- Wednesday Aft - October 3, 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 31 32 33 34
Field strength:  Mean: 13 MP  Geomean: 12 MP
(based on 7 players, 5 non ACBL players ignored)
★ ★ ★  Masterpoint Winners  ★ ★ ★
Partnership Pct Rank MP
Chris Johnson - Dana Johnson 62.50 1st A 0.36
Colleen Conway - Jackie Biederman 60.00 2nd A 0.25
Marc Welter - Richard Cathcart 46.25 1st B 0.12
EVENT>49er Pairs               |SESSION>Wednesday Aft|SECTION> B
------------------------,------ ------------,-------- --------------------------
DATE>October 3, 2018    |CLUB NO.>131102    | 10/03/2018 15:50
---------------------,-- ------------------- -------------,---------------------
DIR> Tom Ciacio      |RATING>Club Masterpoint (60%, 40% Open)|MOVEMENT>ONE WINNER
------------,-------- ,-------------------------,--------- ---------------------
AVE>   20.0 |TOP>   2 |MP LIMITS>50/10          |CLUB>Ventura Unit Bridge Club
------------ --------- ------------------------- -------------------------------
PAIRS IN STRAT A=6/B=3                           ,---,-------------------,------,---------,
-------------------------------------------------|   |      Section      |      |Section  |
No Name                   Name                   |Flt|Rnk-A|Rnk-B| Score | Pct  |Awards   |
------------------------------------------------- --- ----- ----- ------- ------ ---------
 1 Carol Marquez-Olson    Linda Forsyth            A    .     .     21.00  52.50
 2 Ann Nickerson          Martha Fahnoe            B    .     .     16.00  40.00
 3 Dana Johnson           Chris Johnson            A    1     .     25.00  62.50  0.36(A)
 4 Richard Cathcart       Marc Welter              B    .     1     18.50  46.25  0.12(B)
 5 Colleen Conway         Jackie Biederman         A    2     .     24.00  60.00  0.25(A)
 6 Carol Howe             Lucien Lacour            B    .     .     15.50  38.75
                                          Totals                   120.00

Hands and Results
1 ♠T2
T543
J76
♣A983
Dlr: North
Vul: None
♠K865
K98
A9532
♣4
♠QJ4
A7
KQ8
♣KQT75
♠A973
QJ62
T4
♣J62
5
1017
8
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣4 ♦2 ♥5 ♠2 NT2
EW: 3♣ 5 2 5♠ 5NT
LoTT: 16 - 16 = 0
Par: -460 5NT-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
        150    2.00   0.00  3 W +2   B2-Nickerson-Fahnoe vs B4-Cathcart-Welter
        400    1.00   1.00  3N E      B6-Howe-Lacour vs B1-Marquez-Olson-Forsyth
        430    0.00   2.00  3N E +1   B3-Johnson-Johnson vs B5-Conway-Biederman

Kenny Horneman Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
 Pass1Pass
1Pass2NTPass
3NTAll pass  

Although many will open the East hand with 1NT, it looks too strong for that to me, holding a good five card suit and a full 17 HCP. E/W should end up comfortably in 3NT declared by East whether East opens 1 or 1NT. If East opens 1NT, West will check for a fit and then bid 3NT. If East instead opens 1, West will have to decide whether to bid 1 or 1. Many experts play a style whereby they bypass four card or longer suits to bid a major if they have less than an invitational hand. With 10 HCP, West is close to invitational, but with today's light opening bid style, would you really want to bid over a 1NT rebid by East? Of course, if the E/W agreements allow East to rebid 1 with a balanced hand over 1, then West is probably safe starting with 1. The main danger is that the opponents will compete in s. Overall, I prefer to bid my major unless I'm planning to bid again if partner responds 1NT. This isn't a universal viewpoint though, and you should discuss with your partners when to bid 1 and when to bid a major.

