- Wednesday Aft - January 10, 2018

? Explanation of report features  
Download hands in PDF or PBN format (Right click and choose “Save Link As...” in Firefox or “Save Target As...” in IE)
Jump directly to board 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Field strength:  Mean: 9 MP  Geomean: 5 MP
(based on 15 players, 5 non ACBL players ignored)
★ ★ ★  Masterpoint Winners  ★ ★ ★
Partnership Pct Rank MP
Ken Richardson - Patty Richardson 63.13 1st A 0.30
Judy Roberts - Mary Kay Kaufman 59.38 1st A 0.30
Chris Johnson - Dana Johnson 56.88 2nd A 0.21
Jessica Harris - Yvonne Graczyk 54.38 2nd A 0.21
EVENT>49er Pairs               |SESSION>Wednesday Aft|SECTION> B N-S
------------------------,------ ------------,-------- --------------------------
DATE>January 10, 2018   |CLUB NO.>131102    | 01/10/2018 15:53
---------------------,-- ------------------- -------------,---------------------
DIR> Tom Ciacio      |RATING>Club Masterpoint (60%, 40%, 30% Open)|MOVEMENT>MITCHELL
------------,-------- ,-------------------------,--------- ---------------------
AVE>   40.0 |TOP>   4 |MP LIMITS>50/10/5        |CLUB>Ventura Unit Bridge Club
------------ --------- ------------------------- -------------------------------
PAIRS IN STRAT A=5/B=5/C=3                       ,---,-------------------------,------,---------,
-------------------------------------------------|   |           Section       |      |Section  |
No Name                   Name                   |Flt|Rnk-A|Rnk-B|Rnk-C| Score | Pct  |Awards   |
------------------------------------------------- --- ----- ----- ----- ------- ------ ---------
 1 Robert Carrier         Richard Cathcart         B    .     .     .     39.00  48.75
 2 Robert Newman          David Davis              C    .     .     .     36.50  45.63
 3 Judy Roberts           Mary Kay Kaufman         C    1     1     1     47.50  59.38  0.30(A)
 4 Bob Deal               Merrily Lewis            B    .     .     .     33.50  41.88
 5 Yvonne Graczyk         Jessica Harris           C    2     2     .     43.50  54.38  0.21(A)
                                          Totals                         200.00

EVENT>49er Pairs               |SESSION>Wednesday Aft|SECTION> B E-W
------------------------,------ ------------,-------- --------------------------
AVE>   40.0 |TOP>   4 |MP LIMITS>50/10/5        |CLUB>Ventura Unit Bridge Club
------------ --------- ------------------------- -------------------------------
PAIRS IN STRAT A=5/B=4/C=1                       ,---,-------------------------,------,---------,
-------------------------------------------------|   |           Section       |      |Section  |
No Name                   Name                   |Flt|Rnk-A|Rnk-B|Rnk-C| Score | Pct  |Awards   |
------------------------------------------------- --- ----- ----- ----- ------- ------ ---------
 1 Chris Johnson          Dana Johnson             B    2     2     .     45.50  56.88  0.21(A)
 2 Colleen Conway         Jackie Biederman         B    .     .     .     38.00  47.50
 3 Chara Clark            Nancy Bejuene            C    .     .     .     25.00  31.25
 4 Bobbie Boschan         Robert Boschan           A    .     .     .     41.00  51.25
 5 Ken Richardson         Patty Richardson         B    1     1     .     50.50  63.13  0.30(A)
                                          Totals                         200.00

