- Saturday Morn - June 29, 2019

? 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: 204 MP  Geomean: 135 MP
(based on 26 players, 2 non ACBL players ignored)
★ ★ ★  Masterpoint Winners  ★ ★ ★
Partnership Pct Rank MP
Robert Carrier - Saurin Chakrabarti 62.99 1st A 0.56
Ken Vandiver - Marsha Vandiver 56.80 1st A 0.56
Barbara Fitzgerald - Jeff Steward 56.79 2nd A 0.39
Joyce Tuttle - Kay Mendel 55.31 2nd A 0.39
Harry Anand - Susan Lang 53.38 3rd A 0.28
Mary Silverman - Shirley Cann 52.21 3rd A 0.28
EVENT>Sat 499er Prs -- RmG     |SESSION>Saturday Morn|SECTION> C N-S
------------------------,------ ------------,-------- --------------------------
DATE>June 29, 2019      |CLUB NO.>131102    | 06/29/2019 17:06
---------------------,-- ------------------- -------------,---------------------
DIR> Bob Gruber      |RATING>Club Masterpoint (80%, 80%, 60% Open)|MOVEMENT>MITCHELL
------------,-------- ,-------------------------,--------- ---------------------
AVE>   84.0 |TOP>   6 |MP LIMITS>500/300/100    |CLUB>Ventura Unit
------------ --------- ------------------------- -------------------------------
PAIRS IN STRAT A=7/B=5/C=2                       ,---,-------------------------,------,---------,
-------------------------------------------------|   |           Section       |      |Section  |
No Name                   Name                   |Flt|Rnk-A|Rnk-B|Rnk-C| Score | Pct  |Awards   |
------------------------------------------------- --- ----- ----- ----- ------- ------ ---------
 1 Kay Mendel             Joyce Tuttle             C    2     2     1     92.92  55.31  0.39(A)
 2 Jim Weeks              Helen Weeks              C    .     .     .     75.09  44.70
 3 John Anderson          Lorraine Salvatore       A    .     .     .     83.84  49.90
 4 Mark Eckhout           Mimi Draves              A    .     .     .     85.62  50.96
 5 Marsha Vandiver        Ken Vandiver             B    1     1     .     95.42  56.80  0.56(A)
 6 Sharon Matthews        Lynette Haas             B    .     .     .     65.59  39.04
 7 Susan Lang             Harry Anand              B    3     .     .     89.67  53.38  0.28(A)
                                          Totals                         588.15

EVENT>Sat 499er Prs -- RmG     |SESSION>Saturday Morn|SECTION> C E-W
------------------------,------ ------------,-------- --------------------------
AVE>   84.0 |TOP>   6 |MP LIMITS>500/300/100    |CLUB>Ventura Unit
------------ --------- ------------------------- -------------------------------
PAIRS IN STRAT A=7/B=5/C=3                       ,---,-------------------------,------,---------,
-------------------------------------------------|   |           Section       |      |Section  |
No Name                   Name                   |Flt|Rnk-A|Rnk-B|Rnk-C| Score | Pct  |Awards   |
------------------------------------------------- --- ----- ----- ----- ------- ------ ---------
 1 Shirley Cann           Mary Silverman           C    3     .     .     87.71  52.21  0.28(A)
 2 Raymond Kilius         Paula Reach              A    .     .     .     79.58  47.37
 3 Marjorie Butler        Patricia Torres          B    .     .     .     81.08  48.26
 4 Linda Forsyth          Carol Marquez-Olson      C    .     .     .     64.91  38.64
 5 Barbara Fitzgerald     Jeff Steward             C    2     2     1     95.41  56.79  0.39(A)
 6 Vera Iobbi             Karen Roper              A    .     .     .     73.19  43.57
 7 Saurin Chakrabarti     Robert Carrier           B    1     1     .    105.83  62.99  0.56(A)
                                          Totals                         587.71

Hands and Results
1 ♠KJ93
K
T654
♣Q852
Dlr: North
Vul: None
♠8
AQT97
AJ98
♣JT7
♠T762
J84
K3
♣A963
♠AQ54
6532
Q72
♣K4
9
128
11
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣4 ♦4 ♥2 ♠6 NT4
EW: 3♣ 3 4 3NT  ♠6
LoTT: 16 - 16 = 0
Par: -420 4-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
   50          6.00   0.00  3 W -1   C6-Matthews-Haas vs C4-Forsyth-Marquez-Olson
         50    4.50   1.50  3♠ N -1   C3-Anderson-Salvatore vs C5-Fitzgerald-Steward
         50    4.50   1.50  2♠ S -1   C5-Vandiver-Vandiver vs C2-Kilius-Reach
        100    2.50   3.50  3♠ S -2   C7-Lang-Anand vs C6-Iobbi-Roper
        100    2.50   3.50  3♠ N -2   C4-Eckhout-Draves vs C7-Chakrabarti-Carrier
        110    1.00   5.00  2 W      C2-Weeks-Weeks vs C3-Butler-Torres
        140    0.00   6.00  2 W +1   C1-Mendel-Tuttle vs C1-Cann-Silverman

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
 PassPass1
1Dbl22
PassPassPass 

20-20 in HCP between the pairs, and the Boss Suit to NS. One would expect the hand to belong, therefore, to NS. But No! The sad fate of the Q and the wonderful EW spot cards in hearts, diamonds, and clubs make the hand belong to EW. We are not used to bidding on based on spot cards, and some NS pairs will find themselves in 2, as shown. Some EW pairs will move on to 3, based on good trumps. Game in hearts and 3NT can be made by the computer, but the computer peeks! The K is unlikely to be dropped at any table where EW declare. The hand does argue against opening light in third seat in weak suits, doesn't it?

The computer also asserts that NS cannot make even 1, but that, it would appear, takes a series of trump leads, accompanied by double-dummy leads to gain access to East's hand to continue that defense.

