CHEATING DOGS..........( part 3 )

In my final article I want to explore two or three areas of table behaviour, which is my view represents soft cheating.....but bizarrely regarded as "permissible".

The biggest issue by far involves partnership familiarity. If one player over time begins to develop an ability ( at the subconscious level ) to interpret every nuance and detailed mannerism of hisher partner, then that level of acute awareness can translate itself into knowledge.....and understanding of what to do. Successful decisions, when questioned by others, might well receive replies such as " I figured...", " I sensed...." and " something told me to...". Perpetrators with this gift of insight tend to equate this talent with table presence, years of experience and acquired wisdom, but in reality it is an ability to read partner like a book.

Indeed, it may be the case that some players have developed a 6th sense when it comes to always doing the right thing. Subconsciously aided by their partner's aura and behaviour, they certainly know when partner has a problem....and what type of hand causes such a problem. As an acol player I will always open 1H on a 4 card suit. Typically, after partner responds 1S my next bid is 2NT ( showing 17-18 ). But when partner now stops to think, I know he has a 3 card suit holding and is unsure of what game to be in. For those who have regular partners, there must be thousands of examples like this. Moreover, in any situation where feelings are communicated, there is always a great deal of information which is communicated with them.

So now let's move onto to unsportsmanlike behaviour. Surely, if this upsets or distracts the opponents to play their normal game, or not focus fully on what they are doing, then such behaviour secures an unfair advantage. Subtle forms of this unacceptable practice include players who set out to control the tempo of the bidding and play, in such a way as to unsettle their opponents. One motive behind "quick" play is to deflect defenders from thinking declarer has a problem. For less experienced defenders being psychologically pressured into playing at the same quick tempo denies them the essential time they might need to determine their best options. And what about slow play ? Whether it is intentional or not, stealing time is a blatant form of cheating. Often opponents are put under pressure to make up for time lost by making their bids, and carding decisions quickly.....denying them opportunities to make the best choices. Moreover slow players can frustrate their opponents to the point of utter frustration and annoyance. This certainly undermines their ability to really focus on the game itself. In fact any kind of unsportsmanlike behaviour can be viewed as diversionary tactics designed to unsettle the opponents, and disrupt their train of thought. In football there are many players to set out to get opponents sent off. This is done by "winding them up" at every opportunity, hoping their retaliation is an over-the-top sending off offence. Even if this tactic fails the wind ups may be sufficient to put them off their normal game.

So as I said at the very beginning of these short articles, cheating and cards have always been uncomfortable bed-fellows. Bridge remains the most beautiful and wonderful game in the world, but sadly one which is so exposed and vulnerable to cheating. To those who do it deliberately and knowingly, shame upon them. But similarly, to those who cheat without being aware they do so.....or if challenged remain firmly in denial.....then shame upon them too. So is table presence a gift ....or is it an ability to spot "a tell". And as for extreme forms of table behaviour, are they reflections of larger than life characters....... or ones who possess a few ulterior motives ? Who can really tell.......

( If anyone would like to air their views or opinions please to do so. I would very much like to hear them. )