2015 Cheating Scandals

2015 will be remembered as the year of bridge scandals, as several World Class pairs have been accused of systematically cheating.

The background

Last year it emerged that Dr. Michael Elinescu and Dr. Entscho Wladow had been illegally communicating during the 2013 World Senior Championships. They are now known as the German Coughing Doctors. Their basic code was that one, two, three or four coughs meant Clubs, Diamonds, Hearts or Spades respectively. This was used both in the auction, to tell partner about a shortage in the indicated suit, and just before the opening lead, to suggests a suit to partner. They were an eccentric pair with other mannerisms and hand movements (a theme we will see repeating) and there may have been more to their code. They have been found guilty by both the World Bridge Federation and German Bridge Federation, but maintain their innocence (another recurring theme).

This year things began relatively quietly, when at the end of the 2015 World Championships in Chennai a cryptic note in the Daily Bulletin stated that the well-respected American Senior Mike Passell “was found guilty of violating CDR 3.1 (Laws of Duplicate Bridge), 3.7 (Actions unbecoming a Member participating in an ACBL event), 3.20 (Ethical Violations) and E13 (Prearrange a deal or part thereof).” It eventually emerged that Mike had been accused of deliberately creating a ‘fouled board’, by messing up the cards on a deal he’d already played so it couldn’t be played at the other table, and was therefore unscored. This occurred on a hand where Mike had already received a bad result, so it didn't look good. In his defence Mike explained that he had noticed a card face up on the floor and merely added it to the wrong pocket. He admitted an error of judgement in not calling the director, but denied deliberate wrongdoing.

Fisher-Schwartz

This was soon overshadowed by much bigger news, when after his narrow quarterfinal loss in the prestigious Spingold tournament Norwegian Boye Brogeland publicly accused Israeli pair Lotan Fisher and Ron Schwartz of cheating (without saying how), and promised there were more revelations to come. Analysis of video evidence from Per Ola Cullin of Sweden found a link between where a defender placed the tray containing after the auction and the suit he wanted partner to lead.

In this video still Fisher (leftmost) is on opening lead and Schwartz (opposite) is about to place the yellow board down. His board placement matched the suit that he wanted partner to lead, as indicated by the suit symbols. Tellingly, Schwartz’s irregular placement of the board only occurred when his partner was on lead; the rest of the time he placed the board in the middle of the table like everyone else.

The code is nicely explained in a YouTube video by Michael Clark, and there is an analysis by Kit Woolsey on the BridgeWinners website.

Boye set up a website called BridgeCheaters.com outlining the accusations and occasions where F-S achieved good results by suspected foul play, and suggesting there may have also been a coughing code. Naturally F-S denied the allegations, and have hired a lawyer and set up their own Facebook page in defence.

Fantoni-Nunes

Then came the next bombshell, as BridgeWinners.com announced that they had “received overwhelming evidence alleging improper communication between the world’s #1 and #2 ranked bridge players, Fulvio Fantoni and Claudio Nunes, during the 2014 European Championships.”

It took some time before the actual cheating mechanism was unearthed by Maaijke Mevius from the Netherlands. The opening lead is placed vertically when the suit contains an Ace, King or Queen (or is a singleton) else is placed horizontally. This extra nugget of information allowed the partner of the opening leader to defend with much greater accuracy, particularly as ‘Fantunes’ as they are known, play an unusual system of Slawinski leads where the opening lead is often ambiguous.

A team of volunteers (including some Bridge Internationals) reviewed hours of footage and found the orientation of the opening lead followed this system on 82 out of 85 deals. Notably, both F-S and Fantunes were under suspicion before it was known how they were cheating. This was because of their uncanny good fortune and unjustifiable winning decisions had stood out to other experts.

Their is another Michael Clark YouTube video and analysis by Kit Woolsey.

In this video Fantoni (leftmost) makes the opening lead horizontally. His partner now knows he has no high honour in that suit, and no singleton. There may also have been more to their code. The pair were investigated in 2014 for the infamous Blackout Defence, where Nunes made a very illogical but successful action then claimed it was because he had a blackout.

Smirnov-Piekarek

After the Fantunes revelation there were rumours of a ‘third pair’, confirmed German Internationals Alex Smirnov and partner Josef Piekarek announced on the BridgeWinners website that they were “aware of the ‘whispers’ circulating about our ethical conduct, and we are sorry to say there is some truth to them. We regret that in the past as a partnership we committed some ethical violations” (read more here).

Some applauded their honesty, some said they only came forward as they were about to be rumbled (“sounds like an advance sacrifice” said Tom Hanlon of Ireland). With the World Championships about to take place in Chennai in India there were now pairs from Israel, Monaco and Germany under suspicion. All three teams withdrew from the tournament, a blow for their supporters and honest team members.

Balicki-Zmudzinski

The Polish team did not withdraw, despite rumours about Cezary Balicki and Adam Zmudzinski (known as B-Z). It was found that they were communicating illegally by how they spaced out their bidding cards. A card placed close to the previous bid indicates a minimum hand for the previous bidding, a well spaced out bid means a maximum for the previous bidding.

The analysis of this was thoroughly done, with one set of analysts looking at the spacing of the bids, and a separate set independently looking at whether the bids were maximum or minimum. A very strong correlation was found. Although the video resolution is poor the spacing of the bids can be seen nicely in the videos in Kit Woolsey’s analysis on BridgeWinners.com.

B-Z are known as an eccentric pair, not least as sometimes Zmudzinski touches the dummy while in defence. Above is a still from Australian Ishmael Del Monte’s article on Bridge Winners entitled ‘A Helping Hand’. Balicki fans out dummy’s Spades with all five fingers. He had five Spades himself (shown above). A correlation was found between the number of fingers he touches a suit with and his own length in that suit (see here).

Just before the World Championship the WBF withdrew the credentials of that pair, but allowed Poland to compete with other players. Controversially they won, and were crowned World Champions.

The future

With the notable exception of Smirnov-Piekarek all the pairs claim their innocence, so in that sense the cases are not settled. National and International bodies are deciding how to act, as are tournament organisers whose previous winners are now tainted. There are also of course rumours of a ‘fifth pair’, and investigations continue.

Collectively the accused pairs have exploited many methods to communicate, which work even with screens, using audible coughs and visible finger, board, bid and card placement. There is even speculation about other possible ways of exchanging information, such as the angle of the scoring pen.

