CNTC
#1
Posted 2011-May-26, 21:59
#2
Posted 2011-May-26, 22:12
This says they were six down going into the last quarter, but I think Mike told me he was winning at halftime with doesn't match the website, so who knows.
#3
Posted 2011-May-27, 05:23
#5
Posted 2011-May-27, 09:28
Winner - BBO Challenge bracket #6 - February, 2017.
#6
Posted 2011-May-27, 13:55
#7
Posted 2011-May-27, 15:18
JLOGIC, on 2011-May-27, 13:55, said:
not at all....it would be fun to play you....but we have a long way to go
#8
Posted 2011-May-27, 15:51
#11
Posted 2011-May-29, 07:13
Really great to be able to watch people you "know"
#12
Posted 2011-May-29, 09:35
- hrothgar
#13
Posted 2011-May-29, 10:33
Winner - BBO Challenge bracket #6 - February, 2017.
#14
Posted 2011-May-29, 12:05
#15
Posted 2011-May-29, 12:22
ddub47, on 2011-May-29, 12:05, said:
We heard a rumour that Mexico has decided not to compete this year...we do not know if this is true, and (obviously) need to find out asap.
#16
Posted 2011-May-29, 13:02
MickyB, on 2011-May-26, 22:12, said:
This says they were six down going into the last quarter, but I think Mike told me he was winning at halftime with doesn't match the website, so who knows.
From watching a lot of vugraph, I suspect the running scores are not always the actual scores; and that when the final result (win/lost) is the same, no one bothers to correct the vugraph errors.
But, I could be wrong. There are two recent examples, however, which lead me to this conclusion:
1....board 4 on the final quarter of the CNTC, where the play to the early tricks in a spade game made in clear that the contract was down one; yet vugraph showed the contract making. This was a double digit difference, but the winning team would have just won by more.
2...board 22 of the U.S. final where the vugraph showed an alleged claim of 4H+3 (710) where the actual play up to the claim made 680 the clear actual result. This one was only one IMP (12 vs 13) for the slam swing.
Nevertheless...Nice going, MikeH.
#19
Posted 2011-May-30, 15:21
"gwnn" said:
hanp does not always mean literally what he writes.

Help