Scores both ways in both majors, all over the place.



****************************************
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 ♠AKQ752
32
K8
♣AQT
Dlr: East
Vul: N-S
♠J9
T95
AJ973
♣K94
♠8
AK7
T6542
♣8632
♠T643
QJ864
Q
♣J75
18
97
6
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1♣ 3 4♠ 4NT  ♦4
EW: 2  ♣4/5 ♥3 ♠3 NT3
LoTT: 18 - 20 = -2
Par: +500 5*-EW-3
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  650          5.50   0.50  4♠ N +1   C5-Vandiver-Vandiver vs C2-Kilius-Reach
  650          5.50   0.50  4♠ N +1   C7-Lang-Anand vs C6-Iobbi-Roper
  620          3.50   2.50  4♠ N      C2-Weeks-Weeks vs C3-Butler-Torres
  620          3.50   2.50  4♠ N      C6-Matthews-Haas vs C4-Forsyth-Marquez-Olson
  170          1.50   4.50  2♠ S +2   C4-Eckhout-Draves vs C7-Chakrabarti-Carrier
  170          1.50   4.50  2♠ N +2   C3-Anderson-Salvatore vs C5-Fitzgerald-Steward
        100    0.00   6.00  4♠ N -1   C1-Mendel-Tuttle vs C1-Cann-Silverman

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
  PassPass
Pass1Pass2
Pass4All pass 

North has every confidence in bidding game, but clearly needs the club finesse. Unless, of course, the defense attacks dummy's long suit, leading three rounds of that suit should be disastrous. Then three spades ending in dummy, pitch two diamonds on the hearts and take a club finesse for five.

Has not the power of the long suit yet been drilled into all defenders?

Making four should be routine, on the club finesse. Leave dummy's long suit alone.



****************************************
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 ♠QJ8
98764
QT2
♣A5
Dlr: South
Vul: E-W
♠9732
AJ3
AK98
♣86
♠A64
KQ
J765
♣KQT3
♠KT5
T52
43
♣J9742
9
1215
4
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣4 ♦3 ♥5 ♠4 NT4
EW: 3♣ 4 1 3♠ 3NT
LoTT: 15 - 16 = -1
Par: -600 3NT-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  200          6.00   0.00  2N E -2   C5-Vandiver-Vandiver vs C2-Kilius-Reach
  100          5.00   1.00  4 E -1   C1-Mendel-Tuttle vs C1-Cann-Silverman
        110    4.00   2.00  3 W      C7-Lang-Anand vs C6-Iobbi-Roper
        120    3.00   3.00  1N W +1   C6-Matthews-Haas vs C4-Forsyth-Marquez-Olson
        600    1.00   5.00  3N E      C2-Weeks-Weeks vs C3-Butler-Torres
        600    1.00   5.00  3N E      C3-Anderson-Salvatore vs C5-Fitzgerald-Steward
        600    1.00   5.00  3N E      C4-Eckhout-Draves vs C7-Chakrabarti-Carrier

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis

3NT will be the routine contract, regardless of the imaginative alternative routes to everyone's most popular destination. West might open 1 and East simply bid 3NT. That's the simplest way.

Clubs should be led twice toward the honors and that's most of the hand. Spades prove no threat, rather a gain, for declarer, and the heart suit is too well defended against North's length for that suit to have an effect on the 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

4 ♠Q8
T7
T85
♣AQ7543
Dlr: West
Vul: Both
♠J762
QJ4
J63
♣T96
♠K4
AK952
AQ942
♣8
♠AT953
863
K7
♣KJ2
8
516
11
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3♣ 1♠ 1NT  ♦4 ♥3
EW: 3 4/3  ♣4 ♠6 NT5
LoTT: 19 - 17 = +2
Par: -500 5♣*-NS-2
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  110          5.50   0.50  2♠ S      C4-Eckhout-Draves vs C7-Chakrabarti-Carrier
  110          5.50   0.50  2♣ N +1   C1-Mendel-Tuttle vs C1-Cann-Silverman
        200    3.00   3.00  3 E +2   C5-Vandiver-Vandiver vs C2-Kilius-Reach
        200    3.00   3.00  4♣ N -2   C2-Weeks-Weeks vs C3-Butler-Torres
        200    3.00   3.00            C7-Lang-Anand vs C6-Iobbi-Roper
        620    0.50   5.50  4 E      C3-Anderson-Salvatore vs C5-Fitzgerald-Steward
        620    0.50   5.50  4 E      C6-Matthews-Haas vs C4-Forsyth-Marquez-Olson

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
PassPass11
Pass223
3PassPassPass

West comes late to the party after hearing partner bid twice in suits for which contributions can be made. The J provides an unexpected assist, making the spade suit immune from attack. It is, in fact a layout known as a "frozen suit." Whoever leads spades loses thereby a trick.

If that is so, you might ask how East can make 4, having clearly to lose one club, one diamond, and seemingly two spades? All the defense must do, you might think, would be to refrain from leading spades. Yes, yes, in the ordinary course of human play, that is exactly what will happen, and nine tricks will be the normal result playing in a heart contract.

But consider this line of play, the defense refraining from leading spades -- Try a trump lead, won by East, and a club out. South wins and leads another trump, won in dummy, and a club ruffed. Then a trump to dummy and the last club ruffed with the last trump. Now there are no more trumps remaining in any hand, but South has no more clubs. East plays the ace of diamonds and exits a diamond. At this point, South has nothing left but spades, and must break the frozen suit.

Neat, eh? But not for mere mortals.