In response to these weaknesses Fred Gitelman of Bridge Base has designed a hybrid computerised version of the game where players meet around a table but input their bids and plays on tablet computers. This would cut out some methods of communication, and make recording suspicious activity much easier. However for some experts, notably Sabine Auken, this lacks the visceral excitement of playing with cards; picking them up and seeing what you’ve been dealt.

Although for most club players the cheating scandal just leaves a bad taste, one positive thing is that the elite game is now cleaner than ever, which is good news for the other top players who have been so active in the investigations.

Finally, here is probably the best summary in the popular press from Newsweek.

If there are any errors or inaccuracies in my article please let me know and I can correct them - Thanks, Danny.

One hand from the Bermuda Bowl

The Bermuda Bowl is the bridge equivalent of a World Championship, and just took place in India. Put yourself in one defender's shoes for this deal.The opponents have just reached 3NT, after bidding some minors then checking for stops. You and your partner have been quiet throughout. What do you lead from this?

♠ T843 ♥ KQJ43 ♦ J8 ♣Q5

I expect you chose the obvious ♥K. When the hand was played live in the quarterfinal match between England and USA1 one of the commentators suggested instead leading a deceptive ♥J. But at the table the English defender, Andrew Robson, went one better and lead the ♥4! This was the full deal:

The American declarer sitting East assumed from the lead that Hearts were splitting 4-3, and was worried that if he ducked the Heart he'd get a Spade switch. So he immediately won the ♥A, reasoning this way he would lose only three Hearts and a Club. However, once the defence got in Robson surprised everyone at the table by cashing four Heart tricks to set the contract. On the other table game made easily ("Difficult to see how 3NT can go down" said the commentator).

I like this deal as it shows the subtelty the expert game. Any intermediate player would have lead the ♥K, but an expert leads like a beginner and plays fourth highest.

Scottish Cup Final

I was part of the team at the Glasgow Bridge Centre that hosted the Scottish Cup Final this Sunday. The format was two teams of four competing over four segments each of 16 boards. The match was played behind screens, which I've not experienced before.

The favourites and eventual winners were team SHORT consisting of Brian Short, Dave Walker Les Steel and John Matheson. The runners up were team KANE with Danny Kane, Helen Kane, Cliff Gillis and Alistair MacDonald.

The first section was very low scoring, then after the break SHORT started amassing IMPs and never looked back.They seemed to profit from better defence on a lot of part score boards plus a few game swings due to superior play. Their losses were mostly limited to when team KANE hit the jackpot with an ambitious bid.

This was an interesting board from the 3rd segment:

Closed Room Kane D Steel MacDonald Matheson W N E S - 1♠ - 1NT - 3NT - 4♥ - - -

Open Room Walker Gillis Short Kane H W N E S - 1♠ - 2♣* - 2♦* - 2♥ - 4♥ - - -

In the Closed Room East opened 1♠ and West made the disciplined reply of 1NT. East has the points for game so bid 3NT. I thought that might end the auction, as it wouldn't be the first or second time that Kane-MacDonald had played 3NT with a big major fit, but West pulled to 4♥. Les Steel as North lead the ♣4, which in their system is either his 3rd or 5th highest Club (or shortage). Declarer thought for a while, couldn't face going down on trick one, and played the ♣A. When both Spade honours were offside he had to lose three more tricks and go down one.

In the Open Room after the same opening bid West replied 2♣, which for them I think shows one of three things, one of which is weak Hearts, and when East found out it was Hearts he raised to game. This time, playing 4th highest leads, North lead the ♣3. At this point the Closed Room had all finished their match, and along with me, were gathered around a monitor waiting to see what declarer Dave Walker would do. "He ought to get it right" said his team-mate Les Steel "He really ought to get this right.". After a long pause he did get it right, and finessed the ♣Q. He then took a slightly risky line playing for an overtrick which drew disapproving comments from Matheson and Steel, but it worked out fine and making 4♥ was worth 13 IMPs. This gave Team SHORT a 50 IMP lead going into the last segment and virtually sealed the match.

1. Would you finesse the Clubs at trick one?

In the final section there was one soaring highlight for Team KANE, a doubled grand slam!

Closed Room Kane H Steel Gillis Matheson W N E S - 1♥ - 2♦ - 2♥ - 3♥ - 4♣* - 4♦* - 5♣* - 6♥ - - -

Open Room Walker MacDonald Short Kane D W N E S - 1♥ - 1♠ - 2♣ - 2♦ - 3♣ - 6♥ - 7♥ - - x - - -

In the Closed Room when the hands were dealt commentator Liz McGowan said on Vugraph "Back with the slams. Kane needs these to produce some action." Iain Sime described the bidding: "3♥ forcing, 4♣ mild slam try". As the cuebidding continued Liz said: "One great Scottish Bridge tradition is to ensure in a slam auction that partner has to make the last guess. That way it's never your fault.". Finally Matheson took the plunge and bid 6♥. East lead the obvious ♦Q and declarer wrapped up 13 tricks. Afterwards, John Matheson said that he had that Board marked as a likely gain for his team, as they'd bid and made a slam which if off two tricks if East finds a Spade lead.

2. Against 6♥, if East leads a low Spade is it clear for West to play the ♠J?

On the other table the auction was shorter. Commentator Paul Gipson immediately picked up on the significance of the 1♠ bid: "Nice try by Danny Kane, more difficult for Short to lead a Spade now." Danny Kane then took a gamble at 6♥, and I was delighted to see MacDonald top him up to seven. I think that whenever partner makes a surprise jump to slam you should always top him up if possible, and although I'd never met Alistair MacDonald before he'd clearly heard of Hamilton's Rule, as I'd like it to be known, and bid an excellent 7♥. At least, excellent as far as the neutral is concerned. It's a precarious contract.

Before the bid Gipson said: "if MacDonald bids 7♥, will Walker double?". When Walker did double, he queried: "Does double ask for a Spade, or show a void?". Short presumably wasn't sure either, so lead a Diamond (same as closed room), and MacDonald nocholantly wrapped up all 13 tricks, for 7♥x= and 13 IMPs. Afterwards, Short and Walker stayed relatively calm.

3. What would you lead after the double?

In the end Team SHORT ran out comfortable winners by 163 IMPs to 93. Congratulations to them, and thanks to the Glasgow Bridge Center for hosting the event.

