suspecious bidding by top cheating pair on Okbridge
peter cheung
tournament playing against the top cheating pair. Since no one else
can do anything about it I just want to let some of you look at a few
boards they play.
Match Points north Pairs Board 8
Dlr: West
Vul: None S JT west north east
south
H Q
D AKQ82
C QT864 pass 1D pass
1S
west east pass 2C pass
2S
(all pass)
S K86 S Q54
H 72 H KT653 Opening Lead: H7
D J7653 D 94 Result: +5
C A95 C KJ3 Score: 200, Match Points:
83.67%
south Playing time: 3:54
S A9732 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12
H AJ984 W H7 3 5 6 2 D7 J SK-S6 8
C5 9
D T N Q A-DK-DQ D2 ST-D8 C4 J C6
C8 T
C 72 E K 4 9 S4 3 5 H6 T Q 5
C3 J-
S A-DT C2 S7-HJ-H4 S2-H9 A-S9-
H8-C7
Out of 50 tables about ½ of east pass and half bid heart
Out of all those that has the same bidding sequences 1d 1s 2c no one
with south’s hand bid 2s. One bid 2nt and all others bid 2h.
What is the chance for a top pair to bid 2s without knowing what pd
holds?
Not even one other pair bid 2s.
That is how they score 83.67%.
Player
Peter, bidding a 4th suit forcing, usually gf, 2H with the Sth hand is
absurd. The hand looks like a misfit and you just don't have the
values to force to game.
Charles Brenner
Better than bidding 2H anyway which isn't going to do you any good
because it is forcing, shows a better hand than this, and doesn't even
show hearts. You were unlucky to run into the only sane pair on this
difficult hand. Maybe (I don't know) a good player is more likely to
make the overbid of 2NT than the overstatement of spades of 2S, but
it's an extremely awkward hand all of the conceivable bids -- 2NT, 2S,
2D, and pass -- are really unpleasant.
Charles
peter cheung
posibility.
The hand if play in heart or spade has 14 playing point and a game is
at hand.
So everyone else give it a try.
henry...@yahoo.com
So what do you recommend South bid, after 1d 1s 2x, with
S A9732
H AJ984
D T
C 72?
Preference to diamonds on a singleton?
Pass 2c when you might have game opposite
KQx
x
AJxxx
AQxx?
2h, 4sf, and force to game with 9 points opposite a potential misfit?
Sorry buddy, the NS pair might be cheats for all I know, but the only
sane and reasonable rebid by South is 2s. If you understand so little
about bridge that you think this hand is evidence of cheating, then
you must be a novice who fancies himself an expert.
Henrysun909
David Stevenson
2S is quite a normal bid.
I think you should get a life.
--
David Stevenson Bridge RTFLB Cats Railways
Liverpool, England, UK Fax: +44 870 055 7697 ICQ: 20039682
<webj...@googlemail.com> bluejak on OKB
Bridgepage: http://blakjak.org/brg_menu.htm
sawdust
No, this just shows that you fail to understand bidding
at bridge.
2H is 4th suit forcing, an agreement that is a forcing bid
for most good pairs, and fails to explicitly show hearts
at all. South does not have sufficient values to make a
game forcing bid, yet South cannot pass 2C. And bidding
2D with a singleton is not a happy choice, while 2NT is
too forward going of a bid as well as misstating the shape
of the South hand. So 2S is a reasonable shot, perhaps
the best choice for a difficult hand. Slow down the bidding
when you see a misfit.
If you would claim this pair is a pair of cheats, perhaps
you should first progress beyond the novice stage at
bridge.
They scored well, perhaps because they had a better
understanding of bidding at bridge than much of the
field. This does not make them cheats, but possibly
suggests they are better bridge players than are you.
John
Charles Brenner
You may be right about how the field thought, but if so it is a very
weak field. A standard lesson at the intermediate stage of learning
bridge is to count distributional points only after learning of a fit.
That may be an overstatement in general, but certainly for this
particular situation, where the chance of a fit once opener bids 2C is
quite small, it is appropriate to apply the intermediates' rule.
As a second point, bidding 2S doesn't give up on game, but only on a
heart game. The other possibilities remain open.
But all that is a digression. Returning to your original suspicion,
you have learned that all five players here who have responded to you
find 2S a reasonable bid. That should put to rest your concern about
cheating.
Charles
Larry
forcing!
Is it not similar to 1C - 1D - 1H - 1S which Hardy plays as natural
and forcing for one round? 2S (instead of 1S) is 4th suit forcing.