Against 3NT, South doesn't have a great hand to lead from but will likely start with a . Double dummy, declarer can play the King and lead a . This puts North in the uncomfortable situation of going up with the Ace, which will allow the suit to run, or ducking, allowing declarer to win an honor and then switch to s. This could result in declarer making 11 or 12 tricks depending on what North chooses. In practice, though, declarer is more likely to start on the suit. Assuming declarer leads the Queen and Jack and South wins one of those tricks and clears the suit, declarer will be up to nine tricks. With the 10 of s dropping in the North hand, declarer will have to decide whether to finesse South for the 9, or play for the suit to split 3-3. This is an advanced version of a principle known as "Restricted Choice ". Without going into the details here, suffice it to say that odds are 2:1 in favor of finessing South for the 9. So, at matchpoints it is best to finesse, as 3NT looks like the normal contract. In a team game, of course, finessing would be a poor choice as it would risk the contract. The finesse will turn out to be right on this hand, rewarding those who are aware of the concept of Restricted Choice. The difference between +400 and +430 for E/W will be a lot of matchpoints.



****************************************
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 ♠KJT94
T7
K5
♣QT85
Dlr: East
Vul: N-S
♠7
A9652
A982
♣KJ6
♠A852
K
QJT76
♣743
♠Q63
QJ843
43
♣A92
9
1210
9
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1♠  ♣6 ♦2 ♥6 NT5
EW: 5 1 1NT  ♣6 ♠5
LoTT: 18 - 17 = +1
Par: -400 5-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  110          2.00   0.00  2♠ N      B2-Nickerson-Fahnoe vs B4-Cathcart-Welter
        150    0.50   1.50  2N W +1   B6-Howe-Lacour vs B1-Marquez-Olson-Forsyth
        150    0.50   1.50  2 E +3   B3-Johnson-Johnson vs B5-Conway-Biederman

Kenny Horneman Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
  PassPass
1122
3Pass3Pass
4All pass  

Both East and South are close to opening this hand, but at most tables it will be West who starts things off with a 1 bid. At this vulnerability, it's a little scary for North to come in with a overcall, given the "Swiss Cheese" nature of their honors, and not holding in shortness. In fact, I wouldn't recommend overcalling at all on this hand. However, if North passes, it looks like E/W will quietly end up in 3. This might be final contract even if North overcalls 1, as it will take some aggressive bidding by South to push E/W to the four level. As it happens, N/S might regret getting pushy on this hand. East has a really good hand for s opposite known shortness, and might well diagnose to bid game. Of course, with the King offside, declarer will have to guess the suit to make 11 tricks in s, but game is still a decent prospect. Certainly 4 should make easily, as declarer can quickly get a cross ruff going even if they misguess in s. If N/S get doubled in a contract it will not go well for them.



****************************************
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 ♠A
A964
7654
♣8765
Dlr: South
Vul: E-W
♠97652
8
832
♣QT93
♠J84
QJ2
AKQJ9
♣A4
♠KQT3
KT753
T
♣KJ2
8
218
12
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2♣ 4 1NT  ♦5 ♠6
EW: 1 1♠  ♣5 ♥3 NT6
LoTT: 17 - 17 = 0
Par: +420 4-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  590          2.00   0.00  4* N     B3-Johnson-Johnson vs B5-Conway-Biederman
  140          1.00   1.00  2 S +1   B6-Howe-Lacour vs B1-Marquez-Olson-Forsyth
         90    0.00   2.00  1N E      B2-Nickerson-Fahnoe vs B4-Cathcart-Welter

Kenny Horneman Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
   1
Pass31All pass 
  1. Mixed Raise, 7-9 HCP, 4+ s

Everyone but West will be faced with some bidding decisions on this hand. South has a normal 1 opening and North will have to decide whether to call their hand a full four card limit raise or not. With two Aces, the hand is better than an average 8 HCP hand, but the minor suits are really terrible, with no spot cards in either one. Given that on the actual hand, 4 is an excellent contract even with South having strength opposite North's shortness, perhaps North should upgrade their hand to a four card limit raise. If North doesn't upgrade, then they have a hand type very familiar to the regular readers of my commentary, namely the Mixed Raise. A Mixed Raise is a hand with four card or longer support, typically 7-9 HCP, though this can vary a little with vulnerability, some distribution and some defense. A hand that wants to be preemptive, but is too strong to be called a weak raise. The weaker of the two Bergen raises is an example of a Mixed Raise, and many pairs will have this option and use it, bidding either 3 or 3 to show the North hand. Many experts use a direct raise to three of the major to show the Mixed Raise. Although this gives up on a weak raise, the benefit is that it makes it a lot harder for the opponents to enter the bidding, and Mixed Raises are more common that Weak Raises. Notice how much pressure a 3 bid from North puts on East on the actual hand. East has 18 HCP and an excellent five card suit and still can't get in the bidding safely. East has too many major suit losers to want to bid at the four level, even opposite known shortness. Indeed, if East bids 4, North will surely double, and on any defense declarer will go down at least two tricks. As -500 will be worse for East than N/S bidding game, this will be a disaster.