Coughing Scandal in Bali

The April 2014 SBU News reported that after a thorough investigation the World Bridge Federation (WBF) have found a pair from the winning Germany Senior Team guilty of cheating at the 2013 World Championship in Bali. Since then the German Bridge Federation (GBF) has also condemned them. This is the final nail in the coughin’. It is now only the Doctors themselves who protest their innocence.

Dr. Michael Elinescu and Dr. Entscho Wladow.

In this article I will look at the background, how they cheated, how they were caught, the defence, the aftermath, and what happens next.

Background

"It’s the German doctors, hold your cards up!" (David Gold)
(Spectator article)

Elinescu and Wladow have been under suspicion for many years. They play a unique bidding system which leads to unusual results, and have been accused in the past of unethically failing to explain their bids or conveniently forgetting agreements. In 2008 the Italian expert Fulvio Fantoni wrote about Wladow’s "peculiar bidding". They have also been accused of unfriendly and intimidating behaviour at the table.
(Elinescu-Wladow convention card)
(Fantoni article)

As a result of these suspicions in 2008 and 2009 they were extensively monitored by the WBF, to no avail.

How they cheated

"They are just a couple of hacks" (Eric Rodwell)
(Bridge Winners article by Mike Passell)

The World Championship was played behind screens, which makes illegal communication very difficult. With the screen in place you can’t see your partner. There’s only a slit at the bottom of the screen to pass around the bidding tray, and a small door which is opened to draw the cards from the holder and to see dummy’s cards. The screen also extends to the floor to prevent foot tapping (that’s another story).

This image is taken from a video of the event. Elinescu is leftmost in the picture and Wladow rightmost. Their opponents are from the USA2 Senior Team. The German Doctors found a way around the screens - coughing. Just after picking up their cards they coughed to show partner shortage (singleton or void) in any suit:

One cough	Club shortage
Two coughs	Diamond shortage
Three coughs	Heart shortage
Four coughs	Spade shortage

It’s a remarkably simple code, especially for a World Championship pair!

As an example, here is the hand that they have just picked up in the image above:
(WBF hand record)

F 5-12 Dealer W NS Vul	♠ T86 ♡ KQ95 ♢ – ♣ KJT932
♠ Q7432 ♡ A64 ♢ KQ72 ♣ Q		♠ AKJ9 ♡ JT ♢ AJ65 ♣ A85
	♠ 5 ♡ 8732 ♢ T9843 ♣ 764

In this deal (and all deals featured here) Elinescu is North and Wladow is South. In the video recording you can clearly hear North coughing twice to indicate his Diamond shortage and, five seconds later, South coughing four times to show his Spade shortage.
(Youtube video)

There was also a second use of coughs. When one partner was about to lead the other would cough to indicate the suit he wanted.

One cough	Lead Clubs
Two coughs	Lead Diamonds
Three coughs	Lead Hearts
Four coughs	Lead Spades

For example, in the deal above West became declarer in 6♠, meaning North was on lead. If South had wanted a particular lead he could have coughed before the first card, but as it happened on this deal remained silent so North lead a trump.

Coughing to show shortage and suggest an opening lead already gives the pair a huge advantage. But there may have been even more to the coughing code. For example, sometimes with Heart shortage they coughed once then once again, which might have been an alternative to three coughs. There is talk of a call-and-response system, where opening leader can cough for two suits, and his partner coughs back to say which one he prefers.
(Eminenti report)

Elinescu-Wladow also played several rare conventional bids which had two possible meanings. They may have used coughs to indicate to partner which version they had. For example, in one hand in the final Elinescu opened a non-vulnerable 2NT, which for them showed either both minors or just Diamonds. Wladow’s odd bidding in response suggests he 'knew' his partner had the version with just Diamonds.
(Elinescu-Wladow convention card)
(WBF hand record)
(Bridge Winners article by Eddie Wold)
(Parody of Elinescu-Wladow convention card)

There is also a strong suspicion that there was cheating outside coughs, with Wladow exploiting the time when the screen door was open to signal to partner via sweeping hand movements and touching the bidding tray. The best guess here is that the code was to sweep his hand when he had 0-5 points, and not to sweep for stronger hands. It certainly looks odd in the video. However, this and the more exotic aspects of the coughing code have not been proven. With the Doctors still denying all accusations it is unlikely the full code will ever be known.
(German Bridge article June 2014)

How they were caught

"I’m sort of the hero of the bridge world right now for having caught them, everyone’s been dying to catch them for so long" (Eddie Wold, USA2 team)
(CBC radio interview)

The World Championship in Bali began with 22 senior teams. This was reduced to a field of eight (including the Scottish Senior Team of Willie Coyle, Derek Diamond, Gerald Haase, John Murdoch, Victor Silverstone and Iain Sime) for the quarter finals. The Doctors have long had a reputation as an eccentric pair, and suspicion of them was now widespread. At this point in the tournament the USA2 non playing captain Donna Compton started keeping an eye on them.

Germany progressed to the semi-final where they beat France. Phillip Vanhoutte, of the losing French team, said afterwards that "We lost, not because they cheated, but nervousness of having to meet: during the 16 boards I played against them, I mostly wasted my time trying to dissect their code".
(Bridge Winners article by Eddie Wold)

In the final Germany met USA2, in a match of six sets over two days. At this point Compton privately asked WBF Championship manager Maurizio Di Sacco to monitor the Doctors. The request was refused as at this point Compton was offering no new evidence.

In Set 3, just before the overnight break, Elinescu-Wladow sat down against the American pair of Eddie Wold and Mike Passell. When Wladow first coughed, Wold thought it sounded a little off. Then Elinescu coughed too, and Wold thought that sounded really forced. I’ve listened to the videos and I agree that Elinescu is definitely a less convincing cougher. Wladow is at least a bit throaty.