Charles Brenner
> Hmmm, I play the sequence 1D - 1S - 2C - 2H as natural, not 4th suit
> forcing!
>
> Is it not similar to 1C - 1D - 1H - 1S which Hardy plays as natural
> and forcing for one round?
Then you do play 1D 1S 2C 2H as forcing, you just don't call it "4th
suit forcing", presumably because you expect the bidder to have
hearts. Years ago (for example in 1950's Acol), that was standard.
However, from time to time a player holding say AJxxx,xxx,Kx,Axx would
decide that nonetheless bidding 2H would be the least of evils.
Perhaps you would do the same?
> 2S (instead of 1S) is 4th suit forcing.
That's the difference. To apply a similar principle here you'd be
stuck with bidding bidding awfully high -- 3H for the artificial "4th
suit forcing". Consequently all modern players, rightly or wrongly,
have come to the judgment that 2H should include arbitrarily strong
hands including those without hearts and that concomitantly 2H must be
quite a strong bid.
Charles
Richard Pavlicek
_improved_ by Google:
> 1D P 1S P
> 2C P 2S (holding A9732 AJ984 T 72)
I for one think 2S is egregious (2H then 3H invitational is
routine for me) but hardly grounds to suspect cheating.
--
Richard Pavlicek
Web site: http://www.rpbridge.net
sawdust
I don't terribly like the 2S rebid here at all, but the
alternatives seem far worse to me. Partner has
shown very likely 9 cards or more in the minors.
With a misfit apparent, I want to get out of the
bidding, not encourage partner to stay in it. The
lie about my spade length to keep us low seems
a better choice.
John
henry...@yahoo.com
If 1s.2h.3h is not forcing (as, e.g., in BWS85), then that would be
the best choice. My assumption, perhaps wrongly, is that in a random
OKB field, 1s.2h.3h will be treated as GF, since as far as I remember,
most pairs on OKB played it that way.
Henrysun909
Richard Pavlicek
> ... My assumption, perhaps wrongly, is that in a random
> OKB field, 1s.2h.3h will be treated as GF...
Aha! So _that_ explains the OK ghost town.
-RP
dano
Hi Peter,
Ideally what you would need to do is get more than one hand as an
example of the alleged cheating. This might flag the pair for future
investigation, but it is in the type of hand that is indistinguishable
from normal bad/lucky/different bridge.
Occasionally you will find a serious flag, like underleading an Ace at
suits, or leading the opponent's suit for some odd reason. This is
cheating if it happens frequently and successfully.
Rarely you will find a clear automatic cheating sign, like opening 1N
with 8 HCP and partner raising to 3N with 20 HCP.
I've done this a long time, and for perceived cheating, it tends to be
about 200:20:1 ratio in the above. Now I've had to conserve my energy
so I just don't follow up on the 200 and just stick to the other 21.
Unfortunately, OKB does nothing about cheaters - I have flagged 2
pairs in the last two categories in the last year and OKB said they
would investigate and they still play every day.
Good luck,
Dan
Alan Malloy
Don't most pairs who play 1s..2h..3h as forcing use 1s..3h as
invitational, showing the very same thing that Richard wants to show?
That is, exactly one of the two sequences should be used for GF H/S, and
the other should be used for inv H/S. That's certainly what my partners
would understand if I bid 3H over 2C here.
--
Cheers,
Alan (San Jose, California, USA)
castigamatti
Amusing. I think I would have bid the hands in question in this
fashion...
1D - 1S;
2D - 2H;
2S AP
Diamonds are much better than clubs and are a source of tricks. I
would have made my apologies to partner afterwords if we miss a club
slam but this hand looks more like a 6421 hand to me, diamonds being
the source of tricks in this case, in case partner is considering 3NT.
Partner having the right cards will be in a better position to
consider 3NT as the final destination. The hand, prima vista, looks
'notrumpish' with that singleton honor and diamonds as the source of
tricks.
BR
Jürgen R.
> Out of all those that has the same bidding sequences 1d 1s 2c no one
>
> What is the chance for a top pair to bid 2s without knowing what pd
> holds?
>
> Not even one other pair bid 2s.
>
> That is how they score 83.67%.
This hand proves nothing
One isolated hand never proves anything
When asking the group whether a bid is reasonable,
show only the relevant information. Showing all 4
hands inevitably influences the answers.
Remember, you are talking to bridge players, all of
whom are experts at judging with hindsight.
