- Saturday Morn - May 12, 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 28
Field strength:  Mean: 1153 MP  Geomean: 585 MP
(based on 28 players)
★ ★ ★  Masterpoint Winners  ★ ★ ★
Partnership Pct Rank MP
Charles Clarke - Kenneth Thompson 74.40 1st A 1.59
Dagmar Ragnow - Roseann Buckley 59.23 1st A 1.59
Emma Kolesnik - Finn Kolesnik 57.14 2nd A 1.11
Nancy Hall - Rosemary Reitz 56.25 2nd A 1.11
Pradeep Garg - Usha Garg 52.08 3rd A 0.80
Bob Bradish - Josh Rosenbluth 50.89 3rd A 0.80
Paula Reach - Raymond Kilius 49.11 2nd B 0.64
EVENT>Open Pairs A             |SESSION>Saturday Morn|SECTION> A N-S
------------------------,------ ------------,-------- --------------------------
DATE>May 12, 2018       |SANCTION>ST8105039 | 05/12/2018 15:02|EVENT CODE>1601
---------------------,-- ------------------- -------------,---------------------
DIR> Tom Ciacio      |RATING>STAC, CLUB>131102            |MOVEMENT>MITCHELL
------------,-------- ,-------------------------,--------- ---------------------
AVE>   84.0 |TOP>   6 |MP LIMITS>None/2000/750  |CLUB>Ventura Unit Bridge Club
------------ --------- ------------------------- -------------------------------
PAIRS IN STRAT A=7/B=6/C=2                       ,---,-------------------------,------,---------,
-------------------------------------------------|   |           Section       |      |Section  |
No Name                   Name                   |Flt|Rnk-A|Rnk-B|Rnk-C| Score | Pct  |Awards   |
------------------------------------------------- --- ----- ----- ----- ------- ------ ---------
 1 Babette Brenner        Larry Pelletier          B    .     .     .     77.50  46.13
 2 Pradeep Garg           Usha Garg                C    3     .     1     87.50  52.08  0.80(A)
 3 Nancy Wood             George Peckham           B    .     .     .     84.50  50.30
 4 Rosemary Reitz         Nancy Hall               B    2     2     .     94.50  56.25  1.11(A)
 5 Dagmar Ragnow          Roseann Buckley          B    1     1     .     99.50  59.23  1.59(A)
 6 Jody Shapiro           Perry Shapiro            C    .     .     .     61.00  36.31
 7 Ilona Smith            Dick Zizic               A    .     .     .     83.50  49.70
                                          Totals                         588.00

EVENT>Open Pairs A             |SESSION>Saturday Morn|SECTION> A E-W
------------------------,------ ------------,-------- --------------------------
AVE>   84.0 |TOP>   6 |MP LIMITS>None/2000/750  |CLUB>Ventura Unit Bridge Club
------------ --------- ------------------------- -------------------------------
PAIRS IN STRAT A=7/B=5/C=4                       ,---,-------------------------,------,---------,
-------------------------------------------------|   |           Section       |      |Section  |
No Name                   Name                   |Flt|Rnk-A|Rnk-B|Rnk-C| Score | Pct  |Awards   |
------------------------------------------------- --- ----- ----- ----- ------- ------ ---------
 1 Charles Clarke         Kenneth Thompson         A    1     .     .    125.00  74.40  1.59(A)
 2 Raymond Kilius         Paula Reach              C    .     2     2     82.50  49.11  0.64(B)
 3 Bob Bradish            Josh Rosenbluth          A    3     .     .     85.50  50.89  0.80(A)
 4 Kenneth Vandiver       Marsha Vandiver          C    .     .     .     68.50  40.77
 5 Emma Kolesnik          Finn Kolesnik            C    2     1     1     96.00  57.14  1.11(A)
 6 Dennis Charles         Floyd Richards           B    .     .     .     67.00  39.88
 7 Teresa Moore           Sheila Moore             C    .     .     .     63.50  37.80
                                          Totals                         588.00

Hands and Results
1 ♠A
76
AKJT75
♣A832
Dlr: North
Vul: None
♠QJ953
AKQJ9
83
♣7
♠K
T52
94
♣KQJT954
♠T87642
843
Q62
♣6
16
139
2
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3 2NT  ♣4 ♥4 ♠6
EW: 3♣ 3 1♠  ♦4 NT5
LoTT: 18 - 17 = +1
Par: -100 3NT*-NS/4*-NS-1
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  400          5.50   0.50  3N S      A4-Reitz-Hall vs A7-Moore-Moore
  400          5.50   0.50  3N S      A5-Ragnow-Buckley vs A2-Kilius-Reach
  150          3.50   2.50  2N S +1   A2-Garg-Garg vs A3-Bradish-Rosenbluth
  150          3.50   2.50  3♠ E -3   A6-Shapiro-Shapiro vs A4-Vandiver-Vandiver
  130          2.00   4.00  3 N +1   A1-Brenner-Pelletier vs A1-Clarke-Thompson
  100          0.50   5.50  3♠ E -2   A7-Smith-Zizic vs A6-Charles-Richards
  100          0.50   5.50  2♠ E -2   A3-Wood-Peckham vs A5-Kolesnik-Kolesnik

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
 13Pass
PassPass  

East's determination that a preempt of the major suits works two ways: North, having heard "no bid" from South, will reasonably decide that defending against clubs holding four trumps to the ace would be reasonable, that South is weak, West strong with the majors. Perfect! Well, except for the slight factor that 4 turns out to be the ideal contract and that the opponents cannot make four of a major because diamonds split 2-2 and the black aces cash.

For continued diamond competition to be right, South needs diamond support including the queen, diamonds must split, and South needs a singleton club. These factors are beyond the scope of knowledge and fall into the field of luck.

At least by passing 3 North is assured that West will not arise from a slumber and find a way to offer to play in a major suit.

As for West, well, over partner's preempt, do you simply pick 3 as a contract? Isn't 3 forcing? If it isn't, surely it is constructive. And why should East's majors be either worse or reversed?

What is certain is that preempts, whether opening bids or of the overcall variety, are two-edged swords that require judgment by all three of the other players. South's job was easiest. West should probably hope for the best and pass, awaiting better developments.



