BRIDGE : CULTURE, SCIENCE and SPORT

BRIDGE : CULTURE, SCIENCE and SPORT

SUMMARY OF MIGUEL MESTANZA’S THESIS

Miguel Mestanza, former President of the Spanish Bridge Federation (1993-1997),

presented a doctorate thesis on the subject of ‘Bridge: Culture, Science and Sport’ in

the Faculty of Humanities of the Spanish San Pablo CEU University in Madrid on 16

March 2007. Miguel Mestanza got the highest cum laude qualification for a doctorate

thesis in this University.

The idea of preparing such a thesis was based on his conviction that it was important to

bring to the knowledge of the University, a source of didactic possibilities, the unknown

world of culture and science attached to the game of Bridge which he discovered during

his research career.

As far as culture is concerned, Mestanza raises the question of the relation between

Culture and the game in its origin. The game belongs to human nature, either rational or

not. And the human being, using reason and knowledge, gives form to the game and

converts it into culture. Huizinga used to say that the game is not culture, but that

culture derives from the game.

The Greek culture presented amusement and entertainment, including games and

musical and artistic activities such as theatre, as essential components. This was an

important way to achieve education, the ‘paideia’. Another essential target was the

culture of competition, consubstantial with any form of Greek culture.

Rome saw the culture of universality as essential. The ‘ludus’, which replaced ‘paideia’,

had the same meaning but was more universal since it was applied to games, persons

and places.

In the Middle Ages, culture became individual, according to regions or feuds. The

games were local. In order to escape from the barbarians, universal culture took refuge

in the monasteries. But because it was expanding, it returned to its previous form,

although with the added component of teaching.

The invention of playing cards coincided with the beginning of the Renaissance, when

creative culture gave rise to new games, among which the predecessors of bridge,

known in the British Isles from 1526 under the name of triumphus hispanicus. Such

denomination shows that the origin of this game was derived from cultures other than

the British one, probably Arabian, brought to the Iberian Peninsula and from here taken

to the British Isles by merchants and soldiers during the period of the marriage of Henry

the VIII and Catalina of Aragon This could explain the severe homilies of the Anglican

Bishop Hugh Latimer against ‘a game coming from Catholic Spain’.

This game soon received the influence of the culture of the country which welcomed it.

In the British Isles the game became known as Whist because it was played in silence.

The game spread throughout the country and was mentioned by Shakespeare in 1602 in

‘Anthony and Cleopatra’.

Little by little, during the Enlightenment period, several matters that gave rise to various

cultures had to be studied and public cultures were obliged to be regulated. The first

Whist Treaty was prepared by Thomas Hoyle and published in 1742.

Sociology, the science of social phenomena, facilitated the diffusion of Whist through

social relations together with the improved means of communication developed during

the Industrial Revolution. Whist was soon known and practised in France and also in

USA, to where it had been taken by the puritans of Mayflower. A Whist Club was

founded and new formulas were created in order to attract more participants to the

game, such as duplication and the Mitchell and Howell movements.

The science of empiric culture permitted the creation of a series of card-playing

technical rules which became popular, such as the Deschapelles coup, the Bath coup,

the Wien coup and the Rule of 11.

The culture created by political absolutism gave rise to the new concept of sport based

on physical exercise, as a consequence of English colonialism and German nationalism.

It was incorporated into British education with the aim of producing ‘sportsmen’, a

prototype of the admired colonial military. In Germany the so-called turnen games were

held, their aim being to prepare athletes for guerrilla warfare against Napoleon. With

French support, this concept led to the restoring of the Olympic Games in 1896, with

the exclusion of non-physical games.

Last but not least, linguistic culture introduced the most typical innovation into our

game. In fact, the studies on language initiated by Leipzig and Hume influenced Whist

and contributed to introducing the spoken language into the game, as was the case in the

so-called Boston Whist. Later, following the works by the Americans Morris and Pierce

and the European Saussure on semiotic language as a preparatory stage, bidding was

adopted at the end of the 19th century, giving rise to modern Bridge.

During the 20th century, the Greek cultures of the spectacle and of ‘agon’ (competition)

were developed and strengthened. Bridge became a spectacle and also a remarkable

means of competition.

Last but not least, Bridge adopted the cyberspace culture and Internet contributes to its

diffusion through the countless number of competitive hands played by people all over

the world who have never met and will never meet personally.