****************************************
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 ♠KQ6
KJT4
Q98
♣A74
Dlr: North
Vul: N-S
♠T9
986
J765
♣KT65
♠AJ8743
A
AK2
♣J32
♠52
Q7532
T43
♣Q98
15
417
4
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2  ♣4 ♦5 ♠4/3 NT6/5
EW: 2♣ 2 3♠ 1NT  ♥5
LoTT: 17 - 17 = 0
Par: -140 3♠-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  100          6.00   0.00  3♠ E -2   C4-Eckhout-Draves vs C6-Iobbi-Roper
   50          5.00   1.00  2♠ E -1   C6-Matthews-Haas vs C3-Butler-Torres
        110    3.50   2.50  2♠ E      C3-Anderson-Salvatore vs C4-Forsyth-Marquez-Olson
        110    3.50   2.50  2♠ E      C5-Vandiver-Vandiver vs C1-Cann-Silverman
        140    2.00   4.00            C7-Lang-Anand vs C5-Fitzgerald-Steward
        200    0.50   5.50  2♠ E +3   C2-Weeks-Weeks vs C2-Kilius-Reach
        200    0.50   5.50  3 N -2   C1-Mendel-Tuttle vs C7-Chakrabarti-Carrier

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
 1NT2Pass
PassPass  

North and East have the only hands that suggest bidding, and the diagrammed auction should be a frequent occurrence, unless EW play double or 2 to show a one-suited hand, in which case South might show hearts in the partnership fashion. Then North might bid 3 and might buy the pot. Does that help toward making a system change EW, where 2 preempts the heart suit? It hardly is likely that 3 will be doubled. Instead, East will have purchased a tough decision to bid 3.

Making 3 will require building a bridge to the dummy to lead spades at least once. On a heart lead, declarer can play a small spade toward dummy's T9 duo, win any red suit return, and play to the T, holding club losers to one trick while building that bridge! When next in, declarer will play to the K (drat, the Q did not drop!) for a second round spade finesse.

Making 3.



****************************************
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 ♠AKJ6
K73
AJ85
♣53
Dlr: East
Vul: E-W
♠T5432
J8
KT4
♣A92
♠9
AQ942
Q97
♣QJ64
♠Q87
T65
632
♣KT87
16
811
5
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣4 ♦6 ♥4 ♠6 NT6
EW: 3♣ 1 3 1♠ 1NT
LoTT: 15 - 14 = +1
Par: -140 3-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  150          6.00   0.00  1N N +2   C3-Anderson-Salvatore vs C4-Forsyth-Marquez-Olson
  120          5.00   1.00  1N N +1   C6-Matthews-Haas vs C3-Butler-Torres
  100          4.00   2.00  2 E -1   C4-Eckhout-Draves vs C6-Iobbi-Roper
         50    3.00   3.00  2♠ S -1   C2-Weeks-Weeks vs C2-Kilius-Reach
         80    2.00   4.00  1♠ W      C5-Vandiver-Vandiver vs C1-Cann-Silverman
        110    1.00   5.00            C7-Lang-Anand vs C5-Fitzgerald-Steward
        120    0.00   6.00  2N E      C1-Mendel-Tuttle vs C7-Chakrabarti-Carrier

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
  PassPass
Pass1NT2Pass
PassPass  

East's lack of defense and miniscule opening values argues for an original pass, but with some distribution, a later intervention seems reasonable. Others may have a different style and open, after which the auction will be 1 P 1 to North, where the decision whether to play 1NT as a standard 15-17/18 or as a sandwich distributional takeout will come into play. 1NT does not make as the cards lie, but is a better result (minus 50 on a heart lead) than allowing 2 to make three.

A typical matchpoint hand where aggression and skillful card play is more important than bidding theory.



****************************************
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 ♠J7643
K
K32
♣J954
Dlr: South
Vul: Both
♠AQ98
Q97653
876
♣-
♠2
8
AQJT95
♣AKQ73
♠KT5
AJT42
4
♣T862
8
816
8
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣2 ♦0 ♥3 ♠4/5 NT2
EW: 4♣ 6 2 2♠ 5NT
LoTT: 17 - 17 = 0
Par: -1370 6-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  200          6.00   0.00  4* W -1  C2-Weeks-Weeks vs C2-Kilius-Reach
  100          4.50   1.50  2 W -1   C6-Matthews-Haas vs C3-Butler-Torres
  100          4.50   1.50  3♣ E -1   C4-Eckhout-Draves vs C6-Iobbi-Roper
        130    2.50   3.50  3 E +1   C3-Anderson-Salvatore vs C4-Forsyth-Marquez-Olson
        130    2.50   3.50  3 E +1   C5-Vandiver-Vandiver vs C1-Cann-Silverman
        170    1.00   5.00            C7-Lang-Anand vs C5-Fitzgerald-Steward
        600    0.00   6.00  3N E      C1-Mendel-Tuttle vs C7-Chakrabarti-Carrier

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
   Pass
PassPass11
Dbl?Pass3Pass
3Pass3!Pass
3Pass5All pass

Should West make a Negative Double with a void in a side suit? In this specific subset of that question, it appears satisfactory, for West can return to diamonds after East's expected club bid. After the club bid turns out to be a strong jump shift, forcing game, West meekly bids 3, but East persists with a power cue bid, so West shows his spade control, which in this instance should only be the ace -- East needs club and diamond honors and outside aces, not kings.

5 after a strong jump shift and a cue/control bid suggest slam, but West sees nothing in his hand that suggests acceptance. Change the 6 for the K and that opinion would change! Perhaps East will just bid 6 on the theory that at worst this will be on a finesse against the K. Not the worst position ever taken.

Clubs behave and the diamond finesse works twice, so twelve tricks roll in.



