[joshs]

Dyslexics of the world, Untie!

[the saint]

I've have heard many stories of certain players taking certain substabces to improve their game at the top level. Beta blockers were commonly mentioned. I have already gone on record on other threads as stating that I would like strict anti-doping regs and I have been delighted at the extensive use of smoking bans throughout the game. In a big event stamina is critical, and improving ones fitness to cope with the stresses and demands should be an essential part of the preparation.

I have also found that blood-sugar level is critical to my game - my concentration levels, and I'm often carrying something to munch on, or more usually, have a sports energy drink or two with me. I have also found that light exercise a short period before play is relaxing and helps remove a lot of the stresses and tensions that build up.

[mikeh]

While I have heard a number of rumours about top players using drugs, they usually involve recreational substances.... I do not count caffeine or nicotine, altho they are also drugs.

I have never tried cocaine, but those of my friends who have tell me that it induces a sense of increased ability which, in hindsight, turns out to have been false.. in that it causes the individual to be very confident about a line of play, for example, that occurs to them early in a hand... whereas without this artificially induced confidence, they might find a better line after more thought.

There are some very good players (I'm thinking of one former world champion in particular) who are extremely fast and extremely good... so if, as has been rumoured (and I have no personal knowledge of the truth of the rumour) he (or she) uses coke at the table, then it may have little impact on his/her ability because his or her usual first instinct is awfully good. For players like me, who have to grind their way through various options, coke sounds like a bad idea, independent of all of the other problems with it

A friend of mine once played bridge while on LSD and has described to me the unique problems that can result: imagine seeing the spots on a card melt and run off the card, leaving it blank.... and you don't remember what it used to be...

I also know of one player who won a District NAOP playoff because of marijuana: he was a very uptight, conservative player, playing with a similar partner. They played the 1st session, on both days of the event, 'pure' and rolled back to back 51% games.... a little 'herb' in between loosened this player up and they rolled back to back 67% games in a good field.

So sometimes the loss of analytical ability is offset by the relaxation of inhibitions, if the inhibitions get in the way.

Sontag, in one of his books (I think it was The Bridge Bum) spoke of Weischel's approach to sex and bridge: he liked to have sex before a team game to get him relaxed, but not before matchpoints, because he wanted to feel an edge. That was 30 years ago and I don't know if Mr. W still feels the same way

As far as I am concerned, I don't mind the idea of banning (and testing.. without which bans are silly) for performance enhancing drugs... but not for recreational drugs... and how do we deal with Beta Blockers, for example, given that many bridge players require this type of medication? Do we restrict top level bridge only to the young, healthy few.... if so, Justin Lall will get to the Bermuda Bowl a lot sooner than he may otherwise....

[pigpenz]

certain stimulants will improve your awareness or concentration, generally they are short term memory enhancers.

I have seen people who are excellent players when their alcohol levels are very high

some stimulants like dexidrine whould definetely keep one wired alot better than caffeine.

[hrothgar]

There are a wide of drugs that can demonstrated to have a salutory effect on concentration. Folks have already mentioned the four most interesting examples:

1. Caffeine: There are a number of studies that suggest that caffeine improves short term memory and aids concentration. It also can help in "real" endurance events (Marathons, triathalons, and the like) Caffeine has traditonally been listed as a restricted substance by the World Anti-Doping Authority (WADA), however, it was recently removed from the list. Many people expect that caffeine will make its way back onto this list.

2. Nicotine: Caffeine's big brother... The two molocules are quite similiar and share many of the same properties

3. Beta blockers: Beta blockers have a variety of effects including reducing the heart rate and (generally) have a calming effect on people. Beta blockers have been on the IOC banned list for a long time.

4. Ritalin: enough said already

I have mixed feeling about the whole drug testing issue. I favor banning most performance enhancing substances from professional sports. A lot of the substances that folks use are extremely dangerous. I think that there is something genuinely sick about paying people to commit slow motion suicide. Even if folks are comfortable allowing players "control over their body", the decision to use some of these drugs has an impact on society as a whole. Personally, I'm not excited about having lots of "cranky" testosterone jocks wandering arround.