If this pair has scored better than 80% more
than once in a full-length tournament, then cheating
is not only likely but likely to be obvious.
Gordon Rainsford
> Since no one else
> can do anything about it I just want to let some of you look at a few
> boards they play.
Well, you haven't shown us "a few boards", you've shown us one that
doesn't look suspicious at all.
You'll need to do a lot more than that to make any sort of case.
Nick France
wrote:
>
> - Show quoted text -
I'm with Henry here, just what did you think South should do. Look at
the choices
Pass - play in a 4-2 fit
2D - Play in a 5-1 fit
2H - force to game on a misfit and a hand that doesn't have the
strength even to invite
2S - risk playing in a 5-1 fit
Well if I have to make a bad choice, I might as well make the one that
scores best if it works.
Nick France
Nick France
>
> - Show quoted text -
They should but do you really want to invite on this misfit
Nick France
Nick France
I have found okbridge to be responsive to complaints. One hand proves
nothing. A pattern does. Here the bidding is well within reason. I
find that many people seem to complain about cheating when someone
bids different than them and does well.
Nick France
castigamatti
I can foresee...
1D - 1S;
2D - 2H;
2S - 3C;
3N AP
...with some hands, but I am a philosopher in nature, and probably in
real life as well.
BR
Will in New Haven
I don't know about most pairs but that is how I play it with one
partner and used to play it with both. An immediate 3H over 2C in this
auction is invitational values with both Majors. If there is not good
contract, this means that we play a bad contract at a higher level but
otherwise it solves the problem. The reason I don't play this anymore
with one partner is that we now play the "Open 1D/Rebid 2C" sequence
as forcing, the 2C bid is artificial, and promising a rebid over
responder's forced 2D non- preference. Of course, that makes for a
problem with opener's hand here. We would not have this auction as
opener would open 2NT (minor two-suiter minimum opening-bid values) or
open 1D and rebid 2D) Either way, this hand is ugly for that
partnership.
--
Will in New Haven
Nick France
I decided to look at the hand in question and what actually happened.
First, only 21 of the 50 hands started out
West North East South
Pass 1D Pass 1S
Pass 2C Pass ??
More than half of the hands, East bid 1 or 2H. And in these cases
where East bid 1H and South overcalled 1S, I found 4 cases were South
actually rebid 2S over 2C. Now that is strange.
But even stranger to me is how many times after south bid 2H that
North with his 2155 hand rebid 2NT. Now that I find really strange,
and even stranger if its a good player who did it. He doesn't have a
heart sopper, so why isn't he rebidding 3C (or maybe 2S treating JT
like 3 trump and trying to keep it low). In fact 10 pairs did it.
Wow cheating is rampant on okbridge.
Oh what a minute, one of those that bid 2NT over 2H was someone named
Peter Cheung. Could he be cheating.
Now Peter I know that isn't a fair charge against you(and I don't
believe you and the other's are cheating), but all I can conclude from
the bidding is that you dont play a 4th suit bid is artificial. In
fact it seems like a significant number of players on okbridge don't
play 4th suit as artificial and forcing based on the bidding on this
hand.
A 2H bid makes sense if you play it only as a one round force. For
those I think North rebids either 3C or maybe 2S. For those that play
it a game force and think the hand is invitational then only 2NT makes
sense (and only 2 paris bid like this). For those that think this is
a misfit and not invitational then either Pass or 2S makes sense.
Now the pair you questioned, fit one of the sequences I accept but you
(and 9 others) didn't.
My first suggestion to you is understand BWS bidding styles and the
major variations of it before you decide that someones bidding is
questionable.
Nick France
tivojohn
I decided to look at the results for the hand referenced in this
posting. Using the clues provided by the OP, I found it in about 30
seconds. In another 5 seconds, I had the names of the players who are
the targets of the accusation.
I agree with Nick. OKbridge does have an established procedure for
handling reports of cheating and other misconduct. I see no clear
indication that the OP has used this procedure.
I object strongly to public accusations of cheating. They almost
never are based on even a minimum of clear evidence or sound
analysis. Even worse, they poison the environment in which we play
and discuss the game.
I regret the need to remove hahaha48 (aka Peter Cheung) from my
Friends List on OKbridge.
John Hoffman
hoffman on OKbridge, tivohoff on BBO
Stu G
> I have just finished my last round of 12 boards Okbridge ACBL
> tournament playing against the top cheating pair. Since no one else
> can do anything about it I just want to let some of you look at a few
> boards they play.