East will be forced to pass, and now it will be South's turn to decide what to do. South has only 12 HCP, so it looks like passing will be normal, but the South hand is better than it first appears opposite a Mixed Raise. Playing in a team game, South might well just take a chance at game. Game will likely depend on whether North has any wasted values. Those who play 3 as their weak Bergen Raise may be at an advantage here, as South can bid 3 as a generic game try, and North should happily accept. Even with the suit not breaking, 4 is an easy make unless West leads a and East wins and leads a low . This will be a difficult defense to find, as it will be a disaster if South holds the KQ or even the K without the Jack. Even on the actual hand, if South gets the s right and plays the King, East will be unhappy at underleading the Ace.



****************************************
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 ♠QT73
7652
8
♣KJ62
Dlr: West
Vul: Both
♠9
A3
QJT973
♣AQT9
♠J54
QJ4
K64
♣8754
♠AK862
KT98
A52
♣3
6
137
14
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 4 4♠  ♣5 ♦4 NT6
EW: 2♣ 2/3  ♥3 ♠3 NT6
LoTT: 19 - 18 = +1
Par: +500 5*-W-2
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  500          2.00   0.00  5* W -2  B3-Johnson-Johnson vs B5-Conway-Biederman
  100          1.00   1.00  4 W -1   B2-Nickerson-Fahnoe vs B4-Cathcart-Welter
        100    0.00   2.00  4♠ S -1   B6-Howe-Lacour vs B1-Marquez-Olson-Forsyth

Kenny Horneman Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
1Pass1NT2
34PassPass
4NTPass5Pass
PassDblAll pass 

The bidding is likely to be quite competitive on this hand, given the N/S fit, and the highly offensive nature of the West hand. West has a normal 1 opening and East will bid 1NT. South has a good hand and with both majors should want to get into the bidding. Although it is usually preferable to have a six card suit to overcall at the two level, 2 looks like the normal bid for South and not double. The West hand is too oriented towards offense to either pass or double 2, especially as East has at most six cards in the majors and therefore E/W have at least a nine card minor suit fit, and N/S have at least a nine card fit. Once West bids 3, North should recognize that they have a great hand for s and should not hesitate to jump to game. In fact, if North had an honor in s, I think the North hand would be worth a 4 Splinter bid. West will be left to decide what to do over 4. Despite knowing his side holds half the HCP, it doesn't look like E/W have much defense on this hand. Further, it doesn't look like E/W will go down very much in a minor suit contract. The most important thing for West is to find the right minor suit contract. It certainly looks like most of the time a contract will be better, but East could still be 3316 or something similar, and now s is clearly best. A 5 bid by West would suggest a hand with at least five s, so West can bid 4NT, which asks East to choose a minor suit, but shows no more than four s and longer s. West will almost always be 6-4 on this bidding. Although 4-4 fits often play better than 5-3 or even 6-3 fits, East should not be tempted to choose 5. The minors are likely breaking badly, and East can work out that West will get tapped in s right away. Since the East s aren't good enough to pull trump, it should be clear that a contract will be better. Knowing that the s are a likely source of tricks on defense, North should have no trouble doubling a contract.

How will a contract by N/S fair? Let's say that West leads a . The play is a little bit tricky, as declarer needs to get a set up, pull trump and would prefer to lead s from dummy twice, to play for both the QJ in the East hand or the Ace in the East hand. The bidding will suggest that the Ace is in the West hand, so if declarer messes up the communication, they can still get the hand right by playing for the Ace to be doubleton. I think expert players will make 4 most of the time, but it will go down at tables where declarer plays a to the King without thinking about the other options. A contract has four unavoidable losers. If North leads a to the King, South will switch to their low . Declarer has to win the Ace to hold their losses to a minimum and this will not be an easy play to make. If declarer instead takes a finesse, North can win, and should realize that they can give South a ruff and will still score their other honor later. This will lead to five tricks for the defense. +800 will certainly be a top for N/S, but even +500 will not be bad as not all pairs will make 4.