Hands and Results
1 ♠64
Q7632
AQ2
♣Q97
Dlr: North
Vul: None
♠K97
AK4
KJT
♣A865
♠AQ532
85
854
♣K43
♠JT8
JT9
9763
♣JT2
10
189
3
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣3 ♦4 ♥6 ♠3 NT3
EW: 4♣ 2 1 4♠ 4NT
LoTT: 16 - 16 = 0
Par: -430 4NT-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
        170    4.00   0.00  2♠ E +2   B2-Newman-Davis vs B3-Clark-Bejuene
        400    3.00   1.00  3N W      B3-Roberts-Kaufman vs B5-Richardson-Richardson
        430    1.50   2.50  3N W +1   B1-Carrier-Cathcart vs B1-Johnson-Johnson
        430    1.50   2.50  3N W +1   B4-Deal-Lewis vs B2-Conway-Biederman
        450    0.00   4.00  4♠ W +1   B5-Graczyk-Harris vs B4-Boschan-Boschan

Kenny Horneman Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
 PassPassPass
111Pass
2NTPass3NTAll pass

Most of the matchpoints will rest on whether E/W end up in 3NT or 4. Some Norths might open a light 1, some will overcall 1 despite the poor suit quality and some will just pass throughout. No matter what North does, East should be able to show a five card suit. West might opt for 3NT on their own, having no sign of a ruffing value, or East might offer a choice of games, and West will again settle for 3NT. If East knows that their side has a fit, they might bid 4 themselves, having no stopper help in two suits.

This hand shows one of the other advantages of playing in a major suit, even when there is no ruffing available in the hand with short trump, and all suits are well stopped. In 4, declarer will have no issues with pulling trump, and then playing for overtricks by finessing for the Queen. Despite both honors being offside, ten tricks will easily come home. In a NT contract, North might not lead s if they have bid the suit and not been raised, but let's assume that North does. Declarer has nine tricks available, but at matchpoints, it will be obvious that a contract will make ten tricks and 11 if the Queen is onside. If declarer takes an early finesse, they will find themselves with only nine tricks. A NT contract suffers from not having sufficient control of the suit to set up the slow tricks. It looks like declarer can only make 10 tricks by playing for 3-3 s, which is a lower percent chance than the Queen onside if North has never bid. If North has bid, this might be the higher percentage play, particularly if North opened. Declarer could start by running the suit, which would put some pressure on North for discarding, but it would also force an awkward second discard from the West hand. It looks to me like declarer will struggle to go +430 rather than +400 in a NT contract, but will win most of the matchpoints if they do.



****************************************
Comments? Questions?

CLICK HERE to submit a question or join the BridgeWinners.com board discussion.

CLICK HERE or email me directly at krhorneman11@gmail.com

2 ♠43
JT62
KT8
♣AJ92
Dlr: East
Vul: N-S
♠AJT9
AK7
9732
♣73
♠K86
9854
AJ
♣Q654
♠Q752
Q3
Q654
♣KT8
9
1210
9
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣6 ♦5 ♥5 ♠4 NT5
EW: 1/-♣ 1 1 3♠ 1NT  ♣7/6
LoTT: 15 - 14 = +1
Par: -140 3♠-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  100          3.50   0.50  3 E -2   B4-Deal-Lewis vs B2-Conway-Biederman
  100          3.50   0.50  3 E -2   B5-Graczyk-Harris vs B4-Boschan-Boschan
         80    2.00   2.00  1 E      B3-Roberts-Kaufman vs B5-Richardson-Richardson
         90    1.00   3.00  1N E      B1-Carrier-Cathcart vs B1-Johnson-Johnson
        100    0.00   4.00  1N N -1   B2-Newman-Davis vs B3-Clark-Bejuene

Kenny Horneman Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
  PassPass
1Pass1Pass
1Pass1NTAll pass