Is this a new event: Cheating pairs? If so, their 83.67% means they
are more adept at cheating than most. How did you finish? Were you
2nd best cheating pair?
Your example below has nothing to do with cheating or reaching 83.67%.
Maybe that 2S bid got them an above average, but it shouldn't be worth
5/6th of the matchpts in a regular club game, let alone against other
cheating pairs.
-Stu Goodgold
San Jose, CA
'
Alan Malloy
No, I don't. But Richard does, and Henry was claiming that most pairs
don't have Richard's invite available to them. True, but my point was
they have a different mechanism to say the same thing.
Raija D
"Gordon Rainsford" <gor...@gordonrainsford.com> wrote in message
news:1jdjm3z.1ba3scgppo1e5N%gor...@gordonrainsford.com...
========
Well said. I would just add, don't try to make a case in public, no matter
how clear it may be "to YOU" that you have met a cheater. There are proper
channels on OKB to have suspicious activity investigated.
Raija
Will in New Haven
If the alternative is bidding 2S, damn right. If we belong in Hearts,
even if we are one level higher than we would ideally be, it gains. If
we belong in a Spade _game_ it may gain, although partner would
probably bid over 2S. If we belong in 3NT, and that happens more than
people think, it gains. It loses if 2S is the right spot. So we are
guessing that 2S is the right spot. If 3H on this auction is defined
as both Majors and invitational, it is always going to be bid on a
(possible) misfit.
Nick France
wrote:
>
> - Show quoted text -
There is the possiblity that partner is 2155 and now you play in 3S
which is one level higher than 2S. So there is more downside than you
think. One advantage of 2S is partner can still bid with 16-18
points Consider the sequence of
1D 1S
2C 2S
2NT
Now I can bid 3H which should be forcing to suggest several places to
play. Its a strange hand. If you decide that North's hand is
invitational, then you probably wind up in 3NT which makes for a near
top. For me, I'm glad I didn't have to make the choice of what to
do. I just don't feel its worth an invite but hate all three of my
obvious choices (pass, 2D, and 2S) to show less than an invite.
Nick France
Will in New Haven
I don't want my partner bidding over 2S with random sixteen-counts. I
don't want him bidding over 2S because I might have a bad five-card
suit. Bidding 2S on this hand just means that partner will be right to
bid on hands where he would be wrong to bid if I had KJTXXX - XX - XXX
- KX,
Bidding 2S on this hand opens a can of worms on other hands where I
want partner to believe I have my bid and, usually, to stop bidding.
Nick France
I am confused a little here. If I bid over 2S, I'm not trying to save
partner. I have a very good hand. If partner has 8-9 points and 6
spades I think we have a play for game somewhere. As I said I don't
think this is an invite hand you do. Let's make the hand weaker
Axxxx Axxxx x xx now what do you do. If that is an invite hand make
it another point less untill its not an invite hand.
I am not objecting to those that want to treat the hand as an invite
hand as a lesser evil than the other bids of Pass, 2D, or 2S. At some
point the 5512 hand becomes too weak to treat as invitational and the
question is what do you do then?
Nick France
Will in New Haven
Many sixteen-point hands are _not_ "very good hands." However, I don't
mind partner bidding constructively over 2S.
If partner has 8-9 points and 6
> spades I think we have a play for game somewhere. As I said I don't
> think this is an invite hand you do. Let's make the hand weaker
> Axxxx Axxxx x xx now what do you do. If that is an invite hand make
> it another point less untill its not an invite hand.
>
> I am not objecting to those that want to treat the hand as an invite
> hand as a lesser evil than the other bids of Pass, 2D, or 2S. At some
> point the 5512 hand becomes too weak to treat as invitational and the
> question is what do you do then?
If I have two Diamonds, I give a preference. As it is, I bid 2S if the
spots are good and pass otherwise. Obviously, half of the time I will
be a passed hand and can bid a natural, limited 2H.
Barry Margolin
<e5e0d763-70ae-46bf...@v5g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,
Nick France <gand...@att.net> wrote:
> Now Peter I know that isn't a fair charge against you(and I don't
> believe you and the other's are cheating), but all I can conclude from
> the bidding is that you dont play a 4th suit bid is artificial. In
> fact it seems like a significant number of players on okbridge don't
> play 4th suit as artificial and forcing based on the bidding on this
> hand.
Isn't SAYC the standard system on OKB? 4th Suit Forcing isn't part of
SAYC.
