It's gotta suck to blow 15 IMPs in the fourth quarter of the Spingold by screwing up something to your Multi bids and playing 4H-5 instead of a cold 4S, doubly so when you lose by exactly 15.

Looks like there was an error in the BBO scoring and they lost by 18. I know that would save me some sleep.

Well that's good news ok not really

I'd love to know who screwed up there; not knowing Multi at all, it looked like there's no way 4H can actually be natural there but what do I know

Yeah I'm guessing 4H was meant to be a splinter agreeing spades

I'm guessing 2D-4H would be natural but I haven't touched multi in years

I would have thought the same (and clearly that's what it was intended as; that looked like a pretty hungry bid opposite a weak two in spades from my POV but what do I know).

I saw that one - from memory the auction was

2D p 2H p
2S X 4H all pass

If responder has hearts and wants to play game there opposite weak with spades surely he starts with 2NT ? - I have never considered playing the multi but I would of thought an immediate 4H over 2D is best used as correctable.

4H absolutely can't be natural there, so the passer is wrong; whether it should be a splinter (which makes sense to me) or something else is another question, but even if it was undisclosed, responder can be confident that an opener who is not asleep at the wheel will never pass.

lol
If you feel frisky, open 4S with this hand. 1NT is utterly ******ed and whoever did that should quit playing bridge.

Pro GIB auction

http://www.bridgebase.com/tools/hand...396-1458076802

Well, 7NT is second best contract, after 6D

can someone pm me who is involved in this denver swiss bs? thanks

prepare to have your mind blown

lol yep.

It's public record... You can look up the Denver results and look for the match that is scored a tie with 0vp.

It's a major lapse in judgement imo. To me it seems less shady and more just stupidity. The director could have easily adjudicated something without this mess.

im acutely aware that i was the last person on earth to hear about this.

Ha!

If it turns out to be true that they concocted a scorecard to justify the tie match, as is rumored — and maybe even if they didn't do that — then I'm not buying the "it was a mistake" defense that no doubt is coming. Breaking the rules in order to get yourself a score that is higher than what the rules provide for isn't a stupid mistake, it's flat out cheating. (Obviously I don't know what happened; I'm basing this on the rumored facts.)

I'm not saying it was a mistake. It was obviously cheating. Is it the same as FN/FS level? I say probably not as this seems like a one-off incident of stupidity in the moment, not a pattern of premeditated UI over several years. I wholly expect some form of punishment is coming and deserved.

Again with the rider that the facts are currently a decent rumour - we all know when you screw up you go to the director and tell him the whole story acknowledging that your an idiot along the way - I think the rumoured facts speak of a horribly arrogant mind-set - worse than a lapse in judgement - definitely worth a fat suspension

I regard this as on a level well below FS and FN (ldo) and pretty similar to Passell's case (which does not give me much confidence as to how this is going to be handled), again assuming the rumors are essentially correct:

• A probably innocent initial mistake which should result in a standard penalty and a few laughs at the bar afterwards
  
• High level pros who know better decide to not call the director
  
• Said pros adjudicate the result themselves, in a way far more favorable to them than the law would require
  
• and then attempt to cover up the mistake afterwards.

(In particular, the sub-rumor that they made up score sheets to justify the 0-0 IMP score shows they KNOW they were doing something wrong. If that bit is true, anything less than a maximum penalty for this is just absolute garbage worthy of burning down headquarters.)


Obviously not something they went into the match with the intent of cheating on, but most definitely post facto cheating (and much worse than a "lapse in judgement" or a "blackout"). "horribly arrogant mindset" is the right characterization. The only sad part is on some level it makes you wonder how much some people are getting away with -- is there some sort of a code of "we don't pick on each other" (hence the "10-10 is fair" idea) but pull what you can against people who are less likely to notice? I don't really feel like there is, but it's a fair question at this point.

Fourth in hand.

A8
KJT976
Q76
K4

p- 1C - (1D) - 1H
(1S) - 3H - (3S) - 4H
(4S) - P - (P) - ?

Vulnerability and form of scoring deliberately left blank.

5H, since I decided not to make a slam try last time (xx Axxx Kx AQxxx doesn't seem like TOO much to ask)

Vulnerability and form of scoring matter for any bidding problem, though I confess I'm having trouble finding one I'd double on.

Wouldn't be shocked if a natural 4NT was worth all the board-a-match, for instance.

4H is bad, if partner can jump support, you have a very easy 4C over 3S

MPs all vul


AKJx
QJTxxx
void
Axx

You deal and open 1H, partner responds 1S.

Your call.

Meh. Either 3S or 4D depending on your aggro level; I think 3S is high enough personally.