[lycier]

At first,please you look at this hand :

---

North :Fulvio Fantoni
South:Claudio Nunes
2♦ = 10-13 value, 5♦-4M/4+m unbalanced, or 6+♦ ( notes by Daniel Neill 2012)

Now assume you are South,may I ask you a question?

Do you know what's the exact lead?
Here I believe the most of people may not know it,but of course,I know this secret because I was used to be a fanatic fans of Fantunes.
Yes,I can ! ( just like President Obama said "yes,I can." )


It is no great surprise that Fantoni and Nunes employ a special artificial,let's call it as Cuebid Double. Even if you have ever read the book "Fantunes Revealed" by Bill Jacobs (2012) , or may review Fantunes Notes by Daniel Neill (2012),you may not know this secret since they did not record this agreement.
What's the exact meanings of Cuebid Double for Fantunes?
Here sorry,I am only a amateur of the bridge game,I don't have the ability to identify whether they was cheating,I will try my best to tell my understanding:
While the RHO cuebid given own suit,Double=deny lead this suit,but lead higher suit.Pass=imply lead given own suit or lower suit which depend on the bidding sequences with interference.
See this hand in the match at below.

---

You see that both of ♠ and ♥ are higher than ♦,lead trumph ♥ ? lol...that is impossible,so only lead ♠ !


Once both of Thomassen and Karlberg would know the truth, I'm sure they will cry.

[manudude03]

I don't know if their double asks for a specific suit, but using it as asking partner NOT to lead diamonds isn't that rare.

[eagles123]

Theyre scum and I wish the wbf would just hurry up and life ban them but I don't see what's interesting on this hand.

[helene_t]

well it is a bit interesting if the meaning of the double was not disclosed because then the TD should adjust to 5♥=.

[gordontd]

We haven't been given any evidence that it wasn't disclosed, except perhaps the fact that they bid the slam. And of course the contract is off on any lead- it doesn't need a spade lead to beat it.

[barmar]

The fact that the ♠AQ are probably offside should be pretty obvious from the opening bid. I don't see how lack of disclosure about the double would make the slam a better bid.

[helene_t]

If EW bid the slam despite having been told that the double asked for a spade lead then W was a bit ... eh ... not sure what diplomatic adjective I can think of.

But if he wasn't told then the board needs to be adjusted because it is possible that he would have elected a cuebid instead, given the right information. And that they would have stopped in 5♥ then.

[nullve]

Desperately searching for the point of the deal:

Suppose declarer wins the lead of the ♦T in hand, draws just two rounds of trumps (as if he started with seven hearts in hand) on which South follows with the two and the four in some order, and then continues with a small spade from dummy. What is North supposed to think? Would a sane declarer play like that holding ♠JT(x)? If that seems unlikely, North might win with the queen and switch to a club. Then suppose declarer wins in dummy and plays a new spade. If North plays low, which would be the winning play if declarer started with

x
AQJT876
Kxx
Kx,

he will find himself squeezed in the pointed suits a few seconds later.

[cherdano]

lycier, on 2015-November-28, 06:21, said:

Once both of Thomassen and Karlberg would know the truth, I'm sure they will cry.

I think Thomassen might be embarrassed to remember the hand anyway, given that he forced to slam with a balanced 15 count.

[lycier]

I don't care about the result and never care about whether this is cheating , here I honestly say such " Cuebid Double" as a artificial is a really good defensive method which is worth of our learning.
Better an egg today than a hen tommorrow.

isn't it?

[lycier]

For me,the best performance in the world matches are Zia and Fulvio Fantoni in the past ten years.I adore them very much.

[steve2005]

lycier, on 2015-November-29, 08:56, said:

I don't care about the result and never care about whether this is cheating , here I honestly say such " Cuebid Double" as a artificial is a really good defensive method which is worth of our learning.
Better an egg today than a hen tommorrow.

isn't it?

Yes, I agree it's interesting. When u double definitely an improvement.
When u pass there is ambiguity, but if first lead doesn't work and you get a second chance might be useful.

Ive also heard of 1N-3N type auctions where you double for a specific suit like hearts. so at least you have one suit as a possible lightner type double

[cherdano]

barmar, on 2015-November-28, 11:21, said:

The fact that the ♠AQ are probably offside should be pretty obvious from the opening bid. I don't see how lack of disclosure about the double would make the slam a better bid.

Your point seems to be that if you know both hands, then it looks likely that ♠AQ are off-side. This is about 90% correct (are you sure F-N didn't shade their 2-level openings when w/r?) and 1000% irrelevant.

As I wrote above, IMO bidding keycard with West's hand over 4♥ is just bad bridge - but if West knows double asks for a spade lead, then it is easier to stay low.

[lycier]

manudude03, on 2015-November-28, 06:45, said:

I don't know if their double asks for a specific suit, but using it as asking partner NOT to lead diamonds isn't that rare.

cherdano, on 2015-November-29, 05:07, said:

I think Thomassen might be embarrassed to remember the hand anyway, given that he forced to slam with a balanced 15 count.

gordontd, on 2015-November-28, 09:27, said:

We haven't been given any evidence that it wasn't disclosed, except perhaps the fact that they bid the slam. And of course the contract is off on any lead- it doesn't need a spade lead to beat it.

barmar, on 2015-November-28, 11:21, said:

The fact that the ♠AQ are probably offside should be pretty obvious from the opening bid. I don't see how lack of disclosure about the double would make the slam a better bid.

No


I have not remember playing time of this hand including the event,only vaguely remembered that their teammates made 6♥ due to lead ♦.Maybe I am fault.So I have to say " they will cry" only since I can't find the record of this hand in the other room.
Now I only can confirm this hand playing time is before 2013-04-13.

[gordontd]

lycier, on 2015-November-29, 21:19, said:

No


I have not remember playing time of this hand including the event,only vaguely remembered that their teammates made 6♥ due to lead ♦.Maybe I am fault.So I have to say " they will cry" only since I can't find the record of this hand in the other room.
Now I only can confirm this hand playing time is before 2013-04-13.

Shouting "no" at us without providing any new information is no way to progress a discussion.