Wold decided to keep a note of how many coughs each player made. There’s no column for recording coughs on the standard score card, so he had to improvise:

(Eddie Wold's score card)

In the DLR AND VUL column the little numbers record the number of coughs the opponent made. For example, on Board 2 the small '2' is because North, coughed twice. This is that actual deal, which shows North does indeed have Diamond shortage:
(WBF hand record)

F 3-2 Dealer E NS Vul ♠ J7652 ♡ J984 ♢ 3 ♣ QJ2 ♠ 983 ♡ K5 ♢ J65 ♣ A6543 ♠ T ♡ A732 ♢ QT984 ♣ 98 ♠ AKQ4 ♡ QT6 ♢ AK7 ♣ KT7

W N E S Pass 2NT Pass 3♣ Pass 4♠

The German auction is also unusual. Why did South (Wladow) jump to 4♠? According to Compton’s report, when Eddie Wold questioned Wladow about his 4♠ bid the response was "I thought I had responded 3♠ and my partner had passed me out"
(USA2 analysis of final)

Wold soon noticed that the coughs were coming just after the Doctors picked up their hands, or just before the opening lead. He said "The real clincher came to me when my opponent seemed to lead [a Club] instantly after getting one cough from his partner. In the finals of a world championship, everyone takes a couple of seconds to think before putting their lead on the table, but not this opponent."
(Bridge Winners article by Eddie Wold)

At no point did Wold confront the Germany Team or call the tournament director, although he admits he was tempted. Instead at the end of the Set he gave his card to his captain, Donna Compton, who then went over the hand records and fully cracked the code.

That night at their team dinner the Americans discussed what to do. Some were reluctant to continue the match. Some suggested taking an excessive amount of cough sweets to offer their opponents, or coughing themselves to either obstruct the code, or just embarrass the Doctors into stopping. Instead Compton took the score card and a spreadsheet she had made linking coughs to deals back to Maurizio Di Sacco. This time the WBF decided there was enough evidence to take things further, and Di Sacco quietly placed his assistant Manolo Eminenti as the table operator with instructions to film the next set that featured Elinescu and Wladow. This would give a unique opportunity to catch the Doctors in the act.

When the cameras arrived one of the Americans improvised and said they must be broadcasting this match live. The Doctors didn’t suspect anything and Eminenti was able to observe and document the coughing. Germany went on to win the match by a narrow margin. Mike Passell of the losing USA2 team said "It was a long last day playing against a pair we knew were cheating."
(Bridge Winners article by Mike Passell)

Shortly after the tournament Donna Compton submitted a formal complaint and request for an inquiry to the WBF. The Doctors (along with the bridge playing world) were still unaware of the allegations, and they kept on entering tournaments. For example, a month later they played in the prestigious Cavendish pairs. To gather more evidence Di Sacco had asked the Cavendish tournament director Bertrand Gignoux to observe them whenever possible. Gignoux found that on all occasions where he was at their table the coughs matched the code, including this hand were South had two shortages:

♠ 4 ♡ KQT94 ♢ 6 ♣ AJT974

"South ... coughed two times then 10 seconds later, four times."
(Cavendish report)

The WBF held a hearing in March 2014, six months after the World Championship. The key finding of their report was that the Doctors were guilty of breaking Law 73B: "...The gravest possible offence is for a partnership to exchange information through prearranged methods of communication other than those sanctioned by these Laws."
(2007 Bridge Laws).

The coughing was linked to both showing shortages and suggesting opening leads. The hand movements and touching the tray were deemed "contrary to the screen regulations" but nothing more. Elinescu-Wladow were banned from playing together in any WBF event for life, and banned individually for 10 years. They were also requested to pay the costs of the hearing. The report cleared the rest of the Germany Team and the GBF of any wrongdoing.

The defence

"I have asthma, of course I cough a lot" (Entscho Wladow)
(Speigel article - Skandal bei Bridge).

Following the WBF hearing both the GBF and the Doctors appealed the decision.

When the WBF first announced their intention to hold a hearing there were immediate objections from the GBF. These objections took two forms. Firstly, they objected to the process itself, specifically that the hearing was to be in America, that one of the panel of three was American, and that the time of the hearing was inconvenient as it coincided with their AGM. They were offered the possibility of defending themselves on Skype, but refused this.
(GBF letter 13th March 2014)
(German Bridge article May 2014)
(Video of Ulrich Wenning speech)
(GBF letter 20th March 2014)

Secondly they objected to the evidence. Their letters to the WBF say that sometimes there were no coughs or five coughs, which didn’t match the code. They query why the video monitoring was removed for Set 6. They complain that with the strong air conditioning at the event lots of people were coughing, so it would have been hard to tell where each cough came from.

There are also interesting comments on the hand above (F 3-2) where Wold claimed to have questioned Wladow about his unusual 4♠. The GBF pointed out (correctly) that this would not have been possible as Wold and Wladow were on different sides of the screen. On that same board the American West Mike Passell found an inspired defence to beat the contract. He lead the ♣A then ♡K and continued Hearts to get a ruff, gaining 12 IMPs for his team. It is tactfully pointed out that this unlikely defence is no more remarkable than the unusual plays of the German Doctors: "We do not want to assume that the successful defense in Board ... came about on the basis of violating 73 B."

What undermines the GBF protest is that it was lead by its president, Ulrich Wenning, who unfortunately was also a gold-medal winning teammate of Elinescu-Wladow.

Following the hearing the GBF provisionally suspended the Doctors. They appealed their suspension, and lost the appeal, though the process is not yet finished.
(Neapolitan Club: Provisional Suspension for Elinescu and Wladow)
(Neapolitan Club: The GBF Appeal)

After the WBF report the GBF also commissioned their own independent investigation, lead by five top German players. This included more detailed analysis of the hands and leads, and also included testimony from a bridge playing physician who distinguished between imitation and real coughs. Real coughs, it said, are "mostly accompanied by body reactions - like a red head, leaning forward/nodding, twitching etc." This investigation reported in May 2014. It was "100% convinced that unauthorized information was exchanged". It accepted that there was coughing to show shortage, but not enough video footage to link coughs to opening leads or to rule on the suspicious hand movements. This therefore reversed the GBF’s earlier position that there was not enough evidence to conclude there was cheating. The report did maintain the GBF objections to the WBF hearing. The GBF appeal to the WBF therefore remains in place. The report says that this is because "It is important for the GBF’s Executive Committee to continue to be involved".
(GBF report May 2014)
(GBF press release)

The GBF are now considering their own disciplinary procedures against Elinescu-Wladow.

It is now only the German Doctors who protest their innocence. Wladow claims the videos might have been manipulated. In an interview with Der Spiegel he protests at the length of his ban, saying "In 10 years I could already be as dead as a mouse.", and calls the sentence "eine Frechheit" (an impudence).
(Spiegel article - Skandal bei Bridge)

The Aftermath

"This is the biggest scandal the GBF was ever exposed to" (Ulrich Wenning, GBF president)
(Speigel article - Skandal bei Bridge)

In the mainstream press the story has been reported as a scandal to interrupt the otherwise sedate world of bridge. Within the bridge world there has been a re-examination of many of the old hands bid by Elinescu-Wladow, with the thought that they probably achieved their good results by foul play.

