[AL78]

 pilowsky, on 2021-September-08, 03:24, said:

Are there many Bridge clubs where getting your face smashed in is a major risk?

I was referring to online forums whan I said that, not bridge clubs, and yes, there are places you can get your face smashed in if you act like an antagonistic prick in F2F public.

[mycroft]

or if, you know, you deny an "obvious" appeal of an antagonistic prick in F2F public. (note, the appeal was ludicrous, not obvious)

No, I have no experience with this. Why do you ask?

(wasn't me, victim suffered no permanent damage, assailant arrested and deported, not going into further detail).

[pescetom]

 Douglas43, on 2021-September-08, 03:38, said:

Credit to the EBU for setting up and applying what appears to be a credible and effective process.

It's not the only one.
The FIGB has a solid and consistent history of investigating and punishing cheating and other misconduct, which has not diminished since things moved mainly (they think temporarily) online.

[johnu]

 pescetom, on 2021-September-08, 15:09, said:

It's not the only one.
The FIGB has a solid and consistent history of investigating and punishing cheating and other misconduct, which has not diminished since things moved mainly (they think temporarily) online.

Great storytelling. I haven't laughed this hard in a long time. Glad I wasn't drinking something at the time or my desk would be very wet.

[Gilithin]

 pescetom, on 2021-September-08, 15:09, said:

It's not the only one.
The FIGB has a solid and consistent history of investigating and punishing cheating and other misconduct, which has not diminished since things moved mainly (they think temporarily) online.

The last major case I can think of (if you count Fantoni-Nunes as Monacan at least) was Buratti-Lanzarotti, where Buratti was caught cheating first in Seville after multiple accusations (2004) and then more famously both together on Tenerife (2005). Could you perhaps highlight for us what actions the FIGB took after the EBL requested an official statement about them in 2004 (relating to their eligibility for Spain) and then again after the ACBL, EBL and WBF excluded them in 2005. I would assume that reports of these players being used to train Italian juniors must be false, right? No doubt FIGB came down super-hard on a high-profile pair that had systematically cheated for many years and were essentially the Fisher-Schwartz of their generation. Right?

[LBengtsson]

 pilowsky, on 2021-September-08, 03:24, said:

Are there many Bridge clubs where getting your face smashed in is a major risk?

I have seen a player - I will not say man or woman as will be bias - throw a glass of wine over another player in a club and a big argument and swearing language after. they were seniors!!! the bridge club manager had to take them from the club as other players became involved, some in argument, some making calm. I was only visitor but never went back. that was a bad day as I have never seen such awful behavior from older people...

[Vampyr]

 Douglas43, on 2021-September-08, 02:18, said:

To play in an EBU-affiliated club you need to provide your personal EBU membership number, and most club events are for members only, and are local, so people know each other. For a congress you must supply your name and membership number, so a ban would be pretty close to 100% effective as far as officially sanctioned events go. There are unaffiliated clubs though.

Also how can you put money in your BBO account except by credit card?

[Vampyr]

 Douglas43, on 2021-September-08, 02:18, said:

To play in an EBU-affiliated club you need to provide your personal EBU membership number, and most club events are for members only, and are local, so people know each other. For a congress you must supply your name and membership number, so a ban would be pretty close to 100% effective as far as officially sanctioned events go. There are unaffiliated clubs though.

Also how can you put money in your BBO account except by credit card?

[pilowsky]

 Vampyr, on 2021-September-08, 22:23, said:

Also how can you put money in your BBO account except by credit card?

I thought other people could transfer funds to your account.

[pilowsky]

It sounds like detecting cheating using a computer ought to be straightforward.
In Bridge - unlike many other games, there are some boards where the result depends on luck.
This could be a 50% chance of a finesse or a guess about the location of certain cards during the bidding.

'Luck' factors cannot be eliminated unless a pair obtains illicit information; consistently resulting in a right-shift AND skewing of their results curve.

A given pair of players will have their outcomes in a tournament distributed across a normal curve depending on their combined skill level + 'luck' factors.

