[Zelandakh]

I would like to offer, without comment, a 10 month old link to a German language website. Despite this, I feel that it is perhaps worthy of a comment or two. Anyone have any thoughts to share?

[helene_t]

Zelandakh, on 2020-July-29, 16:02, said:

I would like to offer, without comment, a 10 month old link to a German language website. Despite this, I feel that it is perhaps worthy of a comment or two. Anyone have any thoughts to share?

I have googled a bit and find it all confusing. Apparently there have been various lawsuits involving the pair, DBV and WBF. What is their status at the moment? They can't play together at WBF events but otherwise they can do what they want?

But it's very strange that anyone is willing to play against them. I would think that an event in which they were allowed to compete would be boycotted.

[FelicityR]

Zelandakh, on 2020-July-29, 16:02, said:

I would like to offer, without comment, a 10 month old link to a German language website. Despite this, I feel that it is perhaps worthy of a comment or two. Anyone have any thoughts to share?

This was the The Independent's article in 2014

https://www.independ...ge-9225805.html

It comes as no surprise that the German players are still allowed to compete when the appeal against Fantoni-Nunes was upheld.

http://www.eurobridg...018/01/10/4798/

I expect the 'fuzzy' - in my view - legalese wording of such appeals that 'proof beyond a reasonable doubt' was not met so the players were neither innocent nor guilty allows alleged bridge cheats to continue playing.

It again echoes what happened in Buenos Aires in 1965 with Reese-Schapiro when internationally the players were accused of irregularities, but absolved nationally of their alleged wrongdoings.

Despite the sterling work of Boye Brogeland and his followers exposing these alleged bridge cheats, it seems that barristers and the legal world can always find some legal loophole to play down the allegations, thus watering down their seriousness.

[nige1]

FeicityR quotes the Telegraph, which reports that Ulrich Wenning, president of the DBV, said:

It has to be taken into consideration that - in consequence of the climatic conditions in Bali and the very low regulated air conditioner - almost every participant of the tournament was affected for health reasons which caused that there were permanently sounds of coughing in the tournament hall. ... Dr Wladow in particular suffers from an asthmatic cough and the conditions in Bali had therefore been extraordinarily irksome ... (the DBV's) own internal investigation had found no evidence of cheating ... Dr Wladow and Dr Elinescu [affirmed] unmistakably to us that the allegation they are accused of do not apply and were not committed by them.

IMO, the WBF should discourage NBOs from investigating their own members, suspected of cheating. For example, Bobby Wolff says that the ACBL/USBF have suppressed dozens of cases involving American cheats, some featuring convicted top Internationals.

Also, the Telegraph said:

To add to the strained relations between the German bridge fraternity and the WBF, the two doctors had already refused to travel to Dallas to attend the hearing, claiming that they would not receive a fair trial because both the presiding chairman and the WBF prosecutor were Americans.

Allegedly, the Germans cheated against the USA team. Nevertheless, the WBF ...

• Insisted the DBV attend the hearing but scheduled it for a date they knew to be unsuitable (DBV AGM).
• At an American venue (although the WBF is based in Switzerland).
• With Americans dominating the judgement panel.
• And were tardy in providing the DBV with relevant evidence.

In the case of the Doctors and in other recent cheating cases, most players are convinced by the evidence adduced by Kit Woolsey and others; but the WBF must urgently define a timely, fair, efficient, and effective protocol so that ...

• Justice can be done and seen to be done; and
• Verdicts can pass scrutiny by independent arbitration panels.

[sfi]

nige1, on 2020-July-30, 06:59, said:

Allegedly, the Germans cheated against the USA team. Nevertheless, the WBF ...

• Insisted the DBV attend the hearing but scheduled it for a date they knew to be unsuitable (the DBV AGM).
• At an American venue (although the WBF is based in Switzerland).
• With Americans dominating the judgement panel.
• And were tardy in providing the DBV with relevant evidence.

In the case of the Doctors and in other recent cheating cases, most players are convinced by the evidence adduced by Kit Woolsey and others; but the WBF must urgently define a timely, fair, efficient, and effective protocol so that ...

• Justice can be done and seen to be done; and
• Verdicts can pass scrutiny by independent arbitration panels.

The evidence was even more compelling than what Woolsey put together. Eddie Wold cracked the code during one of the sets and informed his captain immediately afterwards.

Looking at the Independent article Felicity linked to, I'm not surprised the DBV balked at attending the hearing. Not only was it in America, it was actually in the home town of the USA Seniors captain. I don't know about any of the other points, but the optics of that do not make for a good start.

[nige1]

sfi, on 2020-July-30, 08:09, said:

The evidence was even more compelling than what Woolsey put together. Eddie Wold cracked the code during one of the sets and informed his captain immediately afterwards.

Good point; but in most cases, the rough chronology has been

• Vague allegations on BridgeWinners convince a majority of the guilt of a world-class pair. Lynch-mob rule No presumption of innocence
• Boye Brogeland, Kit Woolsey and co, with crowd-sourced assistance, painstakingly assemble a seemingly watertight prosecution case
• Meanwhile, as is their nature, Bridge-authorities procrastinate, until forced to act. (Israel is an honourable exception).
• Belatedly they concoct a case, which they slowly manage to prove to their satisfaction.
• CAS or some local appeal court find fatal flaws, immediately, to rehabilitate the alleged cheaters.

