Get a site

2013 Vanderbilt Appeal case: Auken vs Monaco

Leggi in italiano »

Vanderbilt 2013 – Round of 16, Auken vs. Monaco. At the end of the round of 16, the score is 137-131 for Monaco, but after an appeal filed by team Auken, the final result is changed to 131-126 for Auken. The problematic hand is number 21, second round.

Heer is a brief summary of Auken’s appeal against Monaco. Auken won the appeal and this determined Monaco’s elimination from Vanderbilt in the round of 16, by 5 IMPs.


appeal case 6Thor Helness (Monaco), bids and makes 3NT on a spade lead, which was encouraged by misinformation provided by Geir Helgemo, who claimed declarer did not have four spades. Not only did declarer, Helness, have four spades, but also dummy (Helgemo), so the lead made by South (Roy Welland) hits the defender’s 3-2 fit. At the end of the play Welland calls TD and argues that without misinformation he would have lead from Jxx of hearts, a five card suit bid by dummy. TD asks five experts, who all deny the possibility of a heart lead, so he dismisses the complaint and let the result stand. During lunch break, between the second and third round, Welland prepares an appeal, arguing that knowing the spade situation would have allowed him to find the winning line, even after a spade lead; he claims that misinformation helped declarer in two respects, lead and switch. However Welland had not mentioned this second way of beating the contract when he first summoned the TD at the table. The Appeal Committee agrees with Welland and turns the TD’s decision to 3NT -1.

Red the full text of appeal from ACBL Bulletin  Number 9 (volume 56)  March 23, 2013: open >>



(Visited 1,249 times, 1 visits today)
Content Protected Using Blog Protector By: PcDrome.