****************************************
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 ♠AK6
J75
J9863
♣K8
Dlr: East
Vul: N-S
♠J8
AQ942
T2
♣Q973
♠QT732
K
K75
♣AJ42
♠954
T863
AQ4
♣T65
12
913
6
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2/1 1/-NT
       ♣4 ♥5 ♠5 NT7/6
EW: 3♣ 1 2♠  ♦5 NT6
LoTT: 17 - 16 = +1
Par: -110 2♠-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
 1440          5.50   0.50  6N S      A4-Reitz-Hall vs A7-Moore-Moore
 1440          5.50   0.50  6N S      A7-Smith-Zizic vs A6-Charles-Richards
  720          4.00   2.00  3N S +4   A2-Garg-Garg vs A3-Bradish-Rosenbluth
  690          3.00   3.00  3N N +3   A1-Brenner-Pelletier vs A1-Clarke-Thompson
  630          2.00   4.00  3N N +1   A6-Shapiro-Shapiro vs A4-Vandiver-Vandiver
  170          1.00   5.00  2 N +4   A3-Wood-Peckham vs A5-Kolesnik-Kolesnik
        100    0.00   6.00  6N N -1   A5-Ragnow-Buckley vs A2-Kilius-Reach

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
  1Pass
1NTPass2Pass
2PassPassPass

There are a variety of conventions available after East's 2 rebid, including "Bart ," a 2 bid at least initially suggesting five cards in the heart suit. Sounds cool, and many experts play Bart or one of its variants. (No self-respecting bridge player seems willing to play someone else's convention without tinkering -- "Anti-Bart" and "Lisa" come to mind for this convention, but compare "reverse Drury ," "reverse Bergen," "Serious or non-Serious 3NT," etc.

The problem with playing many of these conventions is that you must be on the same wavelength with partner, else the convention will lead to misunderstandings and bad results. Then there is the issue of having too many conventions, too many partners with different conventions, different nuances, and keeping track of who you play which variation of a convention with becomes a distraction from playing the game.

So "Bart" is a neat convention, upon which many experts have expended a lot of time and effort into tweaking just their way. But the advantages are in the eye of the beholder.

West has a reasonable rebid of 2, playing the known 5-2 fit, and eschewing any idea of finding a 5-3 heart fit in its stead. Well, it wasn't there anyway, and some will find that the 2 rebid's temptation leadeth not beside the still waters.

Playing the hand will lead to some different results based on opening lead choices and timing by declarer, but plus 110 for EW seems most likely a success, and better results by declarer should be thwarted by good defense. On a heart lead, a vital entry to dummy for a club finesse is lost forever, and taking that winning finesse isn't everything it's cracked up to be either. Consider winning the A, cashing the Q for a diamond discard, then taking the winning club finesse followed by a spade. North can win the trump trick and play the K, later winning the other top spade and pushing through a diamond for two diamonds, two top spades and a club ruff. 110.



****************************************
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 ♠A
AQ9752
Q85
♣T74
Dlr: South
Vul: E-W
♠98532
83
T962
♣K6
♠KQ764
JT
AKJ
♣J52
♠JT
K64
743
♣AQ983
12
315
10
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3♣ 3 2NT  ♦5/4 ♠4
EW: 2 3♠  ♣4 ♥4 NT4
LoTT: 18 - 19 = -1
Par: -100 3NT*-NS/4*-NS/4♣*-NS-1
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  200          6.00   0.00  4♠ W -2   A7-Smith-Zizic vs A6-Charles-Richards
  120          5.00   1.00  2N N      A5-Ragnow-Buckley vs A2-Kilius-Reach
  110          4.00   2.00  2 S +1   A3-Wood-Peckham vs A5-Kolesnik-Kolesnik
  100          3.00   3.00  2♠ W -1   A2-Garg-Garg vs A3-Bradish-Rosenbluth
         50    2.00   4.00  4 S -1   A4-Reitz-Hall vs A7-Moore-Moore
        100    0.50   5.50  2N N -2   A1-Brenner-Pelletier vs A1-Clarke-Thompson
        100    0.50   5.50  4 S -2   A6-Shapiro-Shapiro vs A4-Vandiver-Vandiver

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
   Pass
Pass112
3PassPass?

If South begins to think at this stage, perhaps the 2 bid was the problem! Should not South express more interest or power, on the second round of bidding (first opportunity to support hearts)?

Get the picture in partner's head before it's too late, even if requiring a slight overbid/optimistic view. Bid 2 to show a limit raise of hearts and then sit back and relax. North will undoubtedly bid 4 over the 3 preempt and will have some sort of play for that -- some of the time, just not today, with the K and the AKJ all offside.

But what is bad for North is good for EW, and while 4 goes down, 3 makes. So bidding 4 and failing is actually winning!

Bottom line, in a manner of speaking: It pays to bid your fits.



****************************************
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 ♠JT
QT965
A62
♣K96
Dlr: West
Vul: Both
♠2
A82
QJ973
♣QJ87
♠Q8643
K74
KT5
♣T3
♠AK975
J3
84
♣A542
10
108
12
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2♣ 2 2♠ 1NT  ♦5
EW: 2  ♣5 ♥4 ♠4 NT5
LoTT: 16 - 15 = +1
Par: +110 2♠-NS/2-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  170          6.00   0.00  2♠ N +2   A6-Shapiro-Shapiro vs A4-Vandiver-Vandiver
        100    4.50   1.50  4 S -1   A5-Ragnow-Buckley vs A2-Kilius-Reach
        100    4.50   1.50  3 S -1   A4-Reitz-Hall vs A7-Moore-Moore
        200    1.50   4.50  4 S -2   A1-Brenner-Pelletier vs A1-Clarke-Thompson
        200    1.50   4.50  4 S -2   A2-Garg-Garg vs A3-Bradish-Rosenbluth
        200    1.50   4.50  4 S -2   A3-Wood-Peckham vs A5-Kolesnik-Kolesnik
        200    1.50   4.50  4 S -2   A7-Smith-Zizic vs A6-Charles-Richards

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
PassPassPass1
DblRdbl2Pass
Pass2PassPass
Pass   

Yes, it is true. The redouble by North did actually both "imply" no fit and produce a lack of a fit, yet the 5-2 fit with two honors in the North hand produces a fair shot at a positive part score. North cannot double 2 or reasonably bid hearts, so 2 becomes a rational bid.

To make the part score South will have to "elope" with a small trump, ruffing a diamond. Add to that four big trumps with the aid of the winning finesse against the queen and the three minor tops, and you will find the abacus produces 8 tricks as a result.



****************************************
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 ♠J4
JT6
AQJ
♣QT752
Dlr: North
Vul: N-S
♠98762
Q3
K64
♣A63
♠T53
A9742
T85
♣K4
♠AKQ
K85
9732
♣J98
11
97
13
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 4♣ 3 1 1♠ 2/3NT
EW:  ♣3 ♦4 ♥5/6 ♠5 NT3
LoTT: 15 - 16 = -1
Par: +600 3NT-N
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  100          5.50   0.50  3N E -2   A4-Reitz-Hall vs A6-Charles-Richards
  100          5.50   0.50  3N E -2   A7-Smith-Zizic vs A5-Kolesnik-Kolesnik
   50          3.00   3.00  3N E -1   A2-Garg-Garg vs A2-Kilius-Reach
   50          3.00   3.00  3N E -1   A6-Shapiro-Shapiro vs A3-Bradish-Rosenbluth
   50          3.00   3.00  3 W -1   A3-Wood-Peckham vs A4-Vandiver-Vandiver
        120    1.00   5.00  1N E +1   A1-Brenner-Pelletier vs A7-Moore-Moore
        400    0.00   6.00  3N E      A5-Ragnow-Buckley vs A1-Clarke-Thompson

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
 PassPass1
Pass1NTPassPass
Pass   

Yes, North has 11 HCP, and neither opens the quacky non-opener nor jumps to 2NT with shortness in spades.