--
Barry Margolin, bar...@alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE don't copy me on replies, I'll read them in the group ***
Nick France
> In article
> <e5e0d763-70ae-46bf-9190-50a31af1b...@v5g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,
> Nick France <gandal...@att.net> wrote:
>
> > Now Peter I know that isn't a fair charge against you(and I don't
> > believe you and the other's are cheating), but all I can conclude from
> > the bidding is that you dont play a 4th suit bid is artificial. In
> > fact it seems like a significant number of players on okbridge don't
> > play 4th suit as artificial and forcing based on the bidding on this
> > hand.
>
> Isn't SAYC the standard system on OKB? 4th Suit Forcing isn't part of
> SAYC.
>
> --
> Barry Margolin, bar...@alum.mit.edu
> Arlington, MA
> *** PLEASE don't copy me on replies, I'll read them in the group ***
Actually the handout from ACBL addresses the issue and says that 4th
suit by responder is forcing and may be artificial. My comment
addressed the issue that it would appear that their is a significant
group on okbridge that must be playing it as natural only, if they can
bid 2NT on a 2155 shape
Nick France
Raija D
"Barry Margolin" <bar...@alum.mit.edu> wrote in message
news:barmar-A8457C....@news.eternal-september.org...
> In article
> <e5e0d763-70ae-46bf...@v5g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,
> Nick France <gand...@att.net> wrote:
>
>> Now Peter I know that isn't a fair charge against you(and I don't
>> believe you and the other's are cheating), but all I can conclude from
>> the bidding is that you dont play a 4th suit bid is artificial. In
>> fact it seems like a significant number of players on okbridge don't
>> play 4th suit as artificial and forcing based on the bidding on this
>> hand.
>
> Isn't SAYC the standard system on OKB? 4th Suit Forcing isn't part of
> SAYC.
========
Actually, it is part of SAYC.
http://web2.acbl.org/documentlibrary/play/SP3%20%28bk%29%20single%20pages.pdf
Free
> I have just finished my last round of 12 boards Okbridge ACBL
> can do anything about it I just want to let some of you look at a few
> boards they play.
>
This is a ridiculous accusation. The fact that one bid 2NT and so
many bid 2H (4th suit GF, so not even natural!!!) on such a hand
proves that you can't compare what a decent pair does with the rest of
the field.
It's a known fact that IF you THINK someone cheats, you'll see all
kind of odd stuff in their actions. Your mind becomes so blurred you
start comparing with poor players' actions, and that you don't see how
aweful these auctions actually are (2H 4th suit in this case). We've
seen people start a blog to prove that 1 person is cheating (even
mentioning his nickname on BBO). If you analyze all the hands on that
site, you'll find maybe 2 out of 25 hands that you can't explain what
he must've been thinking, all others can be explained perfectly. The
arguments are sometimes extremely ridiculous, like comments on
conventions that work out great, the fact that he cheats with all his
partners,... And these aren't even all the hands the guy actually
played, so you don't see where he went wrong, where certain
conventions didn't work out great,...
My advice to you: also look at their bad boards, see what happened
there. If you see silly mistakes or bidding misunderstandings, then
you can hardly say they cheat.
It's easy to look at all the good results and see if they did
something different than the field. Obviously, if they scored better,
they must have done something different. If they did everything the
same, they'd just have 50%. ;-)
For what it's worth, I'd also be in 2S after the auction 1D-2H-2S.
One could say "who bids 2H on such a hand?" while it just shows 5-9HCP
with 5+S and 4+H. Another may say that this convention was discussed
via MSN and that it's just perfect for this deal. However you won't
find hands where the auction goes 1D-2H with other types of hands when
I play with my preferred partner, which in fact proves we play that
convention.
You can make everything look suspicious if you want. I'm glad you
didn't mention this pairs' names, and that you ask advice first before
actually accusing them (although your title should be "possibly
cheating").
rhm
> On Feb 6, 7:27 pm, Larry <lnlow...@flash.net> wrote:
>
> > Hmmm, I play the sequence 1D - 1S - 2C - 2H as natural, not 4th suit
> > forcing!
>
> > Is it not similar to 1C - 1D - 1H - 1S which Hardy plays as natural
> > and forcing for one round?
>
> Then you do play 1D 1S 2C 2H as forcing, you just don't call it "4th
> suit forcing", presumably because you expect the bidder to have
> hearts. Years ago (for example in 1950's Acol), that was standard.
> However, from time to time a player holding say AJxxx,xxx,Kx,Axx would
> decide that nonetheless bidding 2H would be the least of evils.
> Perhaps you would do the same?
