[jillybean]

mike777, on 2026-June-28, 05:09, said:

You actually bring up an interesting off topic regarding speed.
The Dutch player Brink, I think third ranked in the world, advocates for playing fast. If you already play fast, then play faster. I am pretty slow, so playing fast probably gets me up to average player...

I know the world champion player Sontag famously is a very fast player.

What do they say about auction tempo? I know MikeH has had issues with this in WC events.
This is an interesting thread drift while we tread water waiting for the card sequence.

[mikeh]

jillybean, on 2026-June-28, 07:25, said:

What do they say about auction tempo? I know MikeH has had issues with this in WC events.
This is an interesting thread drift while we tread water waiting for the card sequence.

I guess I must have reported some but my current recollection is that tempo issues are extremely rare at a WC. In general, my experience is that the stronger the player, the less tempo issues arise, if only because most top players these days are highly ethical. Their partner may break tempo but they don’t use it. At the club, otoh, it’s a Wild West gong show

[pescetom]

DavidKok, on 2026-June-27, 13:24, said:

I am fishing for information. I need the order and the exact cards, the signalling agreements, and also where they paused to think. I understand that signals against a grand slam may be phony, but I still need to know.

Of course.
I too was fishing for information when I played out the trumps, but I was wrongly focussed on the spades (to get some idea on the finesse odds) and on South's discards in other suits (figuring that some squeeze or discard error of South was the only alternative).
I am pretty sure that South played ♥T, ♥9 and then discarded ♠4, ♠6, ♠7, ♣2, ♠9, ♦2 in that order.
North played ♥4, ♥5 and then discarded ♦3, ♦5, ♦7 and ♣4, ♣5, ♣T in an order I do not recall.
I remember that there were 2 spades unaccounted for (in North, unless the split was 6-0-1-6 and South was wilier than I thought).
No real pauses to think, but South did flinch before playing ♦T when ♦A was cashed.

NS did not seem good and I have learned not ask such players about their carding agreements, such as they will be. In a more normal situation, the first discards of similar club players would exploit odd/even to give suit preference information. Here I think they were just discarding bottom up.

[mikeh]

pescetom, on 2026-June-28, 10:19, said:

Of course.
I too was fishing for information when I played out the trumps, but I was wrongly focussed on the spades (to get some idea on the finesse odds) and on South's discards in other suits (figuring that some squeeze or discard error of South was the only alternative).
I am pretty sure that South played ♥T, ♥9 and then discarded ♠4, ♠6, ♠7, ♣2, ♠9, ♦2 in that order.
North played ♥4, ♥5 and then discarded ♦3, ♦5, ♦7 and ♣4, ♣5, ♣T in an order I do not recall.
I remember that there were 2 spades unaccounted for (in North, unless the split was 6-0-1-6 and South was wilier than I thought).
No real pauses to think, but South did flinch before playing ♦T when ♦A was cashed.

NS did not seem good and I have learned not ask such players about their carding agreements, such as they will be. In a more normal situation, the first discards of similar club players would exploit odd/even to give suit preference information. Here I think they were just discarding bottom up.

Not sure who kept the diamond 8. actually, I think it was probably a belated attempt by north at a falsecard . But I think north unguarded clubs, so south has Qxx in the 4 card end position. If he has the spade King, it will appear when we lead towards dummy, but I think he’d have unguarded clubs to keep Kx of spades. If north has both the spade and diamond kings, we can’t make because he discards behind dummy. So I’m playing south for the diamond king. A spade at trick 10 caters to south being squeezed in all three suits (in fact, the squeeze would have tightened earlier), to being squeezed in spades and clubs (north should have kept 10xx in clubs but that’s a holding many players would think was irrelevant), and in being squeezed in diamonds and clubs. If south, to my surprise, follows, I’m popping the ace then, if need be, hoping clubs come home. Stranger things have happened.

Btw, I’m guessing that south flinched because he suddenly realized he was going to be squeezed on a spade play. After all, our having the diamond Ace could not be a surprise given that we bid 7N.

[WasWinM]

The most difficult part of this hand - other than it can't be made if both missing kings are over dummies hand - is reading the situation correctly if LHO has both missing kings, as if he does playing on clubs becomes mandatory to make the simple squeeze work, but then the simple spade finesse would also work. All told, without any other knowledge or peeking, of the four possible positions of the kings, playing for the double squeeze is twice as likely to be right.

[DavidKok]

pescetom, on 2026-June-28, 10:19, said:

Of course.
I too was fishing for information when I played out the trumps, but I was wrongly focussed on the spades (to get some idea on the finesse odds) and on South's discards in other suits (figuring that some squeeze or discard error of South was the only alternative).
I am pretty sure that South played ♥T, ♥9 and then discarded ♠4, ♠6, ♠7, ♣2, ♠9, ♦2 in that order.
North played ♥4, ♥5 and then discarded ♦3, ♦5, ♦7 and ♣4, ♣5, ♣T in an order I do not recall.
I remember that there were 2 spades unaccounted for (in North, unless the split was 6-0-1-6 and South was wilier than I thought).
No real pauses to think, but South did flinch before playing ♦T when ♦A was cashed.

NS did not seem good and I have learned not ask such players about their carding agreements, such as they will be. In a more normal situation, the first discards of similar club players would exploit odd/even to give suit preference information. Here I think they were just discarding bottom up.

This is the 4-card ending with East on lead (we've cashed 8 hearts and the ♦A):

---

At this point we have a few options. Notably:

• The spade finesse.
  
• Cashing two top clubs, catching South in a spade-diamond squeeze.
  
• A compound squeeze operating on all three suits (it already operated on a previous trick), cashing the ♠A and playing on clubs.

Both 1 & 2 require South to have started with ♠K-sixth. This is possible, and South can count with that holding that a spade pitch on trick 3 can't cost (with 6 spades in dummy we can only finesse once), but not that likely. I'm sticking with my original plan, which is the same one mikeh explained: spade up intending to play the ace, followed by clubs back.
The flinch is a bit of a surprise. South knew we had the ♦A, and should be somewhat relieved to have held on to a presumed ♦Kx. Maybe the significance of North pitching the ♣T just sunk in.

P.S. On a slower auction we might have been able to get more information on South holding a six card spade suit

[jillybean]

mikeh, on 2026-June-28, 08:51, said:

I guess I must have reported some but my current recollection is that tempo issues are extremely rare at a WC. In general, my experience is that the stronger the player, the less tempo issues arise, if only because most top players these days are highly ethical. Their partner may break tempo but they don’t use it. At the club, otoh, it’s a Wild West gong show

Tempo was perhaps the wrong term. You have mentioned being put under warning, perhaps even had a board removed because of the time you were taking during an auction.
IME when an auction is excruciatingly slow, there's only one side bidding and a claim is made after the opening lead.

[mikeh]

jillybean, on 2026-June-28, 13:40, said:

Tempo was perhaps the wrong term. You have mentioned being put under warning, perhaps even had a board removed because of the time you were taking during an auction.
IME when an auction is excruciatingly slow, there's only one side bidding and a claim is made after the opening lead.

Oh, sorry. Misunderstood. Don’t recall losing a board due to time issues in international play. Have several times been penalized in online matches. Haven’t yet lost a match as a result