****************************************
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 ♠K64
Q986
KQ52
♣Q4
Dlr: North
Vul: N-S
♠AQJ
AT54
97
♣J763
♠8753
7
AT864
♣AKT
♠T92
KJ32
J3
♣9852
12
1211
5
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣4 ♦4 ♥6 ♠3 NT4
EW: 3♣ 3 1 3♠ 2NT
LoTT: 15 - 15 = 0
Par: -140 3♠-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
        110    2.00   0.00  1 W +1   B3-Johnson-Johnson vs B4-Cathcart-Welter
        120    1.00   1.00  2N W      B5-Conway-Biederman vs B1-Marquez-Olson-Forsyth
        140    0.00   2.00  2♠ E +1   B6-Howe-Lacour vs B2-Nickerson-Fahnoe
6 ♠J32
7
Q9863
♣QJ53
Dlr: East
Vul: E-W
♠KQT95
Q9843
J
♣K7
♠A86
K62
K754
♣T42
♠74
AJT5
AT2
♣A986
6
1110
13
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3♣ 2  ♥4 ♠4 NT6
EW: 2 2♠  ♣4 ♦5 NT6
LoTT: 17 - 16 = +1
Par: +110 3♣-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  100          2.00   0.00  3♠ W -1   B3-Johnson-Johnson vs B4-Cathcart-Welter
        110    1.00   1.00  2♠ W      B5-Conway-Biederman vs B1-Marquez-Olson-Forsyth
        140    0.00   2.00  3♠ W      B6-Howe-Lacour vs B2-Nickerson-Fahnoe
7 ♠A76543
A
AT53
♣74
Dlr: South
Vul: Both
♠KJT82
K543
72
♣A2
♠Q9
QT762
-
♣KQT965
♠-
J98
KQJ9864
♣J83
12
119
8
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 5 1NT  ♣2 ♥3 ♠6/5
EW: 2♣ 4  ♦1 ♠6 NT4
LoTT: 21 - 20 = +1
Par: +200 5*-EW-1
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  170          2.00   0.00  3 S +3   B5-Conway-Biederman vs B1-Marquez-Olson-Forsyth
  150          1.00   1.00  3 S +2   B6-Howe-Lacour vs B2-Nickerson-Fahnoe
  130          0.00   2.00  3 S +1   B3-Johnson-Johnson vs B4-Cathcart-Welter
8 ♠K74
KQ972
Q
♣6532
Dlr: West
Vul: None
♠J52
A8
JT642
♣QT9
♠QT963
J5
K53
♣K84
♠A8
T643
A987
♣AJ7
10
89
13
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3♣ -/1 4 2NT  ♦6/7 ♠6
EW:  ♣4 ♦6 ♥3 ♠6 NT5
LoTT: 16 - 17 = -1
Par: +420 4-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  170          1.00   1.00  2 N +2   B3-Johnson-Johnson vs B4-Cathcart-Welter
  170          1.00   1.00  2 N +2   B5-Conway-Biederman vs B1-Marquez-Olson-Forsyth
  170          1.00   1.00  1 N +3   B6-Howe-Lacour vs B2-Nickerson-Fahnoe
9 ♠8
KT92
QJ75
♣Q742
Dlr: North
Vul: E-W
♠QT9
Q753
62
♣9865
♠AK7
A86
9843
♣AKT
♠J65432
J4
AKT
♣J3
8
418
10
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1  ♣6 ♥6 ♠6 NT6
EW: 1♣ 1/- 1♠ 1NT  ♦6 ♥7/6
LoTT: 14 - 14 = 0
Par: -90 1NT-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
         90    2.00   0.00  1 E +1   B1-Marquez-Olson-Forsyth vs B2-Nickerson-Fahnoe
        150    1.00   1.00  2♠ S -3   B6-Howe-Lacour vs B3-Johnson-Johnson
        200    0.00   2.00  3 N -4   B4-Cathcart-Welter vs B5-Conway-Biederman
10 ♠62
Q9
98632
♣KT53
Dlr: East
Vul: Both
♠J98
JT
J7
♣AJ9872
♠AKT5
K854
AK54
♣6
♠Q743
A7632
QT
♣Q4
5
817