E/W could end up in 1NT declared by either side, or 2 or 2, depending on their particular agreements and bidding choices. If the West hand were weaker, or they held a three card suit, opening 1 might be a popular choice, but most experts will eschew opening a four card major in third or fourth seat when they have full opening values. East has a normal 1 bid, though their suit is pretty tepid If E/W have the agreement that a 1 bid shows an unbalanced hand, then West will either raise on their three card suit, or bid 1NT. Both of those will get passed, as East has better than a minimum, but not a good enough hand to invite. If West is instead able to bid 1, then East has the choice of making a three card raise of their own or bidding 1NT. Note that the East hand is much better as a three card raise of s than the West hand is in s. Why is this the case? The West hand holds high values and a slow ruffing value in s, which does not bode well for being able to pull trump and get a ruff or two. East, on the other hand, already knows that their partner has some length, which not only means that their honors are useful, but also that quick ruffs might be available, and that the ruffs will be with low s and not with honors. If a West 1 bid promises at least 4-4 in s and s, then I actually like a 2 bid from the East hand. Certainly if West has shortness in either s or s, then that suit will not be well stopped in NT, and a contract is likely to play better. If West has bid 1 on a poor suit, and a balanced hand then a NT contract will usually be better, but West should prefer to bid 1NT if that is their hand type.

It's not clear how any of the E/W contracts will fare. If West declares NT, North is likely to lead a , and South should put in the 10 and switch to the Queen. After that start, declarer may need to guess the Queen just to scramble home seven tricks. If they finesse s into the safe hand, to keep North from leading another , they might likely find that there just aren't seven tricks to be had. If East declares NT, South won't have an obvious lead. If they choose to lead s, the 10 is the best card to lead, and North might duck this, or win and switch to a red suit. The defense will certainly not be obvious. A contract will be the most difficult for declarer, but a contract will play very well, especially as declarer will be overruffing the opponents in all three side suits. Top E/W scores should go to those who play in s and lose only four side suit tricks.



****************************************
Comments? Questions?

CLICK HERE to submit a question or join the BridgeWinners.com board discussion.

CLICK HERE or email me directly at krhorneman11@gmail.com

3 ♠AKJ7
QJ87
-
♣QJ972
Dlr: South
Vul: E-W
♠982
A542
AJ7
♣AK3
♠Q4
KT93
T652
♣654
♠T653
6
KQ9843
♣T8
14
165
5
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1♣ 1 3♠  ♥6 NT6
EW: 1  ♣5 ♦6 ♠4 NT6
LoTT: 16 - 16 = 0
Par: +140 3♠-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  200          4.00   0.00  3 W -2   B3-Roberts-Kaufman vs B5-Richardson-Richardson
  100          2.50   1.50  1N W -1   B5-Graczyk-Harris vs B4-Boschan-Boschan
  100          2.50   1.50  2 E -1   B1-Carrier-Cathcart vs B1-Johnson-Johnson
   90          1.00   3.00  2♣ N      B2-Newman-Davis vs B3-Clark-Bejuene
        100    0.00   4.00  3N* S -1  B4-Deal-Lewis vs B2-Conway-Biederman

Kenny Horneman Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
   2
2NTDbl3Pass
PassDblAll pass 

E/W might get in trouble on this hand, if South starts with a 2 bid. Some South players will pass originally, as they hold a four card major. It is indeed the case on this hand that N/S hold a much better fit than s and in fact, can make nine tricks in a contract. However, the loss of the preemptive value of a 2 bid might hurt N/S. Despite holding a double stopper and 16 HCP, West doesn't have the greatest 2NT bid ever. With no five card suit, and a tepid four card suit, there is no obvious source of tricks. Also, with the hand so concentrated in quick tricks, a NT contract might have a lot of top tricks, but not many total tricks. For example, give East all three missing Kings and how many tricks do you think you will take? Nevertheless, the West hand does look too good to pass, and 2NT seems the best bid, albeit with some trepidation. At matchpoints, North should see that E/W are likely to struggle in any contract, and at this vulnerability and form of scoring, it is time to start doubling. Most E/W pairs will not have discussed how to deal with a penalty double of 2NT, so East might be scrambling for a bid. The spot cards in s suggest that it is likely the best landing spot, unless West has only two s and a five card suit. East will find West with a good fit, but North can continue with their aggressive bidding and double again. 3 will be down two, so even if North decides not to double again, +200 will be a good score for N/S.