****************************************
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 ♠A4
KQT6
J97
♣QJ86
Dlr: West
Vul: None
♠Q32
J3
QT43
♣A942
♠9876
75
AK86
♣K73
♠KJT5
A9842
52
♣T5
13
910
8
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1♣ 3 1♠ 1NT  ♦6
EW: 1  ♣6 ♥4 ♠5/6 NT5
LoTT: 16 - 17 = -1
Par: +140 3-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  450          5.92   0.08  4 S +1   C3-Anderson-Salvatore vs C4-Forsyth-Marquez-Olson
  140          2.42   3.58  3 S      C5-Vandiver-Vandiver vs C1-Cann-Silverman
  140          2.42   3.58  2 S +1   C1-Mendel-Tuttle vs C7-Chakrabarti-Carrier
  140          2.42   3.58  2 S +1   C2-Weeks-Weeks vs C2-Kilius-Reach
  140          2.42   3.58  2 S +1   C6-Matthews-Haas vs C3-Butler-Torres
  140          2.42   3.58            C7-Lang-Anand vs C5-Fitzgerald-Steward

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis

This hand does not appear to warrant a diagram or any particular analysis. Is it the proverbial "flat board?"

North will open the bidding and NS will find the heart partial. EW have not enough values or distribution to get involved.

Trumps are 2-2, so there is nothing to the play there, and the spades can be ruffed out.

Prediction: the "normal" result, by an overwhelming majority of hands, will be a heart partial, usually just 2, making three, losing two clubs and two diamonds, nothing else.

NS plus 140.



****************************************
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 ♠A98
AJ5
T97
♣A952
Dlr: North
Vul: E-W
♠T73
Q3
QJ865
♣QJ7
♠64
K642
K43
♣T643
♠KQJ52
T987
A2
♣K8
13
86
13
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2♣ 1 4 5♠ 3NT
EW:  ♣4 ♦6 ♥2 ♠2 NT2
LoTT: 17 - 16 = +1
Par: +450 5♠-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  480          5.50   0.50  4♠ S +2   C1-Mendel-Tuttle vs C6-Iobbi-Roper
  480          5.50   0.50  4♠ S +2   C4-Eckhout-Draves vs C5-Fitzgerald-Steward
  450          4.00   2.00            C7-Lang-Anand vs C4-Forsyth-Marquez-Olson
  430          3.00   3.00  3N N +1   C3-Anderson-Salvatore vs C3-Butler-Torres
  420          1.50   4.50  4♠ S      C2-Weeks-Weeks vs C1-Cann-Silverman
  420          1.50   4.50  4♠ S      C5-Vandiver-Vandiver vs C7-Chakrabarti-Carrier
  200          0.00   6.00  2♠ S +3   C6-Matthews-Haas vs C2-Kilius-Reach

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
 1Pass1
Pass1NTPass2!1
Pass2Pass4
All pass   
  1. XY Notrump

After a 1NT rebid, it is a good idea to have an artificial checkback convention to look for a fit in the other major or three card support. Many players use "New Minor Forcing," a long-standing and much honored approach which, however, is more complicated than most understand, thus leading to misuse and occasional poor uses. Many players don't understand New Minor Forcing to be a general inquiry or approach, thinking and asserting that all it is for is to find three card support for responder's major. Not so at all. Note that in the present auction South would welcome a heart rebid after either approach, and there is much more than that.

Test your own partnership in these New Minor auctions:
1 - 1; 1NT - 3. Forcing? Signoff?
1 - 1; 1NT - 3. Forcing? Signoff? Invitational?
1 - 1; 1NT - 2. Forcing? Signoff? Invitational?
1 - 1; 1NT - 2; 2 - 3. ?

XYZ or XY NT is a different set of responses to TWO different conventional rebids, which also have an effect on jump rebids. Starting with 1 - 1; 1NT, here are what many consider an improved structure over NMF:

2 forces 2, which may be passed.
After 2 any further bid is invitational, including a rebid of spades, showing five cards
2 shows 54
2 shows 5
3 shows club support
2NT shows a balanced hand. Some promise four of partner's minor, direct 2NT denies
2 is game forcing, asking for four hearts first, then three card spade support. EASY!



****************************************
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 ♠43
T63
AKQJ985
♣5
Dlr: East
Vul: Both
♠AJT6
QJ5
43
♣KJT8
♠K98752
-
T7
♣AQ764
♠Q
AK98742
62
♣932
10
129
9
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3 4  ♣1/0 ♠1 NT2
EW: 5♣ 5♠  ♦4 ♥2 NT4
LoTT: 21 - 20 = +1
Par: -500 6*-NS-2
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  130          6.00   0.00  4 N      C6-Matthews-Haas vs C2-Kilius-Reach
        100    4.50   1.50  5 S -1   C1-Mendel-Tuttle vs C6-Iobbi-Roper
        100    4.50   1.50            C7-Lang-Anand vs C4-Forsyth-Marquez-Olson
        200    2.50   3.50  3♠ E +2   C4-Eckhout-Draves vs C5-Fitzgerald-Steward
        200    2.50   3.50  5* S -1  C2-Weeks-Weeks vs C1-Cann-Silverman
        650    1.00   5.00  5♠ E      C5-Vandiver-Vandiver vs C7-Chakrabarti-Carrier
        680    0.00   6.00  4♠ E +2   C3-Anderson-Salvatore vs C3-Butler-Torres

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
  12
34Pass4
455Pass
PassPass  

"OK," says North -- "we got 'em up there. Now let's beat 5."

Nope. Good try, though. Hard to bid slam vulnerable as a sacrifice, isn't it? Right, though, primarily because North has a singleton club and South has a singleton spade. If either defender knew or could divine partner's fabulous distribution, maybe so.

Who knows? Had the diamond distribution been anything other than 2-2 EW, they could have made a small or grand slam!