And yes, 3NT rolls because the club spots blend so nicely, spades are triple-stopped, the diamond king is onside and the heart spots and honor distribution of the opponent's holdings is favorable.

It is unreasonable to bid game on this hand and making the matchpoint maximum nine tricks should be the focus of declarer's attention, not the missed "opportunity." If you bid such games you will be disappointed in the long run.



****************************************
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 ♠AQ74
QT85
A3
♣JT7
Dlr: East
Vul: E-W
♠KJ653
J72
K84
♣Q5
♠T92
K964
QT96
♣K6
♠8
A3
J752
♣A98432
13
108
9
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 4♣ 2 2 1♠ 3/4NT
EW:  ♣2 ♦5 ♥5 ♠6 NT3
LoTT: 16 - 17 = -1
Par: +430 4NT-N
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  100          5.50   0.50  4♠ E -1   A1-Brenner-Pelletier vs A7-Moore-Moore
  100          5.50   0.50  4♠ E -1   A3-Wood-Peckham vs A4-Vandiver-Vandiver
        130    4.00   2.00  2 W +2   A2-Garg-Garg vs A2-Kilius-Reach
        620    2.50   3.50  4♠ E      A4-Reitz-Hall vs A6-Charles-Richards
        620    2.50   3.50  4♠ E      A7-Smith-Zizic vs A5-Kolesnik-Kolesnik
        650    0.50   5.50  4♠ E +1   A5-Ragnow-Buckley vs A1-Clarke-Thompson
        650    0.50   5.50  4♠ E +1   A6-Shapiro-Shapiro vs A3-Bradish-Rosenbluth

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
  PassPass
Pass1Pass2
Pass2NTPassPass
Pass   

No vouching for the auction, which depends in large part on partnership style and understanding. Is 2 by a passed hand a near opener? Is it intended as "inverted" by a passed hand? Is 2NT defined as a balanced minimum, with a fair expectation of making exactly that contract? Or is it "extras," imploring a game bid? Does South have an acceptance, despite the singleton spade? Should South Run for cover in the safe and secure 3 contract? Is that winning matchpoints? How is the game going? Do you need a good board? Is it the beginning of the round and do you want to set a tone or find out how the day will go? Then bid game. if the game is going well and you cannot risk a bad result, bid 3 and preserve some matchpoints, not wanting to risk down three in 3NT.

"Right" and "wrong" are easily blurred on hands like this.

Perhaps West will open 1 on this nine-loser atrocity. Many would. Then the issues change. North will pass, East will raise (but notice that NORTH-SOUTH can make 2, so even if EW are permitted to play 2, down 200 will be a poor result), and then South will no doubt bid 3 (too bad the hand does not meet the requirements for a double!!)

And North will bid 3NT, surprised at the newly found optimism, but in firm possession thereof!

And if West players do open 1 and the opponents find one of the winning options, will that cure the "third seat light" syndrome? Unlikely -- facts just don't matter so some folks. The 1 opening deserves a poor fate.



****************************************
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 ♠AKQ9
5
AKJ
♣AQ974
Dlr: South
Vul: Both
♠JT8654
KJ42
96
♣T
♠-
AT987
QT8743
♣63
♠732
Q63
52
♣KJ852
23
56
6
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 5/4♣ 2♠ 2NT  ♦4 ♥3
EW: 2 2/3  ♣1 ♠5 NT2
LoTT: 20 - 19 = +1
Par: +500 5*-W-2
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  660          5.50   0.50  3N N +2   A5-Ragnow-Buckley vs A1-Clarke-Thompson
  660          5.50   0.50  3N N +2   A6-Shapiro-Shapiro vs A3-Bradish-Rosenbluth
  630          2.50   3.50  3N N +1   A1-Brenner-Pelletier vs A7-Moore-Moore
  630          2.50   3.50  3N N +1   A2-Garg-Garg vs A2-Kilius-Reach
  630          2.50   3.50  3N N +1   A3-Wood-Peckham vs A4-Vandiver-Vandiver
  630          2.50   3.50  3N N +1   A4-Reitz-Hall vs A6-Charles-Richards
  600          0.00   6.00  3N N      A7-Smith-Zizic vs A5-Kolesnik-Kolesnik

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
   Pass
Pass2Pass?2
Pass3Pass?5
Pass6PassPass
Pass   

5 1/2 quick tricks and 23 HCP certainly qualify for a 2 artificial strong artificial bid, and with an unobstructed auction the diagrammed bidding seems quite reasonable. East will not be up to the task of underleading the A to East's magically existing king for a spade shift and one in a million set. So 6 will almost universally make.

But not all will bid this slam, and less vigorous bidding by South might well result in a final contract of just 5. Although NS can console themselves that 5 is the right contract, that will lead to a below average result. . . Everyone will be in game, right? Right? Right?

Oddly, bidding games and slams in minor suits seems somehow to be a difficult task, and plus 170 scores will occasionally appear, even on this deal.



****************************************
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

8 ♠KQT73
T2
KJ7
♣AJ9
Dlr: West
Vul: None
♠98
K
A8642
♣Q7642
♠A5
J7653
Q953
♣K8
♠J642
AQ984
T
♣T53
14
910
7
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2 3♠ 2/1NT  ♣5 ♦4
EW: 3  ♣6 ♥4/5 ♠3 NT3
LoTT: 18 - 18 = 0
Par: +100 4*-EW-1
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  150          6.00   0.00  4♠ E -3   A3-Wood-Peckham vs A4-Vandiver-Vandiver
   50          4.00   2.00  3 W -1   A4-Reitz-Hall vs A6-Charles-Richards
   50          4.00   2.00  3 W -1   A5-Ragnow-Buckley vs A1-Clarke-Thompson
   50          4.00   2.00  3♣ W -1   A7-Smith-Zizic vs A5-Kolesnik-Kolesnik
        110    2.00   4.00  2 W      A2-Garg-Garg vs A2-Kilius-Reach
        120    1.00   5.00  2N W      A1-Brenner-Pelletier vs A7-Moore-Moore
        140    0.00   6.00  3 W      A6-Shapiro-Shapiro vs A3-Bradish-Rosenbluth

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
Pass1Pass2
2NTPass33
PassPassPass 

If bidding games and slams in minor suit contracts is difficult, so also must be competing to the four level in a minor suit against a major suit part score deal. First there is the problem of defeating the game into which you might push the opponents, and then there is the danger of being doubled and down two versus a non-game hand for the opponents (or doubled down one if vulnerable). So competing to four of a minor seems a very narrow target, indeed, and a rarely well-defined procedure.

