[glen]

Certainly the conditions of contest did not reference anything like the “Zero Tolerance” guidelines that the ACBL has sort of adopted. Thus the event was open to some sort of gamespersonship.

And just like the Zidane red card incident, what is key is the reaction, especially not letting it throw you off or out of your game.

Given that Moss was playing against the main horses of the opposing team, and that these older horses could get weary (especially if they played all the sets), he could have previously adopted the tactic to play out most hands unless a pending claim would be clear to both defenders. If he had done so, following gamesmanship instead of sportspersonship, he might have played out the hand and perhaps fallen into the winning line.

However watching the golf playoff on Sunday, one wonders if sportsmanship is necessary or not. One could imagine Tiger playing Cink, with Cink missing a putt, and Tiger saying, just before the next T-off, “hey, you could have made that last putt”. It might make for a more entertaining broadcast, or it could result in fisticuffs or players clubbing each other, which could be entertaining but would not be golf (flog perhaps).

Thus the USBF needs to decide what is really bridge or not for them, and codify it in their conditions of contest.

[ArcLight]

>I personally find this sort of thing fascinating and sometimes wish there was more of it.

I don't think what Zia did was horrible, but I don't care for that behavior. It doesn't add to the enjoyment of the game. In general (not referring to Zia or Brad) players who are obnoxious make the game less pleasant for all.


> For all the wonder of vugraph, it is ultimately just symbols on a screen and it can resolve the drama down to a logic puzzle when the whole personality clash adds a vital dimension.

I don't really care about the personalities at all. I care about the card play and the at the table psychology, not the off the table baiting.


>The game can often do with a bit of personality and inter-personal edge to give it a bit of needle and zest.

Thats your opinion, but not everyone shares it.


> Many other sports rely on such things to up the adrenalin levels between competitors. There is a limit to what constitutes good/bad behaviour, but gaining a psychological edge and using it to your advantage is part of any sporting contest.

Thats true,, but hopefully there are rules to prevent it getting out of hand. I'm not saying what Zia did was a big deal. But if it was typical to be unpleasant to others, then why bother playing?



>Maybe its because I grew up playing the game in an area where people wouldn't hesitate to use the same sort of tactics on me that I grew stronger through it and would relish the battle.

So they were jerks to you, and you think thats acceptable?

Maybe many people like bridge as a social game, and if there were enough nasty players it would result in fewer people wanting to continue.

Just because bad behavior is common in the USA doesn't mean its enjoyable for most of us.

[the hog]

I don't think it was "horrible" either, just unnecessary.

[the saint]

There is a difference between being rude and offensive and playing on someones mind. I don't condone rudeness, and I am not rude at the table, nor do I point out my opponent's errors (I make enough of my own), but I do believe in making my life difficult for my opponent in every way that is legal and moral at the table.

[ArcLight]

>There is a difference between being rude and offensive and playing on someones mind. I don't condone rudeness, and I am not rude at the table

I'm not saying you are. (If thats how I came across I apologize).
But just because you are able to put up with crap, doesn't mean others will.

> (I make enough of my own), but I do believe in making my life difficult for my opponent in every way that is legal and moral at the table.

OK, I'm curious!
How do you make life difficult for the opponents?

[kenberg]

the saint, on Sep 1 2006, 07:34 AM, said:

There is a difference between being rude and offensive and playing on someones mind. I don't condone rudeness, and I am not rude at the table, nor do I point out my opponent's errors (I make enough of my own), but I do believe in making my life difficult for my opponent in every way that is legal and moral at the table.

The problem with this (aside from the typo where you say "I do believe in making my life difficult...") is that there is apt to be wide disagreement about what is rude and what is "playing with someone's mind". Example:

Some years ago I sat down at a table in a national pairs event. There were many kibitzers and I immediately recognized my rho from the many times his picture has been in the acbl bulletin. My lho, who I did not recognize, was listening to something (music, I suppose) through an earplug. There was a low level electronic buzz and I asked him to turn it off. He didn't understand what I wanted. I explained further (duh) and he got it. He turned it off. My rho then picked up his glass of water, took the ice cubes into his mouth, and began crunching on them. Yes, they got to me, I regret to say. My play of the next hand was embarrassing.

Maybe you approve of this, maybe you don't, I can't tell from your post. You appear to say its up to the players to cope with this. That may well provide the excitement you are looking for. I was younger and trimmer then and I am pretty sure I could have handled the fat SOB on my right, but the guy on my left would have been a problem. I could bring friends. Or the governing organization could try to keep this from happening. That's my preference.

