MEANWHILE BACK IN BRIDGE CLUB BAR ROOM BIGOT EXTOLS HIS VIRTUES......

HEADLINES YOU ARE NEVER LIKELY TO SEE IN THE BIZARRE WORLD OF BRIDGE........( Article by Carp )

CHEATS TURN THEMSELVES IN AND HAND BACK ILLEGALLY WON TROPHIES

PROFESSIONAL RETURNS SPONSOR'S MONEY HAVING PLAYED SO POORLY

INCREASE IN PRIZE MONEY NOW ENABLES WINNERS TO RECOVER ENTRANCE FEES

NATIONAL SELECTORS PICK TEAM BASED PURELY ON MERIT AND ABILITY

WOMEN START TO OUT PERFORM MEN IN TOP CLASS COMPETITIONS

TOP FLIGHT PLAYERS REVERT BACK TO NATURAL BIDDING

COMMITTEES FULFILL THEIR OBLIGATIONS TO BE OPEN AND TRANSPARENT 

COMMITTEE MEMBER REFRAINS FROM VOTING AFTER DECLARING A CONFLICT
OF INTEREST

BRIDGE CLUBS DELUGED WITH APPLICATIONS FROM YOUNG PEOPLE DESPERATELY KEEN TO JOIN

ZERO TOLERANCE POLICIES ARE SCRAPPED IN A BOLD ATTEMPT TO RESTORE
LIFE , LAUGHTER AND EXCITEMENT BACK INTO THE GAME

NEWSFLASH : CHRISTMAS SALES SEE A SENSATIONAL NEW BRIDGE BOOK " WHAT I LOVE DOING WHEN I'M NOT PLAYING BRIDGE " BY ROBIN HOLMES REACH 4 MILLION COPIES WORLDWIDE..................

DR. JOHN'S CASE NOTES :  BRIDGE PLAYERS AND SELF-DECEPTION

Bridge players are renown  for deceiving themselves. Indeed , this condition becomes more acute when they take up key roles on committee. 
Self-deception is a state resembling but distinguishable from that of ignorance or false belief. Every player I have ever come across falsely believes he/she is an expert at the game. But of much greater concern is that decisions made by committees are claimed , quite falsely , to be outcome of an open and fair democratic process : always correct and morally right. 
Sadly their self-deception consists of a motivational blindness to facts that are in some way or for some reason undesirable or unacceptable to the individuals concerned. For instance , when facts can be produced to establish to alternative argument or point of view , bridge players will choose not to see them or accept them , because they are motivated to endorse only those facts which support their chosen position.
Self-deception is a subject which fascinates philosophers as well as psycho-analysts.In an ideal world all viewpoints and decisions should be determined on the availability of correct information , plus that level of effort needed to establish all the relevant and crucial facts . However when self-deception locks in ,  significant facts are conveniently overlooked. Then of course there is the failure to raise relevant questions for fear of getting unacceptable answers.  
A classic example which illustrates collective self-deception by committee members involved the wrongful dismissal of a Reverend  from the church. The court held that there was a deliberate falsification of the hearing and of the evidence concerned. This view was supported by the fact that not one of 38 unsolicited letters of recommendation for the Reverend received by the panel from his former congregants was entered into the final report , or even referred to in discussions. This was simply because of their positive and glowing support for the Reverend and his ministry. Yet all 4 of the solicited letters against the Reverend , obtained during the proceedings, were reproduced in the report having been declared at face value as legitimate evidence.
All this self-deception can be psychologically explained as the unconscious distortion of the appreciation of a state of affairs to satisfy the individual's own motives. In practice self-deception quickly manifests itself into bad faith,  by which most opinions and decisions are predetermined , as opposed to being freely chosen by those with open minds , moral integrity and with no personal agendas or axes to grind.   

" DON'T CALL HIM STUPID " : THE WALNUT TREE ALLOTMENT SOCIETY BC DISCIPLINARY HEARING No.238

(  Within days of his last disciplinary , he was back in front of the disciplinary committee having foul-mouthed an opponent at the table. )

