- Saturday Morn - April 7, 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 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Field strength:  Mean: 1646 MP  Geomean: 1102 MP
(based on 22 players)
★ ★ ★  Masterpoint Winners  ★ ★ ★
Partnership Pct Rank MP
Dennis Charles - Floyd Richards 63.43 1st A 1.50
Bob Bradish - Josh Rosenbluth 60.42 2nd A 1.13
Dagmar Ragnow - Marilyn Brett 59.38 3rd A 0.84
Nancy Stowell - Nancy Wood 58.85 4th A 0.60
George Peckham - Mark Eckhout 47.40 3rd B 0.28
EVENT>Open Pairs               |SESSION>Saturday Morn|SECTION> C
------------------------,------ ------------,-------- --------------------------
DATE>April 7, 2018      |CLUB NO.>131102    | 04/07/2018 15:20
---------------------,-- ------------------- -------------,---------------------
DIR> Tom Ciacio      |RATING>Club Masterpoint (100%, 80%, 80% Open)|MOVEMENT>ONE WINNER
------------,-------- ,-------------------------,--------- ---------------------
AVE>   54.0 |TOP>   4 |MP LIMITS>None/2000/1000 |CLUB>Ventura Unit Bridge Club
------------ --------- ------------------------- -------------------------------
PAIRS IN STRAT A=11/B=7/C=3                      ,---,-------------------------,------,---------,
-------------------------------------------------|   |           Section       |      |Section  |
No Name                   Name                   |Flt|Rnk-A|Rnk-B|Rnk-C| Score | Pct  |Awards   |
------------------------------------------------- --- ----- ----- ----- ------- ------ ---------
 1 Maurine Moore          Joan Cathcart            B    .     .     .     45.56  42.19
 2 Ilona Smith            Dick Zizic               A    .     .     .     41.50  38.43
 4 Dennis Charles         Floyd Richards           C    1     1     1     68.50  63.43  1.50(A)
 5 Dagmar Ragnow          Marilyn Brett            A    3     .     .     64.13  59.38  0.84(A)
 6 Mike Gaddis Jr         Arline Benzien           B    .     .     .     47.25  43.75
 7 Roseann Buckley        Raeann Koerner           C    .     .     .     48.38  44.80
 8 Bob Bradish            Josh Rosenbluth          A    2     .     .     65.25  60.42  1.13(A)
 9 Kenneth Thompson       Charles Clarke           A    .     .     .     57.38  53.13
10 Joann Bowen            Carol Hayhurst           B    .     .     .     41.06  38.02
11 Nancy Wood             Nancy Stowell            B    4     2     .     63.56  58.85  0.60(A)
12 Mark Eckhout           George Peckham           C    .     3     .     51.19  47.40  0.28(B)
                                          Totals                         593.76

Hands and Results
1 ♠AKQJ4
6
72
♣KJ843
Dlr: North
Vul: None
♠975
AKT
Q984
♣QT6
♠T83
J7532
AKJ5
♣7
♠62
Q984
T63
♣A952
14
119
6
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 4♣ 4♠  ♦4 ♥5 NT6
EW: 3 2  ♣2 ♠3 NT3
LoTT: 19 - 17 = +2
Par: +300 5*-EW-2
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  150          4.00   0.00  2♣ N +3   C5-Ragnow-Brett vs C2-Smith-Zizic
  130          3.00   1.00  2♣ N +2   C9-Thompson-Clarke vs C7-Buckley-Koerner
  110          2.00   2.00  3♣ N      C12-Eckhout-Peckham vs C1-Moore-Cathcart
  100          1.00   3.00  3* E -1  C8-Bradish-Rosenbluth vs C4-Charles-Richards
         50    0.00   4.00  4♣ N -1   C6-Gaddis Jr-Benzien vs C10-Bowen-Hayhurst

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
 1Pass1NT
Pass2Pass2
Pass3PassPass
Pass   

If North were to follow some "rule" about bidding, 3 as a third round bid might be considered, even made. the problem is that South might pass!

AKQJx deserves to be treated as a six card suit for purposes of such rules! By bidding first a major, then a minor, then rebidding the major, extra strength is not just implied, but assured, and the bid is almost always made on a six card major suit. Well, back to treating AKQJx as being as good as a six-bagger! North does have a five-loser hand, of sorts, but that evaluation is based on a fit, which does not necessarily exist. So the 3 bid is on the aggressive side.