The game and art are also related. Since ancient Greece both expressions go together;

the link being the human impulse which leads to pleasure being a means to escape from

the material world. Kant dealt with this question as a master in search of the beautiful

and the aesthetic. Such impulse, which is after all the culture of leisure, connects

everything which aims at this movement of emancipation: play, art, literature, theatre,

etc. Ortega Y Gasset designated the impulse which leads the ‘traveller’ to mental

autonomy as ‘aroma’, and wisely stressed that art and play ‘van de consuno porque

tienen la misma oriundez’ (are convergent because they have the same origin).

Science can be defined as knowledge acquired by observation and reasoning. It is

obvious that the scientific nature of Bridge could be justified by only these two aspects.

The major difficulty in accepting science in bridge comes from Empiricism, which

imposes a set of tested principles which can be experienced by observation. In

accordance with this criterion, only the exact sciences can be considered as sciences; all

others - ethics, moral, those derived from natural law and, obviously, philosophy -

falling outside this concept.

The Rationalists had a different view. Descartes, Spinoza, Leibniz and others claimed

that the intellect is capable of recognizing reality, regardless of experience.

Finally another concept: Karl Popper, considering Einstein’s work and conclusions,

believed that knowledge acquired by experience cannot lead to certitude, but only to

probabilities.

In conclusion, one can state that science covers not only technical and exact knowledge

but also moral and natural knowledge, in which games are included.

Bridge respects the principles of Empiricism and can be considered a science fulfilling

both requirements with its discipline and structure.

There is no doubt concerning Mathematics. Arithmetic, geometry, the rules of

percentages and probability calculation are sciences. The same is true regarding the

rules of the game, which have been formulated on the principles of exactitude.

Philosophy finds the truth of a syllogism as a result of the certitude of the premises.

Law not only encompasses the terminology of Bridge (auction, contract, promotion,

sanctions, etc.) but also the regulating of the players per se as a consequence of the

cards which they have in their hands.

There is a science involved in the structure of Bridge: the semiotic language of signs

and symbols in the auction and in card playing. As with any other language, semiotics

has semantics based on the ascription of meanings, the exactitude of which can be

tested. There is also the relation of signs and syntax that can only be explained in a

scientific way. There is still the schematic elaboration of systems in language that can

be tested and continuously subject to revision.

During the 20th century, democratic culture influenced the IOC (International Olympic

Committee) to open the door to a broader definition of sports. Today, the Olympic

Charter today the Olympic ideal as ‘a philosophy of life, exalting and combining in a

balanced whole the qualities of body, will and spirit’. Undoubtedly, the intellect is one

of the qualities of the body. Based on that reality, the IOC, following the same treatment

given to the game of chess, recognized the World Bridge Federation, on 15 June 1995,

in Budapest. This recognition was reconfirmed in Seoul in 1999. Therefore Bridge is a

sport, since the WBF, the object of which consists in the administration of Bridge, is

recognized by the IOC.

Miguel Mestanza opens here a parenthesis to criticize the fact that, the Spanish Supreme

Sports Council, CSC, expressed, in March 2005, the opinion that recognition by the IOC still needs reconfirmation and cannot therefore be accepted as such in Spain.

Among the arguments, Mestanza mentions that the Olympic Movement Report 2005

includes the WBF in the list of Federations recognized by the IOC, and also the fact that

Spain has adhered to the Olympic Charter since 1991, which makes it official in the

whole country.

The last part of Mestanza’s thesis underlines the benefits of teaching Bridge in schools

and universities as a means of fulfilling the social role of the game in the formation of a

person’s character. Its practice contributes to strengthening the memory and to widening

the ethical and philosophical sense of life through the values of self-control, concentration,

decision-making, moderation and balance, together with the discipline and rigour

which are inherent to competition.

Besides these formative aspects, bridge has a great cultural and scientific value which

normally attracts no attention. Following the principle of ‘global teaching’, it is

important to stress them. For instance, when mentioning the fact that bridge is science,

why not explain its empiricism? When recalling the origins of bridge, why not mention

the historical and social circumstances of the period? When teaching the rules of the

game, why not evoke the Lightning? When bringing attention to reasoning, why not

explain the logic and the Aristotelian and stoical syllogism? When studying the bidding

and the card playing, why not connect them with the language of semiotics? And … so

many more teaching and formative possibilities which are put at our disposal by bridge.

To society it is important that schools and universities make good use of everything

connected with culture and science, and for bridge it is important to have access to such

forums. Why not try to harmonize both interests?