Sometimes their curve will move to the left or right depending on how lucky (or, as Bridge players say: skilful) they are over a tournament worth of boards.
Next time around, they will be more or less 'skilful', but the shape of the curve will remain the same over time.

A friend of mine developed a method for detecting publication bias that may cause problems with meta-analysis (here is a link to the latest iteration, including a program in R).
Its mechanics are well above my head, but the principle is that if (usually negative) publications are suppressed, then the scatter of results around the mean will not be normal.
Instead, there will be a bias towards (usually) favourable results.

One consequence of this approach is that clinical trials now have to be registered so that all of the results are available for meta-analysis no matter the outcome.

It seems likely that the same (or similar) approach could be implemented in Bridge. If the results of a pair display a consistent right-shift, there may be something questionable happening.
An advantage of this type of approach is that there is no need for experts to assess whether or not a good result occurred because of cheating.

I would anticipate that many tournaments would need to be analysed to prove anything - which might be a whole different problem.

[pescetom]

 Gilithin, on 2021-September-08, 20:01, said:

The last major case I can think of (if you count Fantoni-Nunes as Monacan at least) was Buratti-Lanzarotti, where Buratti was caught cheating first in Seville after multiple accusations (2004) and then more famously both together on Tenerife (2005). Could you perhaps highlight for us what actions the FIGB took after the EBL requested an official statement about them in 2004 (relating to their eligibility for Spain) and then again after the ACBL, EBL and WBF excluded them in 2005. I would assume that reports of these players being used to train Italian juniors must be false, right? No doubt FIGB came down super-hard on a high-profile pair that had systematically cheated for many years and were essentially the Fisher-Schwartz of their generation. Right?

I was referring to recent history (since I have been a member). Sorry I should have made that clear. My point is that they have a clear and effective disciplinary process in place, at all levels, unlike some federations. I will be testifying in one hearing this month.

[mycroft]

Do expect to see comments like "so, the rank-and-file get removed, but Name Players are backed to the hilt despite years of evidence."

Because that's what it looks like right now from the outside.

Note: this is a criticism that can and has been made about many other regulating authorities. Italy is not alone there. Unfortunately, it's currently in the spotlight.

[pescetom]

 mycroft, on 2021-September-09, 10:14, said:

Do expect to see comments like "so, the rank-and-file get removed, but Name Players are backed to the hilt despite years of evidence."

Because that's what it looks like right now from the outside.

Note: this is a criticism that can and has been made about many other regulating authorities. Italy is not alone there. Unfortunately, it's currently in the spotlight.

I think that would be a mistaken impression as far as their current disciplinary process is concerned. They were quick to ban F&N for example, not just rank and file members. They can be accused of eccessive indulgence towards people who have done their time or got off in some way, but that is a different matter and as you say not unique to one country.

[Gilithin]

 pescetom, on 2021-September-09, 11:55, said:

They were quick to ban F&N for example

And even quicker to unban them. In the original (2015) case, they made a very lacklustre presentation to the court and refused to appeal the ruling. When the (2016) systemic cheating allegations came, FIGB issued a ban based in part on them having cheated (for Monaco) against Italy in the 2013 BB. After the Jan 2018 CAS ruling, the EBL ban remained in place until 2019 and the ACBL ban is still active but FIGB unbanned them immediately.

[johnu]

 Gilithin, on 2021-September-08, 20:01, said:

The last major case I can think of (if you count Fantoni-Nunes as Monacan at least) was Buratti-Lanzarotti, where Buratti was caught cheating first in Seville after multiple accusations (2004) and then more famously both together on Tenerife (2005). Could you perhaps highlight for us what actions the FIGB took after the EBL requested an official statement about them in 2004 (relating to their eligibility for Spain) and then again after the ACBL, EBL and WBF excluded them in 2005. I would assume that reports of these players being used to train Italian juniors must be false, right? No doubt FIGB came down super-hard on a high-profile pair that had systematically cheated for many years and were essentially the Fisher-Schwartz of their generation. Right?