****************************************
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 ♠A63
972
AKQ3
♣AKT
Dlr: South
Vul: None
♠KJ52
T8
T96
♣8742
♠Q98
K6
52
♣QJ9653
♠T74
AQJ543
J874
♣-
20
48
8
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1♣ 7 7 3♠ 7NT
EW:  ♣6 ♦0 ♥0 ♠3 NT0
LoTT: 19 - 19 = 0
Par: +1520 7NT-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
 1010          4.50   1.50  6 S +1   C1-Mendel-Tuttle vs C6-Iobbi-Roper
 1010          4.50   1.50  6 S +1   C2-Weeks-Weeks vs C1-Cann-Silverman
 1010          4.50   1.50  6 S +1   C4-Eckhout-Draves vs C5-Fitzgerald-Steward
 1010          4.50   1.50  6 N +1   C3-Anderson-Salvatore vs C3-Butler-Torres
  980          2.00   4.00            C7-Lang-Anand vs C4-Forsyth-Marquez-Olson
  510          0.50   5.50  4 S +3   C5-Vandiver-Vandiver vs C7-Chakrabarti-Carrier
  510          0.50   5.50  4 S +3   C6-Matthews-Haas vs C2-Kilius-Reach

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
   21
Pass4NTPass5
Pass5Pass6
All pass   
  1. Many "older?" authors advocated against opening a weak two bid with a void for various reasons. Modern players do not follow such ivory-tower advice, and are more practical, rolling the dice routinely.

Bidding grand slams off a key card is not generally approved. The fact that the K is "onside" is not proof of misbidding.

Looks like the 2 bid led to intelligent bidding. 4NT is, of course, 1430 Roman Keycard Blackwood , and 5 asks for the trump queen for suit quality reassurance.



****************************************
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 ♠AKJ86
T65
A
♣AQ93
Dlr: West
Vul: N-S
♠Q
A87432
9876
♣54
♠975
KQJ
K53
♣KT82
♠T432
9
QJT42
♣J76
18
612
4
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3♣ 1 5♠ 1NT  ♥5
EW: 2  ♣4 ♦5 ♠2 NT6
LoTT: 19 - 18 = +1
Par: +650 5♠-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  660          6.00   0.00  4♠ N +1   C4-Eckhout-Draves vs C5-Fitzgerald-Steward
  650          4.50   1.50  4♠ N +1   C1-Mendel-Tuttle vs C6-Iobbi-Roper
  650          4.50   1.50            C7-Lang-Anand vs C4-Forsyth-Marquez-Olson
  620          3.00   3.00  4♠ N      C5-Vandiver-Vandiver vs C7-Chakrabarti-Carrier
  170          2.00   4.00  3♠ N +1   C3-Anderson-Salvatore vs C3-Butler-Torres
  140          1.00   5.00  2♠ N +1   C2-Weeks-Weeks vs C1-Cann-Silverman
   50          0.00   6.00  2 W -1   C6-Matthews-Haas vs C2-Kilius-Reach

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
Pass1Pass4
All pass   

Usually a 4 bid promises FIVE trumps, a singleton, and a generally weak hand. Excellent hands like North's have a problem passing, for "if" partner has such-and-such, slam might be available. To avoid enticing further bidding, a leap to four of partner's major should deny a control-rich minimum. Some play a conventional method to show a raise to four with a side ace or like values, a "good preempt." In order to have such a method available, however, an otherwise popular bid has to be changed. If you adopt such a method, North will not be tempted to bid again on hands like this one.

What is that "other method?" Everyone has heard of 1/1 - 3NT as showing a 4333 hand with three trumps and minimum game values, offering a choice of games. Over the course of several decades, I have played that method, but cannot for the life of me remember a single hand that benefitted from the method. Nor am I constrained to that 3NT bid to offer the choice trumpeted by the 3NT 4333 convention.

So I have ditched 3NT as offering a choice of games. 3NT can be used, instead, as a "good" preempt, promising five (typically) trumps, a singleton somewhere else, and an ace or two kings -- two controls, specifically. With fewer controls, raise directly to game. With more, find a more constructive sequence -- that hand is not a preempt at all, but a limit or single raise or a Splinter bid, depending on other factors.