If South passes originally, West will open 1NT, and this might get passed out. More likely, this will lead to South coming back in with their suit, and putting North in a quandary. N/S might end up in 2, but for sure, the final result will not be +200 or +500 for N/S from defending or doubling a high level contract. If N/S let E/W play 1NT, North will need to lead a before giving up their entries, or declarer might be able to scramble home seven tricks. Six tricks are easy for declarer, in any case, and -100 looks like it will be well above average for E/W.



****************************************
Comments? Questions?

CLICK HERE to submit a question or join the BridgeWinners.com board discussion.

CLICK HERE or email me directly at krhorneman11@gmail.com

4 ♠AQT8
AQT532
J5
♣2
Dlr: West
Vul: Both
♠94
KJ
T643
♣AKT97
♠J7632
86
AQ8
♣J43
♠K5
974
K972
♣Q865
13
118
8
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 5 1♠ 1NT  ♣5 ♦6
EW: 2/1♣  ♦6 ♥2 ♠5/6 NT3
LoTT: 19 - 17 = +2
Par: +650 5-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  200          4.00   0.00  1 N +4   B2-Newman-Davis vs B3-Clark-Bejuene
  170          1.50   2.50  3 N +1   B1-Carrier-Cathcart vs B1-Johnson-Johnson
  170          1.50   2.50  3 N +1   B3-Roberts-Kaufman vs B5-Richardson-Richardson
  170          1.50   2.50  3 N +1   B4-Deal-Lewis vs B2-Conway-Biederman
  170          1.50   2.50  2 N +2   B5-Graczyk-Harris vs B4-Boschan-Boschan

Kenny Horneman Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
Pass1Pass2
Pass21Pass2NT2
Pass4All pass 
  1. Revolving game try (see analysis)
  2. Would accept help suit game try in s

N/S do not have a clear route to 4, and at matchpoints might even prefer not to be in game looking at their two hands. Everything is lying perfectly, though, and a contract will easily make 11 tricks. With two and a half quick tricks and a good five card suit, it's not unreasonable to open the West hand. The minor suit distribution is unfortunate, and I would never open 1 instead of 1, even if my agreements allowed it. The hand would be better if the King were in the suit, and I expect most to just pass. If West does open 1, North can overcall 1 and East will bid 1. The opponents bidding, and in particular the from East might be enough to convince North not to try for game. Certainly, from a pure HCP standpoint, North does not have the values to look for game, even when they know they have a nine card fit. At matchpoints, passing 2 wouldn't be the worst bid in the world. At IMPS, it would be clear to try for the vulnerable game bonus, as game will have good play opposite as little as the two major suit Kings in the South hand.

Certainly North would like South to upgrade honors in s, and Aces in other suits, so a game try in s looks best. One approach that I like, and that a lot of experts I know use, is something known as "revolving game tries", usually as part of a "two-way game try" structure. An example of this is shown in the bidding diagram. A "revolving" game try is one in which North asks which suits South would accept a help suit game try in, starting with the lowest suit. This allows North to give out a minimum of information about their hand while making a game try. The "revolving" part of the game try comes if South doesn't bid the suit North is interested in, but also doesn't bypass it, as North then bids a suit they want help in. You might be wondering at the actual way the revolving game try is implemented in the bidding diagram. This is because of the broader concept of "two way" game tries. Under this idea, the cheapest bid over a two level major suit raise starts the revolving game try, and South uses 2NT to show they would accept in s, when s is trump. If North instead bids 2NT, 3 or 3 over 2, this would show a short suit game try in s, s and s respectively (2NT again substituting as a bid to say something about s.) Thus, North can make two types of game tries. Note that these game tries are not particularly standard, and typically only apply when North has suggested a five card suit, either by opening, responding over interference or overcalling, but they are worth considering if you are an advancing pair.

With everything sitting right, 11 tricks are easy, and N/S will need to be in game to get a top score.



****************************************
Comments? Questions?

CLICK HERE to submit a question or join the BridgeWinners.com board discussion.

