User:Newwhist/sandbox/Project WPCB/Cheating in bridge (governing bodies)

=Current state of affairs=
 * "There are strong indications that bridge organizations have failed to develop the player's respect when it comes to the policing and enforcement of behavioral requirements."
 * Questions for the roles of governing bodies and corportaions
 * what are the organizations fiduciary responsibilities to its members
 * organization must not only do the right things, they must be seen to do the right things
 * does it have a responsibility to in some way 'manage' the business of income-earning professionals?
 * principles of division of power and control
 * the CEO - accountable for establishing effective oversight
 * chief enforcement executive - accountable for conducting effective oversight
 * Board of Directors - should never ever be involved in administrative activities - only policy directions
 * internal and external audit mechanisms
 * setting the rules of the game for ethical play and acceptable behavior; defining consequences for non-compliance
 * having procedures in place to minimize and inhibit opportunities to cheat (screens, bidding boxes, ? etc. )
 * ongoing visible monitoring of behaviors for compliance; both ongoing observations, testing and inspections as well as random more in-depth oversight
 * role of reliance on visual and auditory observations of behavior and of statistical analysis of successful outcomes of non-expert decisions made by expert players
 * setting obligations to report on players and staff; whistleblowing policies and procedures
 * having formal procedures for the reporting of wrongdoing
 * have skilled (specify which skills) investigative resources available with the authority to act independently and quickly within prescribed procedures
 * swift, fair and certain justice for the innocent and the guilty
 * open, public and transparent processes; before, during and after the fact
 * what is the burden of proof required: on the balance of probabilities, clear and compelling evidence or beyond a reasonable doubt
 * rights to privacy on the basis of innocent until proven guilty; degree of privacy at the suspicion and investigative stages
 * public or closed hearings
 * credentials of the members of the investigative teams
 * degree of publication of the process and disclosure of all evidence after the fact with names withheld if found innocent and published if found guilty

=Member behavior=
 * compliance with policy and procedure as accused and as member at-large
 * vigilantism versus procedural compliance
 * resignation and renouncement of titles
 * repudiation of the organization

=Policing - how do we capture reliable unassailable evidence=
 * audio capture
 * visual capture of movements of each person and each object
 * the convention cards and system in play
 * the auction, including tempo
 * the opening lead
 * each trick and each card play, including tempo
 * pre and post behaviours
 * departures from the table during play (bathroom, water and food breaks)

=Sanctions by governing bodies; consequences and rectification if possible=
 * permanent expulsion
 * a period of suspension
 * placed on a 'probationary' status
 * removal of some or all masterpoints
 * removal of some or all titles and awards
 * is there a maximum retroactivity period or statute of limitations
 * treatment of non-offending and unaware teammates
 * consequences for malicious accusors found to be wrong
 * consequences for well-intentioned accusors found to be mistaken
 * it is almost impossible to restore equity if a 'winner' is subsequently disqualified having been found guilty of cheating
 * are there "do-overs" in any sport or game where the 'winners' have been disqualified? or generally are (1) the remaining contestants just moved up the ladder one rung or (2) is everything left was but with an asterisk placed next to the names of the 'winners'?
 * individuals, pairs and/or teams can resign for any stated or unstated reason
 * individuals, pairs and/or teams can renounce previous wins or placements for alleged improprieties or for any other stated or unstated reason

=Ostracism= "“Offenses against the ethics and etiquette of the game are unpardonable, as they are not subject to prescribed penalties. The only redress is to cease playing with those who habitually disregard the following: 3. A player should not allow any hesitation or mannerism of his partner to influence his own declaration or play.""
 * ostracism was the remedy in the days before duplicate.

- Laws of Contract Bridge, in Harold S. Vanderbilt, Contract Bridge, pp. 234-5, Charles Scribner's Sons, 1929.

=Preliminary thoughts re fear of lawsuits=
 * citations to support or refute these notions are required
 * while there may initially be some contentious litigation, cases will "see their day in court"
 * precedents will be set to draw the boundary for the proper and effective use of sanctioning by the governing bodies
 * if we are always doing the right thing, we should embrace litigation and not fear it; it will refine and solidify our best practices
 * if anyone should be worried about a lawsuit, it should be the cheaters.

=Burden of poof; degree of certainty required (in rank order)=
 * the choice should be influenced by the make-up and competence of the panel/committee/jury
 * Word based - this requires some good explanations of what is meant by each
 * beyond a reasonable doubt (the legal test for the death penalty)
 * clear and compelling evidence; clear and convincing evidence
 * on the balance of probabilities (sounds like a coin toss)
 * Math based
 * simple majority decision (at least 50% plus one of the panel membership)
 * super majority (60%, 66.67% or 75% or 80%)
 * unanimous decision (100%)

=Appeals=
 * why have appeals at all?
 * should appeals be (a) automatic or (b) only upon request and at the cost of a convicted party
 * is the burden of proof at appeal more, the same or less stringent than at the initial hearing?
 * who pays if appeals reverse the lower
 * role of lawyers, if permitted (how can they not be)
 * language/interpreter problems
 * what is the scope of the appeal; the whole issue revisited or on a specific matter of process