[pigpenz]

fred, on Aug 29 2006, 07:23 PM, said:

My opinion is that Brad would have tried to make 4H 99 times out of 100 and that he would guess Zia's actual distribution well over half of the time.

We have been regular partners for 6 years or so and I only remember him "giving up" as declarer when an obvious solution (for Brad at least) was present one other time.

This was a lapse in concentration - maybe because he was tired, maybe because he was distracted, maybe because he was annoyed about something, maybe for no reason. It happens to everyone, even the very best players. What makes the best players the best is that it doesn't happen to them very often and, when they do stop to think, they have a good chance of making the right decision.

Unfortunately Brad and I each had a few expensive lapses in concentration in that match. Eliminating any of these lapses would swung the match in our favor (we lost by 5 IMPs).

Here's what happened at the table: Brad claimed down 1 and showed his hand. Michael Rosenberg and I (on the other side of the screen) looked at each other. We knew immediately what he had done. Brad's mom, Gail Greenberg (who was kibitzing me), also knew. I am sure Zia did too and waited for what he thought was a good time to needle Brad.

Serious gamesmanship there by Zia.

My opinion is that this is not a difficult hand for anyone who has studied the game seriously (as it is a textbook hand - perfect for Bridge Master Level 4).

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

thanks for the input Fred....the vugraph commentators really didnt have any extra to add as they were suprised when one said GIB says 4!h should make. In a 120 board match I am sure there are many hands where one board besides this one could have swung the match the other way.

I wasnt aware of the situation between ZIA and Moss and it could be that it had someting to do for the situation.

[barmar]

If this were rubber bridge, I wouldn't expect anyone to have a problem with this. That form of the game is often considered "no holds barred", and gamesmanship is part of the game.

But duplicate bridge is generally expected to be more proper. There's still room for emotion and enjoyment, but comments that are intended to disturb another player are out of line. If you're on friendly terms with an opponent, and you know that they won't take a light-hearted comment inappropriately, fine. But if there's a history of bad blood between Zia and Moss, he should know better than to play on this.

Duplicate bridge is supposed to be about your play of the cards, not playing with heads.

[Rain]

I'm thinking there are other things one can do to be annoying, you know?

-Don't shower for a couple weeks before tourney.
-Alternately, douse yourself in the thickest perfume ever, especially if screenmate has known allergies(?)
-Don't brush your teeth and breath on screenmate
-Practise drumming your fingers in annoying patterns (soundlessly so it won't affect partner)
-Grow your hair really long and keep twirling it

Surely there's more. In the name of gamesmanship........good? bad? allowed?

[SoTired]

Classic psychological chess story:

Before his 1908 game with Emmanuel Lasker, Aron Nimzovich approached the tournament director, pleading with him to insist that Lasker refrain from smoking cigars during their game. [Nimzovich had weak lungs and smoke made him ill. He eventually died of pneumonia. Lasker was known to be fond of smelly cigars.]

The tournament director requests Lasker's compliance and Lasker agrees. The game begins and shortly thereafter Lasker removes a cigar from his pocket and places it on the table.

After a few minutes Nimzovich again approaches the tournament director exclaiming, "See! Look what he's doing!"

The tournament director notices that Lasker's cigar is just sitting on the table and says to Nimzovich: "What's the problem? Lasker is not smoking."

Nimzovich: "Yes, but he is threatening to smoke, and any fool knows that the threat is more powerful than the execution!"

Lasker won.

[pigpenz]

SoTired, on Sep 1 2006, 01:31 PM, said:

Classic psychological chess story:

Before his 1908 game with Emmanuel Lasker, Aron Nimzovich approached the tournament director, pleading with him to insist that Lasker refrain from smoking cigars during their game. [Nimzovich had weak lungs and smoke made him ill. He eventually died of pneumonia. Lasker was known to be fond of smelly cigars.]

The tournament director requests Lasker's compliance and Lasker agrees. The game begins and shortly thereafter Lasker removes a cigar from his pocket and places it on the table.

After a few minutes Nimzovich again approaches the tournament director exclaiming, "See! Look what he's doing!"

The tournament director notices that Lasker's cigar is just sitting on the table and says to Nimzovich: "What's the problem? Lasker is not smoking."

Nimzovich: "Yes, but he is threatening to smoke, and any fool knows that the threat is more powerful than the execution!"

Lasker won.

i dont know the situation but I have always thought that Zia is supposed to be the gertleman of bridge.....Moss I dont know....so in some respects maybe Zia was right for what he was doing in that he felt that Moss deserved it.