>
> > 2S (instead of 1S) is 4th suit forcing.
>
> That's the difference. To apply a similar principle here you'd be
> stuck with bidding bidding awfully high -- 3H for the artificial "4th
> suit forcing". Consequently all modern players, rightly or wrongly,
> have come to the judgment that 2H should include arbitrarily strong
> hands including those without hearts and that concomitantly 2H must be
> quite a strong bid.
>
> Charles
However, you could switch the bids here. (If the 4th suit bid is not
at the one level)
I remember this was once recommended by Kantar using a non forcing
jump in the 4th to show at least 5-5 and a hand not strong enough to
force to game (with which you would go slowly via 4th suit).
Whether this hand qualifies can be argued since the major suits look a
bit barren for a misfit.
But it is a good compromise if you want to invite game, particularly
if 2H forces to game.
Your best chance for game is probably in hearts and 2S could go down
while 4H makes easily!
Rainer Herrmann
Barry Margolin
<fe1478ee-ff72-4c5b...@p23g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>,
Nick France <gand...@att.net> wrote:
"May be artificial" is not the same as "is artificial". I think they're
describing what used to be referred to as "temporizing". The bid is
initially treated as natural, but later bidding might cause you to
revise that expectation.
David Stevenson
>Unfortunately, OKB does nothing about cheaters - I have flagged 2
>pairs in the last two categories in the last year and OKB said they
>would investigate and they still play every day.
Just because OKB do not agree with you does not mean they do nothing.
They do a lot. But not every accusation is justified - as we can see
form the OP!!!!!
--
David Stevenson Bridge RTFLB Cats Railways
Liverpool, England, UK Fax: +44 870 055 7697 ICQ: 20039682
<webj...@googlemail.com> bluejak on OKB
Bridgepage: http://blakjak.org/brg_menu.htm
David Stevenson
>Hmmm, I play the sequence 1D - 1S - 2C - 2H as natural, not 4th suit
>forcing!
>
>Is it not similar to 1C - 1D - 1H - 1S which Hardy plays as natural
No, not all. I play the first as 4SF, the second as natural.
peter cheung
general there are too many hands that they play that deviate from the
normal bidding and end up in contracts that are different from the
norm and almost all of them benefit them.
9/27 5:30
Board 2. No one else play 5hxx. Base on the bidding yyyyyy do not
have a hand to xx.
Board 7 The worst score for them this tourney, but if u do not see the
opponents hand 4s is a good contract
9/27 4pm
Board 4 no one was in 3nt.
Board 10 most pair play in 3nt . xxxx over call with 3h (only 4hcp)
that prevented opp to reach 3nt.
9/27 9am
Board 3 yyyyyy completely misplay the hand and a bottom board.
Board 4 3nt is not a normal contract 4s is. If u only look at your 2
hands 3nt is a safer contract.
Board 5 they are the only one that set 3nt.
Board 12 3ntx they are the only pair that x 3nt and xxxx do not have a
hand to x 3nt
9/26 7pm
Board 11 xxxx overcall 3h with 4s. xxxx do not have a hand to overcall
with 4s. I check about 20 other pairs and no one else over call 3h
with 4s.
9/26 4pm
Board 2 they are the only pair in 1nt x
Most hands in this session are different than the normal bidding
sequence
peter cheung
Board 1. No one has the same bidding sequence as xxxx. Only 2 people
open in 3d and the other pair did not end up in 4h.
Board 2. Again no one has the same bidding sequence as xxxx even
though some end up in the same contract as 3nt. 1nt 2h 3d was the same
as one other pair. Then the bid of yyyyyy’s bid of 3h is unique.
Board 3. He play against me and I suspect he cheats and told him so.
Again no one has the same bidding sequence. Most pairs are in 4s and
4s is the best contract. None arrived at 4s like xxxx. 1c 2h p p 2s p
3nt p 4s. xxxx’s bid of 3nt is obvious wrong and no other pairs bid
that. yyyyyy’s bid of 4s is extremely suspicious. xxxx as a good
player should have bid 2nt or cue bid 3h. But if you assume he is
cheating you can understand his bid of 3nt knowing yyyyyy will correct
to 4s as he stated to me. xxxx and yyyyyy have left the trail like
this in sloppy bidding knowing they will end up in the right contract
anyway. It is not conceivable that with their great records that they
misbid like this and then recover like magic.
Board 4. This time there is one other pair that has the same bidding
sequence as they did. 4 out of 12 pairs who is in 4h make 5 like them
and none play it like them although there is nothing unusual in the
play.