=WBF, EBL, ACBL and others mobilize=
 * WBF statement of October 9 2015
 * October 22 2015 response of the Dutch Bridge Federation to the WBF statement
 * October 28 2015 response of the European Bridge League to the WBF statement
 * On October 22 2015 ACBL announces creation of a Task Force on Cheating
 * NBO that are proactive, transparent and timely

=Commentary=
 * Cheating detection commentary by Jason Hackett. Highlights:
 * The lack of action by such bodies has disappointed me as a professional player
 * I don’t see why its up to other players to catch them [cheaters]. I want to be able to concentrate on my game, I don't want to have to expend my mental energy looking for irregular tray movement or board/bid placement.
 * There is obviously a fear of legal action being waged against sponsoring organisations, so we all need to sign documents to waive our right to legal action
 * Some of the revenue raised from staging events needs to be directed at cleaning up the game, video cameras documentation, and i’m afraid at the top level of the game airport style security.
 * Does the WBF have even a single employee tasked with examining fair play?


 * Actions of Administrators by Avon Wilsmore at the Bridge Winners website
 * "Peter Gill has an interesting article in the new edition of Australian Bridge that goes back over the history of cheating in bridge." Julian Foster, commenting in that BW thread, September 29, 2015. Narky Blert (talk) 18:07, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

=Corrective actions taken=
 * screens
 * bidding boxes
 * electronic scoring devices
 * changes to procedures
 * changes to the Laws
 * increased compliance enforcement (emergence of the zero tolerance policy)
 * audio surveillance (the coughing doctors)
 * visual surveillance (FN opening lead card orientation)
 * statistical analysis of hands; outliers
 * role of monitors
 * role of crowdsourcing
 * mobilization of players for increased vigilance
 * transparency of investigative proceedings and their publication, including results

=Comment by Steve Moese at Bridge Winners Sept 2, 2016= "WBF Charter Excerpt: Purpose “to support and encourage the promotion of sports ethics; to dedicate its efforts to ensuring that in bridge contests the spirit of fair play prevails;” (surprisingly weak focus on collusive cheating and its elimination from Bridge)

WBF Bylaws Excerpt: 8.11 Disciplinary Commission and Appeals Tribunal The President shall appoint a Disciplinary Commission consisting of not fewer than five (5) members, at least two of whom shall be members of the Executive Council. The function and duties of the Disciplinary Commission shall be to investigate and judge any matter involving alleged unethical or reprehensible conduct or behavior as assigned to it by the President which may be in violation of the Disciplinary Code as adopted by the Executive. Any appeal of a determination of the Disciplinary Commission shall be made to an Appeals Tribunal which shall be appointed by the President and which shall not include any member of the Executive who served on the Disciplinary Commission that rendered the determination being appealed. The WBF General Counsel, or his designee, shall represent the WBF as the prosecutor before the Disciplinary Commission as well as before the Appeals Tribunal.

The PROBLEM? - discretion of the President!

Article 2 of the By-Laws proscribes the responsibilities of the NBOs: 2.1 Organizations. A National Contract Bridge Organization (hereafter called the NBO) of any country may apply for membership in the WBF and be elected thereto by the affirmative vote of the/a majority of the members of the Executive present at any meeting at which a quorum is present, provided that any NBO, to be eligible to apply for membership, shall:  be the sole national organization controlling Contract Bridge in its country,  be open to all nationals or bona fide residents of the particular country subject only to meeting the requirements of such NBO,  have an appropriate register of members,  undertake to comply with the Constitution and By-Laws of the WBF,  uphold an image of integrity and enforce a standard of ethics acceptable to the WBF,  exercise Contract Bridge activity in its country and internationally, in particular by organizing and participating in competitions and implementing bridge education and training programs for bridge players,  comply with all applicable rules and regulations of the WBF governing its bridge competitions,  conduct its activities in compliance with both the Olympic Charter and the rules & regulations of the WBF,  play bridge according to the current International Codes,  agree to play in WBF competitions against all other NBO’s which are qualified members of the WBF.

Weak tea if we are to take ethics and integrity seriously."

=WBF, EBL, ACBL and others mobilize=
 * WBF statement of October 9 2015
 * October 22 2015 response of the Dutch Bridge Federation to the WBF statement
 * October 28 2015 response of the European Bridge League to the WBF statement
 * On October 22 2015 ACBL announces creation of a Task Force on Cheating
 * NBO that are proactive, transparent and timely

=Comparison to other organizations=
 * approaches used by professional licensing bodies
 * engineers
 * lawyers
 * doctors
 * Chess
 * Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI) and the Lance Armstrong affair
 * FIFA corruption debaucle
 * Olympics:
 * treatment regarding disqualifications and the re-ordering of medal awards
 * time limits
 * Enforcement of codes of conduct in professional sports - recent changes in the NFL to address off-field behaviors especially domestic violence

=References=