feel.

Besides the tactile feel of the cards is so much better than pushing my finger over my touchpad...

Ben

[the hog]

I totally agree with Ben and Luis here. The psychological aspect plays a big part in the game and I believe this would be lost if computers were used. Just one illustration - look at the BBowl last year and the thrilling result that came down to the last board; this would not have happened if PCs were used.

[mishovnbg]

Spoiler

---------------------------------------------------

Hi all!

The only way some sport to advance is large mass of spectators who pay to watch it, like football. The only way to do it, is to play bridge electronically. Imagine spectators can not only watch play and competitors via camera, but also receive meaning of bids, meaning of cards signals... The popularity of my beloved Bridge is go down and if we all not try to do something, I am afraid this great game can be losed in the tech future, where online life will replace much more than we like real life. This is unavoidable, due to low cost of this type of communication and limted resources. It is true that online bridge is different type than f2f, like making document by text editor is different than write it with pen on paper, but except regress I don't believe in future of pen .

Spoiler

--------------------------------------------------------

Misho