At the end of play in board 4 I said the 4s bid is unusual. He blew up
and said there is nothing unusual about it. Since his partner has a 6
5 she should correct. He forgot his trail of the 3nt bid. At this time
I have no knowledge of what happen in other pairs and my comment is
purely from my observation which is later confirmed by the field.
From here on out he know I’ll be watchin what he does.
Board 9 another unique board they x 4c which is again the only 4cx
contract. Two other pairs play 5cx. They set the contract by 2 tricks
which are better than all other tables.
peter cheung
results.
I ask the director the other day when they show up in my table the
last round to not play against them
The director say I must play
That is why I am so upset right now and go public
thg
> Board 3. He play against me and I suspect he cheats and told him so.
This is the first action you have mentioned that suggests to me that
any action should be taken by OKbridge. If I were in charge and this
was reported to me, you would be suspended for some period of time.
Tim
Nick France
>
> - Show quoted text -
I would think you have it backwards. You treat it as artificial (and
that is how sayc would treat it) for the purposes of bidding notrump.
Nick France
Nick France
Many pairs bid differently from the majority on okbridge. Now you
won't ever be able to well document a case on this group with the way
you are going but let me give you a hand
North
K6
A94
Q73
KQ872
South
A8
T87
AK6
AJT94
South North
1NT 4NT
6NT
Aggressive bidding I guess but I do know I would never be in 6NT if I
saw both hands. No one would have objected to North bidding 3NT as
that was the normal bid.
This is part of the problem. One needs to explain hands like this if
one is accusing someone of cheating.
Nick France
castigamatti
It is very possible. Nevertheless I am the internet cheater number 1
in this case.
:-)
BR
Adam Beneschan
> I have just finished my last round of 12 boards Okbridge ACBL
> tournament playing against the top cheating pair. Since no one else
> can do anything about it I just want to let some of you look at a few
> H Q
> D AKQ82
> C QT864
> S A9732
> H AJ984
> D T
> C 72
> Out of 50 tables about ½ of east pass and half bid heart
> Out of all those that has the same bidding sequences 1d 1s 2c no one
> with south’s hand bid 2s. One bid 2nt and all others bid 2h.
>
> What is the chance for a top pair to bid 2s without knowing what pd
> holds?
>
> Not even one other pair bid 2s.
>
> That is how they score 83.67%.
By beating a lot of other players who don't know how to bid?
2S is an awful call on this hand---but every legal call is awful. The
hand is a nasty misfit. To my mind, both 2H (if game forcing) and 2NT
are terrible calls. Many players (including my regular partnership)
play 2H as game forcing, and this hand isn't worth anywhere near
that. As for 2NT, it could work, but you should have a good 10 or
more for that, and this hand doesn't have that---and with a
distributional misfit, this isn't the kind of hand where you want to
overbid in notrump. (Even hands with 26+ combined HCP often have
trouble in 3NT with this sort of distributional mess.)
3H may be invitational for some, but it's not a bid I want to make.
First, as before, this hand isn't worth an invitation of you have a
misfit. It works if you get lucky and find partner with 3-card heart
support, but otherwise you're too high. Second, I don't like using
that bid even when I do have a real invitation. It gobbles up lots of
space, and leaves partner little room to maneuver, on a hand where a
lot of room is necessary. That's why I think that Richard's methods
may be better here---partner has another opportunity to say something
one level lower so that the partnership can figure out where it
belongs. But those aren't what most players play.
So if you're with me that invitational or better bids are wrong here,
your only choices are pass (could work, but a problem if opener has
more than a minimum), a false "preference" to 2D (good luck with
that), or 2S. You have to guess which one will work best, and this
pair guessed well on this hand. But they were the only pair in the
room that didn't choose a bid I think is a dangerous overbid. So it
hardly surprises me that they got a good result on that hand, and
using this hand to suggest cheating is WAY out of line.
And regarding this later post:
> The reason why no one else bid 2s is that 2s bid gives up game
> posibility.
> The hand if play in heart or spade has 14 playing point and a game is
> at hand.
> So everyone else give it a try.
So this is apparently the only pair in the room that remembered that
they were playing matchpoints and not IMPs? The bit about "14 playing
points if playing in heart or spades" is nonsense after your partner
has shown two suits in diamonds and clubs (opposite your shortness---
aren't you supposed to DEDUCT points for that situation?). There's
still a (remote) chance of game, but you don't try for remote games at
matchpoints. This is probably too remote at IMPs, for that matter.