Chairman ( C ) : Did you or did you not call your opponent Arthur Brayne " stupid "
B-J : I certainly did....for I am a man who speaks the truth
C : That may be so....but in this club we do not insult opponents..... or direct foul and abusive language at them. Zero tolerance rules apply to all members....including you
B-J : Well ....the fool asked a rather inviting question as to what I thought of him as a person given my contempt for him as a player.......and being a man who believes in brevity I thought " stupid " completely summed him up in just one simple easy-to-understand word
C : But you can't do that.....it was an insult.....cruel and heartless
B-J : Excuse me....we know all that the truth hurts..... but stupid is what he is. In fact he should have treated it as a compliment because quite frankly he plays bridge like a moron .....never able to grasp even basic ideas or instructions
C : Really ? 
B-J : Yes really....you see being stupid is not having or showing an ability to absorb ideas readily. Moreover a stupid man is marked by his lack of intellectual acuity. Therefore , if these definitions were applied to him they would be compliments..... because the extent of his stupidity defies belief
C : Well.....even if that was the case.....  political correctness forbids the use of such a word which brutally portrays him a complete jackass 
B-J : Perhaps you're right.....it may have been better to describe old Arthur as " not the sharpest tool in the box "......or " having too much yardage between the goal posts ".....or better still " the wheel is spinning but the hamster's dead "
C : Exactly....because no way would Arthur understand what the hell these statements actually mean. And blissful ignorance would have resulted in no complaint being lodged against you
B-J : Ah well.....I must remember to do that the next time I sit down and play against this numpty
C : Sorry to say this......but there wont be a next time for a while.... that is until your 6 month suspension has been completed
B-J : Bugger... 
  

WALNUT TREE ALLOTMENT SOCIETY BC DISCIPLINARY HEARING No. 236........... 

(  Following a near-miss incident which happened when an irate Bigot-Johnson picked up a bridgemate and hurled it across a crowded room, the club committee ordered him to attend a disciplinary hearing. Many members believed Bigot was destined to be kicked out , but the great man rose to the challenge of defending himself with great success. The following exchange of words demonstrates the wonderful way a philosophical argument can triumph in the face of adversity ).

Chairman (C ) : What we witnessed the other day was an act of reckless disregard for the safety of others  . And we the committee consider this hurling of a bridgemate across a crowded room to be offensive and aggressive. One can only define it as an assault with a deadly weapon. 
B-J : That sir is an outrageous suggestion , and I shall prove to you that my actions were both innocent and harmless
C : Oh please enlighten us as to why you think you have done nothing wrong ?
B-J : Well , let's start with a irrefutable fact that.....when a bridgemate is at rest it occupies a space equal to its own dimensions
C : Yes....that's true
B-J : Moreover , when a bridge is at rest it is completely harmless and safe
C : I couldn't agree more
B-J : So do you accept that when a bridgemate is in flight , at any given moment in time it still occupies a space equal to its dimensions
C : Yes....that must also be true
B-J : Therefore , it is correct to say that throughout its whole flight the bridgemate occupies an infinite number spaces all equal to its dimensions...... and in each space it is of course at rest , making it harmless and safe
C : Yes....I suppose so
B-J : Therefore this argument proves the bridgement is forever at rest even in flight ,  being no danger or risk to anybody at any time
C : I have followed the logic of your argument and even though I am obliged to accept it as a valid defence to the charge made against you , I remain perplexed as to why I have come to this hideous conclusion .....one that seems utterly absurd and wrong
B-J : Well, that how it goes when a numpty like you falls victim to a philosophical paradox    
  

THE SLAUGHTER HOUSE BRIDGE CLUB'S NUMEROUS SUB-COMMITTEES

Chairman , Bigot-Johnson , has always been a great believer in forming specialist sub-committees to handle difficult and demanding tasks , which of course enables the main committee to focus on the broader policy issues. 
Over the years the club has created and developed well over 20 sub-committees , which have all proved indispensable in Bigot-Johnson's quest to run the place with absolute control and ruthless efficiency. The responsibilities and tasks carried out by these extremely important sub-committees are listed below:
1.   Inventing limp but plausible excuses
2.   Blame avoidance and transference
3.   Covert operations
4.   Investigations into members' alleged misconduct
5.   Theatrical productions and re-enactments
6.   Frame-ups and fit-ups
7.   Character assassinations 
8    Publication and dissemination of propaganda
9.    Contracts and indemnity clauses 
10.  Removal and disposal of incriminating evidence
11.  Knee-jerk reactions
12. AGM vote rigging  
13. Applications vetting and reviews
14. Internal surveillance and security
15. Preparation and storage of dossiers on members
16. Incognito ad hoc activities
17. Reckless spending projects
18. Fund raising for lawyers' fees
19. Reviewing oversights and cover ups
20. Circumventing club rules and regulations
21. Coordinating the work of sub-committees
22. Performance and appraisal ( of sub-committee members )
23. Ideas and development for new sub-committees
24. Slush fund budgeting



   

ANOTHER KEEP-THEM-IN-THE-DARK AGM BUT NOW ONE OR TWO CONCERNED MEMBERS ARE STARTING TO ASK SOME SEARCHING QUESTIONS.........