Here are two example hands from the World Championship semi-final, where Elinescu-Wladow’s odd actions can be explained by their coughing code.
(WBF hand record)

SF 5-7 Dealer S All Vul ♠ KJ73 ♡ K95 ♢ KQ ♣ K985 ♠ A4 ♡ T42 ♢ A652 ♣ AQ64 ♠ QT652 ♡ QJ7 ♢ 9 ♣ JT32 ♠ 98 ♡ A863 ♢ JT8743 ♣ 7

W N E S 1♢ x 1♠ Pass 1NT Pass Pass 2♢

The 2♢ bid by South (Wladow) is very unusual, as his left hand opponent had made a natural 1♢ opening and he knew his partner had Heart tolerance. But as Mike Passell said "The Doctors cheated on every single hand - when they didn't cough, they had balanced hands." South would have known his partner had at least a doubleton Diamond, which makes bidding 2♢ a lot safer.
(Bridge Winners article by Mike Passell).

The result was 2♢+1, gaining 5 IMPs for the Germany Team when on the other table South played 2♡–1.
(WBF hand record)

SF 6-24 Dealer W None Vul ♠ A854 ♡ 8765 ♢ 7 ♣ J954 ♠ – ♡ Q3 ♢ KQ86432 ♣ Q763 ♠ KJT97 ♡ AJ92 ♢ JT ♣ T8 ♠ Q632 ♡ KT4 ♢ A95 ♣ AK2

W N E S 3♢ Pass Pass Pass

On the other three tables South found a bid over 3♢, but here Wladow made an excellent Pass. This is much easier to do if you know partner has a singleton Diamond from his cough, and even easier if you somehow know he has a weak hand. The live commentator was baffled by the Pass: "South's decision to pass was well.....winning"

The result was 3♢–1, gaining 4 IMPs for Germany when their teammates defended 3NT–1.

Unhappy with simply cherry picking certain deals, American expert Kit Woolsey conducted an investigation to look for evidence of cheating on the opening lead. He made a systematic search of all the deals in the knockout stages of the World Championship were three conditions were met: the partner of the opening leader clearly wanted a particular suit lead; the opening leader wasn’t likely to lead that suit without help; the opening leader would honour his partner’s suggestion as he didn’t have his own suit to lead. To determine if these conditions were met he polled other experts, and came up with a list of 28 crucial hands. If the Doctors found the winning lead on those hand that would be consistent with a pair using illicit signals.
(Bridge Winners article by Kit Woolsey)

Here is an example hand which meets the criteria:
(WBF hand record)

QF 5-2 Dealer E NS Vul ♠ 7 ♡ K93 ♢ AKQ3 ♣ 87532 ♠ Q84 ♡ 7 ♢ 98765 ♣ JT64 ♠ AKJT6532 ♡ AJ2 ♢ 2 ♣ A ♠ 9 ♡ QT8654 ♢ JT4 ♣ KQ

W N E S 1♣* 2♡ Pass 4♡ 6♠ Pass

Wladow was South, and has a difficult choice of leads. There’s arguments for a trump (Spade), your suit (Heart) or from your King-Queen (Club). Only 5% of experts polled would lead a Diamond. However, now look at the North hand! With North coughing for a Diamond that lead is a lot more attractive, and Wladow found the ♢J at the table. Note that 6♠ still makes on any lead, but that is not relevant to the investigation.

A second example is the hand featured earlier (SF 6-24) where Elinescu found an unlikely Club lead to his partner’s Ace-King.

Out of the 28 hands that met Woolsey’s criteria a normal expert pair would find the unlikely winning lead by chance about 4 times. Elinescu-Wladow found it 15 times, which is statistically very significant. Of the 13 times they did not lead partner’s suit most of these are borderline cases where it’s unclear which suit you might want to cough for. But just for balance here is one counterexample where they made a bad lead which is hard to explain:
(WBF hand record)

F 2-24 Dealer W None Vul ♠ J93 ♡ 96 ♢ Q8643 ♣ 972 ♠ K ♡ KJT8742 ♢ 9 ♣ AK84 ♠ 752 ♡ AQ5 ♢ AJT75 ♣ QJ ♠ AQT864 ♡ 3 ♢ K2 ♣ T653

W N E S 1♣* Pass 1♡ Pass 2♡ Pass 4♡ Pass

For a pair with coughing signals you would expect North (Elinescu) to find a Spade lead to his partner’s strong suit. Instead he chose a Diamond. We’ll never know why!

What happens next

"We are considered by the world bridge population as the true winners, but whether we actually get the medal or not remains to be determined."(Eddie Wold)
(CBC radio interview)

There are several appeals still outstanding. The GBF are still appealing some aspects of the initial WBF hearing, and the Doctors are appealing both the WBF hearing and their ban by the GBF. There is also the matter of what disciplinary procedures if any the GBF will now bring against the Doctors.

However, for almost everyone the Doctors’ guilt is now firmly established, and the main issue is whether the Germany Senior Team will keep their World Championship title.

Donna Compton’s letters to the WBF specifically requested Germany lose their gold medals and USA2 be promoted to 1st place. This is following the Olympic charter, which the Bridge charter is based on, where if a competitor or team is disqualified everyone else is moved up one place. However, the WBF hearing makes no mention of disqualifying the Germany Team. Mike Passell of USA2 said "I found the rest of the Germany Team to be great gentleman and of high ethical standards. I will be surprised if these fine gentlemen have any interest in keeping their gold medals under these circumstances." For now though they are keeping their gold medals, and the WBF website still lists Germany as the winners.
(USA2 request for inquiry)
(USA2 formal complaint)
(Bridge Winners article by Mike Passell)
(WBF website)

Further interesting links:
(Karlkjunk article: Coughing Fits)
(Donna Compton's website: German Coughing Scandal)
(Neapolitan Club: various articles)
(Bridge Base Forums)
(Bridge Winners article of suspicious hands)

IMPs to VPs

This is a summary of the 2014 update to the World Bridge Federation suggested scoring for Teams matches.

In a Teams Tournament each match is scored in IMPs, then based on the IMPs each team is awarded some Victory Points (VPs). This is done to level off the effect of a big IMPs win, and make every match in the tournament worth roughly the same. Although no one thinks of it this way, this is also what happens in football matches when the margin in goals is converted to a number of points. In football this is done in a very extreme way, and the margin of victory is basically ignored and you get 100% of the possible points if you have any positive margin of goals. In Bridge it's done more smoothly, and big IMP wins do translate into bigger VP wins.