10
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣4 ♦5 ♥4 ♠3 NT4/5
EW: 3♣ 2 3 4/3♠ 2NT
LoTT: 15 - 14 = +1
Par: -620 4♠-E
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  100          2.00   0.00  2N E -1   B1-Marquez-Olson-Forsyth vs B2-Nickerson-Fahnoe
        110    1.00   1.00  3♣ E      B4-Cathcart-Welter vs B5-Conway-Biederman
        180    0.00   2.00  2N E +2   B6-Howe-Lacour vs B3-Johnson-Johnson
11 ♠832
T4
K864
♣A742
Dlr: South
Vul: None
♠A9765
AQJ73
A
♣T5
♠T4
K865
JT732
♣J9
♠KQJ
92
Q95
♣KQ863
7
155
13
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2♣ 1  ♥3 ♠4 NT6
EW: 4 3♠ 1NT  ♣4 ♦6
LoTT: 18 - 18 = 0
Par: -420 4-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
   50          2.00   0.00  4 W -1   B6-Howe-Lacour vs B3-Johnson-Johnson
        170    0.50   1.50  3 W +1   B1-Marquez-Olson-Forsyth vs B2-Nickerson-Fahnoe
        170    0.50   1.50  1 W +3   B4-Cathcart-Welter vs B5-Conway-Biederman
12 ♠AQJ4
T72
T6
♣AQT3
Dlr: West
Vul: N-S
♠63
K6
A92
♣KJ8642
♠KT9872
A94
Q54
♣7
♠5
QJ853
KJ873
♣95
13
119
7
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2 3 1NT  ♣6 ♠5
EW: 1♠  ♣6 ♦4 ♥4 NT6
LoTT: 16 - 16 = 0
Par: +140 3-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  600          2.00   0.00  3N N      B1-Marquez-Olson-Forsyth vs B2-Nickerson-Fahnoe
   50          0.50   1.50  3♠ E -1   B6-Howe-Lacour vs B3-Johnson-Johnson
   50          0.50   1.50  3♣ W -1   B4-Cathcart-Welter vs B5-Conway-Biederman
13 ♠A4
JT4
84
♣AQ9432
Dlr: North
Vul: Both
♠KQJ82
Q653
QT
♣KJ
♠765
9872
AK63
♣75
♠T93
AK
J9752
♣T86
11
147
8
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 4♣ 1/2 3NT  ♥6 ♠6
EW: 1 1♠  ♣3 ♦5 NT4
LoTT: 17 - 17 = 0
Par: +600 3NT-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  110          2.00   0.00  2♣ N +1   B5-Conway-Biederman vs B2-Nickerson-Fahnoe
        140    0.50   1.50  2♠ W +1   B1-Marquez-Olson-Forsyth vs B3-Johnson-Johnson
        140    0.50   1.50  2♠ W +1   B6-Howe-Lacour vs B4-Cathcart-Welter
14 ♠JT862
QT4
9874
♣K
Dlr: East
Vul: None
♠Q9
986
AQT32
♣J53
♠K53
5
J65
♣QT9874
♠A74
AKJ732
K
♣A62
6
96
19
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 5 3♠ 2NT  ♣5 ♦6
EW: 2♣ 1  ♥2 ♠3 NT4
LoTT: 19 - 18 = +1
Par: +450 5-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  480          2.00   0.00  4 S +2   B1-Marquez-Olson-Forsyth vs B3-Johnson-Johnson
  450          1.00   1.00  4 N +1   B5-Conway-Biederman vs B2-Nickerson-Fahnoe
  420          0.00   2.00  4 S      B6-Howe-Lacour vs B4-Cathcart-Welter
15 ♠QJ3
A
AJ952
♣J972
Dlr: South
Vul: N-S
♠65
Q93
Q643
♣AQ83
♠AT874
T765
T7
♣65
♠K92
KJ842
K8
♣KT4
13
104
13
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 4♣ 2 2 2♠ 3NT
EW:  ♣3 ♦3 ♥4 ♠4 NT4
LoTT: 14 - 14 = 0
Par: +600 3NT-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  600          2.00   0.00  3N S      B5-Conway-Biederman vs B2-Nickerson-Fahnoe