BOOK BRIDGE ON SALE OVER CHRISTMAS.......

• A Player Like That Is An Absolute Rarity.........................Penny Black
• Whenever I Win I Just Dance With Joy............................Lynn D. Hopper
• If Your Partner Has A Hearing Impediment.....................Belle O. Lauder
• My Damn Partner Never Makes An Honest Bid..............Fuller Sykes
• Believe Me That Man Has Left The Club For Good..........Egan Forshaw
• The Way I Choose To Show My Disapproval.....................Ed Shaker
• I'll Tell You Why Your Results Are Suffering ....................Troy N. Tuard 
• It's No Big Deal If You Don't Get Selected.......................Y. B. Bothard
• The Secret Behind My Success At Bridge......................I. P. Callotte
• We Need Someone To Help Us Fight Our Case.............Noah Loyer

BIGOT-JOHNSON'S GOLDEN RULE ON COMMITTEE RESIGNATIONS.....

Let's face it .....when you join a club committee it's only a matter of time before you get browned off , brassed off , cheesed off and pissed off with the way things are done , or perhaps not done. Whether you are put upon , picked upon or completely ignored , the realization that you this kind of work is not for you quickly sinks home. All too often you are sworn to secrecy , having to attend meetings behind closed doors , and made to fall in line with those who wield the power and the unforgiving axe. Why should humble committee members be treated like mushrooms forever kept in the dark and fed manure ?
So resignation is only your ticket back to sanity , especially if the thought of doing a full term sends shudders down your fragile spine. But what is important is how to show the extreme disappointment and anger you are currently feeling. You need to let the " them " know the true extent of your contempt and disapproval over the way you have been treated. 
So there is no need to write a letter explaining the reasons for your resignation. Make your point there and then as you exit the committee room in a demonstrative huff.  Indeed , there is no need to slope out like a scolded child or a timid mouse. No need to slam the door. One glorious gesture is enough. Therefore , the golden rule is to vent your spleen in the most dramatic and theatrical way you can , which of course can be best illustrated by the picture below. This is calculated to leave a lasting impression in my minds of those looking on , as well as providing the wider membership with a truly wonderful bit of gossip. 

DR. JOHN'S CASE NOTES : ANTISOCIAL PERSONALITY DISORDER

The biggest and greatest irony of all time can be seen in the bizarre world of bridge. So many clubs proudly advertise bridge as the ultimate social experience , where men and women of all ages can come together to play the beautiful game in a quiet , relaxed and friendly environment. But the irony is of course that the demanding and competitive aspects of the game tend to attract people  who are either further along the autistic spectrum , or who have anti-social personality disorders.
Kurt Schneider , an eminent psychiatrist ,  was the first to broaden the concept of personality disorder to include antisocial behaviour. Looking at bridge clubs in particular , his studies found that APD was more common in men than in women , and the incidence of APD was far greater in such venues than anywhere else. The majority of the male players came across as geeks , oddballs , loners , social misfits and grumpy old men. What Kurt also observed was that in most sports men competed against men , but in bridge men were also obliged to compete against women as well. 
So given that APD is characterised by a callous lack of concern for the feeling of others, women of course with their sensitive nature and delicate dispositions were far more prone to being hurt and upset. Indeed , APD sufferers were seen to have a total disregard for the socials rules listed on documents relating to etiquette and best behaviour. Their irritable and aggressive behaviour could never be curbed. Lack of self-control meant bullying was commonplace , and their impulsive acts never showed any guilt or remorse towards those on the receiving end. Even more disconcerting was the fact this kind of nasty behaviour would be repeated week after week , with sufferers completely unable to learn from the experience. 
Even their own partners would be legitimate targets for their antisocial behaviour , as evidenced by the number of partners they would get through on a regular basis. 
However , victims afflicted with APD could when necessary appear to be nice , oozing superficial charm to play down any accusations which might come their way. Once the threat of reprimand or punishment disappears, relationships soon return to being fiery , turbulent and short-lived affairs.
Sadly , APD  is a clinically defined mental disorder which closely correlates with instances of petty crime. These misdemeanours within the world of bridge encompass such acts as cheating , physical assaults , harassment , graffiti , and criminal damage. So there we have it : a social game which unfortunately attracts and harbours anti-social types. The irony could not be more obvious.

