NN wins the declare-only with 54.69%, by 2.35%. NN and I tied our 2-way 5-5 after pushing the first 12 boards. No nearly so peaceful against procrastinator, where he wins 42-23 with only 6 pushes. All reissued
procrastinator wins the declare-only with 60.16%, by 3.91%. I win the regular challenge with +10.50, by 0.25. I lose to AA by 12. All reissued
ETA: Lose to NN by 14. Win by 1 against procrastinator. Both reissued
For the second straight regular challenge, someone wins by only 0.25. This time it’s oirg, with +7.75. Declare-only not close: procrastinator’s 57.81% is a margin of 5.47%. Both may be the biggest ever, but I will be amazed if anyone looks back to check. Back to the close end: AA beats me by 1, which included a push at -1100.
Declare-only reissued now. Probably the other two reissued this evening, else tomorrow.
Win by 2 vs procrastinator, 10-8 with no swing more than 7. Win by 6 vs NN despite going down in a very poor slam that was going to make until I lost my mind overthinking it. With a trump holding of AKQJ107 opposite 65 (in dummy), I ruffed a club in dummy and RHO didn’t overruff. I tried to make it on a holding where he didn’t overruff because he had a lot of trumps and chose not to shorten himself. :duh: In fact, LHO had both the 8 and 9 and he couldn’t overruff.
Both reissued.
procrastinator wins the regular challenge with +20.25, by 5.50. Second declare-only in a row is not close. I win with 60.94%, by 10.16%. Both reissued.
ETA: win by 6 vs AA. Reissued
EATA: Lose to procrastinator by 30. Win by 13 vs NN. Both reissued
EATA: procrastinator wins the regular challenge with +16.75, by 3.25. oirg wins the declare-only with 57.91%, by 3.90%. Both reissued
EATA: win by 6 vs AA. Reissued
EATA: lose to NN by 8 when a misclick in a cold game costs 10. Lose by 18 to procrastinator in a match that made me wonder, if these were advanced bots, how terrible basic bots would be. One bot made an insane pass of 1S XX by them, the kind of thing I’ve been burned by bots on before. Cost 13 imps. OTOH a bot handed me 10 imps or so by going down in 3C X that surely should have made.
Both willl be reissued later tonight.
procrastinator runs away with the regular challenge with an astonishing +33.50. The only other positive score was +0.75. I thought I was having a great set in the declare-only, but procrastinator won it with 62.50%, with second place 58.59%, which was not I. Both will be reissued this evening, I hope (the two individual challenges I had planned to enter last evening didn’t get reissued until this morning.)
ETA: Lose to AA by 2, to procrastinator by 23. Both reissued
I win the declare-only with 59.11%, by 1.82%. oirg wins the regular challenge with 10.00 by 0.50. Not 100% sure what happened to my individual challenge against NN. Certainly I didn’t even start it, and it’s gone, so I guess time expired on me. I thought it was gone before time should have expired, so maybe something else went wrong.
All three reissued.
ETA: Lose by 22 to procrastinator. Win by 18 vs AA. Both reissued
EATA: procrastinator with a big win in the regular challenge: +27.50, by 16.00. I lose to NN by 6, I win the declare-only with 55.47%, by 3.13%. All reissued
EATA: I win vs procrastinator by 8. I win by 6 vs AA, when bots let me make a slam which should not have made as the cards lie, though it’s not clear, except seeing all 4 hans, that their defense was wrong.
EATA: Big win for oirg in the regular challenge, +24.75 by 15.25. I win by 29 vs NN. NN wins the declare-only, with 56.25%, by 3.91%. All reissued
procrastinator wins the declare-only with 60.94%, by 3.13%. I lose to procrastinator by 6, to AA by 10. All reissued
ETA: I win the regular challenge with +22.75 by 13.50. I beat NN by 12, 11 of them extremely strange. We’re both on 5H on the same auction, one where I probably would not have been so aggressive IRL (risking 5H on Ax = Qxx = Qxx=A987x after 1C (by me) - 3S - 4H - 4S - ? at both vul). Could be right, but could also be quite wrong.