****************************************
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 ♠9754
T9643
A54
♣8
Dlr: North
Vul: Both
♠Q
AKQ5
963
♣AQ973
♠3
J2
QJT82
♣KJT64
♠AKJT862
87
K7
♣52
4
178
11
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 4♠  ♣2 ♦4 ♥6 NT4
EW: 3♣ 3  ♥6 ♠3 NT4
LoTT: 19 - 21 = -2
Par: +500 5*-EW/5♣*-EW-2
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
 1700          6.00   0.00            C7-Lang-Anand vs C3-Butler-Torres
  100          4.00   2.00  5♣ W -1   C2-Weeks-Weeks vs C7-Chakrabarti-Carrier
  100          4.00   2.00  5♣ W -1   C3-Anderson-Salvatore vs C2-Kilius-Reach
  100          4.00   2.00  5♣ E -1   C5-Vandiver-Vandiver vs C6-Iobbi-Roper
        100    2.00   4.00  4♠ S -1   C4-Eckhout-Draves vs C4-Forsyth-Marquez-Olson
        110    1.00   5.00  3♣ E      C6-Matthews-Haas vs C1-Cann-Silverman
        200    0.00   6.00  5♠* S -1  C1-Mendel-Tuttle vs C5-Fitzgerald-Steward
14 ♠AT4
K
AK94
♣97532
Dlr: East
Vul: None
♠J7
AQJT63
73
♣AQJ
♠965
952
QT86
♣T64
♠KQ832
874
J52
♣K8
14
152
9
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1♣ 2 3♠  ♥4 NT4
EW: 3  ♣6 ♦5 ♠4 NT6
LoTT: 18 - 17 = +1
Par: +100 4*-EW-1
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  140          5.50   0.50  2♠ N +1   C5-Vandiver-Vandiver vs C6-Iobbi-Roper
  140          5.50   0.50            C7-Lang-Anand vs C3-Butler-Torres
  110          4.00   2.00  2♠ S      C1-Mendel-Tuttle vs C5-Fitzgerald-Steward
  100          3.00   3.00  3 W -2   C2-Weeks-Weeks vs C7-Chakrabarti-Carrier
        110    2.00   4.00  2 W      C6-Matthews-Haas vs C1-Cann-Silverman
        140    0.50   5.50  2 W +1   C3-Anderson-Salvatore vs C2-Kilius-Reach
        140    0.50   5.50  2 W +1   C4-Eckhout-Draves vs C4-Forsyth-Marquez-Olson
15 ♠Q95
AKQJ
AT75
♣83
Dlr: South
Vul: N-S
♠KJT84
854
KJ4
♣72
♠2
T976
632
♣JT964
♠A763
32
Q98
♣AKQ5
16
81
15
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 4♣ 5 5 4♠ 5NT
EW:  ♣3 ♦2 ♥2 ♠3 NT2
LoTT: 14 - 14 = 0
Par: +660 5NT-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  990          6.00   0.00            C7-Lang-Anand vs C3-Butler-Torres
  660          4.50   1.50  3N S +2   C5-Vandiver-Vandiver vs C6-Iobbi-Roper
  660          4.50   1.50  3N N +2   C4-Eckhout-Draves vs C4-Forsyth-Marquez-Olson
  630          3.00   3.00  3N S +1   C6-Matthews-Haas vs C1-Cann-Silverman
  600          2.00   4.00  3N S      C2-Weeks-Weeks vs C7-Chakrabarti-Carrier
        200    0.50   5.50  6♠ S -2   C3-Anderson-Salvatore vs C2-Kilius-Reach
        200    0.50   5.50  6 N -2   C1-Mendel-Tuttle vs C5-Fitzgerald-Steward
16 ♠Q9832
AT
T854
♣86
Dlr: West
Vul: E-W
♠AKJT76
863
-
♣AK95
♠54
Q94
A96
♣QJT74
♠-
KJ752
KQJ732
♣32
6
159
10
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 4 2  ♣1 ♠4 NT5
EW: 2♣ 2♠ 2NT  ♦2 ♥3
LoTT: 18 - 19 = -1
Par: +130 4-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  800          6.00   0.00  4♠* W -3  C4-Eckhout-Draves vs C4-Forsyth-Marquez-Olson
  500          5.00   1.00  3♠* W -2  C1-Mendel-Tuttle vs C5-Fitzgerald-Steward
  110          4.00   2.00  2 S      C3-Anderson-Salvatore vs C2-Kilius-Reach
  100          2.50   3.50  3♠ W -1   C2-Weeks-Weeks vs C7-Chakrabarti-Carrier
  100          2.50   3.50            C5-Vandiver-Vandiver vs C6-Iobbi-Roper
        100    1.00   5.00            C7-Lang-Anand vs C3-Butler-Torres
        140    0.00   6.00  3♠ W      C6-Matthews-Haas vs C1-Cann-Silverman
17 ♠J76532
Q3
52
♣J82
Dlr: North
Vul: None
♠4
852
JT863
♣AQ76
♠KT
AJ7
AK74
♣9543
♠AQ98
KT964
Q9
♣KT
4
715
14
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2♠  ♣3 ♦3 ♥6 NT4
EW: 3♣ 3 3/1NT  ♥6 ♠5
LoTT: 17 - 19 = -2
Par: -300 4♠*-NS-2
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
   80          6.00   0.00  1 S      C1-Mendel-Tuttle vs C4-Forsyth-Marquez-Olson
         50    5.00   1.00            C7-Lang-Anand vs C2-Kilius-Reach
        130    4.00   2.00  3 E +1   C2-Weeks-Weeks vs C6-Iobbi-Roper
        150    1.50   4.50  2N E +1   C4-Eckhout-Draves vs C3-Butler-Torres
        150    1.50   4.50  2N E +1   C6-Matthews-Haas vs C7-Chakrabarti-Carrier
        150    1.50   4.50  4♠ S -3   C3-Anderson-Salvatore vs C1-Cann-Silverman
        150    1.50   4.50  2 S -3   C5-Vandiver-Vandiver vs C5-Fitzgerald-Steward
18 ♠QJ872
T7
AK2
♣543
Dlr: East
Vul: N-S
♠54
K42
J63
♣QJ972
♠AK3
9865
85
♣AKT8
♠T96
AQJ3
QT974
♣6
10
714
9
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2 2♠  ♣4 ♥6 NT6
