Bridge Cheating Scandals: When the Game We Love Went Wrong

Bridge is supposed to be a gentleman’s game. A game of skill, ethics, and sportsmanship. A game where your word is your bond and the rules are sacred.

And then sometimes, people cheat.

The history of bridge includes some spectacular scandals where top players were caught (or accused) of using improper signals to gain an advantage. These stories are painful to recount because they involve players we admired, methods that violated everything bridge stands for, and damage to the game’s reputation that took years to repair.

But these stories are part of our history. And if we want to protect the game’s integrity, we need to talk about when that integrity failed.

The Buenos Aires Affair: Reese and Schapiro (1965)

This is the big one. The scandal that rocked the bridge world to its foundations.

May 1965. The Bermuda Bowl world championship in Buenos Aires. Great Britain fielded a strong team that included Terence Reese and Boris Schapiro, two of Britain’s best players and highly respected figures in world bridge.

During the early rounds, someone noticed something odd. When Reese and Schapiro held heart cards, they seemed to position their fingers on their cards in unusual ways. Different numbers of fingers showing. Patterns that changed from hand to hand.

American captain John Gerber observed this and became suspicious. He quietly started keeping notes. He noticed that the finger positions correlated with the number of hearts each player held. When Reese held three hearts, he showed three fingers. Four hearts, four fingers. It was a simple code, but devastatingly effective.

Gerber reported his suspicions to the tournament authorities. An investigation began. More observers watched Reese and Schapiro. The evidence mounted.

The scandal exploded. Two of the world’s most respected players were accused of cheating at the world championships. The British team withdrew from the tournament. The bridge world divided into camps: those who believed the accusations and those who defended Reese and Schapiro.

The Inquiry

A formal inquiry was held in London. Reese and Schapiro denied everything. They had explanations for the finger positions (nervous habits, coincidences). They pointed out that the evidence wasn’t conclusive for every hand. They attacked the credibility of the accusers.

The inquiry ultimately found them guilty, though the evidence was circumstantial. No one caught them explicitly agreeing to the signals. No one had recordings or definitive proof. But the pattern was too strong to ignore.

Reese and Schapiro were effectively banned from international competition, though the ban wasn’t universal or permanent. The British Bridge League found them not guilty in a later inquiry, which only muddied the waters further.

The Aftermath

The Reese-Schapiro affair damaged bridge’s reputation. Here were top players, established figures, accused of cheating at the world championships. If they would cheat, who else might be?

More painfully, the affair split the bridge community. Some players steadfastly defended Reese and Schapiro. Others believed the evidence was overwhelming. Friendships ended. Bridge clubs took sides. The whole mess left a bitter taste.

Reese continued to play and write about bridge for decades. He never admitted to cheating and maintained his innocence until his death in 1996. Schapiro similarly denied any wrongdoing until he died in 2002.

Were they guilty? Almost certainly. The evidence was too strong, too consistent. But without a confession, we’ll never have absolute proof. And that ambiguity made the scandal even worse.

The Foot Soldiers: Other Early Scandals

The Reese-Schapiro case was the most famous, but it wasn’t the only one. Throughout the 1960s and 1970s, there were periodic accusations of cheating through signals:

Foot tapping under the table to communicate suit holdings. (Yes, this actually happened.)

Card positioning where how you placed your cards in the dummy or your hand conveyed information.

Coughing codes where different coughs meant different things.

Board placement where how you set the board back after playing signaled something about the hand.

These methods seem crude now, but they worked. Bridge players sit close together, often with screens between partners and opponents but not always. There are opportunities to signal if you’re willing to cross that line.

Most of these cases involved lesser-known players and were handled quietly. But they established a pattern: wherever there’s competition, there’s temptation to cheat.

The Italian Crisis: The 1970s-2000s

Italy has the most successful bridge team in history (the Blue Team), but Italy also has had recurring cheating scandals.

In the late 1950s and 1960s, there were quiet accusations about the Blue Team using signals. Most of these were dismissed as sour grapes from losing opponents. But after the Blue Team retired in 1975, more evidence emerged that some pairs had improper agreements.

The signals were subtle: how they arranged their cards, pencil positioning, timing tells. Nothing was conclusively proven against the classic Blue Team, though suspicions remained.

More damaging was what came later. In 2015, the bridge world was shocked by accusations against several top Italian pairs, including world champions. The accusations involved:

“Coded” coughs during the auction that indicated specific holdings.

Body language signals that were so subtle most players wouldn’t notice but partners understood.

Tempo variations where how long you thought before passing conveyed information.

An investigation led by the ACBL (American Contract Bridge League) and the European Bridge League found evidence against several Italian pairs. Some were suspended. Others were banned. The Italian bridge federation faced serious sanctions.

This wasn’t ancient history. This was 2015, in an era with video recording and extensive monitoring. These were world champions, players with international reputations, caught cheating at major events.

The scandal devastated Italian bridge. A program that had produced the greatest team in history was now associated with systematic cheating. Fair or not, Italy’s reputation in the bridge world hasn’t recovered.

The Worst Case: Boye Brogeland’s Investigation (2015-2016)

Norwegian player Boye Brogeland became bridge’s unlikely whistleblower in 2015. He started investigating suspicious play patterns and compiled evidence against multiple pairs across several countries.

What Brogeland found shocked the bridge world:

Multiple world-class pairs appearing to use coded signals.

Patterns in their leads and signals that were too successful to be legitimate.

Statistical analyses showing their results in certain situations were essentially impossible without information they shouldn’t have.

Brogeland published his findings online, naming names and presenting evidence. The bridge establishment initially resisted (nobody wants to believe top players are cheating), but the evidence was overwhelming.