Then there is the issue of whether the opponents will actually make the three level part score to which they have been pushed. Will the K take a trick? Likely so. Then 3 may be set, and a four level minor contract will be a phantom against real life results.

So push then to the three level and defend.



****************************************
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

9 ♠AQT976
543
6
♣T97
Dlr: North
Vul: E-W
♠543
T2
J9753
♣Q52
♠J2
AQJ7
T2
♣K8643
♠K8
K986
AKQ84
♣AJ
6
311
20
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1♣ 3 3 5♠ 4/5NT
EW:  ♣5 ♦4 ♥4 ♠2 NT2
LoTT: 16 - 16 = 0
Par: +460 5NT-N
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  200          6.00   0.00  4♠ W -2   A4-Reitz-Hall vs A5-Kolesnik-Kolesnik
  140          5.00   1.00  2 S +1   A5-Ragnow-Buckley vs A7-Moore-Moore
  100          3.00   3.00  3♠ W -1   A2-Garg-Garg vs A1-Clarke-Thompson
  100          3.00   3.00  3♠ W -1   A6-Shapiro-Shapiro vs A2-Kilius-Reach
  100          3.00   3.00  2♠ W -1   A7-Smith-Zizic vs A4-Vandiver-Vandiver
        110    0.50   5.50  2♠ W      A1-Brenner-Pelletier vs A6-Charles-Richards
        110    0.50   5.50  2♠ W      A3-Wood-Peckham vs A3-Bradish-Rosenbluth

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
 2Pass4
All pass   

3NT is not so clear, and makes rather nicely based in the invisible club spots, on a hypothetical club lead. 4 is the clear path to a reasonable contract.



****************************************
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

10 ♠Q86
J542
Q753
♣Q6
Dlr: East
Vul: Both
♠J75432
T
J84
♣J85
♠AKT9
KQ
AT92
♣T74
♠-
A98763
K6
♣AK932
7
316
14
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 5/4♣ 1 5 1/-NT
       ♠5 NT7/6
EW: 2♠  ♣2 ♦6 ♥2 NT4
LoTT: 19 - 20 = -1
Par: +650 5-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  680          6.00   0.00  4♠ S +2   A3-Wood-Peckham vs A3-Bradish-Rosenbluth
  650          4.00   2.00  4♠ S +1   A1-Brenner-Pelletier vs A6-Charles-Richards
  650          4.00   2.00  4♠ S +1   A5-Ragnow-Buckley vs A7-Moore-Moore
  650          4.00   2.00  4♠ S +1   A7-Smith-Zizic vs A4-Vandiver-Vandiver
  620          2.00   4.00  4♠ S      A4-Reitz-Hall vs A5-Kolesnik-Kolesnik
  180          1.00   5.00  1N N +3   A6-Shapiro-Shapiro vs A2-Kilius-Reach
        100    0.00   6.00  4♠ S -1   A2-Garg-Garg vs A1-Clarke-Thompson

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
  1NT?

I've read that there are about 140 conventions to use against 1NT, Meckwell, DONT , HELLO, Cappelletti (a/k/a Hamilton and other attributed authors), Modified Cappelletti, Ripstra, Astro, Aspro, and on and on. The usual targets of interference bidding are two-fold: to make constructive bidding difficult for the opener's side and to find a playable spot. Consider the underlying meaning of the DONT convention's acronym name: "Disturb Opponent's NoTrump!"

Rarely is the goal to bid a makeable game. Some efforts have been made in this area, but primarily by the advancer of the overcaller, when the combined assets and fit are recognized as having potential. In DONT and HELLO, advancer's 2NT bid is a signal of such potential, requiring a description of strength and suit qualities, for advancer to make a final determination as to strain and level.

Less effort and fewer conventions have been generated for the powerful hand that desires to invite game with hands such as South's. Hands that might imagine game will by necessity be monster single suited hands or extreme two-suiters, so it appears possible to allocate little-used sequences to describe these once-in-a-blue-moon hands without losing any more normal meaning.

HELLO allocates 3 as an immediate overcall of 1NT as a big two suited major hand. Minor suits can be described depending on methods (not wedded to HELLO at the moment) by bidding 2NT unusual and raising advancer's choice, or transferring to clubs and bidding diamonds. Or some such, as the partnership might agree.

But how about one major and one minor? Perhaps transfer to clubs, if that is available, then bid the major. Reasonable if available in your system.

If available, and if partner remembers this rare sequence, South's hand qualifies for the invitational to game sequence you might choose, and North has an acceptance with the heart fit and fitting club honor. Bridge is a partnership game. The more you discuss, the better.



****************************************
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

11 ♠KQ863
862
954
♣95
Dlr: South
Vul: None
♠942
AJT7
82
♣KT43
♠J7
K94
AQJ
♣AJ762
♠AT5
Q53
KT763
♣Q8
5
816
11
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣2 ♦6 ♥3 ♠6 NT3
EW: 4♣ 1 4 1♠ 2NT
LoTT: 16 - 17 = -1
Par: -420 4-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  480          5.50   0.50  4♠ S +2   A1-Brenner-Pelletier vs A6-Charles-Richards
  480          5.50   0.50  4♠ S +2   A5-Ragnow-Buckley vs A7-Moore-Moore
  450          3.00   3.00  5♠ S      A7-Smith-Zizic vs A4-Vandiver-Vandiver
  450          3.00   3.00  4♠ S +1   A4-Reitz-Hall vs A5-Kolesnik-Kolesnik
  450          3.00   3.00  4♠ S +1   A6-Shapiro-Shapiro vs A2-Kilius-Reach
  420          1.00   5.00  4♠ N      A3-Wood-Peckham vs A3-Bradish-Rosenbluth
  200          0.00   6.00  3♠ S +2   A2-Garg-Garg vs A1-Clarke-Thompson

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
   Pass
PassPass1NTPass
2Pass2Pass
2NTPass3NTAll pass

West makes a reasonable upgrade based on his spot cards, including the interior hearts, and invites game. East accepts and all eyes are on South.

Considering the invitation and acceptance, South should assume EW have 24-26 HCP and that North has, therefore, from three to five points. Further, leading a diamond is virtually hopeless, and South should find a major suit to lead. Pick one, and go with your choice. Spades win big time, hearts lose big time. The difference is about five tricks, depending on South's choice!

Hearts might be chosen on the basis that South has spades and diamonds under control and the club smidge might slow down that suit if partner has Jxx With those considerations, hearts might need to be developed, and if North has KJxxx and Jxx, a heart would certainly be right.