NEWSFLASH : TOP LADY PLAYER GETS A NASTY
SURPRISE.......

" How could the team selectors do this to me.....pairing
me up again with that wretched Bigot-Johnson ! " 

BIGOT CONFESSES TO HAVING A RARE MEDICAL CONDITION .....

BIGOT SHOWS THE WORLD ON HOW COMMITTEES SHOULD BE RUN...... (  As evidenced by this secret recording of a recent committee meeting )

B-J ( Chairman ) :  I wish to put forward a motion........which is to raise funds by remortgaging the club house
Spokesman  ( for all the other committee members ) : We're all in complete agreement with you , my Fuhrer 
B-J : I wholeheartedly agree that you were right to support this motion
Spokesman : We agree that the chairman couldn't be more right about agreeing that we were right to support the motion
B-J : So let's now have a debate on the motion
New committee member : I don't mean to rock to boat , but I can't help but query why we need to debate the motion  , when it is perfectly clear that everyone is in agreement with the motion 
B-J : How dare you suggest that we forego the debate......such a suggestion warrants a severe reprimand.....and as a consequence , I certainly wish to put another motion to the committee ....which is to implement your immediate expulsion from this club .... and your ejection from this meeting
Spokesman : We too agree with this motion 
B-J : Motion carried then.......so can someone call in security to get this man removed forthwith from this building......thank you......and now let's move onto motion number 3....which states that in all future meetings only committee members , who agree without question any motion I care to introduce ,  will be allowed into the committee room
Spokesman : Yes , yes.....yes.....we all agree that motion too
B-J  : Well,  I take then motions 1 and 3 are also by carried by a unanimous majority
Spokesman : Indeed , my Fuhrer........indeed
B-J  : Shall we dispense with debating these two issues.......and have a liquid lunch instead
Spokesman: What a splendid idea......
      

DR. JOHN'S CASE NOTES: THE BAH BAH COMPLEX

Victims of this complex are found in large numbers in bridge clubs across the world. Many of them through gentle cajoling are persuaded to help make up committee numbers to perform the role of obliging sheep.
This condition manifests itself by a growing lack of personal confidence , which in turn compels them to adopt the opinions and views of the group. This need to follow soon becomes the most important aspect of their personal behaviour , especially when surrounded by more controlling and  domineering club members. Indeed , the group's praise encourages the bah bah victim to reject their own opinions in favour of the group's. In short , this complex turns them into completely harmless sheep , willing to follow the leads and directions made by others.
This follow-my-leader merry-go-round completely runs the life of these woolly-headed sufferers , who become hostages to this debilitating affliction. Classic symptoms associated with this condition can be listed as follows:
- an inability to formulate their own position without the preliminary guidance and counselling
  of the group
- high estimation of the opinions held by the group leader , which initiates the depreciation of 
  their own opinions , irrespective of the fact they might even be of greater merit 
- high tendency to believe in the mantra recited by the group without ever questioning its
  content or meaning
- the abject desire to allow the influences of others to shape and direct their lives to an
  excessive almost dangerous degree
- an inability to cope with the group's indifference or condemnation towards themselves  

Sadly , this complex tends develop into a vicious circle. The more they lose their own personal identity by agreeing with everything others are saying ,  the more despised they become. This in turn compels them to seek favour and praise by choosing to go along with the majority view , but in doing so this subjects them to even more derision and ridicule. So by becoming the ultimate sheep-like individual , the risk of dramatic consequences  ( such as mental breakdowns ) heightens considerably. This bah bah complex can only be cured by relations moving towards mutual respect and esteem. However , the chances of this happening are nil because what sane person could ever respect a " yes " man , nodding dog ,  or  an eager-to-please sycophantic creep.               

WHEN IT COMES TO DISCIPLINARY HEARINGS EVEN TOP ACADEMIC UNIVERSITIES GET IT ALL WRONG....
( Article by Professor Hu Chi Ku Chi )

No matter where you look ,  disciplinary processes and decisions are often flawed giving rise to well founded claims that those in the dock have been cheated of justice.

Even universities , where disciplinary panels are made up of extremely well qualified staff with access to the resources and expertise located in their law faculties , operate like amateurs making one mistake after another. 
In a recent article in the " I " newspaper , Dr Daniel Sokol , a leading barrister in this field of law , seemed  appalled at the lamentable performance of these high powered disciplinary panels. On many occasions he felt the process was a disgrace , and therefore much of his criticism was directed at the chairmen involved.