[shyams]

I'm afraid I disagree with two of the five bullet points above:

nige1, on 2020-July-30, 09:00, said:

1. Vague allegations on BridgeWinners convince a majority of the guilt of a world-class pair. Lynch-mob rule No presumption of innocence

IMO, the bridge world had typically tried to regulate itself per the "Victorian era gentlemen" & their code. In this (fanciful) world, everyone is a true-blue Gentleman who can do no wrong. Ergo accusing someone of being ungentlemanly is like slapping that person with a glove challenging them to a duel. Come on, let's please get rid of the notions from that long-gone-era and accept that people cheat.

Sometimes, especially when the regulating organisations are unable to move their rearsides fast enough, one has to make an allegation publicly. Clearly the WC players who played against the cheats knew that something fishy was going on --- that they did not identify and demonstrate (to a degree of certainty that satisfies every onlooker) does not make it a lynch-mob.

You may have seen the confessions on Bridgewinners by a couple of people. Do you think the first one would have materialised if one of the regular posters hadn't made a public accusation? Or the confession by the English expert (again on Bridgewinners) which was triggered by a tongue-in-cheek article about his greatness?

Note that I am NOT advocating people making accusations willy-nilly; in fact, I am happy for the accuser to face consequences every time.

nige1, on 2020-July-30, 09:00, said:

2. Boye Brogeland, Kit Woolsey and co, with crowd-sourced assistance, painstakingly assemble a seemingly watertight prosecution case

Emphasis added by me.

What is the "seemingly" meant to convey? Are you saying that you are one of those who is not satisfied with the case? I'm afraid that you, by using the word, are trying to somehow convey that the post-facto "evidence" is engineered to fit the case and therefore not suitable for labelling them cheats.

[Zelandakh]

Just to clarify, there has been no exoneration in this case as far as I am aware. The players brought a case against the WBF and DBV in March 2017 that was finally decided in November 2017 by the Court of Appeal in Düsseldorf, with the ruling that the WBF did not have the right to impose sanctions on individual players via the Arbitration clause and that the players must therefore be reinstated for play. The court explicitly did not make any judgement on the guilt or innocence of the players.

A copy of the ruling (in German) can be found here. By taking this legal route, the players were specifically able to avoid having to have their case heard in the CAS, which would most likely have looked into the substance of the case against them as part of its deliberations.

[nige1]

shyams, on 2020-July-30, 09:45, said:

I'm afraid I disagree with two of the five bullet points above:IMO, the bridge world had typically tried to regulate itself per the "Victorian era gentlemen" & their code. In this (fanciful) world, everyone is a true-blue Gentleman who can do no wrong. Ergo accusing someone of being ungentlemanly is like slapping that person with a glove challenging them to a duel. Come on, let's please get rid of the notions from that long-gone-era and accept that people cheat ...Note that I am NOT advocating people making accusations willy-nilly; in fact, I am happy for the accuser to face consequences every time.

Admittedly, people cheat and collusive cheating seems to have been rife among some of the most successful Bridge-players. IMO, when the authorities are dilatory, a methodical approach that does not assume guilt, like Kit Woolsey's, is best.

shyams, on 2020-July-30, 09:45, said:

What is the "seemingly" meant to convey? Are you saying that you are one of those who is not satisfied with the case? I'm afraid that you, by using the word, are trying to somehow convey that the post-facto "evidence" is engineered to fit the case and therefore not suitable for labelling them cheats.

I was privileged to be one of Kit Woolsey's helpers. His arguments convince me

[nige1]

Zelandakh, on 2020-July-30, 09:54, said:

Just to clarify, there has been no exoneration in this case as far as I am aware. The players brought a case against the WBF and DBV in March 2017 that was finally decided in November 2017 by the Court of Appeal in Düsseldorf, with the ruling that the WBF did not have the right to impose sanctions on individual players via the Arbitration clause and that the players must therefore be reinstated for play. The court explicitly did not make any judgement on the guilt or innocence of the players. A copy of the ruling (in German) can be found here. By taking this legal route, the players were specifically able to avoid having to have their case heard in the CAS, which would most likely have looked into the substance of the case against them as part of its deliberations.

The Telegraph article is confusing. Thank you for the clarification, Zelandakh. As others have written elsewhere, IMO... The WBF and NBOs should, urgently, ...

• Ban convicted cheats.
• Strip titles, places, and masterpoints from them, their partners, and their team-mates. This might also help to concentrate the minds of selectors and sponsors.
• Reallocate places and titles to their victims, quickly, in the simplest, fairest way possible, however crude e.g. shuffle them all up one, into the vacant slots.
• Belatedly, endow an international committee with adequate powers to investigate and prosecute alleged cheats, in a legally bullet-proof, timely, efficient, effective, transparent, and fair way.

This might deter some would-be cheats and those tempted to collude with them. It would provide, partial redress, at least, to the cheats' victims. At last, some justice would be done and seen to be done.

[FelicityR]

Surely the easiest way to handle cheating allegations is to appoint an independent arbitrator to look again at WBF cases. If the pair wish to appeal then it goes to a bridge federation that is not connected to the players or those that feel they have been cheated. And one appeal only, not some protracted excuse to get lawyers and barristers who probably know every little about bridge involved. There's plenty enough brains within the bridge world to see that justice and fairness are seen to be done.

It seems that at national level the whole process turns into a parochial farce where bridge friendships perhaps sully decision making. There's so much forensic evidence available including video evidence that hopefully cheating will be eliminated, but I don't hold my breath while there is not a WBF sanctioned format for dealing with alleged cheats.

Simply, if you are accused of cheating at world level and found guilty, then you should be banned from the game for life. No ifs or buts.