Not today!! A spade lead pays off big time, and the heart lead leads to eleven fast tricks and all the matchpoints to the aggressive game.

South's choice is not enviable.



****************************************
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

12 ♠Q7
Q5
QT652
♣KJ62
Dlr: West
Vul: N-S
♠KJ8652
943
9
♣873
♠93
AKT
AJ873
♣AT9
♠AT4
J8762
K4
♣Q54
10
416
10
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1NT  ♣6 ♦6 ♥6 ♠4
EW: 1 1 2♠  ♣6 NT5
LoTT: 14 - 15 = -1
Par: -110 2♠-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
   50          6.00   0.00  4♠ W -1   A7-Smith-Zizic vs A4-Vandiver-Vandiver
        170    5.00   1.00  3♠ W +1   A5-Ragnow-Buckley vs A7-Moore-Moore
        420    2.00   4.00  4♠ W      A1-Brenner-Pelletier vs A6-Charles-Richards
        420    2.00   4.00  4♠ W      A2-Garg-Garg vs A1-Clarke-Thompson
        420    2.00   4.00  4♠ W      A3-Wood-Peckham vs A3-Bradish-Rosenbluth
        420    2.00   4.00  4♠ W      A4-Reitz-Hall vs A5-Kolesnik-Kolesnik
        420    2.00   4.00  4♠ W      A6-Shapiro-Shapiro vs A2-Kilius-Reach

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
PassPass1NTPass
2Pass2Pass
PassPass  

Those Wests who play undisciplined weak two bids will put an enormous amount of pressure on their partners. Marty Bergen's partners would have passed 2 and hope for a make. Players with a more disciplined reputation will find themselves in game, regretting a deviation from the expectation they created for their partners..

"But I was not vulnerable against vulnerable opponents and wanted to make life difficult for them," cries West. "Well, if I an your CHO, then you succeeded!" (CHO = "Center Hand Opponent)

Disciplined players simply obtain a plus score by transferring partner's 1NT opening bid to 2 and enjoy a positive score.



****************************************
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

13 ♠A65
843
QT8653
♣6
Dlr: North
Vul: Both
♠9842
KJ76
J
♣AT72
♠KQJ
QT95
97
♣K954
♠T73
A2
AK42
♣QJ83
6
911
14
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3 2NT  ♣5 ♥4 ♠5
EW: 2♣ 2 1♠  ♦4 NT5
LoTT: 17 - 18 = -1
Par: +120 2NT-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  200          5.50   0.50  2♠ N +3   A2-Garg-Garg vs A7-Moore-Moore
  200          5.50   0.50  3 E -2   A7-Smith-Zizic vs A3-Bradish-Rosenbluth
  170          4.00   2.00  2♠ N +2   A3-Wood-Peckham vs A2-Kilius-Reach
  140          2.50   3.50  3♠ N      A4-Reitz-Hall vs A4-Vandiver-Vandiver
  140          2.50   3.50  2♠ S +1   A5-Ragnow-Buckley vs A6-Charles-Richards
        200    1.00   5.00  4♠* N -1  A1-Brenner-Pelletier vs A5-Kolesnik-Kolesnik
        300    0.00   6.00  3N S -3   A6-Shapiro-Shapiro vs A1-Clarke-Thompson

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
 PassPass1
Pass3PassPass
Pass   

Assuming East passes on the first opportunity, the vulnerability will most likely keep EW out of the auction even after the diamond fit is revealed, for the three level is a bit high for an uncertain venture. West has the perfect shape for a takeout double of 1, but not the horsepower. Acting with just eight working HCP would entice disastrous action too often and introduce great uncertainty in the partnership.

Four tricks for the defense, and no more.

Should EW actually get into the auction and compete in hearts, there is actually a decent chance of making nine tricks. To defeat 3, the defense will have to use its energy efficiently. Only by leading clubs before relinquishing the advantage of the opening lead without squandering a diamond entry will ensure that North will obtain two club ruffs to go along with the aces of trump, spades and diamonds. Five tricks, down one.

Unfortunately for NS, should East become the declarer, South is likely to lead the A to begin festivities, and then the 3 contract can no longer be defeated for lack of an entry for the second defensive ruff.

Bottom line, then -- should East act? If so, when? How? If feeling frisky, East might consider a double after the 3 bid. Opening that trash still does not entice.



****************************************
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

14 ♠KJ854
JT8
5
♣KJ43
Dlr: East
Vul: None
♠AQ932
KQ92
6
♣A72
♠T
7543
QJT98432
♣-
♠76
A6
AK7
♣QT9865
9
153
13
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 4♣ 2/1♠ 2/3NT  ♦3 ♥5
EW: 4 1  ♣3 ♠5 NT3
LoTT: 20 - 19 = +1
Par: -100 4NT*-N/5♣*-NS-1
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  490          4.50   1.50  3N S +3   A4-Reitz-Hall vs A4-Vandiver-Vandiver
  490          4.50   1.50  3N S +3   A5-Ragnow-Buckley vs A6-Charles-Richards
  490          4.50   1.50  3N S +3   A7-Smith-Zizic vs A3-Bradish-Rosenbluth
  490          4.50   1.50  3N N +3   A2-Garg-Garg vs A7-Moore-Moore
  460          2.00   4.00  3N S +2   A3-Wood-Peckham vs A2-Kilius-Reach
  210          1.00   5.00  2N S +3   A1-Brenner-Pelletier vs A5-Kolesnik-Kolesnik
  150          0.00   6.00  3 S +2   A6-Shapiro-Shapiro vs A1-Clarke-Thompson

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
  3Pass
PassPass  

Another preempt, more headaches all around. 4 certainly seems rich for the South hand, but North provides a wonderful dummy for the aggressive overcall. Of course, North should raise to game, and that would be a bit of an unsurprising negative. When one acts aggressively or with fewer assets than partner will imagine, then often partner will make the reasonable action that causes the action to fail.

But failure comes in all sizes and shapes. It turns out that 4 is a make, so 5 going down is not such a terrible result, after all.

You pay your money and you take your chance. Preempts spice up the game and send results skimmering about.

One this might happen not mentioned. If NS buy the auction, then West might double, and a premature double of 4 would explode in his face.

Really, though, where are the defensive tricks for a double? One trump trick is assured. One heart trick is likely. One spade trick can be banked. More than that is highly speculative, and counts on partner for a trick that has not been promised.