South might be tempted, for that A is a really, really good card, but that's the only favorable aspect of the South hand on this auction

Unless East leads a silly singleton club, there seems no reason for declarer to play for the actual club position, instead playing for "Eight ever, nine never." Still, the 3-3 spade division will save declarer's bacon.

Considering the precariousness of the contract, was the 3 bid justified? Of course! South could have had a much better hand, and game might well have been missed had North meekly passed. Or even had the EW clubs been distributed differently. Clubs 2-2 is about a 52% chance (40% for 2-2, 12% for singleton queen either way).



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

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

CLICK HERE or email me directly at rcraigh@aol.com

2 ♠A3
K3
KT73
♣QT865
Dlr: East
Vul: N-S
♠T74
QJT
AJ98
♣K97
♠QJ5
A954
6542
♣J3
♠K9862
8762
Q
♣A42
12
118
9
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3♣ 1♠ 1/-NT
       ♦6 ♥6 NT7/6
EW: 1  ♣4 ♥6 ♠6 NT6
LoTT: 16 - 16 = 0
Par: +110 3♣-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  100          4.00   0.00  3 W -2   C12-Eckhout-Peckham vs C1-Moore-Cathcart
   90          3.00   1.00  1N N      C8-Bradish-Rosenbluth vs C4-Charles-Richards
   50          2.00   2.00  2 W -1   C6-Gaddis Jr-Benzien vs C10-Bowen-Hayhurst
        100    1.00   3.00  2♠ S -1   C9-Thompson-Clarke vs C7-Buckley-Koerner
        200    0.00   4.00  4♣ N -2   C5-Ragnow-Brett vs C2-Smith-Zizic

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
  PassPass
Pass1Pass1
Pass1NTPass2
Pass2PassPass
Pass   

There have been better contracts. Declarer's problem is all of those losing hearts. The defense has several avenues available to defeat 2, but at some point that will require leading trumps at least once, leaving the A the task of ruffing the fourth heart, at the expense of a trump trick to the defense.

One reason for seeking more length in the selected trump suit.



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

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

CLICK HERE or email me directly at rcraigh@aol.com

3 ♠QJT
KQT7
KT84
♣Q5
Dlr: South
Vul: E-W
♠98753
J9
Q76
♣AK3
♠K4
864
J953
♣J862
♠A62
A532
A2
♣T974
13
105
12
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2♣ 2 5 2♠ 3NT
EW:  ♣4 ♦5 ♥2 ♠5 NT4
LoTT: 16 - 15 = +1
Par: +450 5-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  450          3.00   1.00  4 S +1   C9-Thompson-Clarke vs C7-Buckley-Koerner
  450          3.00   1.00  4 S +1   C12-Eckhout-Peckham vs C1-Moore-Cathcart
  450          3.00   1.00  4 N +1   C5-Ragnow-Brett vs C2-Smith-Zizic
  420          1.00   3.00  4 S      C6-Gaddis Jr-Benzien vs C10-Bowen-Hayhurst
  200          0.00   4.00  3 S +2   C8-Bradish-Rosenbluth vs C4-Charles-Richards

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
   1
Pass1Pass2
Pass4All pass 

An uncontested auction? Unheard of!

Flat board! Unheard of!

Next board, please.



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

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

CLICK HERE or email me directly at rcraigh@aol.com

4 ♠J74
542
74
♣QJ974
Dlr: West
Vul: Both
♠KQT8
K6
KQ9853
♣6
♠52
AT3
AT62
♣A532
♠A963
QJ987
J
♣KT8
4
1312
11
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣6 ♦1 ♥5 ♠2 NT1
EW: 1♣ 6 1 4♠ 4NT
LoTT: 18 - 18 = 0
Par: -1370 6-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
        170    4.00   0.00  3 W +3   C12-Eckhout-Peckham vs C2-Smith-Zizic
        620    3.00   1.00  5 W +1   C7-Buckley-Koerner vs C10-Bowen-Hayhurst
        630    2.00   2.00  3N E +1   C9-Thompson-Clarke vs C5-Ragnow-Brett
        690    1.00   3.00  3N E +3   C11-Wood-Stowell vs C4-Charles-Richards
       1100    0.00   4.00  4♣* N -4  C1-Moore-Cathcart vs C8-Bradish-Rosenbluth

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
1Pass2Pass
3!1Pass3Pass
3Pass4Pass
4Pass4Pass
6All pass  
  1. Singleton.