5

Aku Menangis

Bambang Hartono (baju putih pegang piala)

Aku Menangis

Oleh: Michael Bambang Hartono

Sebagaimana para pembaca sekalian, saya adalah salah satu penggemar setia bridge

di tanah air yang kita cintai ini. Berpuluh-puluh tahun saya sudah menggeluti dunia bridge, tak terhitung kenangan manis yang pernah saya rasakan selama bermain olahraga otak ini.

Tetapi, minggu-minggu terakhir ini sebagian dari diri saya seperti memberontak. Walaupun kita sangat senang melihat banyaknya anak-anak pelajar yang saat ini sudah ikut menikmati permainan yang sangat menyenangkan ini, tetapi ada berita-berita miring yang sangat menyakitkan untuk didengar. Saya benar-benar menangis mendengarnya, tidak mampu untuk berbicara apapun. Untuk itulah, pada kesempatan ini saya memberanikan untuk membagi pemikiran saya kepada teman-teman semua, para pemain bridge sekalian.

Dalam beberapa hari Kejuaraan Nasional Pelajar, banyak sekali berita tentang kecurangan yang dilakukan oleh siswa-siswa, yang sebagian besar malah dibantu oleh oknum pelatih, orang tua ataupun gurunya. Tindakan-tindakan keji yang sangat dilarang (dan merusak) mereka praktekkan disini. Ada siswa yang terang-terangan mengubah skor untuk kepentingannya. Ada pula para guru yang membantu siswanya ketika memainkan kartu. Bahkan para ofisial ada yang terlihat dengan sengaja memberikan kode kepada muridnya tentang posisi kartu tertentu. Beberapa daerah seperti Sulawesi dan pulau-pulau di sebelah Timur Jawa santer terdengar melakukan tindakan amoral tersebut.

Bridge adalah olahraga yang sangat positif, yang mengembleng jiwa orang yang mempelajarinya agar bisa menjadi insan yang lebih baik. Dengan mendapatkan informasi, lalu menyimpulkannya berdasarkan strategi yang sudah diperhitungkan, setiap pemain bridge terdidik untuk bisa mengelola setiap kegiatan dan kesempatan menjadi sesuatu yang berguna. Bridge mendidik setiap anak untuk berpikir sistimatis, dan mengambil keputusan berdasarkan kerja sama yang ia lakukan dengan partnernya. Dengan memperhitungkan risiko yang mungkin muncul, ia nantinya akan mumpuni sebagai seorang “decision maker.”

Sangat banyak bukti yang bisa kita lihat bagaimana pemain bridge yang baik akan menjadi seorang pemimpin atau pengusaha. Saya sendiri adalah salah satu contoh nyatanya. Kalau mau dilihat, orang terkaya di dunia saat ini (Warren Buffet) adalah pemain bridge aktif, demikian juga Bill Gates yang lama bercokol sebagai orang terkaya di dunia.

Hai, para orang tua, guru-guru dan pembina bridge di seluruh tanah air, relakah anda-anda semua jika anak-anak kita terperosok kedalam lubang yang kalian gali sendiri. Mereka, yang seharusnya memperoleh nilai-nilai positif dari permainan ini, malah mempelajari aspek negatif yang bisa mengubah kepribadiannya. Jika saat ini saja mereka sudah melakukan tindakan keji tersebut, bisa dibayangkan apa yang bisa mereka lakukan ketika menjadi pemimpin disuatu hari nanti. Anak-anak muda yang dengan mempelajari permainan ini bisa menjadi pemimpin dan lokomotif di generasinya, sekarang bahkan sudah mendapatkan sifat pencuri, penipu dan menghalalkan segala macam kecurangan, yang tentu saja bakal merekat erat di jiwanya, dan sangat mungkin akan susah untuk dihilangkan.

Para pembina, pengurus, pemain dan seluruh komunitas bridge tanah air. Marilah kita bersama-sama, bahu membahu untuk melawan tindakan yang sudah jelas sangat salah dan sangat tidak bertanggung jawab tersebut. Mari kita berantas semua tindakan tidak sportif dan segala kecurangan yang saat ini sudah terlihat dimana-mana dengan sangat mencolok. Bapak-bapak, ibu-ibu, mari kita selamatkan generasi muda dan masa depan bridge Indonesia. Jangan sampai negeri kita yang sudah sangat terpuruk ini menjadi semakin tenggelam akibat kelengahan kita. Mudah-mudahan pada saat yang akan datang tidak ada lagi yang menangis seperti saya. Hidup bridge Indonesia.