kgr Posted June 25, 2008 Report Share Posted June 25, 2008 1. Watched Netherlands play some days ago and they made 6S and that was corrected by the director to 6S-1 because of misinformation. (opps did not expect 5422 shape). opps claimed that they would not lead ♦A without the misinformation....anyone know more details about this and did NL appeal? 2. Belgium is heading first in the seniors champ. I'm happily surprised by this. Are these Belgian seniors that good or are other countries not interested in the seniors (maybe BE seniors team is better then the open team)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexOgan Posted June 25, 2008 Report Share Posted June 25, 2008 Regarding your first question, you might try looking through the bulletins at http://www.eurobridge1.org/competitions/08pau/Bulletins.htm. The bulletins contain reports on appeals (e.g. page 19 of http://www.eurobridge1.org/bulletin/08_1%2...pdf/Bul_10.pdf. (URL CORRECTED TO REMOVE BRACKET -- INQUIRY) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdaming Posted June 25, 2008 Report Share Posted June 25, 2008 if you want to see the link make sure to just take the ) off the end Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kgr Posted June 26, 2008 Author Report Share Posted June 26, 2008 Regarding your first question, you might try looking through the bulletins at http://www.eurobridge1.org/competitions/08pau/Bulletins.htm. The bulletins contain reports on appeals (e.g. page 19 of http://www.eurobridge1.org/bulletin/08_1%2...pdf/Bul_10.pdf). I couldn't find an appeal about it and that surprises me. 6S-1 seemed like a heavy punishment to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skjaeran Posted June 29, 2008 Report Share Posted June 29, 2008 Regarding your first question, you might try looking through the bulletins at http://www.eurobridge1.org/competitions/08pau/Bulletins.htm. The bulletins contain reports on appeals (e.g. page 19 of http://www.eurobridge1.org/bulletin/08_1%2...pdf/Bul_10.pdf). I couldn't find an appeal about it and that surprises me. 6S-1 seemed like a heavy punishment to me. I strongly agree with your opinion. I attended the appeals hearing with our pair. Brogeland was very clear that he didn't know what he'd have lead with the correct explanation (4225) instead of what he was told (4441 with a weak diamond suit) - he might either have lead the ♦A or a low heart. 5 other tables in the open series played 6♠ by south, 3 received the ♦A lead. We were expecting the appeals committee to change the TD's ruling to a weighted score somewhere between 25 and 50% 6♠= and 50-75% 6♠-1. The decision was really a surprise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.