Many partnerships play that ANY three-level bid after an inverted minor raise shows a singleton. This NS pair does play with that understanding, and 3 by East shows a lack of desire to play 3NT as well as some useful value in hearts. Whether it is a control or not is debatable, but it might be. West might well not bid 4, Minorwood, but just to see what is happening, 3 can act as a waiting bid. East hears West describing a promising unbalanced hand and should show the club ace rather than an unimaginative and misdirected 3NT. Yes, that is a club stopper, but three aces are much more offensive in aspect than might be inferred from a 3NT bid. 4 is aggressive, and three aces deserve to be bid aggressively/descriptively.

4 is Minorwood, and three keycards/aces make this hand a beautiful thing.



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

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

CLICK HERE or email me directly at rcraigh@aol.com

5 ♠AK432
Q85
A5
♣J86
Dlr: North
Vul: N-S
♠QJ7
KJ4
QT6
♣KQ75
♠9865
A73
987
♣A43
♠T
T962
KJ432
♣T92
14
148
4
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1 1  ♣4 ♠5 NT4
EW: 1/2♠ 2/3NT  ♣6 ♦6 ♥6
LoTT: 15 - 14 = +1
Par: -400 3NT-W
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  100          3.50   0.50  2 E -2   C11-Wood-Stowell vs C4-Charles-Richards
  100          3.50   0.50  2 E -2   C12-Eckhout-Peckham vs C2-Smith-Zizic
         90    2.00   2.00  1N E      C7-Buckley-Koerner vs C10-Bowen-Hayhurst
        120    1.00   3.00  2N W      C9-Thompson-Clarke vs C5-Ragnow-Brett
        150    0.00   4.00  1N W +2   C1-Moore-Cathcart vs C8-Bradish-Rosenbluth

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
 1PassPass
1NTPassPassPass

A balancing notrump does not, of course, promise the values for an opening 1NT bid, but many play that it may contain enough values. Many play the bid shows 11-14, others 11-16, and still others a higher range the higher in rank the opening bid. That is to say, that 1 P P 1NT can or should be stronger than 1 P P 1NT.

But it need not be. What else would West bid? And for East's part, even in the unlikely event that partner has 16 HCP, is that enough to invite game? What if West has 11? Passing seems normal.

Indeed, the hand does make 3NT by West, but primarily because the spade spots are magical, providing two full stoppers, while clubs split 3-2 and the diamond suit is not only not a danger, but cannot be led by the defense without yielding a trick. The diamond suit is "frozen."

If North leads a spade, West wins, smiling as the T falls from South, and then leads out four rounds of clubs, happily splitting 3-3. Look what happens to North on the fourth club! Squeezed! Discarding a heart won't do at all, and a diamond discard kills the diamond communication between defenders, so that only one diamond can be taken against the notrump contract.

That leaves a spade discard, which could not be worse for the defense -- there go tricks! If Declarer next plays a spade, North may try to avoid giving away a red suit trick by cashing and exiting spades, but then declarer simply runs the Curse of Scotland (9) and again there are nine tricks.

Declarers who play well enough to achieve that result are entitled to their tie for top.



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

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

CLICK HERE or email me directly at rcraigh@aol.com

6 ♠6
QJ7
97
♣AKQ5432
Dlr: East
Vul: E-W
♠KQT7
T9532
QT6
♣T
♠AJ942
K
J5432
♣87
♠853
A864
AK8
♣J96
12
79
12
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 6♣ 2 2NT  ♦5 ♠4
EW: 1 2♠  ♣1 ♥5 NT1
LoTT: 20 - 19 = +1
Par: +920 6♣-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  420          4.00   0.00  5♣ N +1   C7-Buckley-Koerner vs C10-Bowen-Hayhurst
  400          2.50   1.50  5♣ S      C1-Moore-Cathcart vs C8-Bradish-Rosenbluth
  400          2.50   1.50  5♣ N      C9-Thompson-Clarke vs C5-Ragnow-Brett
  170          1.00   3.00  3♣ N +3   C11-Wood-Stowell vs C4-Charles-Richards
  150          0.00   4.00  4♣ N +1   C12-Eckhout-Peckham vs C2-Smith-Zizic

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
  Pass1
Pass3Pass4
Pass5All pass 

All right, then. It has come to be accepted practice among many tournament players that a three-level double jump shift over a minor suit opening bid shows a game-forcing raise of the minor suit with a singleton or void in the double-jump shift suit.

Fine! Usually opener bids 3NT with a good stop in the Splinter suit, or something else looks useful. Here, however, South cannot stand 3NT, his clubs are awful, and the hand is minimum. Now what?

