One of my favorite stories in bridge happened when a player replied "Lose 'em all" during a score comparison. "All" means 24 IMPs which (see IMP table at the end of the article) is the most you can lose on a deal, thus "all."

A similar instance occurred in the 2007 National Open Swiss Teams. Kit Woolsey held:

3
A Q J 10 6 5
--
A 10 7 6 5 4

With both sides vulnerable, RHO opened 1, and Kit tried 2, Michaels. LHO bid 3 (natural) and RHO bid 3. Kit now bid 4, which was doubled. His partner, Fred Stewart, redoubled. This was supposedly for rescue*, but Kit stuck it out. This was the full deal:

Vul: Both Dlr: North	J 5 3 4 7 6 5 2 K Q J 8 2
Q 7 K 9 8 7 3 A Q J 10 8 4 --		A K 10 9 8 6 4 2 K 9 3 9 3
	2 A Q J 10 6 5 -- A 10 7 6 5 4

East	South	West	North
1	2	3	Pass
3	4	Double	Redouble
Pass	Pass	Pass

West led the Q and continued the suit. Declarer ruffed the spade, then played the A and the Q in an attempt to make his contract (on 4-2 or 3-3 hearts). Disaster! West was in control. He played diamonds every time he was in and declarer was held to only his 5 natural trump tricks. Down 2800!

At the other table, East opened 4, South bid 4NT, takeout, West raised to 5. North bid 6 and East doubled. Declarer had no trouble making this for 1540 to go with 2800 from his teammates.

Kit was ready for the score comparison. When his teammates read off "minus 1540," the reply was "lose 'em all."

* No, I don't understand why North wouldn't bid 4NT to ask partner to choose a minor, and no, I don't understand why the partnership wouldn't presume South held clubs (since West bid diamonds).

IMP Table