The reason I'm mentioning this is because recently the WBF have adopted a new IMPs to VPs conversion table, which differs in two ways. Firstly, every different IMP win now scores a different number of VPs, which leads to some decimal VP scores. Secondly. there is a bigger reward for small wins, as noticed by Paul Gipson noticed this in his blog post:Changing Tactics.

The graph below shows how IMPs are converted to VPs, on the old and new scales. The vertical axis measures the winning margin as a percentage of the maximum win.

Sources: New Scale and Old scale

You can see the new scoring system is much smoother, and is 'higher' on the left hand side, meaning small IMP wins now have a bigger effect than before. The new scale also flattens off a bit sooner, meaning (for a 16 board match), you get a 100% win at 60 IMPs.

Note (October 2015): Following some interest from a Swedish bridge forum (in Swedish) I've had another look at this. My graph is correct, although the situation is slightly blurred by the fact that the old scale was out of between 25 and 30 (a whitewash was 25-0, a draw 15-15) and the new scale is always out of 20. Because of this I've had to use 'VPs gained over loser as % of max' as my measure. This slightly exaggerates the effect of the new scale, where a narrow win like 11-9 on the new scale is counted as more significant than a narrow win like 16-14 on the old scale.

Notes on a Scandal

This is my first report about the German Coughing Scandal - replaced by a longer piece for the SBU news available here.

I was very surprised when someone told me that they'd seen a story about Bridge in a newspaper. Of course, it was the cheating scandal, where the German Senior Pair of Michael Elinescu and Entscho Wladow have had their gold medals from last year's world championship removed, for coughing to each other to give special signals. They have also been banned from World Bridge Federation (WBF) events for life as a pair, and for ten years individually.

The German team. Wladow then Elinescu are on the far left.

I've been looking into this. It was an impressive investigation by the WBF, and I am satisfied the German pair are guilty.

Here's a summary of their coughing code. There's two opportunities to cough. Firstly, you can cough once you've got your cards and before the auction starts to show a void or singleton, using this code:

1 cough	Club shortage
2 coughs	Diamond shortage
3 coughs	Heart shortage
4 coughs	Spade shortage

Secondly, just before your partner makes the opening lead you can cough to indicate which suit you want lead, with the same code as before.

Apparently, there's long been a suspicion of this German pair. They are known to be not especially ethical, and have in the past for example just said they "can't remember" to defend themselves in tricky situations. They were investigated in 2008 and 2009 with no conclusion. The USA team wanted them monitored for this final, but the WBF refused. So one of the USA team, Eddie Wold, took it upon himself to discreetly note down on his scorecard when the coughs occurred, so he could later match this up with the hands they had. After showing this evidence to the WBF, they agreed to install video cameras (which happens often anyway, so isn't too suspicious) for the next two segments of the final. Based on this, they've been convicted, in a hearing which just happened in the USA.

Here's all the relevant links I've found, if you want to find out more:

• Summary from The Telegraph Newspaper here.
• Initial Request from USA for this pair to be investigated, including Spreadsheet matching coughs to hands here.
• Full technical report of the WBF hearing here.
• Video feed of the final here.
• Rebuttal from German Bridge Union here.
• Article from a few years ago subtly implying the pair is up to something here.

The initial request from the USA also has several further allegations, suggesting a more complicated cheating code involving how they pick up their cards. The rebuttal from the Germans is interesting, and points out that sometimes the coughs don't match the alleged code. I watched a bit of the video myself. It makes for very dull viewing, and as you can't actually see the cards you can't work out if the coughs are matching or not. I did notice one bit though where Elinescu is on lead and Wladow doesn't cough at all.

One things for sure - there'll be plenty of gags next time someone accidentally coughs at the bridge club!

Read my full report here.

Grand Slam USA

This is about the USA team selection for the 2013 Bermuda Bowl. The USA are allowed two teams. In order to choose USA1, there is a massive knock out teams tournament, happening right now. If you lose, at any point, you drop into the draw at an appropriate point to compete for the chance to be USA2.

I've been watching some of the matches on BBO. My favourite player is Zia Mahmood, so I follow his Fleisher team. On the deal below it looked like he had nothing much to do, but he still made a crucial difference (which I'll mention at the end).

The matches are over 120 Boards. This must have been the most important one in Fleisher's quarter-final. Here's the hand and auction, provided in the daily bulletin (click on it to enlarge, or open it in a new tab):

You can see that on the 1st table the Fleisher team, sitting East-West, are playing 7♦. This needs the Diamonds to come home, which they do unless it's a 3-0 split. Although it feels more natural to cash the ♦K first then lead to the ♦AJ it could work just as well cashing the ♦A first, so it's a complete guess. When South lead the ♣Q, declarer did guess correctly to start with ♦K, and then finessed North to claim all 13 tricks.

At the 2nd table the contract was 7NT. I think West bid it because he knew with his Heart suit there could be a chance for 13 tricks even if Diamonds split badly. As it happens, declarer did get Diamonds wrong. There was indeed still a chance for 13 tricks, if he got Hearts right (played for the drop) and then squeezed North in Diamonds and Spades. This is the advantage of being in 7NT, a second chance to make the contract. However, the disadvantage of being in 7NT is that if you go wrong you go lots down. Declarer, seeing that South was void in Diamonds finessed the ♥J and went six off.

Here's what the daily bulletin said:

Fleisher went on to win the match, and set up a semi-final against the Spector team.

A final note - the Daily Bulletin was slightly wrong. I know this as I watched the hand live. On the second table, against 7NT, Zia was on lead. He didn't lead the ♣Q, which would give away that he had long Clubs, but instead made the strange looking lead of the ♣T. This seems harmless, but maybe lead declarer to think that South had short Clubs, leading him to guess to play South for the long Diamonds and go down.

Slam bidding with Sabine and Roy

This is a snapshot of Sabine and Roy playing in a Teams Tournament in 2013 and bidding a good slam.

There's a big Teams tournament in Japan at the moment. In one semi-final a Mixed Nationality Team, including Sabine Auken and Roy Welland, raced ahead with a series of great results. They'll play Russia in the final tomorrow. Here's a hand where Sabine and Roy gained IMPs for getting to slam.

I think it's quite a hard one to bid. The auction from Sabine and Roy is interesting, as it features a couple of useful conventions.