CLICK HERE or email me directly at krhorneman11@gmail.com

5 ♠QT543
J2
AJ
♣9754
Dlr: North
Vul: N-S
♠98
97653
K64
♣JT3
♠KJ72
T8
9852
♣AQ2
♠A6
AKQ4
QT73
♣K86
8
410
18
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 4/3♣ 3/2 2 3♠ 3NT
EW:  ♣3 ♦4 ♥4 ♠4 NT4
LoTT: 14 - 14 = 0
Par: +600 3NT-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  600          4.00   0.00  3N S      B5-Graczyk-Harris vs B3-Clark-Bejuene
  120          3.00   1.00  1N S +1   B3-Roberts-Kaufman vs B4-Boschan-Boschan
  110          2.00   2.00  2 S      B1-Carrier-Cathcart vs B5-Richardson-Richardson
        100    0.50   3.50  3N S -1   B2-Newman-Davis vs B2-Conway-Biederman
        100    0.50   3.50  3N S -1   B4-Deal-Lewis vs B1-Johnson-Johnson
6 ♠7543
T92
83
♣AJT7
Dlr: East
Vul: E-W
♠QJ96
AQJ83
T5
♣Q4
♠AT8
7
AJ642
♣K832
♠K2
K654
KQ97
♣965
5
1212
11
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣5 ♦5 ♥4 ♠3 NT5
EW: 1♣ 2 3 4/3♠ 2NT
LoTT: 15 - 14 = +1
Par: -620 4♠-E
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
         90    4.00   0.00  1N E      B3-Roberts-Kaufman vs B4-Boschan-Boschan
        140    3.00   1.00  2♠ W +1   B5-Graczyk-Harris vs B3-Clark-Bejuene
        600    2.00   2.00  3N E      B2-Newman-Davis vs B2-Conway-Biederman
        630    0.50   3.50  3N W +1   B4-Deal-Lewis vs B1-Johnson-Johnson
        630    0.50   3.50  3N E +1   B1-Carrier-Cathcart vs B5-Richardson-Richardson
7 ♠A8652
AT85
97
♣A6
Dlr: South
Vul: Both
♠J4
962
A86
♣KT842
♠T73
KQ7
QT432
♣J5
♠KQ9
J43
KJ5
♣Q973
12
88
12
Double Dummy Makes
NS: -/1♣ 3 3♠ 2NT  ♣6/7 ♦6
EW: 1  ♣6 ♥4 ♠4 NT5
LoTT: 16 - 16 = 0
Par: +140 3♠-NS/3-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  600          4.00   0.00  3N S      B4-Deal-Lewis vs B1-Johnson-Johnson
  170          3.00   1.00  2♠ N +2   B5-Graczyk-Harris vs B3-Clark-Bejuene
        100    1.00   3.00  4♠ N -1   B1-Carrier-Cathcart vs B5-Richardson-Richardson
        100    1.00   3.00  4♠ N -1   B2-Newman-Davis vs B2-Conway-Biederman
        100    1.00   3.00  4♠ N -1   B3-Roberts-Kaufman vs B4-Boschan-Boschan
8 ♠A82
A2
AQJ83
♣T84
Dlr: West
Vul: None
♠QT974
QJ93
-
♣Q972
♠K653
T7654
K6
♣K6
♠J
K8
T97542
♣AJ53
15
79
9
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2♣ 5 2NT  ♥5 ♠4
EW: 2 3♠  ♣4 ♦2 NT4
LoTT: 20 - 20 = 0
Par: +300 5♠*-EW-2
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  400          3.50   0.50  5 N      B2-Newman-Davis vs B2-Conway-Biederman
  400          3.50   0.50  5 N      B5-Graczyk-Harris vs B3-Clark-Bejuene
  300          2.00   2.00  5* W -2  B1-Carrier-Cathcart vs B5-Richardson-Richardson
  150          1.00   3.00  3 N +2   B3-Roberts-Kaufman vs B4-Boschan-Boschan
  120          0.00   4.00  1N N +1   B4-Deal-Lewis vs B1-Johnson-Johnson