EW: 3♣ 1 1NT  ♦4 ♠4
LoTT: 17 - 17 = 0
Par: -110 3♣-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  140          6.00   0.00  2♠ N +1   C3-Anderson-Salvatore vs C1-Cann-Silverman
  130          5.00   1.00            C7-Lang-Anand vs C2-Kilius-Reach
   50          4.00   2.00  4♣ E -1   C5-Vandiver-Vandiver vs C5-Fitzgerald-Steward
        100    3.00   3.00  3♠ N -1   C6-Matthews-Haas vs C7-Chakrabarti-Carrier
        110    1.00   5.00  3♣ E      C2-Weeks-Weeks vs C6-Iobbi-Roper
        110    1.00   5.00  2♣ E +1   C1-Mendel-Tuttle vs C4-Forsyth-Marquez-Olson
        110    1.00   5.00  2♣ E +1   C4-Eckhout-Draves vs C3-Butler-Torres
19 ♠KQ2
QT72
8543
♣J5
Dlr: South
Vul: E-W
♠AT73
KJ3
AKQ
♣AT9
♠J864
A94
J976
♣74
♠95
865
T2
♣KQ8632
8
216
5
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣6 ♦3 ♥5 ♠3 NT3
EW: 3/4 2 4♠ 3/4NT  ♣6
LoTT: 16 - 16 = 0
Par: -630 4NT-W
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
        600    4.50   1.50  3N W      C1-Mendel-Tuttle vs C4-Forsyth-Marquez-Olson
        600    4.50   1.50  3N W      C3-Anderson-Salvatore vs C1-Cann-Silverman
        600    4.50   1.50  3N W      C5-Vandiver-Vandiver vs C5-Fitzgerald-Steward
        600    4.50   1.50  3N W      C6-Matthews-Haas vs C7-Chakrabarti-Carrier
        620    1.50   4.50  4♠ W      C4-Eckhout-Draves vs C3-Butler-Torres
        620    1.50   4.50            C7-Lang-Anand vs C2-Kilius-Reach
        650    0.00   6.00  4♠ W +1   C2-Weeks-Weeks vs C6-Iobbi-Roper
20 ♠J8
763
T63
♣KQ754
Dlr: West
Vul: Both
♠Q9753
5
QJ92
♣T86
♠AK4
AKQ42
A7
♣J93
♠T62
JT98
K854
♣A2
6
521
8
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣5 ♦4 ♥4 ♠1 NT4
EW: 1♣ 2 2 4♠ 2NT
LoTT: 15 - 15 = 0
Par: -620 4♠-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  100          6.00   0.00  2N E -1   C1-Mendel-Tuttle vs C4-Forsyth-Marquez-Olson
        140    5.00   1.00  3♠ W      C3-Anderson-Salvatore vs C1-Cann-Silverman
        620    3.00   3.00  4♠ E      C2-Weeks-Weeks vs C6-Iobbi-Roper
        620    3.00   3.00  4♠ E      C5-Vandiver-Vandiver vs C5-Fitzgerald-Steward
        620    3.00   3.00  4♠ E      C6-Matthews-Haas vs C7-Chakrabarti-Carrier
        630    1.00   5.00            C7-Lang-Anand vs C2-Kilius-Reach
        650    0.00   6.00  4♠ E +1   C4-Eckhout-Draves vs C3-Butler-Torres
21 ♠T8532
876
-
♣Q8743
Dlr: North
Vul: N-S
♠A
A542
AKQ
♣AKJ52
♠KJ74
Q
J96542
♣T9
♠Q96
KJT93
T873
♣6
2
257
6
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣3 ♦1 ♥6 ♠5 NT1
EW: 3/4♣ 6 1 1♠ 3NT
LoTT: 18 - 17 = +1
Par: -920 6-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  300          6.00   0.00  5 W -6   C4-Eckhout-Draves vs C2-Kilius-Reach
   50          5.00   1.00  3N W -1   C3-Anderson-Salvatore vs C7-Chakrabarti-Carrier
        430    3.00   3.00  3N W +1   C2-Weeks-Weeks vs C5-Fitzgerald-Steward
        430    3.00   3.00  3N W +1   C5-Vandiver-Vandiver vs C4-Forsyth-Marquez-Olson
        430    3.00   3.00            C7-Lang-Anand vs C1-Cann-Silverman
        490    1.00   5.00  3N W +3   C1-Mendel-Tuttle vs C3-Butler-Torres
        990    0.00   6.00  6N W      C6-Matthews-Haas vs C6-Iobbi-Roper
22 ♠A92
KQ7
AK6
♣KJ96
Dlr: East
Vul: E-W
♠QJ63
AJ8
974
♣A53
♠KT84
96
QT5
♣8742
♠75
T5432
J832
♣QT
20
125
3
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1♣ 2 4 1NT  ♠6
EW: 1♠  ♣6 ♦4 ♥3 NT5/6
LoTT: 17 - 16 = +1
Par: +420 4-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  170          5.50   0.50  3 S +1   C6-Matthews-Haas vs C6-Iobbi-Roper
  170          5.50   0.50  3 N +1   C1-Mendel-Tuttle vs C3-Butler-Torres
  140          4.00   2.00            C7-Lang-Anand vs C1-Cann-Silverman
   90          3.00   3.00  1N N      C5-Vandiver-Vandiver vs C4-Forsyth-Marquez-Olson
         50    2.00   4.00  2N N -1   C2-Weeks-Weeks vs C5-Fitzgerald-Steward
        100    0.50   5.50  3N N -2   C3-Anderson-Salvatore vs C7-Chakrabarti-Carrier
        100    0.50   5.50  3N N -2   C4-Eckhout-Draves vs C2-Kilius-Reach
23 ♠AQJ
62
AQ965
♣T83
Dlr: South
Vul: Both
♠K83
AK843
84
♣Q92
♠9765
QJ9
T3
♣AJ54
♠T42
T75
KJ72
♣K76
13
128
7
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3 1NT  ♣6 ♥6 ♠6
EW: 1♣ 1 1♠  ♦4 NT5
LoTT: 16 - 17 = -1
Par: +110 3-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  110          5.50   0.50  3 N      C3-Anderson-Salvatore vs C7-Chakrabarti-Carrier
  110          5.50   0.50  2 N +1   C5-Vandiver-Vandiver vs C4-Forsyth-Marquez-Olson