To say South's hand is minimum is accurate to a degree, but for what there is, it is rather perfect, holding five controls in the suits that matter (A=2, K=1).

If you play Minorwood, does 4 by opener that meaning? If not, why not? 3 was a Game Force , correct? Then South has the following options: (1) 5, please stop bidding (2) 4 Minorwood (3/4) 4 and 4 are ostensibly control bids toward slam (5) 4 is an odd duck, perhaps a control bid, but how can you not have a diamond or heart control?

An additional problem is that South's hand is not particularly suited for asking for key cards, lacking anything in hearts except the ace.

I like 4 as a control-showing bid, which on this hand allows North to deny either a heart control or a spade void. 5 should end the auction,

Unless the opening lead is the K, how many players will make what I would consider to be the technically correct play of the A without leading an honor?? Unless West is dealt specifically the T9, which is just one possible distribution of the suit, the heart suit can never be played for zero losers except by playing the ace first, which caters to two possible distributions. . .



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

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

CLICK HERE or email me directly at rcraigh@aol.com

7 ♠T6
KQ94
QJ6532
♣T
Dlr: South
Vul: Both
♠AQ98
J832
K97
♣Q5
♠75
75
AT84
♣98432
♠KJ432
AT6
-
♣AKJ76
8
124
16
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2♣ -/1 3 4♠ 2NT  ♦6/7
EW:  ♣5 ♦5 ♥4 ♠3 NT5
LoTT: 15 - 14 = +1
Par: +620 4♠-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  170          4.00   0.00  2♠ S +2   C2-Smith-Zizic vs C9-Thompson-Clarke
  140          3.00   1.00  3♠ S      C10-Bowen-Hayhurst vs C8-Bradish-Rosenbluth
        100    2.00   2.00  3N N -1   C11-Wood-Stowell vs C5-Ragnow-Brett
        200    0.50   3.50  3N N -2   C1-Moore-Cathcart vs C6-Gaddis Jr-Benzien
        200    0.50   3.50  4♠ S -2   C7-Buckley-Koerner vs C4-Charles-Richards
8 ♠J3
T82
K8
♣AT6532
Dlr: West
Vul: None
♠KQ874
AQ
7432
♣K9
♠6
K763
AQT95
♣Q84
♠AT952
J954
J6
♣J7
8
1411
7
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣5 ♦2 ♥3 ♠4 NT3
EW: 2♣ 5 4 3♠ 4NT
LoTT: 16 - 17 = -1
Par: -430 4NT-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
   50          4.00   0.00  4♠ W -1   C7-Buckley-Koerner vs C4-Charles-Richards
        150    3.00   1.00  3 W +2   C2-Smith-Zizic vs C9-Thompson-Clarke
        170    2.00   2.00  4 E +2   C1-Moore-Cathcart vs C6-Gaddis Jr-Benzien
        430    1.00   3.00  3N W +1   C10-Bowen-Hayhurst vs C8-Bradish-Rosenbluth
        460    0.00   4.00  3N E +2   C11-Wood-Stowell vs C5-Ragnow-Brett
9 ♠A97642
K9
7
♣K985
Dlr: North
Vul: E-W
♠J8
QJ753
JT832
♣6
♠K
T86
AK954
♣QT73
♠QT53
A42
Q6
♣AJ42
10
512
13
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 5♣ 5♠ 2NT  ♦4 ♥5
EW: 2 1  ♣2 ♠1 NT1
LoTT: 19 - 20 = -1
Par: +450 5♠-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  450          2.50   1.50  5♠ N      C1-Moore-Cathcart vs C6-Gaddis Jr-Benzien
  450          2.50   1.50  4♠ N +1   C7-Buckley-Koerner vs C4-Charles-Richards
