I'm not sure if was such a good idea to play a club in the ending. If West was 2-3-5-3 (with say KJx of clubs) it would look rather bad. However, the overtricks did hold the loss to 12 imps, so was worth something.
Michael was a great guy, fun (and funny) to be with and an excellent bridge player. He died much too young and will be greatly missed. My condolences to Janice and also Sylvia and Shannon for their loss and the shock of finding him.
I also started my duplicate career playing in the games on the University of Illinois campus, though while still in high school. Cheri Bjerkan ran the novice game I first played in. This was about 1969, shortly after Kit left, so probably after Mike's time.
Actually LHO had AQxxx Jxxxx - QJx which is a routine 3H bid to me. In fact 2H made 6 with a very friendly lie and 5D X was down 2 for -300 (the best the defense can do), so not bidding won 2 IMPs on this hand.
Thanks for being in the Well, and you are doing a great job! Thanks for passing on the Billy approach to answering bridge questions. I'll be sure to use it in the future when you ask me about hands.
Edgar wrote an editorial on the Cokin-Sion cheating affair and on dealing with cheating in the September 1979 issue of TBW. He notes that experts will "smell something rotten" though he doesn't specifically mention odd temp here (I think that was in another article).
I'd add my support of Kit's comment: you need the bidding to understand the play (also the vulnerability). Only one type of play problem is appropriate without that info: guarantee the contract against any lie of the cards.
As noted (and in the official writeup), my main objection was that Peter (W) doubled quickly and immediately passed the tray, thus showing a clear double. I never accused him of signaling, only of creating UI by the quick pass of the tray.
Normally if E-W pass the tray in ...