Re: Cheating

"Bill Jacobs" <bill.jacobs@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:Xns9467A92FAbilljacobsflashmailc@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Thanks Fred.
>
> Whilst the two processes look similar, it is interesting that the
volumes
> are so different: 150 over 3 years banned from OKB, and <10 from BBO.
>
> I can think of 3 possible reasons:
>
> 1.  OKB has a much large number of players.
>
> 2.  BBO is more conservative than OKB in "convicting" people of cheating
>
> 3.  The presence of Lehman ratings in OKB provides a motivation for
cheating
>
> Item 3 is the one that interests me.  I am coming to the conclusion that
on-
> line bridge is only playable in an environment where it is played purely
for
> fun - that is, there is absolutely no reward or prize of any kind
involved.
>
> Cheers ... Bill

The difference in numbers is probably not a function of Item 1.
In fact, nowadays it is the other way around - BBO has a much
larger number of players than OKB does. OKB was bigger than
BBO for much of the 3-year period you are talking about, but
these days it is not even close. Yesterday we had over 3000
people logged in at peak time and over 1000 people logged in
during almost 20 hours of the day.

If our growth curve continues, then the member****p of BBO
will surpass the ACBL's around the middle of 2004 (and we
will surpass planet Earth's population some time in early 2009).

I don't know whether Items 2 or 3 are true or not. I can tell you
that I receive more e-mails about rating systems than on any
other topic (except for when I foolishly involve myself in
a controversial rgb thread). Some of these are from people
asking me to include a rating system in BBO, but the majority
are from people who are grateful that we do not have a rating
system.

I can think of 2 other possible reasons why OKB bars
more people for cheating than we do.

4. OKB has a much larger number of cheaters for some
reason other than that expressed in Item 3.

5. BBO members are less aggressive than OKB members
when it comes to re****ting cheating accusations.

Item 5 could well be true since we have not had anywhere
near 150 cheating accusastions (let alone convictions) in
the past 3 years. Perhaps some of our members simply mark
suspected cheats as enemies and try to avoid them in the
future rather than re****ting their suspicions to us. I have to
admit that this is what I would probably do (since by and
large I agree with you that online bridge should be looked
at as a source of fun and learning as opposed to a viable
competitive activity).

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com