[HedyG]

fred, on Oct 16 2007, 11:43 PM, said:

Elianna, on Oct 17 2007, 04:26 AM, said:

I can't imagine what goes through the mind of someone who's just played a gruelling bridge tournament, and probably had to explain/apologize for their country to everyone they met.

This seems to be a widely-held misconception.

I have been to many international bridge tournaments in many countries and I don't recall any player ever confronting another player and putting them in a position where they had to apologize for or explain the actions of their country.

That is one of the nice things about these tournaments. (Almost) everyone leaves their politics at home. People accept each other for who they are. Where they are from does not come into play.

In most places I have been it is not much different on the street. Regardless of what they may think of your country, most natives would not even think about taking it out on you. Making individual guests feel welcome regardless of where they are from seems to be all but universal in my experience.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

i couldnt agree more with Fred!
in none of the international events i have been to has anybody ever started political discussions nor discussed religious or racial differences!
its one of the nicest things in taking part! we are all there as bridgeplayers and not as somebody whose governement did something somebody else disagrees with or whose religion or colour is different!
as Sabine Auken said so correctly: "we are all one big bridge-family" and never do you feel it more than at one of these events.

[paulg]

HedyG, on Oct 17 2007, 12:24 PM, said:

as Sabine Auken said so correctly: "we are all one big bridge-family" and never do you feel it more than at one of these events.

Making them go stand in the corner might be a suitable punishment.

p

[helene_t]

So far, the impact of this incident, outside BBF, seems to be zero. In spite of Swangames publishing several photos, zooming in on the sign.

[pokerbids]

impact appears to be zero?????? I didnt even read of this incident on here - I was first led to the incident NOT even on a bridge site. It made headline on a non bridge site that first alerted me to it - So I woudnt say it was zero. And the picture I saw on another site altogether - Another non bridge site http://www.democraticunderground.com/discu...ess=389x2040421

Heres another headline from a site - I didnt even go to the link cause the headline read like this and was self explanatory

Chimp Dissed By Women's Bridge Team - No medals for guessing the reference they were making there?

So I wouldnt say it were zero. I dont want to publicise other bridge forums but there is one where there is a full scale brouhaha on this very subject itself on their forum. Everyone has piled on in that forum and it has had the most interactions and views relative to their site - Its not as big as BBO so naturally numbers cant be compared.

No say what you want to and agree or dont agree with this subject but I wouldnt say the chatter of this subject is on this forum alone. Its making news elsewhere also in a loud manner. And news in non bridge forums. Bridge is hardly ever commented on in non bridge forums so when they start jabbering about it...need I say more

[hotShot]

Google news has 0 hits for "venice cup", so I guess the scandal is unnoticed by the general public.

If it were a scandal, the public might notice that there is a bridge championship at all......

Google finds 7 hits, one hit in a polish newsgroup, 2 on the site you quoted and 3 blog entries (probably from people reading this forum).

What an impact.

The latest scandal I followed, hat more than 10000 forum entries withing a weak in each major newspaper and television forum, not to mention several hundred newspaper articles.

[bid_em_up]

MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING OF THE USBF BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Monday, October 15, 2007 - 4:30pm – Pacific Time
The USBF Board of Directors met by conference call on Monday, October 15, 2007 at 4:30pm Pacific Time. Jan Martel, president of the USBF called the meeting to order.

Present: Jan Martel, president; Steve Beatty, Joan Gerard, Bob Hamman, Rose Meltzer, LouAnn O’Rourke, Bill Pollack
Also present: Peter Rank, Gary Blaiss

A quorum was established. Peter Rank, legal counsel for the USBF, stated that according to the USBF By-Laws a board meeting can be called without proper notice and be official if all members of the board are present and do not protest the lack of notice. All members were present and no one protested the lack of notice. . The board then went into Executive Session. The board came out of Executive Session at 5:45pm Pacific Time and went back into
Open Session.