  450          2.50   1.50  4♠ N +1   C10-Bowen-Hayhurst vs C8-Bradish-Rosenbluth
  450          2.50   1.50  4♠ N +1   C11-Wood-Stowell vs C5-Ragnow-Brett
  420          0.00   4.00  4♠ N      C2-Smith-Zizic vs C9-Thompson-Clarke
10 ♠42
KT
QJ63
♣AKQ42
Dlr: East
Vul: Both
♠AQJ9876
A9872
T
♣-
♠KT3
QJ53
K75
♣987
♠5
64
A9842
♣JT653
15
119
5
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 5♣ 4  ♥2 ♠2 NT5
EW: 5 5♠  ♣2 ♦3/2 NT3
LoTT: 22 - 20 = +2
Par: -200 6♣*-NS-1
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
        200    4.00   0.00  6♣* N -1  C11-Wood-Stowell vs C6-Gaddis Jr-Benzien
        650    2.00   2.00  4♠ W +1   C2-Smith-Zizic vs C7-Buckley-Koerner
        650    2.00   2.00  4♠ W +1   C8-Bradish-Rosenbluth vs C5-Ragnow-Brett
        650    2.00   2.00  4♠ W +1   C10-Bowen-Hayhurst vs C9-Thompson-Clarke
        680    0.00   4.00  4♠ W +2   C12-Eckhout-Peckham vs C4-Charles-Richards
11 ♠QJT62
-
AKT
♣T8642
Dlr: South
Vul: None
♠A8
AK7432
852
♣QJ
♠K7
J865
J7
♣K9753
♠9543
QT9
Q9643
♣A
10
148
8
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3 5♠ 1NT  ♣6 ♥4
EW: 1♣ 3  ♦3 ♠2 NT6
LoTT: 20 - 19 = +1
Par: +450 5♠-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  450          3.00   1.00  4♠ S +1   C8-Bradish-Rosenbluth vs C5-Ragnow-Brett
  450          3.00   1.00  4♠ N +1   C2-Smith-Zizic vs C7-Buckley-Koerner
  450          3.00   1.00  4♠ N +1   C11-Wood-Stowell vs C6-Gaddis Jr-Benzien
  200          1.00   3.00  3♠ S +2   C10-Bowen-Hayhurst vs C9-Thompson-Clarke
   50          0.00   4.00  4 W -1   C12-Eckhout-Peckham vs C4-Charles-Richards
12 ♠6
T2
AQ853
♣Q8762
Dlr: West
Vul: N-S
♠QT53
A5
KJ97
♣AK3
♠J9874
9863
T6
♣95
♠AK2
KQJ74
42
♣JT4
8
171
14
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 4♣ 1 3 2NT  ♠5
EW: 2♠  ♣3 ♦5 ♥4 NT5
LoTT: 18 - 17 = +1
Par: +130 4♣-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  110          4.00   0.00  3♣ S      C8-Bradish-Rosenbluth vs C5-Ragnow-Brett
  100          3.00   1.00  4♠ W -2   C11-Wood-Stowell vs C6-Gaddis Jr-Benzien
        100    2.00   2.00  2N S -1   C10-Bowen-Hayhurst vs C9-Thompson-Clarke
        200    0.50   3.50  3 S -2   C2-Smith-Zizic vs C7-Buckley-Koerner
        200    0.50   3.50  3 S -2   C12-Eckhout-Peckham vs C4-Charles-Richards
13 ♠97
J532
KQ6
♣Q732
Dlr: North
Vul: Both
♠T6
K964
JT5
♣AJ95
♠QJ43
T87
A87
♣K64
♠AK852
AQ
9432
♣T8
8
910
13
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1  ♣6 ♥6 ♠6 NT5/6
EW: 1♣ 1 1NT  ♦6 ♠6
LoTT: 14 - 14 = 0
Par: -90 1NT-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  110          4.00   0.00  2♠ S      C12-Eckhout-Peckham vs C5-Ragnow-Brett
   90          2.50   1.50  1N N      C1-Moore-Cathcart vs C10-Bowen-Hayhurst
   90          2.50   1.50  1N N      C4-Charles-Richards vs C2-Smith-Zizic
        100    1.00   3.00  1N N -1   C9-Thompson-Clarke vs C6-Gaddis Jr-Benzien
        200    0.00   4.00  1N N -2   C7-Buckley-Koerner vs C11-Wood-Stowell
14 ♠9
AKQ943
A3
♣KQT8
Dlr: East
Vul: None
♠QJ875
J86
JT62
♣2
♠AKT43
2
Q75
♣A964
♠62
T75
K984
♣J753
18
513
4
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 4♣ 3 1NT  ♦6 ♠3