****************************************
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

15 ♠84
A962
KQT5
♣KQ8
Dlr: South
Vul: N-S
♠QJ652
84
J7
♣AT72
♠AK93
QT5
86
♣J654
♠T7
KJ73
A9432
♣93
14
810
8
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 4 4 1NT  ♣6 ♠6
EW: 1♣ 1♠  ♦3 ♥2 NT4
LoTT: 17 - 18 = -1
Par: +500 4♠*-EW-3
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  130          5.50   0.50  4♣ S      A4-Reitz-Hall vs A4-Vandiver-Vandiver
  130          5.50   0.50  4♣ S      A5-Ragnow-Buckley vs A6-Charles-Richards
  110          3.50   2.50  3♣ S      A3-Wood-Peckham vs A2-Kilius-Reach
  110          3.50   2.50  2♣ S +1   A7-Smith-Zizic vs A3-Bradish-Rosenbluth
   90          2.00   4.00  1N S      A2-Garg-Garg vs A7-Moore-Moore
   50          1.00   5.00  3 W -1   A6-Shapiro-Shapiro vs A1-Clarke-Thompson
        300    0.00   6.00  4♣ S -3   A1-Brenner-Pelletier vs A5-Kolesnik-Kolesnik

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
   Pass
Pass1Dbl1
12PassPass
2PassPass3
Pass3PassPass
Pass   

It is surely conceivable that NS will wind up in diamonds to avoid a bad trump split when East has made a takeout double, but, hey! it's matchpoints. Play the major suit fit. Devil take the hindmost! Courage! 3 it is.

Yes, East MIGHT have four hearts and that would be unfortunate. But it is not written in stone.

East does not have quite a classical takeout double -- 10 HCP and a singleton might be fine with everyone, but with a doubleton diamond it is generally advocated to be a bit stronger. In the thick of the contest we all tend to stretch a tiny bit, and I will not denounce action by East. At least it may have an impact on the final contract if NS veer from 3. EW's matchpoint score might benefit from the takeout double by instilling a bit of fear in the opponents, rather than by any inherent virtue of the bid.



****************************************
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

16 ♠Q5
T743
96542
♣Q4
Dlr: West
Vul: E-W
♠A864
K95
K3
♣KT85
♠KJT73
Q862
J
♣J73
♠92
AJ
AQT87
♣A962
4
138
15
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2  ♣5 ♥4 ♠3 NT4
EW: 2♣ 3 3/4♠ 1NT  ♦5
LoTT: 18 - 19 = -1
Par: -500 5*-NS-3
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  200          6.00   0.00  2♠ E -2   A2-Garg-Garg vs A7-Moore-Moore
  100          5.00   1.00  2♠ E -1   A5-Ragnow-Buckley vs A6-Charles-Richards
         50    3.00   3.00  2N N -1   A4-Reitz-Hall vs A4-Vandiver-Vandiver
         50    3.00   3.00  1N N -1   A1-Brenner-Pelletier vs A5-Kolesnik-Kolesnik
         50    3.00   3.00  3 S -1   A3-Wood-Peckham vs A2-Kilius-Reach
        110    1.00   5.00  2♠ E      A7-Smith-Zizic vs A3-Bradish-Rosenbluth
        200    0.00   6.00  3 S -4   A6-Shapiro-Shapiro vs A1-Clarke-Thompson

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
1Pass12
2PassPassPass

Hmmm. Can it be right for North to refrain from raising partner with FIVE trumps? Can it be right for North to keep dry his powder until he can see the whites of the opponents' eyes? Can it be right for North to sit and wait, then bid 5 after the opponents bid game in spades? Well, it is on this deal. And it isn't!

What is right and what is wrong? 5 is a reasonable call for North given the double-dummy analysis with all four hands exposed as far as East's declarer play after any lead than a small club, underleading that ace. On any other lead 4 makes by dropping the Q and "obligatory finessing the A!

So 5 doubled (yes, it will be doubled) goes down one for plus 100 to EW.

EW are entitled to better than 100 points on this deal if they play in a spade part score or in game on any other lead than the club underlead. So it would appear that a diamond raise will be best, provided that the diamond competition continues to the five level.

North's considerations should include the two major apparent negatives of queen doubleton in each of the opponents' suits. the lack of any other honors, and the lack of a singleton or void. The only plus value for preemptively raising is the existence of five trumps. That fact, in and of itself, is not sufficient to override the negatives.

Passing the 2 bid is reasonable, The result is likely to be minus 170. Hardly any will be plus with the NS cards, and very few will be minus 140. That result will likely come from a trump suit misguess, sparingly distributed, or a heart suit misguess, unlikely.

If North is a blaster, 5 doubled will actually pay off rather well today, for plus scores NS will be a rarity.



****************************************
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

17 ♠J6
K93
943
♣AT875
Dlr: North
Vul: None
♠972
86
KT75
♣KQJ6
♠AKQT54
A752
J2
♣3
♠83
QJT4
AQ86
♣942
8
914
9
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣5 ♦5 ♥5 ♠3 NT5
EW: 2♣ 2 2 4♠ 2NT
LoTT: 15 - 17 = -2
Par: -420 4♠-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  100          5.50   0.50  2 W -2   A2-Garg-Garg vs A6-Charles-Richards
  100          5.50   0.50  3♣ W -2   A4-Reitz-Hall vs A3-Bradish-Rosenbluth
   50          3.50   2.50  1N W -1   A6-Shapiro-Shapiro vs A7-Moore-Moore
   50          3.50   2.50  3 E -1   A3-Wood-Peckham vs A1-Clarke-Thompson
    PASS       1.50   4.50  Pass Out  A1-Brenner-Pelletier vs A4-Vandiver-Vandiver
    PASS       1.50   4.50  Pass Out  A7-Smith-Zizic vs A2-Kilius-Reach
        120    0.00   6.00  1N E +1   A5-Ragnow-Buckley vs A5-Kolesnik-Kolesnik

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
 Pass1Pass
2Pass4All pass

East has a nice five loser hand with rather nice values, and can justify simply bidding game. Dummy is quite suitable, and the location of the A Q makes failing impossible.



****************************************
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

18 ♠KJ93
J64
KT73
♣86
Dlr: East
Vul: N-S
♠T82
T73
654
♣KJ72
♠76
AKQ982
Q2
♣543
♠AQ54
5
AJ98
♣AQT9
8
411
17
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2♣ 5 5♠ 1NT  ♥5
EW: 2  ♣5 ♦2 ♠2 NT4
LoTT: 19 - 17 = +2
Par: +650 5♠-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  110          6.00   0.00  2♠ N      A5-Ragnow-Buckley vs A5-Kolesnik-Kolesnik
         90    5.00   1.00  2♣ E      A7-Smith-Zizic vs A2-Kilius-Reach
        100    4.00   2.00  4 S -1   A2-Garg-Garg vs A6-Charles-Richards
        110    3.00   3.00  3♣ E      A1-Brenner-Pelletier vs A4-Vandiver-Vandiver
        200    1.50   4.50  3♠ N -2   A4-Reitz-Hall vs A3-Bradish-Rosenbluth
        200    1.50   4.50  3 S -2   A6-Shapiro-Shapiro vs A7-Moore-Moore
        300    0.00   6.00  3 S -3   A3-Wood-Peckham vs A1-Clarke-Thompson

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
  1Dbl
22Pass4
All pass   

Now, it is true that EW have a profitable save in 5 doubled against the spade game, but it is also true that NS can overcome that sacrificial strategy by simply bidding on. South has the type of hand that would feel comfortable in taking the push opposite North's voluntary 2 action.