By a 6-0 vote with Bill Pollack abstaining because of his possible conflict of interest it was agreed that a letter of regret will be written to the president of the Chinese Contract Bridge Association and to Mr. Jose Damiani, President of the World Bridge Federation regarding the incident at the Closing Ceremonies on Saturday, October 13, 2007 in Shanghai when the US Women’s team received their gold medals and remained on stage during the playing of the US National Anthem while holding a sign “we did not vote for Bush”. This letter of regret will be written by Jan Martel and approved by an e-mail vote of the full board. The board also agreed that these Minutes could be approved by e-mail vote and they have been so approved.

The board further agreed to meet again next week to discuss this incident.

This meeting was adjourned at 6:15pm Pacific Time.

[blackshoe]

How many of the millions of non-bridge players in the world will now decline to take up the game because of this incident? None.

How many of the millions of bridge players in the world will now quit the game because of this incident? None.

Or a very, very, few.

What is the impact of this incident on the world as a whole? Zero.

That said, I applaud the action of the USBF BoD.

[han]

Looks like a good decision. I imagine that most people who posted here can live with this.

[joshs]

Woah Nelly,

I didn't notice what happened in Shanghei or this thread until now, but I have quite a few things to say.

First is this preposterous claim that the players are representing the US. As far as I know the people of the US did not select them, and neither did anyone the people of the US did select (aka representatives). They were not delegated any power by the US.

I went to dictionary.com and looked up "represent":

1. to serve to express, designate, stand for, or denote, as a word, symbol, or the like does; symbolize: In this painting the cat represents evil and the bird, good.
2. to express or designate by some term, character, symbol, or the like: to represent musical sounds by notes.
3. to stand or act in the place of, as a substitute, proxy, or agent does: He represents the company in Boston.
4. to speak and act for by delegated authority: to represent one's government in a foreign country.
5. to act for or in behalf of (a constituency, state, etc.) by deputed right in exercising a voice in legislation or government: He represents Chicago's third Congressional district.
6. to portray or depict; present the likeness of, as a picture does: The painting represents him as a man 22 years old.
7. to present or picture to the mind.
8. to present in words; set forth; describe; state.
9. to set forth or describe as having a particular character (usually fol. by as, to be, etc.): The article represented the dictator as a benevolent despot.
10. to set forth clearly or earnestly with a view to influencing opinion or action or making protest.
11. to present, produce, or perform, as on a stage.
12. to impersonate, as in acting.
13. to serve as an example or specimen of; exemplify: a genus represented by two species.
14. to be the equivalent of; correspond to: The llama of the New World represents the camel of the Old World.
–verb (used without object) 15. to protest; make representations against.
16. Slang. to use or display a secret handshake, sign, gesture, etc., for purposes of identification: The gang members always represent when they see one another.


The one claim that can posibly be made is is definitions 1 or 13 hold, that is the players symbolize america or serve as typical examples of americans. This claim would be purely in their own minds, since american bridge players are hardly representative, in any sense, of the american population, and some of them are not even US citizens.

If the National Rifle Association, The American Civil Liberty Organization, The American Nazi party, or any other association in america went abroad they would not be representing america, despite any pretentions they might have.

So if we want to claim that these players are representing something, they are representing the USBF, which was the organization that did designate them and collected money to send them. I still find this representation idea funny, since it really just means in this case, that according to the rules set forth by the USBF they earned the right to play in the world championships that is reserved for a team from the USBF. This is no different then the colorado rockies winning the national league and being able to play in the world series as a result. Its a bit unusual for an organization have one set of conduct rules for its members (at least during an event sponsored by the organization), and another set of conduct rules for those who happen to win, but I suppose that an organization in advance can make whatever rules it wants for its members. In the case of other sports, the rules that apply to players in the championship event are not different then the other players in the league.

Now to prefice my next comment I want to relate a story. In around 1988 or 1989, the communist mayor of Leningrad (now St. Petersburgh) was running unopposed. The rules required everyone to vote, and he needed 50% of the vote to win. In one of the final actions in the soviet union, more then 50% of the people showed up to vote but left they ballot blank, which did not allow him to get re-elected. The point here is while voting is a political act, so is the decision to not vote. And while speaking out about politics carries political content, so does not speaking out. Were the people in germany during the Nazis who did not speak out against discriminatory laws. imprisonment, and genocide towards the jews (and gays and gypsies) free from responsibility for what happened there?