        100    0.50   1.50  3N S -1   B1-Marquez-Olson-Forsyth vs B3-Johnson-Johnson
        100    0.50   1.50  3N S -1   B6-Howe-Lacour vs B4-Cathcart-Welter
16 ♠T87
KT
KJT84
♣854
Dlr: West
Vul: E-W
♠J
Q8532
Q97653
♣9
♠4
964
2
♣AQJT7632
♠AKQ96532
AJ7
A
♣K
7
57
21
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2 6♠  ♣5 ♥6 NT5
EW: 1♣  ♦4 ♥6 ♠0 NT0
LoTT: 19 - 20 = -1
Par: +980 6♠-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  450          1.50   0.50  4♠ S +1   B5-Conway-Biederman vs B2-Nickerson-Fahnoe
  450          1.50   0.50  4♠ S +1   B6-Howe-Lacour vs B4-Cathcart-Welter
  230          0.00   2.00  3♠ S +3   B1-Marquez-Olson-Forsyth vs B3-Johnson-Johnson
31 ♠A852
Q74
AQ8
♣JT5
Dlr: South
Vul: N-S
♠KT743
T32
754
♣Q9
♠Q9
KJ86
T6
♣AK743
♠J6
A95
KJ932
♣862
13
513
9
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1 1NT  ♣5 ♥5 ♠5
EW: 2♣ 2 2♠  ♦6 NT6
LoTT: 15 - 15 = 0
Par: -110 2♠-EW/2-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
   90          2.00   0.00  2 S      B6-Howe-Lacour vs B5-Conway-Biederman
        100    1.00   1.00  2 S -1   B2-Nickerson-Fahnoe vs B3-Johnson-Johnson
        200    0.00   2.00  3 N -2   B4-Cathcart-Welter vs B1-Marquez-Olson-Forsyth
32 ♠KT92
JT
872
♣Q983
Dlr: West
Vul: E-W
♠Q86
A72
J53
♣AT42
♠AJ53
K9
AKT64
♣KJ
♠74
Q86543
Q9
♣765
6
1119
4
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣1 ♦0 ♥4 ♠1 NT0
EW: 6♣ 7 3 6♠ 7NT
LoTT: 17 - 16 = +1
Par: -2220 7NT-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
        130    2.00   0.00  3♣ W +1   B4-Cathcart-Welter vs B1-Marquez-Olson-Forsyth
        200    1.00   1.00  2♠ E +3   B6-Howe-Lacour vs B5-Conway-Biederman
        690    0.00   2.00  3N W +3   B2-Nickerson-Fahnoe vs B3-Johnson-Johnson
33 ♠QJ5
KQ97
AT543
♣Q
Dlr: North
Vul: None
♠A3
T
J972
♣JT9632
♠4
A8643
K86
♣AK54
♠KT98762
J52
Q
♣87
14
614
6
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3♠  ♣2 ♦4 ♥5 NT4
EW: 5♣ 2 2 2NT  ♠4
LoTT: 20 - 20 = 0
Par: -300 5♠*-NS-2
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
         50    1.00   1.00  4♠ S -1   B2-Nickerson-Fahnoe vs B3-Johnson-Johnson
         50    1.00   1.00  4♠ S -1   B4-Cathcart-Welter vs B1-Marquez-Olson-Forsyth
         50    1.00   1.00  4♠ S -1   B6-Howe-Lacour vs B5-Conway-Biederman
34 ♠AQJ92
Q3
843
♣953
Dlr: East
Vul: N-S
♠874
K9752
AK9
♣K2
♠T63
AJ
JT6
♣QJ864
♠K5
T864
Q752
♣AT7
9
139
9
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣5 ♦5 ♥5 ♠6 NT6
EW: 2♣ 2 2 1♠ 1NT
LoTT: 14 - 14 = 0
Par: -110 2-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
   50          2.00   0.00  2 E -1   B4-Cathcart-Welter vs B1-Marquez-Olson-Forsyth
        110    1.00   1.00  2 W      B6-Howe-Lacour vs B5-Conway-Biederman
        120    0.00   2.00  1N E +1   B2-Nickerson-Fahnoe vs B3-Johnson-Johnson