Bridgewinners has a new article giving some history of the FIGB.

Bridge In Italy is Different

[pescetom]

 Gilithin, on 2021-September-09, 13:34, said:

And even quicker to unban them. In the original (2015) case, they made a very lacklustre presentation to the court and refused to appeal the ruling. When the (2016) systemic cheating allegations came, FIGB issued a ban based in part on them having cheated (for Monaco) against Italy in the 2013 BB. After the Jan 2018 CAS ruling, the EBL ban remained in place until 2019 and the ACBL ban is still active but FIGB unbanned them immediately.

As I remember it, the FIGB opposed the CAS ruling saying they respected the EBL ban (based on the FIGB ban) and only unbanned following legal action in Italy by F&N and presumably uncertain support from EBL/WBF. Since then, years have passed. Be that as it may, my point was (only) that they have an effective and reasonably transparent disciplinary process in place.

[Gilithin]

 pescetom, on 2021-September-10, 16:41, said:

As I remember it, the FIGB opposed the CAS ruling saying they respected the EBL ban (based on the FIGB ban) and only unbanned following legal action in Italy by F&N and presumably uncertain support from EBL/WBF. Since then, years have passed. Be that as it may, my point was (only) that they have an effective and reasonably transparent disciplinary process in place.

Could you direct me to the public report for the allegations against Giorgio Duboin then please?

[pescetom]

 Gilithin, on 2021-September-11, 05:32, said:

Could you direct me to the public report for the allegations against Giorgio Duboin then please?

I don't think D. has been accused of breaking any rules under jurisdiction of FIGB or another WBF body, quite a different situation to F&N or to anyone accused of cheating or serious misconduct in an FIGB online event (which is what my contribution to this thread was about). There are hundreds of pages of discussion about the D. accusations (and the resulting law suit which he apparently won) on BW already.

[Gilithin]

 pescetom, on 2021-September-11, 09:31, said:

I don't think D. has been accused of breaking any rules under jurisdiction of FIGB or another WBF body, quite a different situation to F&N or to anyone accused of cheating or serious misconduct in an FIGB online event (which is what my contribution to this thread was about). There are hundreds of pages of discussion about the D. accusations (and the resulting law suit which he apparently won) on BW already.

NBOs have jurisdiction over their members regardless of whether they are playing online or in an FIGB event. It is also irrelevant whether Duboin is actually guilty or not. An NBO with "a clear and effective disciplinary process in place" would have looked into the allegations and created a full independent report. If they subsequently find him not guilty then fine, everyone can look at the report and judge how trustworthy it is. But just holding up the hands and saying "Nothing to do with me guv'"? No, that's just not good enough. Overall, the impression one gets when one looks at the history of the FIGB is that while they will occasionally discipline rank and file members, it is very much a case of "Hands off our elite players!" Show us why we should take seriously your claim of "at all levels".

[pescetom]

 Gilithin, on 2021-September-11, 11:55, said:

NBOs have jurisdiction over their members regardless of whether they are playing online or in an FIGB event. It is also irrelevant whether Duboin is actually guilty or not. An NBO with "a clear and effective disciplinary process in place" would have looked into the allegations and created a full independent report. If they subsequently find him not guilty then fine, everyone can look at the report and judge how trustworthy it is. But just holding up the hands and saying "Nothing to do with me guv'"? No, that's just not good enough. Overall, the impression one gets when one looks at the history of the FIGB is that while they will occasionally discipline rank and file members, it is very much a case of "Hands off our elite players!"

My impression is that they will systematically discipline both rank and file members and elite members if accused during a sanctioned online event, which is all I had to say here.
Yes FIGB have jurisdiction over D. or me in any event, but they are not obliged to undertake proceedings if the event is not under the WBF umbrella and no WBF recognised body is complaining. In this case as I understand they took a look at the allegations and rejected them, defending D. The popular verdict was far from unanimous even on BW. The legal verdict was against the accusers.