The judges were now in a quandary. We had no proof that extra olive oil or sugar had been introduced into people's dishes. Betty's cookies were clearly different than they had been the day before, but we had no way to prove that there had been actual malfeasance on the part of the winning team, or anyone else. I approached the chef and put the question to them. No one owned up to the extra olive oil but Betty acknowledged that she had tweaked her cookie recipe on day two. She seemed surprised to learn this was taboo, insisting that she had understood the rules to be about the 500 calorie limit (although I find this suspect, since she knew we had no nutritionists on day two to OK the changes.) But without video to prove cheating -- and given that the White Team had won the challenge -- the judges weren't prepared to send anyone from that team home. That said, under the circumstances, there was no way we could send home one of the "losers" who had actually played by the rules. For this reason, we decided not to send anyone home at all. Given what we knew and could decisively prove, this seemed to be the fairest way to go. Still, the whole thing left me annoyed. I dislike the passive-aggressive tendency on the part of some chefs to keep mum about possible violations -- "stolen" lychees, extra squeezes of olive oil -- until they themselves are under fire at the judges' table. What's stopping them from speaking up at the time, so that the producers and judge's can rule on it then and there? I believe in addressing things head on -- both for your own sake and for the overall health of the working environment.