EW vul N deal ♠ A Q T ♥ 8 2 ♦ A K 8 7 ♣ A K 6 2 ♠ 9 8 2 ♥ K Q 9 7 3 ♦ Q 9 4 ♣ 5 3 20 7 2 11 ♠ J 7 ♥ J T 4 ♦ T 5 3 ♣ T 9 8 7 4 ♠ K 6 5 4 3 ♥ A 6 5 ♦ J 6 2 ♣ Q J

Roy Sabine W N E S 2♣* - 2♦* - 2♥* - 2♠ - 2NT - 4NT - 5NT* - 6♠ - - -

North has a balanced 20 count. Depending on your system, this will normally be opened 2NT. For me and Anna, we would open 2♦, then rebid 2NT. For Sabine and Roy, they open 2♣, which shows either 23+ or a balanced 20-21. South's automatic reply is 2♦, then North makes the special bid of 2♥. This shows either 23+ with Hearts, or a balanced 20-21. It's called Kokish. How does partner know which of these two possible hand types you have? He bids a totally aritificial 2♠, then your rebid shows your hand type. The 2NT bid shows the 20-21 balanced hand, and any other bid shows the strong hand with Hearts (and describes the hand further).

After North shows 20-21 South has an average looking 11 point hand, so slam is borderline. One way to bid investigate is to transfer into Spades then bid 3NT. With no Spade fit partner will pass 3NT, and you end up playing there, which is fine. When partner has three Spades they'll correct 3NT to 4♠, and now you can bid on. Partner will know you only have a mild slam invite, as you were prepared to let the bidding die in 3NT if there was no Spade fit.

Sabine instead prioritised finding out if partner was maximum or minimum, and bid an invitational 4NT. Perhaps she knew with their system she'd be able to introduce a suit later. Roy has only 20 points, so could have passed 4NT, but liked his hand. One of the commentators said "Roy never thinks he has a minimum". He responded 5NT. This looks natural, passing the buck back to partner to see if they wanted to bid 6NT, but I don't think it was. Despite having a balanced 20 count Roy has a weakness in Hearts and his hand looks like it will play much better in a suit contract. 5NT invited partner to bid a 5 card suit, which Sabine did.

I think me and Anna have a similar agreement, or at least I think we should have. After an invitational, quantitative 4NT, partner can simply accept with 6NT, or can show a four card suit at the 5 level, or a five card suit at the 6 level. Then the 4NT bidder has a chance of finding a 4-4 or 5-3 fit, and can always play 6NT if they don't like it. And the general rule if you get very confused is just bid 6NT.

In the play of 6♠ there were no problems, and since the other table only bid 3NT+3 Team Sabine won another 10 IMPs.

Lady Milne 2013

The Lady Milne is a tournament of Home Internationals for top Women players. I wasn't eligible, and Anna's invite never arrived, so we settled for watching it on BridgeBase.

The 2013 event was hosted in Edinburgh, so Scotland were allowed two teams. We've met several of them: Sheila MacDonald and Maida Grant play at St. Andrews in Glasgow; Sam Punch played against us at the SBU Congress; Liz McGowan taught at Edinburgh University (and has a bridge column in the Scotsman); Cathy Ferguson and Michele Gladstone were our opponents at a tournament last weekend.

And for extra excitement the Vugraph operators were Scottish Juniors, including Jake Corry.

Here's a hand between England and the SBU (the Scottish second team). I remember once reading an analysis of the results of lots of expert Team Matches, trying to work out where IMPs were won and lost. Apparently 50% are won and lost in the auction (one table reaching a better contract), and 50% in the play (one table declaring or defending better). This hand was definitely won by England in the auction. Dealer has a weak two in Hearts - on one table they opened a Multi 2♦ (showing a Weak Two in either Major), and on the other hand a direct 2♥, and from there things diverged.

First, here's what happened when the Scottish West opened 2♦ and the English North-South reached a good 3NT.

All vul W deal ♠ Q 9 ♥ J T 7 5 ♦ Q 9 8 ♣ K 8 3 2 ♠ 8 7 ♥ A 9 8 6 4 3 ♦ A 2 ♣ J 6 4 8 9 5 18 ♠ K J T 6 4 3 2 ♥ 2 ♦ T ♣ J T 4 3 ♠ A 5 ♥ K Q ♦ K 7 6 5 ♣ A Q 9 7 5

Ferguson Cohen Gladstone Godfrey W N E S 2♦* - 2♥* 2NT - 3♣* - 3♦* - 3NT - - -

I've starred the conventional bids. West opens a Multi 2♦. If East has a very strong hand she can reply with 2NT, but the normal responses are 2♥ meant as pass-or-correct. Unless responder has both Majors she can't immediately make a pre-emptive raise, as she doesn't know what partner's Major is. However, if responder has several Spades she can bid 2♥, and if partner does correct to 2♠ (showing a Weak Two in Spades), responder can then raise Spades. Similarly, if responder has a few Hearts they can start with 2♠, and if partner has Hearts they'll bid 3♥. Taken together, this means that responder bids 2♥ if she has Spades, and 2♠ if she has Hearts! These are known as paradox responses.

On this deal East must respond 2♥, virtually certain that partner will pass this. South still doesn't know which Major West has, but has stops in both and a solid 18 points so bid 2NT anyway. North has 8 points, and knows partner has between 15-19. There's no room to invite so North just decided to go for game, starting with Stayman to see if there's a 4-4 Heart fit (North also doesn't know which six card Major West has). 3♦ denies a four card Major, so North just bids 3NT.

As for the play, there's 6 top tricks, and three more in the Heart suit once you knock out the ♥A. On a Spade lead you have to duck the first round, but then you're fine as there's no entries to the East hand. West actually led a fourth highest Heart, and nine tricks were easy. +600 to England.