  100          4.00   2.00  2 W -1   C1-Mendel-Tuttle vs C3-Butler-Torres
        100    2.50   3.50  4 N -1   C2-Weeks-Weeks vs C5-Fitzgerald-Steward
        100    2.50   3.50            C7-Lang-Anand vs C1-Cann-Silverman
        110    1.00   5.00  2 W      C6-Matthews-Haas vs C6-Iobbi-Roper
        140    0.00   6.00  3 W      C4-Eckhout-Draves vs C2-Kilius-Reach
24 ♠9
J732
2
♣QJT7654
Dlr: West
Vul: None
♠Q84
AK
QT943
♣AK3
♠AKJT752
T8
KJ6
♣8
♠63
Q9654
A875
♣92
4
1812
6
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2♣  ♦1 ♥6 ♠1 NT1
EW: 6 5♠ 6NT  ♣5 ♥5
LoTT: 19 - 19 = 0
Par: -990 6NT-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
   50          6.00   0.00  7♠ W -1   C2-Weeks-Weeks vs C5-Fitzgerald-Steward
        450    5.00   1.00            C7-Lang-Anand vs C1-Cann-Silverman
        480    3.00   3.00  4♠ E +2   C1-Mendel-Tuttle vs C3-Butler-Torres
        480    3.00   3.00  4♠ E +2   C4-Eckhout-Draves vs C2-Kilius-Reach
        480    3.00   3.00  4♠ E +2   C5-Vandiver-Vandiver vs C4-Forsyth-Marquez-Olson
        980    0.50   5.50  6♠ W      C3-Anderson-Salvatore vs C7-Chakrabarti-Carrier
        980    0.50   5.50  6♠ E      C6-Matthews-Haas vs C6-Iobbi-Roper
25 ♠A76
JT74
AKQJ7
♣7
Dlr: North
Vul: E-W
♠KJT84
65
654
♣KT9
♠Q93
AK93
3
♣QJ853
♠52
Q82
T982
♣A642
15
712
6
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 4 1 1NT  ♣4 ♠4
EW: 3♣ 2♠  ♦3 ♥5 NT6
LoTT: 19 - 17 = +2
Par: +130 4-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  150          6.00   0.00  3 N +2   C5-Vandiver-Vandiver vs C3-Butler-Torres
  130          5.00   1.00  5 N -1   C1-Mendel-Tuttle vs C2-Kilius-Reach
  110          3.00   3.00  3 N      C2-Weeks-Weeks vs C4-Forsyth-Marquez-Olson
  110          3.00   3.00  3 N      C4-Eckhout-Draves vs C1-Cann-Silverman
  110          3.00   3.00  3 N      C7-Lang-Anand vs C7-Chakrabarti-Carrier
        140    0.50   5.50  3♠ W      C3-Anderson-Salvatore vs C6-Iobbi-Roper
        140    0.50   5.50  2♠ W +1   C6-Matthews-Haas vs C5-Fitzgerald-Steward
26 ♠QT2
J8754
75
♣QT9
Dlr: East
Vul: Both
♠KJ5
AK2
AQT94
♣J2
♠A98643
3
J82
♣864
♠7
QT96
K63
♣AK753
5
185
12
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1♣ 2  ♦3 ♠3 NT4
EW: 4 4♠ 2NT  ♣6 ♥5
LoTT: 18 - 18 = 0
Par: -620 4♠-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  200          6.00   0.00  3 N -1   C1-Mendel-Tuttle vs C2-Kilius-Reach
  110          5.00   1.00  2 N      C2-Weeks-Weeks vs C4-Forsyth-Marquez-Olson
  100          4.00   2.00  4 W -1   C3-Anderson-Salvatore vs C6-Iobbi-Roper
        100    3.00   3.00  3 N -1   C4-Eckhout-Draves vs C1-Cann-Silverman
        110    2.00   4.00  3 W      C5-Vandiver-Vandiver vs C3-Butler-Torres
        140    1.00   5.00  2♠ E +1   C6-Matthews-Haas vs C5-Fitzgerald-Steward
        170    0.00   6.00  3♠ E +1   C7-Lang-Anand vs C7-Chakrabarti-Carrier
27 ♠K864
QJT6
KT9
♣T4
Dlr: South
Vul: None
♠J32
5
J85
♣KQ9873
♠AT5
K873
6432
♣J6
♠Q97
A942
AQ7
♣A52
9
78
16
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3 4 3♠ 4NT  ♣6
EW: 1♣  ♦4 ♥3 ♠3 NT3
LoTT: 17 - 16 = +1
Par: +430 4NT-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  450          6.00   0.00  2 S +1   C1-Mendel-Tuttle vs C2-Kilius-Reach
  420          5.00   1.00  4 S      C5-Vandiver-Vandiver vs C3-Butler-Torres
  400          3.50   2.50  3N S      C2-Weeks-Weeks vs C4-Forsyth-Marquez-Olson
  400          3.50   2.50  3N S      C4-Eckhout-Draves vs C1-Cann-Silverman
  140          2.00   4.00  3 S      C6-Matthews-Haas vs C5-Fitzgerald-Steward
         50    1.00   5.00  4 S -1   C3-Anderson-Salvatore vs C6-Iobbi-Roper
        100    0.00   6.00  4 S -2   C7-Lang-Anand vs C7-Chakrabarti-Carrier
28 ♠AJ
J742
QJ7
♣AQ65
Dlr: West
Vul: N-S
♠954
AT63
985
♣JT9
♠QT763
KQ5
A632
♣2
♠K82
98
KT4
♣K8743
15
511
9
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 4♣ 1 2/1 3NT  ♠6
EW: 1♠  ♣3 ♦5 ♥5 NT4
LoTT: 17 - 17 = 0
Par: +500 4♠*-EW-3
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  630          5.92   0.08  3N N +1   C3-Anderson-Salvatore vs C6-Iobbi-Roper
  600          4.75   1.25  3N N      C7-Lang-Anand vs C7-Chakrabarti-Carrier
  150          3.00   3.00  2N N +2   C1-Mendel-Tuttle vs C2-Kilius-Reach
  150          3.00   3.00  1N N +2   C5-Vandiver-Vandiver vs C3-Butler-Torres
  130          0.67   5.33  2♣ N +2   C2-Weeks-Weeks vs C4-Forsyth-Marquez-Olson
  130          0.67   5.33  2♣ N +2   C6-Matthews-Haas vs C5-Fitzgerald-Steward