EW: 1 3♠  ♣2 ♥2 NT5
LoTT: 18 - 19 = -1
Par: +100 4♠*-EW-1
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  450          3.50   0.50  5 N      C1-Moore-Cathcart vs C10-Bowen-Hayhurst
  450          3.50   0.50  5 N      C4-Charles-Richards vs C2-Smith-Zizic
  100          2.00   2.00  5♠* E -1  C7-Buckley-Koerner vs C11-Wood-Stowell
   50          1.00   3.00  5♠ E -1   C12-Eckhout-Peckham vs C5-Ragnow-Brett
        590    0.00   4.00  4♠* E     C9-Thompson-Clarke vs C6-Gaddis Jr-Benzien
15 ♠KQ43
95
Q95
♣J972
Dlr: South
Vul: N-S
♠AT8
JT8432
T3
♣AT
♠962
A7
AKJ82
♣543
♠J75
KQ6
764
♣KQ86
8
912
11
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣6 ♦4/2 ♥3 ♠5 NT5
EW: 3 4 2♠ 2NT  ♣6
LoTT: 16 - 16 = 0
Par: -420 4-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  100          4.00   0.00  4 W -2   C1-Moore-Cathcart vs C10-Bowen-Hayhurst
    PASS       3.00   1.00  Pass Out  C4-Charles-Richards vs C2-Smith-Zizic
        110    1.50   2.50  2 W      C9-Thompson-Clarke vs C6-Gaddis Jr-Benzien
        110    1.50   2.50  2 W      C12-Eckhout-Peckham vs C5-Ragnow-Brett
        170    0.00   4.00  2 W +2   C7-Buckley-Koerner vs C11-Wood-Stowell
16 ♠754
Q53
T63
♣AQT7
Dlr: West
Vul: E-W
♠AKJT
J2
K9874
♣32
♠Q82
T9764
Q
♣9864
♠963
AK8
AJ52
♣KJ5
8
124
16
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2♣ 1 2 -/1♠ 2NT  ♠6/7
EW:  ♣5 ♦6 ♥5 ♠6 NT5
LoTT: 14 - 14 = 0
Par: +120 2NT-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  180          3.50   0.50  2N S +2   C4-Charles-Richards vs C9-Thompson-Clarke
  180          3.50   0.50  1N S +3   C8-Bradish-Rosenbluth vs C11-Wood-Stowell
  150          2.00   2.00  1N S +2   C1-Moore-Cathcart vs C7-Buckley-Koerner
  120          1.00   3.00  1N S +1   C2-Smith-Zizic vs C10-Bowen-Hayhurst
         90    0.00   4.00  1N E      C12-Eckhout-Peckham vs C6-Gaddis Jr-Benzien
17 ♠A
J762
KJ5
♣AJ976
Dlr: North
Vul: None
♠Q98743
K3
Q97
♣42
♠JT62
QT5
42
♣T853
♠K5
A984
AT863
♣KQ
14
73
16
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 7♣ 7 5 1♠ 7NT
EW:  ♣0 ♦0 ♥2 ♠6 NT0
LoTT: 19 - 18 = +1
Par: +1520 7NT-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  520          4.00   0.00  3N S +4   C12-Eckhout-Peckham vs C6-Gaddis Jr-Benzien
  490          3.00   1.00  3N S +3   C4-Charles-Richards vs C9-Thompson-Clarke
  450          1.00   3.00  5 S      C2-Smith-Zizic vs C10-Bowen-Hayhurst
  450          1.00   3.00  4 S +1   C1-Moore-Cathcart vs C7-Buckley-Koerner
  450          1.00   3.00  4 N +1   C8-Bradish-Rosenbluth vs C11-Wood-Stowell
18 ♠QJ954
Q87
JT
♣QJ4
Dlr: East
Vul: N-S
♠-
J632
AKQ8532
♣93
♠K86
AKT95
974
♣K8
♠AT732
4
6
♣AT7652
9
1013
8
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2/3♣ 4♠  ♦1 ♥0 NT1
EW: 6/5 6/5 5/-NT
       ♣3/2 ♠3/1 NT11/2
LoTT: 22 - 20 = +2
Par: -500 6♠*-NS-2
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  350          4.00   0.00  4♠ W -7   C2-Smith-Zizic vs C10-Bowen-Hayhurst
   50          3.00   1.00  5 E -1   C1-Moore-Cathcart vs C7-Buckley-Koerner
        450    1.50   2.50  5 E      C8-Bradish-Rosenbluth vs C11-Wood-Stowell