There was so many failings within  the disciplinary process  which  beggared belief , as outlined in the following extract :

The author then went on to say that in some cases the length of the initial hearing was no more than 15 minutes , even though expulsion was clearly on the cards. When certain things needed to be disclosed they were not. So when he , on behalf of the student , reminded the chair that a particular report should have been disclosed earlier  to allow time to review it , the chair's response was " We don't do that , and we find that the report just confuses students ".


















                                                
This notion that we did what we felt was right smacks of gross naivety , vanity and self-delusion. Not only should appeal panels religiously follow their own rules and regulations to the letter , but they also need to recognise and adhere to the basic rules of natural justice. Yet panels choose to give students , say accused of plagiarism , a really hard time. This is fine , as long as the questions are fair. Moreover , panels should not automatically greet evidence produced by the students with suspicion , whilst at the same time taking testimony of the academic staff making the complaint at face value as infallible evidence . Indeed , there had been instances of students being denied the opportunity to call key witnesses to give evidence on their behalf. Once when acting as counsel he pointed out to the panel  a query regarding evidence given against the student by an absent witness , since he/she was unable to confirm their evidence , or have it challenged by others. And what was the chairman's response ?  " Oh , it wouldn't make any difference anyway ". This reply sent out a clear message that guilty verdicts had already been decided upon. 
What the author knows to be true is that any person brought up before a disciplinary body has the fundamental right to expect a reasonable standard of fairness , throughout the whole process. This could only be possible if the panelists were properly trained , resourced , and supported by those in a position to offer sound legal advice and guidance. This quasi-judicial task is not one which should be carried out by ill-trained panelists with little understanding of what constitutes a " fair " hearing . No one deserves a panel who simply reach decisions on the basis that they feel what they're doing is right . Surely , the process needs to be right in order to arrive at a fair and correct outcome ?  A tainted process raises too many questions about the reliability, merit and value of the outcome. No one deserves to be cheated of justice.    

DR . JOHN'S CASE NOTES : THE NAPOLEON COMPLEX

In the bizarre world of bridge , you will always find in every club at least one player who suffers from this egocentric complex. Often this afflicted person has physical shortcomings in terms of height and stature , but his game however will always be head and shoulders above the rest, when it comes to subtle art of bidding and card play. Victims of the Napoleon Complex are consequently blessed with high reputation and publicly acknowledged leadership qualities.
The classic symptoms of this condition are ; 
- a vertically challenged physique or facial disfigurement , which they choose to ignore or hide
  behind a rhetoric of bravado and self-worship
- self-centrism which is the consequence of years of self-isolation as a child , but essential as a 
  quality to persevere and develop his/her unique talent at bridge
- a tendency to assume leadership and dominance over others , alongside a passionate desire
  to control and manipulate the masses
- the need to harness and nurture a devoted band of followers
- an uncontrollable urge to hold court , lecturing and preaching to those in attendance on the 
  finer and more subtle aspects of the game
Sadly however , this complex never goes away , and although it never results in others being put at risk of serious harm , there is a likelihood that excessive exposure to such a person will lead to problems such as chronic " ear-bashing " ear ache ". 

LAW REPORT :  GILBERT and others v BIGOT-JOHNSON and others ( 2015 )

( In this landmark case a group action claim for negligence against Bigot-Johnson and his fellow committee members came up before High Court judge. Having lost their previous case, Bigot and the committee were obliged to pay an unbelievably high legal bill  , which was to be paid out of club funds. Some of the ordinary members now reeling under this financial burden wanted to refinance the club from the personal damages obtained against the committee members for their negligent mismanagement of club finances. Bigot as usual elected to act as defence counsel , and this short extract from the trial's transcript covered a critical stage of the trial . ) 