-- Adam
Charles Brenner
I guess the idea -- compared to Richard Pavlicek's method of showing
the invitational hand via 2H then 3H -- would be that 2H then
accommodates a greater number of forcing sequences. Personally though
I'd be reluctant to give up on 1D - 1S - 2C - 3H=some kind of forcing
club raise, which I think is a very useful alternative to Eddie's
suggestion.
> Whether this hand qualifies can be argued since the major suits look a
> bit barren for a misfit.
> But it is a good compromise if you want to invite game, particularly
> if 2H forces to game.
> Your best chance for game is probably in hearts and 2S could go down
> while 4H makes easily!
All true.
Charles
Richard Pavlicek
> ... Personally though I'd be reluctant to give up on
> 1D - 1S - 2C - 3H=some kind of forcing club raise, which I
> think is a very useful alternative to Eddie's suggestion.
Another option, which I adopted many years ago, is to play
minor raises to three (1D 1S; 2C 3C) as _forcing_ (assuming
an unpassed hand and no enemy bid).
To invite in _any_ suit, I go through the fourth-suit loop
(1D 1S; 2C 2H; 2N 3C). My wife used to call this the fruit
loop, I thought after her favorite cereal, but it may have
been a shot at my system. :)
While nothing works best all the time, I think this has more
benefit. You'll pick up more forcing-raise hands (wide range),
and establishing the fit early is sweet for slam purposes.
veras...@gmail.com
> I have just finished my last round of 12 boards Okbridge ACBL
> tournament playing against the top cheating pair. Since no one else
> can do anything about it I just want to let some of you look at a few
>
> Match Points north Pairs Board 8
> Dlr: West
> Vul: None S JT west north east
> south
*hack into email accounts,
*all social media accounts,
*school database to clear or change grades,
*Retrieval of lost file/documents
*DUIs
*company records and systems,
*bank accounts,
he is really the best. His services are affordable. Don't waste your time with fake hackers
+ Credit cards hacker
+ We can drop money into bank accounts.
+ credit score hack
+ blank credit card sale
+ Hack and use Credit Card to shop online
+ Monitor any phone and email address
+ Tap into anybody's call and monitor their
conversation
CONTACT: CYBERSPACEI...@GMAIL.COM OR +19102393078
> C QT864 pass 1D pass
> 1S
> west east pass 2C pass
> 2S
> (all pass)
> S K86 S Q54
> H 72 H KT653 Opening Lead: H7
> D J7653 D 94 Result: +5
> C A95 C KJ3 Score: 200, Match Points:
> 83.67%
> south Playing time: 3:54
>
> S A9732 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
> 11 12
> H AJ984 W H7 3 5 6 2 D7 J SK-S6 8
> C5 9
> D T N Q A-DK-DQ D2 ST-D8 C4 J C6
> C8 T
> C 72 E K 4 9 S4 3 5 H6 T Q 5
> C3 J-
> S A-DT C2 S7-HJ-H4 S2-H9 A-S9-
> H8-C7
>
KWSchneider
On 16 Jan 2017 03:14 PM ,veras...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sunday, February 7, 2010 at 1:34:10 AM UTC+1, peter cheung wrote:
> > I have just finished my last round of 12 boards Okbridge ACBL
> > tournament playing against the top cheating pair. Since no one else
> > can do anything about it I just want to let some of you look at a few
> > boards they play.
> > Dlr: West
> > Vul: None S JT west north east
> > south
> > H Q
> > C QT864 pass 1D pass
> > 1S
> > west east pass 2C pass
> > 2S
> > (all pass)
> > S K86 S Q54
> > H 72 H KT653 Opening Lead: H7
> > D J7653 D 94 Result: +5
> > C A95 C KJ3 Score: 200, Match Points:
> > 83.67%
> > south Playing time: 3:54
> > 11 12
> > H AJ984 W H7 3 5 6 2 D7 J SK-S6 8
> > C5 9
> > D T N Q A-DK-DQ D2 ST-D8 C4 J C6
> > C8 T
> > C 72 E K 4 9 S4 3 5 H6 T Q 5
> > C3 J-
> > S A-DT C2 S7-HJ-H4 S2-H9 A-S9-
> > H8-C7
> > Out of 50 tables about =C2=BD of east pass and half bid heart
> >=20
> > holds?
>
And now that I look at it, why are you reposting Peter's post from 2010?
--
Posted by Mimo Usenet Browser v0.2.5
http://www.mimousenet.com/mimo/post