        450    1.50   2.50  4 E +1   C12-Eckhout-Peckham vs C6-Gaddis Jr-Benzien
        510    0.00   4.00  4 E +3   C4-Charles-Richards vs C9-Thompson-Clarke
19 ♠A4
J9642
K2
♣T752
Dlr: South
Vul: E-W
♠Q965
75
A874
♣A84
♠KJT2
Q83
T9
♣KJ96
♠873
AKT
QJ653
♣Q3
8
1010
12
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1 2  ♣5 ♠4 NT5
EW: 1♣ 3♠  ♦5 ♥5 NT6
LoTT: 17 - 16 = +1
Par: -140 3♠-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  140          4.00   0.00  1 N +2   C12-Eckhout-Peckham vs C7-Buckley-Koerner
    PASS       3.00   1.00  Pass Out  C2-Smith-Zizic vs C8-Bradish-Rosenbluth
         50    1.50   2.50  3 N -1   C6-Gaddis Jr-Benzien vs C4-Charles-Richards
         50    1.50   2.50  2 N -1   C5-Ragnow-Brett vs C1-Moore-Cathcart
        140    0.00   4.00  3♠ E      C11-Wood-Stowell vs C9-Thompson-Clarke
20 ♠K982
7
KQ8
♣QT862
Dlr: West
Vul: Both
♠A743
AJ852
53
♣97
♠JT5
Q4
AT762
♣AKJ
♠Q6
KT963
J94
♣543
10
915
6
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣6 ♦3 ♥4 ♠3 NT3
EW: 1♣ 3 3 3♠ 3NT
LoTT: 15 - 15 = 0
Par: -600 3NT-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  100          4.00   0.00  3N E -1   C5-Ragnow-Brett vs C1-Moore-Cathcart
        150    3.00   1.00  2N E +1   C12-Eckhout-Peckham vs C7-Buckley-Koerner
        600    2.00   2.00  3N E      C11-Wood-Stowell vs C9-Thompson-Clarke
        630    1.00   3.00  3N E +1   C6-Gaddis Jr-Benzien vs C4-Charles-Richards
        800    0.00   4.00  3♣* N -3  C2-Smith-Zizic vs C8-Bradish-Rosenbluth
21 ♠Q9
KT97
QT74
♣A76
Dlr: North
Vul: N-S
♠6
AQ86
A862
♣K853
♠JT84
5432
J953
♣2
♠AK7532
J
K
♣QJT94
11
132
14
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3♣ 1 4♠ 2NT  ♥6
EW: 1  ♣4 ♦6 ♠3 NT4
LoTT: 17 - 16 = +1
Par: +620 4♠-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  650          4.00   0.00  4♠ S +1   C5-Ragnow-Brett vs C1-Moore-Cathcart
  620          3.00   1.00  4♠ S      C12-Eckhout-Peckham vs C7-Buckley-Koerner
  200          2.00   2.00  3♠ S +2   C2-Smith-Zizic vs C8-Bradish-Rosenbluth
  140          1.00   3.00  3♠ S      C11-Wood-Stowell vs C9-Thompson-Clarke
        100    0.00   4.00  4♠ S -1   C6-Gaddis Jr-Benzien vs C4-Charles-Richards
22 ♠J987
6
QT7
♣AK864
Dlr: East
Vul: E-W
♠A63
KQJ
J642
♣T72
♠KQ5
T8753
98
♣Q95
♠T42
A942
AK53
♣J3
10
117
12
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3♣ 3 3♠ 1NT  ♥6
EW: 1  ♣4 ♦4 ♠4 NT4
LoTT: 16 - 15 = +1
Par: +140 3♠-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  400          4.00   0.00  3N N      C6-Gaddis Jr-Benzien vs C2-Smith-Zizic
  110          3.00   1.00  3♣ N      C11-Wood-Stowell vs C1-Moore-Cathcart
   90          2.00   2.00  2 S      C7-Buckley-Koerner vs C5-Ragnow-Brett
         50    1.00   3.00  3N S -1   C10-Bowen-Hayhurst vs C4-Charles-Richards
        100    0.00   4.00  1N S -2   C12-Eckhout-Peckham vs C8-Bradish-Rosenbluth
23 ♠J5
T54
K754
♣AT85
Dlr: South
Vul: Both
♠K73
QJ72
AQ986
♣4
♠T92
83
J32
♣KJ762
♠AQ864
AK96
T
♣Q93
8
125
15
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2♣ 3 3♠ 2NT  ♦6
EW: 1  ♣4/5 ♥4 ♠4 NT5
LoTT: 16 - 15 = +1
Par: +140 3♠-NS/3-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  150          3.50   0.50  2N N +1   C6-Gaddis Jr-Benzien vs C2-Smith-Zizic