9 ♠T97
K
T5432
♣JT32
Dlr: North
Vul: E-W
♠K43
QT9
A98
♣AK85
♠QJ82
5432
K7
♣764
♠A65
AJ876
QJ6
♣Q9
4
166
14
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1  ♣5 ♥5 ♠5 NT6
EW: 2♣ 2 2♠ 1NT  ♦5
LoTT: 15 - 15 = 0
Par: -110 2♠-EW/2-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  200          4.00   0.00  3♣ E -2   B3-Roberts-Kaufman vs B3-Clark-Bejuene
         90    3.00   1.00  1N W      B1-Carrier-Cathcart vs B4-Boschan-Boschan
        110    1.50   2.50  2♠ W      B2-Newman-Davis vs B1-Johnson-Johnson
        110    1.50   2.50  2♠ E      B5-Graczyk-Harris vs B2-Conway-Biederman
        120    0.00   4.00  1N W +1   B4-Deal-Lewis vs B5-Richardson-Richardson
10 ♠74
AQJ5
Q53
♣K975
Dlr: East
Vul: Both
♠KJ2
872
AK976
♣JT
♠AT8
43
J82
♣86432
♠Q9653
KT96
T4
♣AQ
12
125
11
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1♣ 3 1♠ 2NT  ♦5
EW: 1  ♣6 ♥4 ♠5 NT5
LoTT: 16 - 16 = 0
Par: +140 3-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  140          3.00   1.00  3 S      B3-Roberts-Kaufman vs B3-Clark-Bejuene
  140          3.00   1.00  3 N      B1-Carrier-Cathcart vs B4-Boschan-Boschan
  140          3.00   1.00  2 N +1   B5-Graczyk-Harris vs B2-Conway-Biederman
         70    1.00   3.00  1 W      B4-Deal-Lewis vs B5-Richardson-Richardson
        200    0.00   4.00  3♣ N -2   B2-Newman-Davis vs B1-Johnson-Johnson
11 ♠873
J86
KT
♣QJT52
Dlr: South
Vul: None
♠A94
KT932
542
♣K6
♠KJT52
A74
Q763
♣A
♠Q6
Q5
AJ98
♣98743
7
1014
9
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1♣  ♦4 ♥3 ♠2 NT3
EW: 2 3 4♠ 3NT  ♣6
LoTT: 17 - 18 = -1
Par: -420 4♠-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
   50          3.50   0.50  4♠ E -1   B2-Newman-Davis vs B1-Johnson-Johnson
   50          3.50   0.50  4 W -1   B5-Graczyk-Harris vs B2-Conway-Biederman
        110    2.00   2.00  2♠ E      B3-Roberts-Kaufman vs B3-Clark-Bejuene
        170    1.00   3.00  2♠ E +2   B4-Deal-Lewis vs B5-Richardson-Richardson
        420    0.00   4.00  4♠ E      B1-Carrier-Cathcart vs B4-Boschan-Boschan
12 ♠53
KJ95
KT9654
♣7
Dlr: West
Vul: N-S
♠T8742
Q63
AQ
♣KQ9
♠AK9
A842
872
♣J85
♠QJ6
T7
J3
♣AT6432
7
1312
8
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2  ♣6 ♥6 ♠4 NT5
EW: 1♣ 1 2♠ -/2NT
       ♦5 NT6/8
LoTT: 16 - 16 = 0
Par: -120 2NT-W
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  100          4.00   0.00  4♠ W -2   B2-Newman-Davis vs B1-Johnson-Johnson
        110    2.50   1.50  2♠ W      B3-Roberts-Kaufman vs B3-Clark-Bejuene
        110    2.50   1.50  2♠ W      B5-Graczyk-Harris vs B2-Conway-Biederman
        140    1.00   3.00  1♠ W +2   B4-Deal-Lewis vs B5-Richardson-Richardson
        400    0.00   4.00  3N W      B1-Carrier-Cathcart vs B4-Boschan-Boschan