With spades splitting and the diamond queen favorable, eleven tricks are available for a spade contract.



****************************************
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

19 ♠T8
AQ9865
T2
♣JT7
Dlr: South
Vul: E-W
♠975
J432
J95
♣Q54
♠KQ6
K
AKQ874
♣K32
♠AJ432
T7
63
♣A986
7
420
9
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2♣ 3 1♠  ♦4 NT5
EW: 2 1NT  ♣5/4 ♥4 ♠4
LoTT: 17 - 17 = 0
Par: +140 3-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  530          6.00   0.00  3* N     A5-Ragnow-Buckley vs A5-Kolesnik-Kolesnik
  140          4.00   2.00  3 N      A1-Brenner-Pelletier vs A4-Vandiver-Vandiver
  140          4.00   2.00  3 N      A6-Shapiro-Shapiro vs A7-Moore-Moore
  140          4.00   2.00  2 N +1   A4-Reitz-Hall vs A3-Bradish-Rosenbluth
  120          1.50   4.50  2N S      A3-Wood-Peckham vs A1-Clarke-Thompson
  120          1.50   4.50  2N N      A2-Garg-Garg vs A6-Charles-Richards
         80    0.00   6.00  1♠ W      A7-Smith-Zizic vs A2-Kilius-Reach

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
   Pass
Pass2DblPass
2NT1Pass3Pass
PassPass  
  1. Lebensohl

In response to the takeout double of the opponent's weak two bid, many play 2NT as a relay to 3 for various purposes, primarily to show weakness and slow down partner's ambitions. For the sake of this hand the other options will not be explored.

West wants desperately to keep partner in check, so bids 2NT, ostensibly relaying to 3, but of course East will have none of it. 3 in standard bidding shows a huge hand with long diamonds, too strong to bid 3 directly over 2. That should be quite strong, indeed, for 3 should be a pretty darned good hand.

West sighs a great sigh of relief (A) because the bidding is over and (B) because he does not have to declare the hand.

East will be annoyed that 3 cannot be made.

North-South will be surprised to learn that nine tricks can be made in hearts and that plus 100 will not be adequate compensation for the missed part score. Further, East-West did not get terribly overboard, only a reasonable amount.



****************************************
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

20 ♠AK62
K63
Q2
♣KJT7
Dlr: West
Vul: Both
♠Q54
QJ8
AJT65
♣52
♠T73
2
K973
♣AQ984
♠J98
AT9754
84
♣63
16
109
5
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2 1/-♠
       ♣5/4 ♦3 ♠7/6 NT5
EW: 2♣ 4 2NT  ♥5 ♠6
LoTT: 18 - 18 = 0
Par: -130 4-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  300          6.00   0.00  2♠ E -3   A2-Garg-Garg vs A6-Charles-Richards
  200          4.50   1.50  2♠ E -2   A4-Reitz-Hall vs A3-Bradish-Rosenbluth
  200          4.50   1.50  1 W -2   A3-Wood-Peckham vs A1-Clarke-Thompson
  110          3.00   3.00  2♣ S +1   A1-Brenner-Pelletier vs A4-Vandiver-Vandiver
  100          2.00   4.00  2N E -1   A5-Ragnow-Buckley vs A5-Kolesnik-Kolesnik
   90          1.00   5.00  2♣ S      A6-Shapiro-Shapiro vs A7-Moore-Moore
    PASS       0.00   6.00  Pass Out  A7-Smith-Zizic vs A2-Kilius-Reach

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
Pass1NTPass2
Dbl233
PassPassPass 

Down one in 3 is good for NS. Down one does, indeed, appear to be good bridge, as evidenced by this and the previous deal.



