Wow, that is super sad. I take it your group did not invite him to join you?
How about red rover, or tug-o-war.
No, not that we played that often anyway. The crazy thing was that he was arrogant, even needling people about how awesome he was. We had no reservations about telling him to his face how we felt about him. I flat-out told him that being your own Monty Hall GM was pathetic.
It’s actually only in retrospect I realize how sad it was. At the time I was just annoyed by him. I was only 14-15 at the time and not terribly empathetic.
My Aunt Amy, a very sweet and caring person, is a citizen of NunatuKavut. I do not have any idea how you know about her weight problem ( it is genetic, I’m told), but that was a very cruel remark.
I mentioned kabaddi in another thread, and even if someone enlightened me of the different ways you can cheat in it, it’s doubtful I’d be able to follow. Even Olympic wrestlng, for that matter (barring steroids/PEDS).
Cricket I can also vege out on, but don’t follow too well - any cheating in that, other than the hallucinatory, sensual dynamics of Pasolini’s Third Test Match?
How about Aussie Rules football, or hurling?
Skullbumping? Impossible, I’d say.
Little Chocolate Donuts could be considered track and field cheating.
Someone said soccer. It seems basically similar to hockey and anyone who watched Gordie Howe could see him fouling opponents as long as the referee was looking elsewhere. Since the (single) referee had to be looking at the puck, this was easy.
Leaving doping aside (you can do that in any sport), it is virtually impossible to cheat in curling since the players basically run the game without officials.
That makes it easier to cheat, not harder. It wouldn’t be ethical, but then, cheating by definition isn’t ethical in any sport.
Hmmm, is privateering ever looked at as a sport?
In hockey, didn’t Marty McSorley use an illegal stick during the play-offs in 93? Other than that, I don’t think there have been any huge instances of cheating, but I think a lot of guys used to “adjust” their equipment back in days, that would certainly be against the rules now.
Cheating is rampant in competitive eating contests–as long as one of the competitors is a giant. Two strategies:
-
[If your competitor is the giant] Put your purse inside your shirt, and secretly pour all the porridge into your purse. Then, when you’ve out-eaten the giant, hold a “stab yourself in the belly with a knife” contest, and stab the purse and let all the porridge out. The giant will stab himself in the belly and fall over dead.
-
[If you’re the giant] Actually be fire.
There was a major diplomatic row over potential cheaing at the 1908 Olympic tug-of-war. The event was held on sand, and spiked footwear was not allowed - only ‘normal footwear’ (uh-oh, can already see where this is going :dubious:).
The English team was drawn from the Police department (who had a big tug-of-war league at the time). The English wore ‘normal footwear’ - ie heavy police boots with hobnails, metal rims etc. When the Americans protested, they were told that the boots were accepted as ‘normal’ - if you were a member of the Police Force. (The americans should have all claimed they were lumberjacks, and worn the spiked tree-climbing shoes, but I digress).
Full details are lost in the following hundred years, but it did cause quite some concern at the time.
Of course, if both teams in a tug-of-war contest have the same footwear, it mostly just comes down to the total weight of each team. Not a very interesting athletic event.
It’s hard to cheat at bridge, at high-level events.
- Screens on/over the table to prevent hand and other visual signals.
- Sometimes screens underneath the table to prevent foot signals
- Silent bidding using special cards.
The most famous bridge cheating was found in Ian Fleming’s “Moonraker” book (not the movie), in which James Bond rigs a hand.
I don’t know; there are a lot of subtle things that humans do that could be used for signals, that would be hard to notice if you weren’t alerted to them specifically. A team could construct codes based on eye movements, or biting one’s lip, or shoulder-shrugging, or whatever.
That is a petty thorough website, but they left off the most important part.
Dennis and Dee ALWAYS win.
Put that in a spoiler if you want. I don’t care.
… because of the various controls put in place in response to past cheating.
The basic point is that it’s valuable to know details of the cards held by others. Your opponents understand this, so will tend to keep their details from you *. Your partner knows this, so you and he have an incentive to secretly communicate during bidding.
- I knew a successful tournament player who’d occasionally do otherwise. He was sensitive to attempts by his opponents to steal a look into his hand. When he saw this, he’d take advantage: When the opponent to his right was contemplating which card to play, he’d push one card up a bit (indicating it - a benign card - was the one he was planning to play) and casually tilt his hand so it was just visible. This would induce a desired choice by his opponent, at which point he’d play a better card and win the trick. He said this typically worked only once, but used with care could be valuable. Is it wrong to take advantage of cheating attempts?