13 ♠K52
A5
Q643
♣AKJ5
Dlr: North
Vul: Both
♠J6
J432
JT97
♣T93
♠AQ9
Q86
AK82
♣762
♠T8743
KT97
5
♣Q84
17
315
5
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2♣ 1 4/3♠ 1/-NT
       ♦6 NT7/6
EW: 1  ♣4 ♥5 ♠3 NT6
LoTT: 17 - 16 = +1
Par: +620 4♠-S
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  300          4.00   0.00  2 E -3   B1-Carrier-Cathcart vs B3-Clark-Bejuene
  110          3.00   1.00  2♠ N      B4-Deal-Lewis vs B4-Boschan-Boschan
  100          1.50   2.50  2 W -1   B5-Graczyk-Harris vs B1-Johnson-Johnson
  100          1.50   2.50  2 E -1   B3-Roberts-Kaufman vs B2-Conway-Biederman
        200    0.00   4.00  3N N -2   B2-Newman-Davis vs B5-Richardson-Richardson
14 ♠J
K5
AQT9873
♣AK7
Dlr: East
Vul: None
♠A654
AJT86
64
♣53
♠T9832
Q973
-
♣Q986
♠KQ7
42
KJ52
♣JT42
17
94
10
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3♣ 5 4NT  ♥5 ♠5
EW: 2 2♠  ♣4 ♦2 NT2
LoTT: 19 - 20 = -1
Par: +430 4NT-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  420          4.00   0.00  5 N +1   B1-Carrier-Cathcart vs B3-Clark-Bejuene
  400          2.50   1.50  5 N      B2-Newman-Davis vs B5-Richardson-Richardson
  400          2.50   1.50  5 N      B5-Graczyk-Harris vs B1-Johnson-Johnson
  150          0.50   3.50  4 N +1   B4-Deal-Lewis vs B4-Boschan-Boschan
  150          0.50   3.50  3 N +2   B3-Roberts-Kaufman vs B2-Conway-Biederman
15 ♠A5
K5
AQ75
♣AJT64
Dlr: South
Vul: N-S
♠T83
AQJ83
4
♣K752
♠KQJ74
T62
KJ2
♣Q3
♠962
974
T9863
♣98
18
1012
0
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2  ♣6 ♥4 ♠4 NT4
EW: -/1♣ 3 3♠ 2NT  ♣6/7 ♦5
LoTT: 17 - 17 = 0
Par: -140 3♠-EW/3-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
   50          3.50   0.50  3♠ E -1   B1-Carrier-Cathcart vs B3-Clark-Bejuene
   50          3.50   0.50  3♠ E -1   B3-Roberts-Kaufman vs B2-Conway-Biederman
        170    2.00   2.00  3 W +1   B4-Deal-Lewis vs B4-Boschan-Boschan
        420    1.00   3.00  4♠ E      B5-Graczyk-Harris vs B1-Johnson-Johnson
        530    0.00   4.00  3* W     B2-Newman-Davis vs B5-Richardson-Richardson
16 ♠KJ73
A52
A84
♣AK6
Dlr: West
Vul: E-W
♠AT4
KQ83
Q72
♣T43
♠Q865
T76
3
♣QJ987
♠92
J94
KJT965
♣52
19
115
5
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 4/5 1 1♠ 3NT  ♣5
EW: 1♣  ♦2 ♥6/5 ♠5 NT3/4
LoTT: 18 - 17 = +1
Par: +400 3NT-NS/5-N
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  170          4.00   0.00  2♠ N +2   B4-Deal-Lewis vs B4-Boschan-Boschan
  150          3.00   1.00  1N N +2   B3-Roberts-Kaufman vs B2-Conway-Biederman
  120          2.00   2.00  1N N +1   B2-Newman-Davis vs B5-Richardson-Richardson
   90          1.00   3.00  1N N      B5-Graczyk-Harris vs B1-Johnson-Johnson