If a bunch of americans show up abroad, and never say a word about american politics this actually carries some subtle messages:
a. there is tacit support for current american policies from these people
b. there lacks serious diversity of ideas in america

and these influence how we, as a country, are viewed by those who come into contact with. That is a lack of a sign influences how we are viewed as does the presence of a sign does. Did they do this to claim that all americans all the USBF all have one opinion? In fact, the sign itself was making the claim for there being a diversity of ideas within america. This articulation of diversity, almost by its nature, rejects the idea that this idea comes from a large organization. Instead it implicity carries the disclaimer "the ideas presented here are my own personal ideas, and do not come from the USBF or the US government or any other organization".

Was this sign a good idea? I don't know. I think it achieved its ends of announcing US diversity of political opinion and at the same time caused a bit of a ruckus and
shifted our discussion from about bridge (which unites us) to some stuff which divides us.

Should there be rules against such a sign? There is a fine line between forcing conformity from the participants, and making rules so that others are not offended (I personally, am offended by most instances of enforced conformity unless there is a clear harm that the rules are preventing). When we pass rules that say there is no smoking at the table, there is one group (the smokers) who are disadvantaged, and others (the non-smokers, especially folks like me who are allergic to the smoke and would not be able to play if the rooms were like they used to be) that benefit. Both rules and lack of rules have there benefits and costs. I just think an organization should step very carefully when it attempts to pass rules that have nothing to do with what unifies its membership, which in our case is the game of bridge.


Josh

P.S. I am still outraged by how the protesting athletes in the 1968 olympics were treated....

[Walddk]

Hannie, on Oct 18 2007, 10:45 PM, said:

Looks like a good decision. I imagine that most people who posted here can live with this.

Indeed appropriate (hmm!), Han, but that is hardly the end of it since the committee is going to meet again next week as we read. My guess is still that the women will be reprimanded and asked to confirm that this will not happen again.

Finally, the USBF needs better rules if they want to stop/pre-empt these incidents from now on.

Roland

[pclayton]

Seems like a good start to me. I expect more will be forthcoming.

[fred]

Agree - so far the USBF BOD is handling this well (no surprise to me given who is on the Board).

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[Deanrover]

Can someone provide some cliff notes? This thread is very long and my time is very short!

Thanks,

D

[mike777]

Here is a copy of an email I just got.

"Follow the Money

Well this reporter has dug a little deeper into the matter. I just interviewed a Deep Throat informer and can give you the real scoop.

The incident was just as it appears in the photos, not overly pre-meditated. The words were scribbled on the back of a menu at the dinner. The winners were quite giddy from the dual euphoria of Winning the Venice Cup and imbibing an ample supply of intoxicants at the victory dinner. They clearly were not thinking about how ineffective this political statement would be in this particular forum, and indeed how members of the "other side" could use this incident to create a backlash against not only them, but future generations of Americans wishing to compete in the international arena.

Currently the ACBL funds our international teams through a series of events, most notably the International Fund Game that is held at the beginning of National Bridge Tournaments. There apparently already is a movement among some of our ACBL Board of Directors to make serious cuts in this funding. They do not see the benefit of the ACBL subsidizing our representatives in World competition. It is feared by those who do see the benefit, that some will use the China Venice Idiot (wow, my Word editor automatically changes b-u-s-h to i-d-i-o-t, does yours?) Bashing Incident as an EXCUSE to kill the funding for our teams. One such director is quoted as declaring that if any American says anything against our country (and he obviously believes this was an anti-American statement) on foreign soil is grounds for Treason.

So that, my friends, is really what's at stake. Hopefully, an expensive lawyer and really good apologies will spare them from the firing squad. The real danger is the backlash that causes others to needlessly suffer. Financially supporting our International Team is good for American Bridge. If the funding is withdrawn, only the super rich will be able to afford to go. Not cool at all.