[Codo]

pigpenz, on Sep 2 2006, 11:09 AM, said:

i dont know the situation but I have always thought that Zia is supposed to be the gertleman of bridge.....Moss I dont know....so in some respects maybe Zia was right for what he was doing in that he felt that Moss deserved it.

And maybe we just put too much guesses into a situation where noone of us had been in?
Fred had been there and he knows the two guys from the other screen side. So we should hold on to the facts he told us.

To make suspicions about who was guilty in this affair is not real sportsmanship ihmo.

[fred]

I have been Zia's partner in one week-long tournament and I have played many many boards against him. In my experience he is almost always worthy of the reputation that pigpenz suggests he has as being "the gentleman of bridge" - he is almost always charming, polite, and fun at the table.

All this incident proves is that Zia, like just about everyone else (including me), is capable of being rude at the table. What happened was not that big a deal in my view and, as far as I could tell, Zia's comment did not have an impact on Brad's subseqent play. Every player at Brad's level has to be capable of rising above personal or bridge adversity at the table and Brad (who has a very thick skin) tends to excel in this area.

I found Zia's actions in this case to be distasteful, but please don't read something into my post that wasn't there. He certainly is not a monster and his colorful personality, dedication, and incredible talent as a player have certainly been good for bridge.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[kenberg]

Fred,

As Pig suggests, you were there, you know the people, your assessment is good enough for me. With at least three of the matches, including yours, being decided on the last board I can well imagine many players having nightmares about what they might have done differently but I seriously doubt any player would have collapsed at the table because an opponent noted that he could have made the contract.

My most frequent play on BBO is in the ACBL tourneys. Often, waiting for the round to change, there is some interesting feature of the boards that I would like to discuss. Of course I do not, at least unless I already know the players, but it's sort of a shame. Not every comment is a gloat, and I would far prefer a little honest discussion to the everpresent wp, gt, etc when there was absolutely nothing well done or good about the try.

It would be of great interest to discuss some of the swing boards from the matches. Some of these were due to different methods, some due to decisions that could have gone either way, some seemed, to me, to truly be errors. The commentators were not by any means always right in their analysis nor in their predictions about how the play would go. I'm enthusiastically fine with this and in fact found it a great kick to see if I could out-analyse or out-predict them. Sometimes I believe I did. Not often. It was really one hell of a show.

One other point. It is often said that at the top level everything depends on the bidding because all the top players handle the cards well. No doubt most of the swings were from the bidding, but a significant number turned on the play.

Ken

[pigpenz]

I watched almost all of the 120 board final and there were so many boards that could have changed the final result either way.

The last hand for one was an interesting one, if a diamond was led instead of a club i Believe 6♥x would have pushed with 5♠ making at the other table and Freds team would be on top.

another hand where Garner holding 8♥ did not pre empt and his partner ducked the q♥ in at around trick 9 letting 3♠ make.

the story goes on and on

but the great thing about it was that we were able to watch it live on VuGraph and not have to read select tidbits of it in bridge world......so Kudos to Fred, Uday, and those who run Bridge Base for making this possible.

[SoTired]

It is also possible that Zia made the comment without thinking how it was recieved. After all, Zia was tired, too. It is not just our logic centers that degrade with fatigue, so do our social graces and internal warning voices.

[HeartA]

An "expert" like me would be able to make 4H with the way Zia defended (2 black Aces and then spade). With a club continuation at trick 3, I would probably go down.

BTW, I "never claim down 1" for a game contract...

[kenberg]

SoTired, on Sep 3 2006, 11:15 AM, said:

It is also possible that Zia made the comment without thinking how it was recieved. After all, Zia was tired, too. It is not just our logic centers that degrade with fatigue, so do our social graces and internal warning voices.

This, imo, is a very, very good point. If it is a problem at all, and it very well may not be a problem for anyone, it's for the principals to work out. Not taking offense when none was intended can greatly simplify life.

[Flame]

There could be another angle to look at this.
My wife and i had once a talk about what is the right thing to do when you see a friend with an open fly in his paints. Most ppl just dont do anything but my wife is pround of being the one to tell the guy, yes its imberessing but she say he would like to know.
I think there are some similarity here, everyone knew but decided to say nothing while zia was the one to tell the guy.
I know its not the same, but reading fred post about how he and rosenberg where smiling to each other on the other side just remind me of the other situation.

[pigpenz]

then again we keep acting like everyone at the table is wearing tuxedoes and wearing white gloves