Here's the auction on the other table:

All vul W deal ♠ Q 9 ♥ J T 7 5 ♦ Q 9 8 ♣ K 8 3 2 ♠ 8 7 ♥ A 9 8 6 4 3 ♦ A 2 ♣ J 6 4 8 9 5 18 ♠ K J T 6 4 3 2 ♥ 2 ♦ J T 4 3 ♣ T ♠ A 5 ♥ K Q ♦ K 7 6 5 ♣ A Q 9 7 5

Moore Grant Fawcett MacDonald W N E S 2♥ - 2♠* x 3♠ - 4♠ - - -

West opened a straight up 2♥. The advantage of playing specific Weak Twos is that it makes it much easier for partner to pre-empt, as they know your suit. It ought to make life easier for the opponents too, but here North-South had a tough time as there was some further bold bidding from East. She replied to the 2♥ opening with 2♠. Me and Anna play a new suit after a Weak Two as forcing, some pairs play it as invitational only, looking for a better contract. Not sure what this East-West do. South at this table, perhaps believing the opponent's were stronger, went for a cautious double rather than a more aggressive 2NT. West then found an excellent raise to 3♠, as with two Aces her hand is pretty good in a Spade contract (assuming partner has good trumps). By now I think East-West have already won the board, and would probably have been left to play in 3♠, as I'm not sure North or South can bid again over 3♠. But East pushed her luck, and went on with 4♠.

Against 4♠ by East, South lead a top Club. Declarer has an easy eight tricks - six trumps (assuming you finesse the Jack), and two Aces. There's a possibility of two more if you can ruff a couple of Diamonds. Declarer therefore tried Ace and another Diamond, but South won the ♦K and shrewdly played Ace and another Spade. Declarer did still get one extra trick though, when the ♦Q dropped on the third round declarer's ♦T was high. 4♠-1 was only +100 to Scotland. From making 3NT on one table and going one off in 4♠ on the other England gained 11 IMPs, and went on to win the match.

Paul Gipson, in his BeerCard Blog, said afterwards that the standard of the tournament was very variable. Some very good play followed by some bizarre mistakes.

In the end the strong England team won, followed by Scotland and then SBU.

Clever Bidding

Here's a hand I saw on Bridge Base with some good slam bidding. Me and Anna have been working on slam bidding, wonder if we'd have found 6♥?

This deal has a special vividness for me, as I had a tooth removed yesterday and during the lengthy extraction (took three dentists in the end, all taking turns) I tried to recall every detail of the hand, to distract myself. Here it is:

EW vul S deal ♠ A K J 9 5 ♥ Q J 5 4 ♦ 4 3 ♣ 8 7 ♠ Q T 8 ♥ 8 7 ♦ K J T 6 ♣ K J 9 3 11 10 6 13 ♠ 4 ♥ T 6 ♦ 8 7 2 ♣ A Q T 6 5 4 2 ♠ 7 6 3 2 ♥ A K 9 3 2 ♦ A Q 9 5 ♣ -

Roy Sabine W N E S 1♥ - 2NT* 3♣ 4♣* 4♦ 4NT* - 5NT* - 6♥ - - -

I've starred the conventional bids in the auction. South had an easy 1♥ opener, playing five card Majors. North replied with Jacoby 2NT, agreeing Hearts as trumps and game forcing. East (Sabine Auken) then came in with 3♣, natural. Over this South was able to make his usual bid of 4♣, a splinter showing a singleton or void Club. West (Roy Welland) found a nice bid over 4♣, bidding 4♦. As a passed hand this must promise Club support (enough to play at the 5 level), but also shows some cards in Diamonds. North knew partner had an opening hand, with nothing in Clubs, so could presume a Diamond control and bid 4NT as Blackwood. South has a void and and 3 keycards. For me and Anna, that would mean bidding the void suit at the 6 level (here 6♣), or 6 of the trump suit if the void is above trumps. This North-South had a different agreement though, or forgot their agreement, as South bid 5NT. I wonder if they did get muddled, as North then signed off in 6♥, whereas if you know you've got all the keycards you could look for a Grand Slam, presumably by bidding 6♦ and hoping partner realises you're worried about Diamonds and should bid 7♥ with the King of Diamonds.

6♥ was an excellent contract, making if either the Diamond finesse is on or you find the Spade Queen. Because East has shown long Clubs in the auction, I think finessing Spades is better than playing for the drop, but there is in fact an even better line.

Here's what you do. First ruff out the two Clubs, draw trumps, and cash the ♠A. Then, you play a Spade to the King. If Spades are 2-2 and the Queen drops, you're home. If it turns out East has the Queen, you have to rely on the Diamond finesse. But if it turns out West has the Queen, you're in business. You now give up a Spade to West. West only has Clubs and Diamonds left, so must either lead a Club and give you a ruff and discard (that's why you had to ruff out the Clubs earlier), or lead a Diamond round to your Ace-Queen. Playing it this way is better than just a straight Spade finesse, as you make it when the Spade finesse is on and also when the Queen drops.

At the table declarer mistimed it. She followed the line above, but forgot to ruff out the Clubs early on. When she decided to ruff out the Clubs she had no easy entries back to dummy, so had to use up an extra round of trumps getting back and forth. That meant by the time she lost a Spade trick to West she no longer had a trump in each hand, so West could play a Club without giving a ruff and discard.

Final result then was 6♥-1. On the other table after a 1♥ opener North replied 1♠, instead of a Jacoby 2NT. This made the North-South auction much harder, as South didn't know partner had a trump fit or an opening hand. North-South ended up playing 4♥+2, the wrong contract but it gained them IMPs here.

Vanderbilt 2013

At Achray House near Loch Earn me and Anna watched some of the North American Bridge Championships. The winning team featured Sabine Auken, from Germany, and Roy Welland. Here's a hand which prompted Anna to say "looks like magic, they must be cheating".

EW vul W deal ♠ 4 2 ♥ 9 6 ♦ J T 9 5 ♣ K Q 7 6 4 ♠ J 5 3 ♥ Q 5 4 3 ♦ K Q 8 6 3 ♣ 2 6 8 13 13 ♠ K Q 8 6 ♥ A T 7 2 ♦ A 4 ♣ 9 8 5 ♠ A T 9 7 ♥ K J 8 ♦ 7 2 ♣ A J T 3

Auken Welland W N E S - - 1♣ - 1♥ - 2♥ 2♠ - 2NT - 3♣ - - -

This is a board from the Semi-final. Everyone plays Strong NT and 5 Card Majors, so East opened 1♣. West replied 1♥, and East raised to 2♥.

South now knows that East has a minimum opener, and knows West isn't too strong as he's a passed hand. South can't double though (that would show minors), so comes in with 2♠. North replies 2NT, and South correctly interprets this as minors and bids 3♣, passed out.

One expert commentator said "NS seem to be on the same wavelength here", and the other added "it's like stealing, well done by South".

3♣ made. On the other table EW played 3♥+1, so overall it was a 7 IMP gain for Team Auken, who went on to win the semi-final and the final.