Anyway, my hand is dummy and my RHO leads the spade 9. Partner (declarer) has Qx = AK108xxxx = x = Kx. 10 tricks look cold, what about 11?
I figure that on that lead, opening leader “can’t” have the spade K, so even though it is exceedingly unlikely clubs are 3=3, I play for that. They weren’t.
NN, presumably also thinking it extremely unlikely opening leader has the spade king, but considering clubs 3-3 even less likely, ducked in dummy. No overtrick, and no game either. Preempter wins the spade king, underfeeds his diamond ace to partner’s K, and ruffs a club for down 1! Who ever hear of bots declaring that well?
Both reissued.
Bummer. \textcolor{blue}{\text{Very rare opportunity missed.}}
Same bidding at both tables my match against @procrastinator . Same misdefense by bots at both tables.
Low heart lead to the J at both tables. Misdefense, but not clearly wrong.
Diamond from declarer’s hand, won by East’s queen. Club Q, won by declarer. Diamond J led, double won: by East’s king, perforce overtaken by West’s A. Not good, and almost certainly east should have known to duck.
On lead, west plays a second club, won by declarer’s king. Silly me, I claimed 9 tricks. Procrastinator, probably aware what was going on, cashed his 4 diamond tricks, leaving this position when three diamonds are left.
I chose to show the position here, since this is the last point before East made a fatal discard, but at this point he’s going to have to make 3 discards, and he’s doomed. He could safely toss 2 spades, but the he’s got to give up his (and the defense’s only) spade guard, club guard, or heart guard. Yes, the very rare 3-suit squeeze.
In face east gave up the heart guard on this trick, making 10 tricks. Had he instead given up a black suit guard, it would have been the even rarer \textcolor{blue}{\text{repeating squeeze}} Declarer could, after the diamonds, cash his established black suit winner (having pitched the spade K from dummy, if east gave up spades), which would squeeze east again in hearts and the remaining black suit for 11 tricks!
Fortunately for me, missing that opportunity only cost 1 imp, and I won the match by 10. Reissued.
I win the declare-only with 60.94%, by 3.13%. I beat AA by 20. Both reissued.
ETA: NN wins the regular challenge with +30.25, by 13.75. I lose to NN by 33 in a match I didn’t realize was going nearly that badly. Both reissued.
Lost to @procrastinator by 9. Didn’t help that I lost 11 on a misclick during the bidding, ending up -3 with 3 NT making. OTOH, a misclick during the play of a different hand did help, 12 imps worth. That misclick should have cost me an extra undertrick, but the bots found a way to give me the game. Reissued
NN wins the declare-only with 56.25%, by 3.91%. I beat AA by 22. Both reissued
procrastinator wins the very low-scoring regular challenge with +6.00, just +.25 over both 2nd and 3rd. I lose to NN by 4. Both reissued
Can’t make first place in the declare-only much closer: a 3-way tie for first: oirg, procrastinator, NN each with 55.47%. In a 2-ways, I beat procrastinator by 17 and AA by 32. All reissued
NN wins the regular challenge with +18.50, by 11.50. He also beats me in the 2-way, by 7. Both reissued.
oirg wins the declare-only with 58.59%, 1,56% ahead of second and third. Reissued
I win by 16 vs procrastinator, by 55 vs AA. Both reissued
procrastinator wins the regular challenge in a laugher, with +33.75, the only positive score. I lose by 13 to NN. Both reissued
procrastinator wins the declare-only with 62.50%, by 5.47%. Reissued
ETA: win by 12 vs procrastinator, by 23 vs AA. Both reissued
So close to a second consecutive group challenge with only one player with +imps. Not quite. oirg’s +34.75 was only 32.75 ahead of second. I lose to NN by 27. Both reissued