Counsel for the plaintiffs ( CP ) : Might I point out Bigot that in any club  the contractual relationship between the members imposes a duty upon the elected committee to manage the affairs of the club in a competent way. Such a contract will contain an implied term that financial decisions are carried out with reasonable skill , care and diligence. This action could be framed as a claim in contract , or alternatively .....as in this case.....as a free standing claim in negligence against each and every committee member. Your conduct would be measured by the standards which it would be reasonable to expect of a comparable and competent committee in all the circumstances of this case.
B-J : There is no case to answer. We always carried out all our duties with the club's best interests in mind , and decisions we took were supported and endorsed by the membership.
CP : Who of course voted on issues regarding a previous legal battle without never knowing the full facts...... or their long term financial implications. The club and all its members suffered a great financial loss because of the committee's refusal to admit liability for the damage to a member's car. The committee in fact allowed the dispute to go all the way to court....as in this case....with no guarantee of winning. 
B-J : Well....we didn't lose that case as I recall
CP : Yes that's true .....but quite rightly the judge ordered that both parties should meet their own legal costs ......which for your side amounted to nearly £200,000
B-J : We couldn't let that bastard hold us to ransom for criminal damage caused by an unknown third party
CP : Sometimes choosing the lesser of two financial evils makes really good sense
B-J : Might I remind you that I and my fellow committee members have always gone about our business in a very efficient and effective way. We are all principled people totally committed to stand up for what we consider as " doing the right thing " no matter what the cost
CP : But it wasn't your money which was at stake.....you made sure you had nothing to lose....it was the club and all its members who had to face and finance the legal costs incurred. Costs that I might add represent fruitless and wasteful expenditure , which was made in vain and could have been avoided had reasonable care been exercised
B-J : Rubbish.....we did what any committee would have done
CP : I think not. Would average men in your position chosen to incur such expenditure knowing that the club's whole future could be put at risk ? Funding a dispute all the way to court is absolutely unnecessary , especially when cheaper options , like mediation , were readily available.
B-J : But we went to mediation...
CP : But only after after two years of stubborn resistance and refusal , and only then when ordered to do so by a judge..... you scuppered the process by turning up to the mediation hearing with a rigid set of non-negotiable preconditions  
B-J : Oh.....
CP :  Negligence as you well know involves establishing a duty of care based on a reasonably foreseeable risk of loss or financial damage. And any numpty can foresee that litigation involves heavy costs which are never likely to be recovered. Your task as a committee was to look at the most cost effective options , and/or employ damage limitation strategies , which you failed to do. This unfortunate omission on your part amounts to gross negligence. This " bring it on " attitude of yours was both reckless and regrettable
B-J : So what does one do when being sued by a member who claimed we were at fault for the damage to his car ?
CP : Acknowledge that you knew  " someone " had already damaged other members' cars in previous weeks but then failed to take steps to avoid further incidents . Acknowledge that he had a justifiable claim given your refusal to employ a car park attendant , which would have cost so little. Acknowledge the fact that paying the member £2,000 for his car repairs was small change in comparison to the cost of fighting his claim in court.   
Judge :  I've heard enough .....Bigot .....you are someone who will never learn....and as such I have no choice but to find the plaintiffs. Damages with be set to the level of the legal bill incurred by the club in the previous case , which will be used to refinance the club .....and in addition to that.... all costs in this case with will met by you and your foolhardy committee members
B-J : Bugger....bugger.....bugger 
  

BRIDGE BOOKS NO GIVES A DAMN ABOUT.......( Including Pun )

• This Club's Expenditure Is Running Way Ahead Of Income..............Annette Loss
• That Lady Managed To Make Every Slam She Punted.....................Rhoda Luck
• I'veJust Played 10 Hours Of Non-stop Internet  Bridge......................Al Dunning
• Why Did Your Partner Slap You Across The Face ?..........................Helda Juggs
• Playing Cold Contracts Is What I Love Doing The Most....................Jack Frost
• Don't Tell Me You Believe I Cheat At This Game ?............................Gill T. Azelle
• Getting Married Put A Stop On A Glittering Bridge Career...............Nora Gretz
• What Decorations Can The Club Afford To Buy This Christmas ?.......Aretha Holly
• That Man Has The Knack Of Getting Any Lady To Partner Him...........Fanny Tickler
• I Would Avoid That Man Like The Plague..........................................E. Bowler
• Sorry , But This Club Has Refused Your Application To Join.............Doris Schutt
• Spotting Who Is Cheating At The Table Is Easy................................Ike Cantelle

BIGOT VEHEMENTLY OBJECTS TO THE JUDGE'S CHOICE OF WORDS....

( A snippet from the trial's lengthy transcript involving the infamous flying bridgemate incident and the alleged wrongful expulsion which stemmed from it )

Judge : Are you telling me , Bigot , that you launched and propelled a bridgemate across the table within inches of an opponent's nose ?
Bigot : Yes....I did
Judge : Well , from seeing the video evidence of the re-enactment..... this swift and sudden act seems both misdirected and misguided 
Bigot : What !  Misdirected ?   Misguided ?  How dare you make inferences. I can assure you that this airborne manoeuvre was carried out with military precision and pin point accuracy ....just like a laser guided missile ......because no way was there any deviation from its intended flight path
Judge : Sorry Bigot......I stand corrected
    

MEANWHILE BACK IN THE SLAUGHTER HOUSE BC BAR ROOM.......