Right now, the monkey is on the back of one Jan Martel, president (and a volunteer I need to stress) of the United States Bridge Federation, who now must pull together an apology to send the International Hosts and WBF. Obviously, each of the members of the team also needs to make the best sincerest apology they can muster. Most of the team members do realize the seriousness of the situation, that there are greater things at stake, and should hopefully co-operate.

As for the 16 minute tardy player on the USA team, what happened was a Temporary Power Outage, which somehow caused an alarm clock to falsely convince the player that it was actually about 40 minutes or so earlier than it actually was. The team was penalized 11 IMPS…and they nearly lost the event on the last board. China (the opponent) had a chance to beat a 3NTX contract 1100, but the play would cost letting the hand make if it was wrong, so the defender (not knowing the exact state of the match) chose instead to guarantee beating the contract and took 200 instead……getting 1100 on the board combined with the 11 IMP penalty would have swung the final outcome! "

[kenrexford]

For what it is worth:

According to the USBF Bylaws, "The purposes of this corporation are charitable in nature and are to advance the interests of the United States in international bridge competition, including the selection and support of United States bridge teams and players in international and Olympic bridge competition."

The purpose of the USBF, of which I am a member, is not to advance the interests of specific people in international bridge competition. It is to advance the interests of the United States. Thus, when someone is selected by the USBF and supported in a bridge competition, they are supposedly furthering the interests of the United States. Thus, they are representing those of us who are citizens.

In furtherance of these purposes, the USBF is supposed to support "United States participation in *** world championships." Thus, when a team of ladies are playing, under the support of the USBF, they are literally surrogates for the United States participating, per the bylaws. Again, they do represent us.

Further, an active member of the USBF becomes, per the bylaws, qualified to "represent the United States in international competition."

So, again, these ladies were representing us, not themselves.

That should end part of the debate.

[mrdct]

The whole ACBL/USBF situation really appears quite sub-optimal for the organisation of the game in the United States.

In most (if not all) other Zones in the WBF, the Zonal body tends to have their activities confined to organising competitions amongst the member of that Zone and the individual national bridge organisations look after both the grass-roots bridge players and international selection for that country. In North America it seems to be the other way around.

I guess it would be quite difficult to unravel such a structure and it could even lead to a potentially worse situation of the so-called elite bridge players all belonging to one organisation and the grass-roots players belonging to another.

Of course the existence of the American Bridge Association which has its origins in the period when the ACBL was "whites only" further complicates matters.

[mrdct]

mike777, on Oct 18 2007, 08:24 PM, said:

As for the 16 minute tardy player on the USA team, what happened was a Temporary Power Outage, which somehow caused an alarm clock to falsely convince the player that it was actually about 40 minutes or so earlier than it actually was.

No sympathy from me.

If I was going to take a nap between segments of a semi-final of a world championship I would have at least three power-independent alarm clocks set plus a wake-up call booked with main reception.

Perhaps some team rules around being in the playing area at least 15 minutes before the scheduled start time might have helped as when the player was identified as missing with 10 minutes before session time, the npc could have got on the phone to her.

[jocdelevat]

I supose after this incident WBF or the bridge organization for each country will require a special comitee to take actions against players who doesn't respect the new law " no signs are apropriate" . Im sure some posters here who was making fun of creating a Committee will be happy to hear.

[cherdano]

mrdct, on Oct 18 2007, 09:05 PM, said:

mike777, on Oct 18 2007, 08:24 PM, said:

As for the 16 minute tardy player on the USA team, what happened was a Temporary Power Outage, which somehow caused an alarm clock to falsely convince the player that it was actually about 40 minutes or so earlier than it actually was.

No sympathy from me.

Well, I wouldn't have expected sympathy from you. Ever. No matter who made a mistake and what was the mistake.

Quote

If I was going to take a nap between segments of a semi-final of a world championship I would have at least three power-independent alarm clocks set plus a wake-up call booked with main reception.

Yeah, right, everybody would do that.

[Walddk]

I also think Dave (mrdct) exaggerates. Perhaps a simpler approach would be to let one of your team-mates, your captain or your coach give you a wake-up call just in case.

This was the first segment of the day, so a qualified guess is that the player simply overslept, probably because she was still jet-lagged and fell asleep very late.

Roland