Several pairs were investigated and subsequently sanctioned:

Fulvio Fantoni and Claudio Nunes (Italy/Monaco) - Banned for using coded coughs.

Lotan Fisher and Ron Schwartz (Israel) - Banned for illicit signaling.

Multiple German pairs - Suspended for various infractions.

The scandal reached into the highest levels of competitive bridge. These weren’t club players cutting corners. These were world champions, players with endorsements and teaching careers, people who represented the sport at the highest level.

Technology Makes It Worse

Modern technology created new cheating opportunities that would have amazed the finger-signal cheaters of 1965:

Smartphones - A player excuses themselves to the bathroom and checks on Bridge Base Online to see the exact hand their partner is playing. They return with perfect knowledge.

Hidden communication devices - Tiny earpieces that can receive signals from a confederate watching online broadcasts.

Hacking - In events that use electronic dealing machines and BridgeMates, there have been attempts to hack the system to learn hands in advance.

Real-time analysis - Software that can analyze a hand in seconds and transmit optimal plays to a player wearing a hidden device.

The bridge authorities have responded with:

Stricter device policies - No phones allowed during play. Penalties for even checking your phone.

Delayed broadcasts - Major championships now delay their online broadcasts to prevent real-time information transfer.

Better monitoring - More cameras, more review of suspicious plays, statistical analysis of results.

Harsher penalties - Players caught cheating face multi-year bans and lifetime bans for repeat offenses.

But it’s an arms race. Every new security measure leads to new attempts to circumvent it.

Why Do They Do It?

This is the question that haunts every bridge player: why would top players risk their reputations by cheating?

The answers are depressingly human:

Ego - Some players can’t stand losing. They’ve convinced themselves they’re the best, and they’ll do anything to maintain that illusion.

Money - Top bridge players can make good money through endorsements, teaching, and appearance fees. Winning championships increases earning potential.

Competition pressure - At the highest levels, margins are tiny. A small edge from illicit signals can be the difference between winning and losing.

Rationalization - Some cheaters convince themselves that “everyone does it” or that their methods are “just interpretation of legal signals.” They rationalize their way past ethical boundaries.

The perfect crime - Bridge cheating is hard to prove definitively. You need patterns, statistical evidence, video review. Some cheaters think they’re clever enough to get away with it.

None of these are good reasons. All of them are real.

The Cost to the Game

Every cheating scandal damages bridge:

Reputation - When mainstream media covers bridge, it’s often because of cheating scandals, not championship victories.

Trust - Players become suspicious of each other. Legitimate good results get questioned. The atmosphere becomes toxic.

Participation - Who wants to play a game where cheating is rampant? Tournament entries decline. New players are harder to recruit.

Sponsorship - Companies don’t want to associate with a scandal-ridden sport. Sponsorship money dries up.

The bridge community has worked hard to restore integrity. The investigations, bans, and increased monitoring show the authorities are taking cheating seriously. But the damage lingers.

What We’ve Learned

The history of bridge cheating teaches some hard lessons:

Nobody is above suspicion - The most respected players, the biggest names, have been caught cheating. Reputation doesn’t guarantee integrity.

Systems alone aren’t enough - You need monitoring, review, statistical analysis, and willingness to investigate even when it’s uncomfortable.

The cover-up is often worse - Authorities who ignored early warning signs or protected favorite players made scandals worse when the truth emerged.

Transparency matters - Publishing evidence, explaining decisions, and being open about investigations helps restore trust.

Harsh penalties work - Players who face serious consequences are less likely to cheat. Light penalties just encourage others to try.

The Current State

As of 2026, bridge has made progress:

Better monitoring - Cameras are standard at major events. Expert panels review suspicious hands. Statistical analysis flags outlier performances.

Clearer rules - What constitutes cheating is more precisely defined. Gray areas have been eliminated.

Stronger enforcement - Cheaters face real penalties. Banned players are actually kept out of events.

Cultural change - There’s less tolerance for “that’s just how the game is played” excuses. Ethics matter.

But cheating hasn’t been eliminated. It probably never will be. As long as there’s competition, there will be people tempted to cheat.

What We Can Do

Every bridge player has a responsibility to protect the game’s integrity:

Don’t cheat - Obviously. But also don’t rationalize borderline behavior. Don’t convince yourself that minor violations are okay.

Report suspicions - If something seems wrong, say something. Don’t assume someone else will handle it.

Support ethical players - Play with people you trust. Refuse to play with known cheaters even if they’ve “served their time.”

Teach ethics - New players need to understand that bridge has ethical standards and they matter.

Demand transparency - Bridge organizations should be open about investigations and penalties.

The Bottom Line

Bridge is a great game. It’s intellectually challenging, socially engaging, endlessly fascinating. The vast majority of players are honest people who love the game and play it fairly.

But bridge has had cheating scandals. Top players have been caught using improper signals. The game’s reputation has suffered.

We can’t pretend these scandals didn’t happen. We can’t excuse them or minimize them. What we can do is learn from them, strengthen our ethical standards, and protect the game for future generations.

Because bridge is worth protecting. It’s worth fighting for. It’s worth keeping clean.

The cheaters damaged the game we love. But they didn’t destroy it. Bridge survives because the honest players vastly outnumber the cheaters. Because the authorities eventually get serious about enforcement. Because most of us play for the right reasons.

Next time you sit down at a bridge table, remember: you’re part of a tradition that includes spectacular brilliance and shameful failures. Choose which tradition you want to contribute to.

The vast majority of us choose correctly.

The game survives because of that choice.