BIGOT PUTS A REJECTED APPLICANT FIRMLY IN THE PICTURE .....

Dear Alistair ,

I'm a little perturbed by the content and tone of your letter. Your membership application was rejected for good reasons , but basically it was a case of you not be able to meet our high expectations and lofty ideals. As you know this bridge club is privately owned and managed by myself with the assistance of a few well trained lackeys. Indeed , it is the club's policy to exclude anyone we consider to be from the lower end in our society,  which certainly applies to you.
The Slaughter House prides itself on catering for people of real stature , blessed with excellent overview of things. Although I accept I was wrong to label you as a child actor , you were at least placed on the short list before the vetting committee finally decided to reject your application. 
Now you may well ask " Why was that ? ". Well , surely you must know. As a 4 foot 4 inch misfit you belong to that group of growth retarded individuals , commonly referred to midgets , hobbits , dwarfs , and pygmies. And according to the club's Constitution the rules on membership are clear and precise : members must be of good standing who are capable of taking big strides towards self-actualisation and achievement.
Moreover , the club doesn't provide big enough table-chair cushions.... and standing on the seats during play is strictly forbidden. 

Yours faithfully,
                  Howard Bigot-Johnson ( Chairman and Chief Executioner )

COGNITIVE ILLUSIONS ....... ( Article by Professor Hu Chi Ku Chi )

Cognitive illusions occur when the flawed , irrational thinking individuals still choose to hold onto their erroneous beliefs , even though evidence can be produced to show that the premise on which those beliefs were founded lacked any credibility whatsoever. 
Psychological experiments have shown time and time again that a belief founded on original knowledge known to be false still exerts a lingering influence on all subsequent decisions and judgements. It is impossible for the flawed , irrational individual to hit the reset button. A poisoned mind unfortunately remains poisoned, since there are no known antidotes to cure cognitive illusions. 
Jurors provide a wonderful example of people renown for succumbing to cognitive illusions. Lawyers know this human trait all too well , as they set out to plant the seeds of a false belief in the minds of such gullible people. Once the jury adopt a view or belief about the accused , then the outcome almost becomes a foregone conclusion. Objections by the opposing counsel will no doubt be lodge , and judges will ask the jury to disregard the " these last statements ", but to no avail. The poisonous seeds once planted will leave a permanent impression on the minds of the jurors. So even when compelling evidence is introduced later on by the opposing counsel , it is completely ignored. The erroneous belief is firmly in place and with it a predetermined verdict which refuses to be dislodged.
So in the context of a bridge club's disciplinary process , the committee are obliged to act as both judge and jurors. However , the fact that they all hold subjective opinions about the accused member, whether positive or negative , does not bode well for justice. If he/she has already been labelled as a " bad apple " , the incident complained of can never be looked at in an impartial and objective way. 
Committee members will come to the meeting ( or hearing ) with a set belief , and even when evidence is produced to discredit , undermine or disprove that belief , pre-judgements based on that belief have already been made. Many will have invested a significant amount of cognitive effort in making sure that belief is consistent with the psychological feelings they have towards the accused member. Therefore feelings of loathing and hatred fly in the face of fairness and justice , as the committee will be extremely persistent and resistant to change. The cognitive illusion forbids such change , and so an insidious errors of judgement will be made.
The Human Condition is such that we all to a lesser or large extent suffer from a multitude of failings and shortcomings. But the real tragedy is that each one of us remains blissfully unaware of the construction of our beliefs , and the mental processes that lead to them. Belief perseverance is in itself the reason why so much injustice occurs. People only believe what they want to believe in , and reject anything they choose not to believe in. Cognitive illusions , like optical illusions , distort what we see , or believe to be seeing . Indeed, cognitive illusions completely undermine the individual's ability to look at things with an open mind.  

