rb@cci632.UUCP (Rex Ballard) (07/09/86)
In article <715@oakhill.UUCP> davet@oakhill.UUCP (Dave Trissel) writes: >[...] > >One of my roomates at the University was a bridge fanatic. He explained to me >that at tournaments each individual had to sign a statement as to whether >they used ESP in their playing. This struck me as odd at the time (1968) >since that was the first time I had heard of any organization acting as though >ESP was a serious subject. Maybe they were simply doing a survey out of >curiousity? > >Does anyone know if this still goes on (or why they ever did it in the first >place?) > > -- Dave Trissel {siesmo,ihnp4}!ut-sally!im4u!oakhill!davet I do know that an uncle of mine had the obnoxious habit of occaisionally bidding 7 and taking the grand slam each time. He was a scientist as well. Although he would jokingly admit to having ESP, he couldn't explain how, but he could tell by the third bid what everyone had. If someone claims to use ESP in a strategy game, it is possible that even though the nature of this ability might be quite scientific, it might also be an "unfair" advantage. Did your friend tell you how many of the "psychics" won, and how often?
davet@oakhill.UUCP (Dave Trissel) (07/19/86)
In article <200@cci632.UUCP> rb@ccird1.UUCP (Rex Ballard) writes: >>...that at tournaments each individual had to sign a statement as to whether >>they used ESP in their playing. ... >Did your friend tell you how many of the "psychics" won, and how often? The forms requesting the information went to the organizers so the players never did know who (if anyone) ever made any such claims. If a correlation was found then one would think that today they would still be asking the question. (I don't know if they are or not.) On the other hand, if a player did think she/he had such an advantage why would they risk labeling themselves in a tournament? Indicating YES to the question may lead to future discrimination whereas a NO would be quite safe. -- Dave Trissel {seismo,ihnp4}!ut-sally!im4u!oakhill!davet