****************************************
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

21 ♠AK5
KT532
JT74
♣6
Dlr: North
Vul: N-S
♠J872
A987
86
♣K87
♠6
4
AKQ2
♣QT95432
♠QT943
QJ6
953
♣AJ
11
811
10
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2 1♠  ♣2 ♦5 NT4
EW: 5♣  ♦5 ♥4/5 ♠5 NT5
LoTT: 19 - 18 = +1
Par: -400 5♣-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
        100    6.00   0.00  3 S -1   A3-Wood-Peckham vs A7-Moore-Moore
        150    3.50   2.50  1N W +2   A1-Brenner-Pelletier vs A3-Bradish-Rosenbluth
        150    3.50   2.50  1N W +2   A5-Ragnow-Buckley vs A4-Vandiver-Vandiver
        150    3.50   2.50  1N W +2   A6-Shapiro-Shapiro vs A6-Charles-Richards
        150    3.50   2.50  1N W +2   A7-Smith-Zizic vs A1-Clarke-Thompson
        200    1.00   5.00  2 N -2   A4-Reitz-Hall vs A2-Kilius-Reach
        210    0.00   6.00  1N W +4   A2-Garg-Garg vs A5-Kolesnik-Kolesnik
22 ♠5
K865
J97
♣AKT62
Dlr: East
Vul: E-W
♠JT4
AT3
K432
♣973
♠A9876
74
AT86
♣85
♠KQ32
QJ92
Q5
♣QJ4
11
88
13
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3♣ 3 2NT  ♦6 ♠6
EW: 1 1♠  ♣4 ♥4 NT4
LoTT: 16 - 16 = 0
Par: +140 3-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  460          6.00   0.00  3N N +2   A6-Shapiro-Shapiro vs A6-Charles-Richards
  450          3.00   3.00  4 S +1   A1-Brenner-Pelletier vs A3-Bradish-Rosenbluth
  450          3.00   3.00  4 S +1   A2-Garg-Garg vs A5-Kolesnik-Kolesnik
  450          3.00   3.00  4 S +1   A4-Reitz-Hall vs A2-Kilius-Reach
  450          3.00   3.00  4 S +1   A5-Ragnow-Buckley vs A4-Vandiver-Vandiver
  450          3.00   3.00  4 N +1   A3-Wood-Peckham vs A7-Moore-Moore
  420          0.00   6.00  4♠ S      A7-Smith-Zizic vs A1-Clarke-Thompson
23 ♠853
8753
KJ32
♣Q3
Dlr: South
Vul: Both
♠A974
964
A65
♣A92
♠JT2
AKJT2
-
♣KT875
♠KQ6
Q
QT9874
♣J64
6
1212
10
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1  ♣2 ♥2 ♠1 NT2
EW: 5♣ 5 6♠ 4NT  ♦6
LoTT: 18 - 18 = 0
Par: -1430 6♠-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  300          5.50   0.50  4♠ W -3   A2-Garg-Garg vs A5-Kolesnik-Kolesnik
  300          5.50   0.50  4♠ W -3   A5-Ragnow-Buckley vs A4-Vandiver-Vandiver
  200          4.00   2.00  3♠ W -2   A1-Brenner-Pelletier vs A3-Bradish-Rosenbluth
  100          3.00   3.00  3♠ W -1   A4-Reitz-Hall vs A2-Kilius-Reach
        110    1.00   5.00  2♠ W      A6-Shapiro-Shapiro vs A6-Charles-Richards
        110    1.00   5.00  2♠ W      A7-Smith-Zizic vs A1-Clarke-Thompson
        110    1.00   5.00  1♠ W +1   A3-Wood-Peckham vs A7-Moore-Moore
24 ♠AT
QT4
AJ94
♣Q765
Dlr: West
Vul: None
♠QJ764
A98
Q7
♣J43
♠K9832
K63
K32
♣T2
♠5
J752
T865
♣AK98
13
109
8
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 4♣ 4 2  ♠5 NT6
EW: 2♠  ♣3 ♦3 ♥4 NT5
LoTT: 18 - 18 = 0
Par: +130 4-NS/4♣-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
   50          6.00   0.00  3♠ W -1   A4-Reitz-Hall vs A2-Kilius-Reach
        140    3.50   2.50  3♠ W      A1-Brenner-Pelletier vs A3-Bradish-Rosenbluth
        140    3.50   2.50  3♠ W      A2-Garg-Garg vs A5-Kolesnik-Kolesnik
        140    3.50   2.50  3♠ W      A5-Ragnow-Buckley vs A4-Vandiver-Vandiver
        140    3.50   2.50  2♠ W +1   A3-Wood-Peckham vs A7-Moore-Moore
        170    0.50   5.50  3♠ W +1   A6-Shapiro-Shapiro vs A6-Charles-Richards
        170    0.50   5.50  2♠ W +2   A7-Smith-Zizic vs A1-Clarke-Thompson
25 ♠AJ742
9
T54
♣8542
Dlr: North
Vul: E-W
♠8
KQT2
J983
♣A976
♠QT65
AJ864
762
♣Q
♠K93
753
AKQ
♣KJT3
5
109
16
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3♣ 3♠ 1NT  ♦6 ♥4
EW: 2  ♣4 ♦6 ♠4 NT6
LoTT: 17 - 17 = 0
Par: +140 3♠-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  800          6.00   0.00  4♠* E -3  A3-Wood-Peckham vs A6-Charles-Richards
  200          5.00   1.00  4 E -2   A1-Brenner-Pelletier vs A2-Kilius-Reach
         50    3.50   2.50  4 N -1   A2-Garg-Garg vs A4-Vandiver-Vandiver
         50    3.50   2.50  4 N -1   A7-Smith-Zizic vs A7-Moore-Moore
        100    2.00   4.00  3 N -2   A4-Reitz-Hall vs A1-Clarke-Thompson
        140    1.00   5.00  3♠ E      A6-Shapiro-Shapiro vs A5-Kolesnik-Kolesnik
        150    0.00   6.00  4 N -3   A5-Ragnow-Buckley vs A3-Bradish-Rosenbluth
26 ♠Q864
75
T
♣KQJ853
Dlr: East
Vul: Both
♠T3
AKQT432
65
♣T7
♠J952
986
87
♣A964
♠AK7
J
AKQJ9432
♣2
8
95
18
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3♣ 5 3♠  ♥5 NT5
EW: 2  ♣3 ♦2 ♠2 NT2
LoTT: 19 - 19 = 0
Par: +600 5-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  100          6.00   0.00  3N W -1   A3-Wood-Peckham vs A6-Charles-Richards
        110    4.50   1.50  2 W +1   A1-Brenner-Pelletier vs A2-Kilius-Reach
        110    4.50   1.50  2 W +1   A5-Ragnow-Buckley vs A3-Bradish-Rosenbluth
        130    2.00   4.00  3 W +1   A2-Garg-Garg vs A4-Vandiver-Vandiver
        130    2.00   4.00  3 W +1   A4-Reitz-Hall vs A1-Clarke-Thompson
        130    2.00   4.00  3 W +1   A7-Smith-Zizic vs A7-Moore-Moore
        600    0.00   6.00  3N W      A6-Shapiro-Shapiro vs A5-Kolesnik-Kolesnik
27 ♠K
T92
AKT9864
♣AK
Dlr: South
Vul: None
♠AQT3
AQ8
QJ53
♣T3
♠87642
K53
-
♣Q9865
♠J95
J764
72
♣J742
17
155
3
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1  ♣3 ♥5 ♠2 NT4
EW: 4♣ 1 5♠ 3NT  ♦5/6
LoTT: 18 - 18 = 0
Par: -450 5♠-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  150          6.00   0.00  3 E -3   A7-Smith-Zizic vs A7-Moore-Moore
  100          5.00   1.00  3 E -2   A2-Garg-Garg vs A4-Vandiver-Vandiver
   90          4.00   2.00  2♣ S      A1-Brenner-Pelletier vs A2-Kilius-Reach
   50          2.00   4.00  2 W -1   A3-Wood-Peckham vs A6-Charles-Richards
   50          2.00   4.00  2 W -1   A5-Ragnow-Buckley vs A3-Bradish-Rosenbluth
   50          2.00   4.00  2 W -1   A6-Shapiro-Shapiro vs A5-Kolesnik-Kolesnik
         50    0.00   6.00  2♠ N -1   A4-Reitz-Hall vs A1-Clarke-Thompson
28 ♠KJ9
A75
K95
♣J864
Dlr: West
Vul: N-S
♠AT73
6
T76
♣AKQ75
♠Q852
Q42
QJ842
♣T
♠64
KJT983
A3
♣932
12
137
8
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3 3NT  ♣6 ♦4 ♠4
EW: 1♣ 2/3 2♠  ♥4 NT4
LoTT: 18 - 17 = +1
Par: +100 4*-W-1
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  100          6.00   0.00  6N E -2   A6-Shapiro-Shapiro vs A5-Kolesnik-Kolesnik
        450    4.50   1.50  4♠ W +1   A1-Brenner-Pelletier vs A2-Kilius-Reach
        450    4.50   1.50  4♠ W +1   A7-Smith-Zizic vs A7-Moore-Moore
        480    1.50   4.50  5♠ W +1   A2-Garg-Garg vs A4-Vandiver-Vandiver
        480    1.50   4.50  4♠ W +2   A3-Wood-Peckham vs A6-Charles-Richards
        480    1.50   4.50  4♠ W +2   A4-Reitz-Hall vs A1-Clarke-Thompson
        480    1.50   4.50  4♠ W +2   A5-Ragnow-Buckley vs A3-Bradish-Rosenbluth