Aardv

If you're going to start watching video to find possible signals, it will be much less of a strain to view the Polish Premier League (Glen's link), which is in high resolution. If you want to decode any suspected signal it helps if you have some understanding of the bidding methods: here's their convention card. (Boye hasn't made any statement describing alleged signalling methods, so neither do I.)

Try reading the facebook group "facebridge". Which is in Norwegian.

I've added the counts of suit-signalled-for and impossible-suits to the spreadsheet. paul

Debrett's has "Bath-urst" with a short 'a'. Not that Kevin B need pronounce his name the same way as his namesake the Earl.

I am competent. A specific 4-1 break is more likely than a specific 5-0 by a ratio of 13:9, by vacant places. A priori, with AQ1098 opposite Kxx, the usual line is small to the king, picking up all 3-2 breaks, 4-1 or 5-0 onside, and singleton jack offside (86.7%). The line Schwarz played makes with singleton jack onside or jack offside unless 5-0 (50.9%) (but it's a bit better than that because you usually have a trump coup against 5-0 onside breaks). Running the 10 on the first round makes with jack offside or 5-0 onside (52%). The usual line is very much better than the finesse, unless you think there's a strong indication that LHO thinks the defence has a trump trick. And if he thinks that, he's much more likely to have Jxxxx than xxxx.

I doubt that two other declarers did exactly the same thing (does anyone know?). If you think trumps are lying badly, you run ♦10 on the first round - why shouldn't they be 5-0?

The auction was 2♣-2♦, 2NT-3NT. Opener showed 20-21 balanced, 2♦ gave no relevant information. Relevantly, partner was a passed hand. (Board 24 here).

If ♣A lead is a strong enough indication that the leader is hoping for a trump trick, it seems logical to me to run ♦10 on the first round. That way you can pick up five diamonds in either hand. You pay off to singleton ♦J on your right, but that doesn't fit with your reading of the opening lead. On the other hand, Boye Brogeland in his book recommends that one should believe a defender's spot cards in trumps. If West's ♦7 on the first round is his lowest trump, that improves the odds on the finesse. (Not that I think Brogeland's advice necessary applies in the European Championships.)

6♦ was played nine times (Group A, Group B) in the Open Teams. At seven tables, the recorded lead is ♣A. At the other two tables, the recorded lead is ♥6, which East didn't have, and ♦5, which seems impossible since the contract went one off (this last table was on BBO, but unfortunately it was board 1 and there's no record of the bidding or play). Two of the other six declarers who got the ♣A lead made 6♦, the other four went off. So apparently ♣A is the normal lead, and it's then possible but not usual to get the diamonds right (but I have no information about the other auctions). Watching the video, it seems odd to me that there's no reaction from Schwarz when Verhees discards on ♦10. But you might argue that just shows he's not acting.

I think you misread that.

The EBU offers advice along those lines: However, that's not an injunction. Personally I like to have an idea what's going on during the auction, but I prefer looking at the convention card to asking questions.

The EBU disagrees with you

I saw no need to repeat myself, but since you insist: (It makes no different if it's a misbid rather than a psyche.)

You've overlooked this: (I needn't answer your (2). North must take South's double as showing diamonds, in accordance with their partnership agreements.) If I'm persuaded that South's double was a genuine psyche, then I need to rule whether North's pass made it Red or Amber, as defined by the White Book*. If Red, then I award an artificial adjusted score and a PP. I'd talk to the players, and consult if possible, but my first thought is that 2♦ is the obvious and normal call, so it's a Red psyche. *I'm assuming that if the Blue book was in force, so was the White book.

There's a prima facie case that North's pass over 1♠ was based on or suggested by UI.