         50    0.00   4.00  3N N -1   B1-Carrier-Cathcart vs B3-Clark-Bejuene
17 ♠6532
52
9
♣K76532
Dlr: North
Vul: None
♠AQJT8
AJ4
K64
♣AQ
♠K97
T86
AQT
♣T984
♠4
KQ973
J87532
♣J
3
219
7
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣4 ♦5 ♥4 ♠1 NT1
EW: 3♣ 2 3 5♠ 5NT
LoTT: 16 - 15 = +1
Par: -460 5NT-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
        140    4.00   0.00  2♠ W +1   B4-Deal-Lewis vs B3-Clark-Bejuene
        200    3.00   1.00  2♠ W +3   B3-Roberts-Kaufman vs B1-Johnson-Johnson
        420    1.50   2.50  4♠ W      B1-Carrier-Cathcart vs B2-Conway-Biederman
        420    1.50   2.50  4♠ W      B2-Newman-Davis vs B4-Boschan-Boschan
        450    0.00   4.00  4♠ W +1   B5-Graczyk-Harris vs B5-Richardson-Richardson
18 ♠AJT2
K9
Q984
♣532
Dlr: East
Vul: N-S
♠K754
T86
J3
♣AT87
♠863
AQ54
KT2
♣J64
♠Q9
J732
A765
♣KQ9
10
810
12
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1♣ 2 1 1♠ 1NT
EW:  ♣6 ♦4 ♥6 ♠6 NT6
LoTT: 14 - 15 = -1
Par: +90 1NT-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
   90          4.00   0.00  2 N      B1-Carrier-Cathcart vs B2-Conway-Biederman
        100    3.00   1.00  2 N -1   B5-Graczyk-Harris vs B5-Richardson-Richardson
        200    1.50   2.50  3N S -2   B4-Deal-Lewis vs B3-Clark-Bejuene
        200    1.50   2.50  3 S -2   B2-Newman-Davis vs B4-Boschan-Boschan
        300    0.00   4.00  3N S -3   B3-Roberts-Kaufman vs B1-Johnson-Johnson
19 ♠A975
K3
84
♣A9753
Dlr: South
Vul: E-W
♠KJ63
JT4
KQJ9
♣KJ
♠Q
Q98762
AT63
♣T6
♠T842
A5
752
♣Q842
11
158
6
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2♣ 1♠  ♦4 ♥4 NT6
EW: 3 3  ♣5 ♠6 NT6
LoTT: 17 - 18 = -1
Par: -140 3-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  100          3.00   1.00  2N W -1   B3-Roberts-Kaufman vs B1-Johnson-Johnson
  100          3.00   1.00  4 W -1   B5-Graczyk-Harris vs B5-Richardson-Richardson
  100          3.00   1.00  3 E -1   B4-Deal-Lewis vs B3-Clark-Bejuene
        110    1.00   3.00  2 W +1   B2-Newman-Davis vs B4-Boschan-Boschan
        620    0.00   4.00  4 W      B1-Carrier-Cathcart vs B2-Conway-Biederman
20 ♠Q632
JT
Q9642
♣73
Dlr: West
Vul: Both
♠-
532
K53
♣QT98654
♠T8
AKQ98
A7
♣AKJ2
♠AKJ9754
764
JT8
♣-
5
521
9
Double Dummy Makes
NS: -/1 2♠  ♣0 ♦6/7 ♥0 NT0
EW: 7♣ 7/6  ♦6 ♠4 NT6
LoTT: 21 - 22 = -1
Par: -1400 7♠*-NS-5
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
        100    4.00   0.00  4♠ S -1   B1-Carrier-Cathcart vs B2-Conway-Biederman
        260    3.00   1.00  3 E +4   B2-Newman-Davis vs B4-Boschan-Boschan
        640    2.00   2.00  5♣ W +2   B3-Roberts-Kaufman vs B1-Johnson-Johnson
        710    1.00   3.00  4 E +3   B4-Deal-Lewis vs B3-Clark-Bejuene
       1150    0.00   4.00  5♣* E +2  B5-Graczyk-Harris vs B5-Richardson-Richardson