BRIDGE BOOKS FOR QUALITY BEDTIME READING................ ( Recommendations by Pun )

• Members In My Club Are A Right Mishmash...............................Allan Sundrey
• So Tell Me What Shape Was Your Partner's Hand......................L. E. Fantine 
• Someone Had To Tell That Woman The Error Of Her Ways.........Sue I Tolder 
• Oh No My Partner's Looking Agitated Yet Again..........................Ena Flapp
• Why Wont Our Chairman Ever Face Up To Reality......................N. D. Nyall
• Those Allegations About Me Are A Load Of Balls.......................Tess Tickles
• Any Player Suspected Of Cheating Action Is Called For............Mark Hiskard
• My Game Has Gone Completely To Pieces.................................A. Wyre
• What All Stressed Out Bridge Players Need To Take.................Ann O'Dyne
• Should A Player Get Physically Abusive Then Restrain Him......Ed Lock 
• Bridge Players Need To Relax And Take Things Easy...............Mel O'Ness
• I'll Tell You What Our Chairman Should Do.................................Stan Downe
• No Way Do I Refer To Coloured Members In Racist Terms.........Sam Bowes
• Buccaneering Bridge Is What My Game Is All About...................Sally Mann
• She Gets UI from Tuning In To Loose Talk On Other Tables.......Ann Tanner 
• How Is The Team Getting On At The Other Tables ?...................Fay Lyne Badleigh 

IN DEFENCE OF SARCASM.............( Article by Bigot-Johnson )

Does it never occur to people that sarcasm is not the lowest form of wit but the highest. Moreover , it can only be delivered by those who are blessed with a higher form of intellect and intelligence. Indeed it is people like me who set out with a clear agenda to help these critics improve their own intellectual capacities.
Some of these dullards have the audacity to suggest that the extent of my sarcasm is associated with an outrageous arrogance. But hold here.....surely gifted as I am with intelligence and wit ,  I am entitled to be arrogant. Nevertheless I do acknowledge that I am no Graucho Marx , who without a shadow of doubt was the greatest of them of all. In terms of off-the-cuff sarcastic quips this man had no equal. He took sarcasm up to unprecedented heights :
sublime , excruciatingly funny and utter devastating.
In my mind sarcasm is a bold and noble attempt to expose a truth by means of stating the opposite , or by making gross or absurd exaggerations. It is in effect making a joke of hard unpalatable truths. Too many readers fail to register and accept any disturbing and unsettling facts. Therefore such revelations need to be knocked into their tiny heads with a magical hammer forged out of  pure sarcasm and acid wit. But then these dullards have the bare faced cheek to object to the choice of language used. 
And what of the victims of such vitriolic attacks ? If they are guilty of crimes , immoral acts or other forms of unacceptable behaviour, then why not expose such wrongdoings by means of poetic licence , verbal dexterity and imagination laced with well crafted figures of speech. To craft sarcasm is an incredible challenge , worthy of praise , and these people who have been exposed in this way should regard it all as flattery. They should take responsibility for their actions and in doing so respect the authors for putting them firmly into the spotlight.    

BIGOT RECEIVES A LETTER.............

Dear Bigot ,
Allow me to introduce myself. My name is Roger M. Knightley and to put it mildly I'm a buccaneering, womanising, fun loving bridge player ,  who always sets out to speak his mind and ruffle a few feathers. As yet I have not found a club happy to  accept my talents and cavalier attitudes.
Indeed , I am writing to you in a state of profound despair. Every club I have ever joined has slung me out ,  claiming my presence had a severe negative effect on the social harmony and friendly atmosphere , committee members were keen to promote. These puritans were all obsessed with cleansing the membership of undesirables , a category into which I unfortunately fell.
Having heard so much about the Slaughter House Bridge Club , I felt this could be the place where I truly fit in. I want to leave behind all the polite bullshit pleasantries, false bon hommie , holding my tongue , walking on eggshells , pious attitudes , blind obedience , doing what I'm told , best behaviour rules , zero tolerance policies , stepping back from conflict and confrontation , benign compliance and submission , all of which have squeezed the life and character out of my very being. I want to play bridge in a place where anything goes , reminiscent of Sir Francis Dashwood's Hell Fire Bridge Club which first came to prominence in the early 18th century.
I know that as a seasoned campaigner , with my colourful personality , outrageous behaviour , and immense talent at bridge I can make a meaningful contribution to the bridge experience enjoyed by your members, You Bigot must recall how important it was for you to escape from the straitjacket of conformity and be true to yourself. Look at you now . You're chairman of the most infamous bridge club in the world and one of selectors for the national team . probably netting £50,000 a year or more from backhanders and bribes.  
So by joining this inclusive,  amoral society of like-minded men and women I would surely be in dream land . Please find the enclosed cheque to assist you with processing my application , and I hope to hear from you very shortly.

The Devil be with you also ,
                                 Roger M. Knightley