  150          3.50   0.50  1N N +2   C10-Bowen-Hayhurst vs C4-Charles-Richards
        200    1.50   2.50  4♠ S -2   C7-Buckley-Koerner vs C5-Ragnow-Brett
        200    1.50   2.50  4 S -2   C11-Wood-Stowell vs C1-Moore-Cathcart
        300    0.00   4.00  4♠ S -3   C12-Eckhout-Peckham vs C8-Bradish-Rosenbluth
24 ♠A952
A6
73
♣QJT53
Dlr: West
Vul: None
♠KJ7
K8742
AJ4
♣82
♠T6
J5
T9652
♣AK97
♠Q843
QT93
KQ8
♣64
11
128
9
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1♣ 2♠  ♦4 ♥6 NT5
EW: 2 1 2/1NT  ♣6 ♠5
LoTT: 16 - 16 = 0
Par: -100 3♠*-NS-1
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  180          4.00   0.00  2♣* N     C12-Eckhout-Peckham vs C8-Bradish-Rosenbluth
   90          3.00   1.00  2♣ N      C11-Wood-Stowell vs C1-Moore-Cathcart
         50    2.00   2.00  2♣ N -1   C7-Buckley-Koerner vs C5-Ragnow-Brett
        100    1.00   3.00  3♠ N -2   C6-Gaddis Jr-Benzien vs C2-Smith-Zizic
        150    0.00   4.00  2N E +1   C10-Bowen-Hayhurst vs C4-Charles-Richards
25 ♠A9643
KT64
A98
♣Q
Dlr: North
Vul: E-W
♠KJ
A732
K7652
♣84
♠T752
QJ85
QJ43
♣3
♠Q8
9
T
♣AKJT97652
13
116
10
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 5/6♣ 1♠ 5/6NT  ♦4 ♥5
EW: 3 1  ♣1 ♠5 NT1
LoTT: 21 - 19 = +2
Par: +990 6NT-N
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  920          3.50   0.50  6♣ S      C5-Ragnow-Brett vs C10-Bowen-Hayhurst
  920          3.50   0.50  6♣ S      C8-Bradish-Rosenbluth vs C6-Gaddis Jr-Benzien
  420          1.50   2.50  5♣ S +1   C4-Charles-Richards vs C1-Moore-Cathcart
  420          1.50   2.50  5♣ S +1   C12-Eckhout-Peckham vs C9-Thompson-Clarke
  400          0.00   4.00  5♣ S      C2-Smith-Zizic vs C11-Wood-Stowell
26 ♠J863
QT987
73
♣A6
Dlr: East
Vul: Both
♠75
643
Q864
♣KQ43
♠KQT9
K
AJ5
♣J9875
♠A42
AJ52
KT92
♣T2
7
714
12
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3 2♠ 2NT  ♣4 ♦6
EW: 3/2♣ 1/-
       ♦7/6 ♥4 ♠5 NT5
LoTT: 18 - 18 = 0
Par: +140 3-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  300          4.00   0.00  2N W -3   C5-Ragnow-Brett vs C10-Bowen-Hayhurst
  170          2.50   1.50  3 N +1   C4-Charles-Richards vs C1-Moore-Cathcart
  170          2.50   1.50  1 N +3   C8-Bradish-Rosenbluth vs C6-Gaddis Jr-Benzien
        100    1.00   3.00  4 N -1   C12-Eckhout-Peckham vs C9-Thompson-Clarke
        130    0.00   4.00  3♣ E +1   C2-Smith-Zizic vs C11-Wood-Stowell
27 ♠T982
AT3
K854
♣93
Dlr: South
Vul: None
♠J3
K2
AQ732
♣KT62
♠K74
QJ
J96
♣J8754
♠AQ65
987654
T
♣AQ
7
138
12
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3/4 3/4♠ 1/2NT  ♣5 ♦5
EW: 1♣ 1  ♥3 ♠3 NT4
LoTT: 17 - 18 = -1
Par: +420 4♠-N/4-N
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  420          4.00   0.00  4 S      C5-Ragnow-Brett vs C10-Bowen-Hayhurst
  200          3.00   1.00  3 S +2   C8-Bradish-Rosenbluth vs C6-Gaddis Jr-Benzien
  170          2.00   2.00  2 S +2   C2-Smith-Zizic vs C11-Wood-Stowell
  100          1.00   3.00  4♣ W -2   C4-Charles-Richards vs C1-Moore-Cathcart
         50    0.00   4.00  4 S -1   C12-Eckhout-Peckham vs C9-Thompson-Clarke