If we move over to bridge, my main concern is whether the WBF would be able to administer drug testing in a fair and unbiased manner. If you are going to ban drugs, I think that you need to ban performance enhancing drugs. This means regulating caffeine, nicotine, ritalin, and the like. This means that all those seniors who need Beta Blockers for their health get booted from competitive bridge. This means that Lynn Deas never gets to play in a big event again.

Personally, I don't think that the benefits of an anti-doping program come close to compensating for the very real costs. (Some of the costs will be financial, but the really burdensome ones with be related to the social nature of the game as well as the inevitable legal challenges)

From my perspective, the worst possible result would be a half assed drug testing system designed to look for steroids and pot that doesn't actually grapple with any of the drugs that might actually be beneficial to someone competing in a mind sport. I have the unfortunate feeling that this is the type of policy that will be adopted as the WBF continues its efforts to suckle at the IOC teat while cravenly refusing to deal with any important issues.

[luke warm]

the saint, on Jul 28 2006, 05:07 PM, said:

~~I have already gone on record on other threads as stating that I would like strict anti-doping regs and I have been delighted at the extensive use of smoking bans throughout the game. In a big event stamina is critical, and improving ones fitness to cope with the stresses and demands should be an essential part of the preparation.

I have also ~~ a sports energy drink or two with me.

do you object to smoking because of the beneficial effect some people claim, or is there another reason? why ban nicotine and not caffine (as supposedly is in your energy drink)?

it sounds like you don't want to ban things that might help your concentration and/or stamina but don't have the same concerns for things that might help others... my thughts are more along the lines of todd's

[hrothgar]

luke warm, on Jul 30 2006, 01:59 AM, said:

do you object to smoking because of the beneficial effect some people claim, or is there another reason? why ban nicotine and not caffine (as supposedly is in your energy drink)?

it sounds like you don't want to ban things that might help your concentration and/or stamina but don't have the same concerns for things that might help others... my thughts are more along the lines of todd's

I object to smoking at bridge tournaments for the same reason that I object to smoking in restuarants and work places.

Its a filthy habit that stinks up the surroundings.
Its documented that second hand smoke causes cancer.

The issues with nicotine are completely incidental...

(for what its worth, back in the carefree days of my youth, I was flying in to Marseilles and was stuck in the airport for an hour waiting for my car. Some annoying teen age brit he had a god given right to smoke in the no smoking section in the non-smoking section. I asked him politely to stop and he responded that this was France, everyone smoked, and I should get used to it. He then started blowed smoke in my face. He got very upset when I pissed on his lap...)

[luke warm]

hrothgar, on Jul 29 2006, 06:13 PM, said:

He got very upset when I pissed on his lap...)

you're kidding? some people just have no sense of humor... in any case, the subject was 'doping' and i took saint's post as referring to tobacco in that context

[hrothgar]

luke warm, on Jul 30 2006, 02:16 AM, said:

you're kidding? some people just have no sense of humor... in any case, the subject was 'doping' and i took saint's post as referring to tobacco in that context

Not joking in the slightest...

The "hrothgar" you see on the forums is the improved, mellow/laid back Hrothgar...

You should have seen me back in the day.

[lalislol]

re: Roland's #1
Unfortunately no...Goren is dead.

[matmat]

What about all those people wheeling around oxygen tanks?

just kidding..

[Sigi_BC84]

DrTodd13, on Jul 28 2006, 02:10 AM, said:

I say get rid of all doping regulations and let them all dope. I want to see what a human body can do when aided by the full power of mind and science.

I say the same, but not for the anarchist aspect of it, but instead because it's close to impossible to effectively enforce doping regulations. Those who have access to the latest doping methods (which usually cannot be detected for a while) have an unfair advantage to all the others. Appealing to fairness doesn't work -- the pressure to win is much too high in high-profile events.

From a certain standpoint I would welcome an entirely drug-free sports world (it's better for the athletes health etc.), but in reality it simply doesn't work out. Heck, I'd favor a drug-free world in general, but that doesn't work out either.

So a common sense reaction should be to let people decide on their own and have a go at whatever drugs they favour (be it in sports or otherwise).

