October 2022 - 8

IN Box
times a week? That's $5000 a year.
Finally, a game at a club in Manhattan
is different than anywhere else.
At least 25% of the players are professionals,
paid to play with wealthy
patrons. This type of interaction is
not conducive to collegiality; they are
working, I am playing.
Now, I play when I want, on short
notice, with three or four different
partners. Sometimes watching TV.
Sometimes working (don't tell!). I
consider all my partners friends, and
I interact with them more playing
online than when I played live.
So, I get my fix almost anytime I
want, for as long as I want, for a fraction
of the cost and without the lost
hour each way getting to and from the
club.
There are no late plays so the games,
which are timed, move quickly. I know
players cheat, but, so what? It would
be naive to think those same players
don't/wouldn't cheat in live games as
well.
The death of F2F play reflects the
realities and advantages of modern
technology. I fully embrace it.
ERIC J. SNYDER
New York NY
Safety protocols
There have been many letters
published regarding the pros and cons
of online and F2F bridge. Some deal
with the minutiae of the weight that
the ACBL awards masterpoints in the
respective venues, but I have a different
concern.
After playing in the Long Beach Regional
last week, I was diagnosed with
COVID three days after my return
home. My symptoms began the night
after the last event ended. To make
matters worse, my wife, who does not
play bridge and has a compromised
immune system, was diagnosed with
COVID after I tested positive.
Is ACBL doing enough to protect its
8 | Bridge Bulletin | October 2022
members? I have been to three tournaments
since they were reinstated
following the onset of the pandemic.
In each case, there is a proof of vaccination
station where you are awarded
a colored plastic wrist band which
gains you entry. That is not enough.
When I went to the doctor's office two
days ago, I was asked two questions
that everyone should get asked at
tournaments: (1) Have you traveled in
the past 30 days? (2) Have you had any
contact with anyone diagnosed with
COVID in the past 30 days? If the answer
to either of those questions is yes,
the ACBL should have staffing, such
as a nurse, set up in a special room, to
administer the 15-minute COVID test.
Obviously, there are players who fall
into these categories who have fallen
through the cracks and are infecting
others. ACBL members deserve to
know how many players are getting
sick at these events. Besides the
usual questions on post-tournament
surveys such as, " How were the cards?
How were the directors? How was the
venue? " , let's focus attention on how
many of us got sick.
Some letters have implied that online
bridge is killing the game. Nobody
has died playing online bridge. Can
the same be said about F2F?
LARRY SHERMAN
San Diego CA
Bad advice
To my dismay, ACBL recently
published an article that endorses and
encourages an unethical, sharp practice.
I'm referring to Simon Cocheme's
guest column in the August 2022 Bulletin
(pages 26-27). Cocheme recommends
that, when withdrawing your
cards from a board, you should examine
the order in which they appear,
hoping the player in your seat at the
last table failed to shuffle their cards
before returning them to the tray. If so,
he says, that sequence may reveal the
location of a key missing honor. Doing
that, however, constitutes a prohibited
use of unauthorized information.
Leaving aside rare exceptions
not relevant here, under Law 16A,
a player is only authorized to use
information derived from " legal calls
and plays of the current board. " Law
16D tells us we must not use any information
obtained " by overhearing
calls, results or remarks ... at another
table, " or by " seeing cards [played]
at another table. " So we're not allowed
to use knowledge about what
happened at another table even if we
acquired that info " accidentally, " let
alone on purpose, as Cocheme urges.
An ACBL publication titled Duplicate
Decisions elaborates on this point. It
states, " [After finishing a hand,] players
should shuffle their cards even
if the hand is passed out, so as not to
give the next table any unauthorized
information from the order in which
the cards were played or placed in
the pocket. " Reread that sentence.
Information gleaned from " the order
in which cards were played or placed
in the pocket " at another table is " unauthorized "
to all players at the " next
table. " Yet that is exactly the information
Cocheme advocates using.
MARTY HARRIS
Chicago IL
Editor's note: Simon Cocheme is
a humorist and bridge history buff
whose piece in the August issue explained
the dangers of not shuffling
one's hand sufficiently after play is
completed. Cocheme even ends the article
with the admonition that players
should be in the habit of doing so to prevent
information being passed to the
next player who holds the same hand.
Harris is correct that information such
as the order of the cards as they are
withdrawn from the board is not authorized,
but Cocheme was not advocating
this practice. If there is any fault here,
it is with the editors who might have
strengthened Cocheme's point.
October 2022

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of October 2022
