[Cascade]

Jlall, on Dec 25 2007, 09:39 AM, said:

What about caffine?

What about nicotine?

[Cascade]

Echognome, on Dec 27 2007, 01:47 PM, said:

I think it comes down to what we view is right or fair and what is not. My view is namely that if a drug can be bought over-the-counter then it's legal. If you need a prescription, then it should be legal if you have a prescription. If not, then it should be illegal in bridge too. However, I am not making any judgment on whether the drugs that are legal, or prescription, or illegal should be. That is for society to determine.

There are problems with this view when a drug is "over the counter" in one juristiction but "prescription only" or "illegal" in another.

Many many drugs are in this situation ...

pseudoephidrine
antibiotics
cannabis
etc etc

[Echognome]

Cascade, on Dec 27 2007, 11:11 AM, said:

Echognome, on Dec 27 2007, 01:47 PM, said:

I think it comes down to what we view is right or fair and what is not.  My view is namely that if a drug can be bought over-the-counter then it's legal.  If you need a prescription, then it should be legal if you have a prescription.  If not, then it should be illegal in bridge too.  However, I am not making any judgment on whether the drugs that are legal, or prescription, or illegal should be.  That is for society to determine.

There are problems with this view when a drug is "over the counter" in one juristiction but "prescription only" or "illegal" in another.

Many many drugs are in this situation ...

pseudoephidrine
antibiotics
cannabis
etc etc

I do not disagree. But there has to be someone to judge and whoever you select as judge (IOC, FDA, some health minisitry, etc) at least it's something determined for us.

I do think bridge is quite different from other sports though and think that the list of banned drugs for an athletic competition should be different than for a mind sport. For example, if an asthmatic is not allowed to take epinephrine, that would be a very strange rule for bridge.

[Apollo81]

As far as the bridge world goes, I think that if the drug is legal, it shouldn't be banned. In particular I think a caffeine ban would be utterly ridiculous.

[pclayton]

Jlall, on Dec 24 2007, 03:19 PM, said:

I will say if I cannot drink like 10 cokes a day my bridge will suffer.

Only if your restroom access isn't denied.

[pclayton]

hrothgar, on Dec 26 2007, 06:25 PM, said:

Lets assume the following:

1. We have a population of Bridge players with roughly equivalent skills

(snip)

Richard:

I think your argument falls apart right here.

Even comparing the highest flight of players (Meckstroth, Fantoni, etc..) with the next flight (say a Wildavsky) there is a marked difference in talent.

Do you really think the skills of a burglar are as differentiated as bridge player?

Furthermore, how much of an 'edge' does drugs give a player? Compare someone like Brad Moss (top flight by definition) with a Meckstroth. Would drugs make Brad as good of a player, much less superior? I doubt it.

Stealing a necklace has a similar fence value for an experienced burglar as it does a novice. The experienced burglar might have a 5:1 better chance of not getting caught. OTOH, a novice player has a 0% chance chance of winning a NABC.

[hrothgar]

pclayton, on Dec 27 2007, 11:18 PM, said:

hrothgar, on Dec 26 2007, 06:25 PM, said:

Lets assume the following:

1.  We have a population of Bridge players with roughly equivalent skills

(snip)

Richard:

I think your argument falls apart right here.

Even comparing the highest flight of players (Meckstroth, Fantoni, etc..) with the next flight (say a Wildavsky) there is a marked difference in talent.

Do you really think the skills of a burglar are as differentiated as bridge player?

Furthermore, how much of an 'edge' does drugs give a player? Compare someone like Brad Moss (top flight by definition) with a Meckstroth. Would drugs make Brad as good of a player, much less superior? I doubt it.

Stealing a necklace has a similar fence value for an experienced burglar as it does a novice. The experienced burglar might have a 5:1 better chance of not getting caught. OTOH, a novice player has a 0% chance chance of winning a NABC.

As Helene mentions, there is a significant difference between simplified models intended to illustrate basic concepts and what one uses in the real world.

For what its worth, I full agree with your comments about the differences between different flights of players. And yet, for some reason, the second, third, and even 10th tier players keep investing time and money trying to win...

As for your comments about skill levels of burglars, fence values, and the like...
None of this has anything to do with constructing the typical prisoner's dilemma example.

Prisoner's dilemma is defined by

The available strategy set (Cooperate or Defect)

The payoff matrix for the following cases

Cooperate - Cooperate
Cooperate - Defect
Defect - Cooperate
Defect - Defect

As is oft the case, Wikipedia has a good writeup

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoner's_dilemma

[pclayton]

I stand corrected.

I hadn't initially realized that this dealt with 2 accused ratting the other out. I haven't looked at this in awhile.

[Echognome]

hrothgar, on Dec 27 2007, 12:37 PM, said:

As Helene mentions, there is a significant difference between simplified models intended to illustrate basic concepts and what one uses in the real world.

For what its worth, I full agree with your comments about the differences between different flights of players. And yet, for some reason, the second, third, and even 10th tier players keep investing time and money trying to win...

As for your comments about skill levels of burglars, fence values, and the like...
None of this has anything to do with constructing the typical prisoner's dilemma example.

Prisoner's dilemma is defined by

The available strategy set (Cooperate or Defect)

The payoff matrix for the following cases

Cooperate - Cooperate
Cooperate - Defect
Defect - Cooperate
Defect - Defect

As is oft the case, Wikipedia has a good writeup

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoner's_dilemma

Well, even though they have a reference at the bottom to Tragedy of the Commons, it is not stated that the PD is really just a formal modelling of the concept.

One other thing to note if we model the problem as a PD is that we are certainly dealing with a repeated game. So if we assume homogeneity of time preferences, we can rely on the folk theorem for a multiplicity of equilibria. If we do not, then we may still achieve cooperation.

I've done some research in this area, but I will refrain from further comment as not to bore everyone out of their skulls.

[mike777]

http://www.latimes.com/news/science/la-sci...0,6487141.story

Drugs to build up that mental muscle
Peter Macdiarmid / Getty Images
Unlike the performance enhancers that plague athletic competitions, brain drugs haven't provoked similar outrage.
Academics, musicians, even poker champs use pills to sharpen their minds, legally. Labs race to develop even more.



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

http://www.medicalne...icles/92700.php

[SoTired]

bridge is a game, not a sport.

IMHO, bridge players can take all the drugs they want, legal or otherwise. As long as they can make it out of jail to the table to play, it is OK by me.

That is the only true "Prisoners Dilemna" for me.

Definitely too many lawyers in this world and maybe too many mathematicians.