--Sigi

[Sigi_BC84]

fred, on Jul 28 2006, 05:35 PM, said:

As an ex-smoker of 1.5 years and a person who chews nicotine gum constantly regardless of whether I am playing bridge or not, I can confirm that nicotine is good for my bridge.

The main reason for this (I think) is because having nicotine in my system allows me to avoid the effects of withdrawl.

I don't want to lecture you on this here, but my advice is to get rid of the nicotine gums. It's just a waste of money and what point is there in prolonging your nicotine addiction by constantly giving it to your body?

I've managed to stop smoking a few times simply by being consequent about it and never used gums. Well, after a few months I thought I could "handle it" and started again. Silly me.

It's a myth that nicotine withdrawal is preventing you from stopping. The effects last only a few days and after two weeks time 99% of the nicotine in the system has been broken down or left the body. What remains are the psychological effects which are much stronger.

I guess gums can be a help with quitting because you only have to handle one part of the addiction (the psychological part) and deal with the nicotine later, but continuing to use gums, what point is therein?

--Sigi

[the saint]

luke warm, on Jul 29 2006, 10:59 PM, said:

the saint, on Jul 28 2006, 05:07 PM, said:

~~I have already gone on record on other threads as stating that I would like strict anti-doping regs and I have been delighted at the extensive use of smoking bans throughout the game. In a big event stamina is critical, and improving ones fitness to cope with the stresses and demands should be an essential part of the preparation.

I have also ~~ a sports energy drink or two with me.

do you object to smoking because of the beneficial effect some people claim, or is there another reason? why ban nicotine and not caffine (as supposedly is in your energy drink)?

it sounds like you don't want to ban things that might help your concentration and/or stamina but don't have the same concerns for things that might help others... my thughts are more along the lines of todd's

I suppose this means where do you draw the boundary between what is a performance enhancing substance and what isn't. Technically food and water must be because if you didn't partake, you would drop dead after a few days, which while preventing you making any more mistakes, might get you fined for slow play.

The difference I believe is that we all need to intake certain things to function normally, but we condemn the use of substances that would enable performance above our normal level. Hence natural food and drink may be legal, and a stimulant/depressant (dependent upon the user) would not be. I note that isotonic drinks are not on the list of banned substance.

[Joe de Balliol]

I vote to ban dopes from bridge - too many of them imo.

[jtfanclub]

I would be willing to bet that blood doping would help you in bridge: take out a couple liters a week before the match, get it good and oxygenated, then put it back through an IV between sessions. Supposedly, it almost completely eliminates fatigue, and it's safe when done properly (it's your blood, after all).

[daffodil]

fred, on Jul 28 2006, 10:35 AM, said:

As an ex-smoker of 1.5 years

Wow, Fred!! Congratulations on quitting! Your future holds many healthy hands!!

[Editer]

I'm surprised no one has mentioned drugs such as modafinil, which is used to treat narcolepsy. In a healthy person, I've read, modafinil boosts alertness without the jitters and faster heart rate that come with caffeine, dexedrine et al. Back then, playing regularly, I was a middling B player; I suspected that with an expert partner and a supply of modafinil I could probably make the finals of the Blue Ribbons.

Several top track athletes got suspensions not long ago for taking modafinil, which is on the banned list.

I'd be more than a little surprised if no bridge pros are taking the drug or something similar. The workaday traveling pro playing 2-3 sessions a day several days a week may have a hard time resisting the temptation. And at the moment there are no professional repercussions (and I'm not saying there should be), so why not give in?

[the saint]

I would be surprised if none were too. As I have said before, I have heard stories of pros taking various such substances although nothing concrete. IF there are no procedures against it, then you can't really blame them for doing it. I would like to see such things introduced, if only so Bridge can take itself seriously.

[mike777]

The line between what chemicals are allowed in sports and which are not is just going to grow more blurry. As we use more of these drugs in our everyday lives it may get to the point where most sports fans just will not care what the players use.

How many of our American Football players play every game hopped up on painkillers of one sort or another. I doubt almost any of the paying fans care that much to find out and or to tell the players to just not play.