[1eyedjack]

http://tinyurl.com/lvmj5e8

I was on the point of reporting this to GIBmeister, but stopped myself just in time, on realising that the fault was mainly mine.

I possibly erred at trick 7 by playing the ♣J (card I am known to hold) instead of ♣T (to tell P that I have it). Probably should not make any difference.

GIB erred at double dummy on trick 8 by leading ♠x where the ♠K beats the contract.
Should GIB have got that right? Certainly tempting, if something of an "expert" play. And the later in the play, the more accuracy you expect of GIB. Maybe there is some logic to it if declarer has ♣T (inferred from my failure to play it on trick 7). Perhaps leading ♠K is losing long term play at single dummy.

Then declarer erred (at double dummy, anyway) on the same trick by ducking to my ♠Q, so we are back in the driving seat. Spotlight on me.

I erred at trick 9 by attempting to cash the ♣T before ♦J.
At this point GIB North played what I thought at the time to be an incomprensibly palooka ♠K (the initial cause of my export to robot report motive). But it would in fact be right if I held ♠QJ tight and a 5th ♣. Maybe GIB is playing for this only chance from my failure first to cash ♦J. But then would I not lead my lowest ♣ to ensure that partner ruffs? Maybe I would also win♠J before ♠Q from ♠QJ doubleton although I can understand if GIB randomises these plays and presumably expects the same of its partners