- Thursday Aft - August 1, 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: 87 MP  Geomean: 26 MP
(based on 14 players, 2 non ACBL players ignored)
★ ★ ★  Masterpoint Winners  ★ ★ ★
Partnership Pct Rank MP
Mark Eckhout - Tim Rea 64.37 1st A 0.64
Barbara Fitzgerald - Susan Lang 61.42 2nd A 0.45
Carol Bartlett - Kathy Masi 58.10 3rd A 0.32
Katarina Bernbaum - Miki Thompson 55.42 1st B 0.30
Inge Schroeder - Robert Carrier 49.65 2nd B 0.21
EVENT>299er Pairs              |SESSION>Thursday Aft |SECTION> B
------------------------,------ ------------,-------- --------------------------
DATE>August 1, 2019     |CLUB NO.>131102    | 08/01/2019 15:32
---------------------,-- ------------------- -------------,---------------------
DIR> Gruber          |RATING>Club Masterpoint (80%, 60%, 50% Open)|MOVEMENT>ONE WINNER
------------,-------- ,-------------------------,--------- ---------------------
AVE>   30.0 |TOP>   3 |MP LIMITS>300/100/20     |CLUB>Ventura Unit Bridge Club
------------ --------- ------------------------- -------------------------------
PAIRS IN STRAT A=8/B=5/C=3                       ,---,-------------------------,------,---------,
-------------------------------------------------|   |           Section       |      |Section  |
No Name                   Name                   |Flt|Rnk-A|Rnk-B|Rnk-C| Score | Pct  |Awards   |
------------------------------------------------- --- ----- ----- ----- ------- ------ ---------
 1 Miki Thompson          Katarina Bernbaum        C    .     1     1     33.25  55.42  0.30(B)
 2 Sandy Klein            Jeff Steward             B    .     .     .     24.74  41.23
 3 Kathy Thomson          Patricia Torres          B    .     .     .     22.81  38.02
 4 Tim Rea                Mark Eckhout             A    1     .     .     38.62  64.37  0.64(A)
 5 Barbara Fitzgerald     Susan Lang               A    2     .     .     36.85  61.42  0.45(A)
 6 Robert Carrier         Inge Schroeder           C    .     2     .     29.79  49.65  0.21(B)
 7 Carol Bartlett         Kathy Masi               A    3     .     .     34.86  58.10  0.32(A)
 8 Nancy Maclean          Ken Webster              C    .     .     .     29.68  49.47
                                          Totals                         250.60

Hands and Results
1 ♠42
KT95
AQ4
♣QT73
Dlr: North
Vul: None
♠AT8753
Q3
97
♣KJ9
♠J9
J86
KJ53
♣A642
♠KQ6
A742
T862
♣85
11
1010
9
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1/- 1  ♣6 ♦7/6 ♠4 NT5
EW: 1♣ 3♠ 1NT  ♦6 ♥6
LoTT: 16 - 16 = 0
Par: -140 3♠-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  110          3.00   0.00  2 S      B8-Maclean-Webster vs B1-Thompson-Bernbaum
    PASS       2.00   1.00  Pass Out  B5-Fitzgerald-Lang vs B6-Carrier-Schroeder
        120    1.00   2.00  1N E +1   B2-Klein-Steward vs B4-Rea-Eckhout
        160    0.00   3.00  1♠* W     B3-Thomson-Torres vs B7-Bartlett-Masi

Michael Berkowitz Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
 PassPassPass
2DblPass3
All pass   

Is 11 the new 12 for opening bids? Possibly. I open a lot of 11 counts and this North hand has some charm - two 10s and a little shape, but I`d rather have a five-card suit or something that looks like a potential source of tricks (QJ109). East has an easy pass, and South is in third chair. People will almost certainly open this, but I think it`s wrong. I prefer to treat third seat openings as a chance to overcall; you should be doing it either because you have a suit you want partner to lead or want to compete in the auction or want to preempt your opponents. Opening hands with flat 9 counts will yield a lot of 1NT down 2 when the opponents might make 1NT, go down, or pass out the hand. On this hand, West might choose whether to open or not based on casino count (high card points + spades) or CRIFS (Cohen`s Rule in Fourth Seat-- look left and right and if you think you will do better by playing, bid). If West does open, 2 is a better choice than 1 since it might buy the auction. A fourth-seat 2 bid isn`t preemptive, it shows 10-15 and 6 spades. The rest of the auction is a guess. North might feel her hand is worth a takeout double, and if so, South will compete to 3. Should East do anything? Not likely.

The play in hearts will not be particularly fun for South as she has to lose two diamonds, two clubs, one heart and one spade. Of course, I know some Wests will lead the ace of spades, costing the defense a trick as unsupported ace leads often do. If East-West play the hand in spades, declarer can make 9 tricks fairly easily since most leads from North will give away a trick. Without a helpful lead, declarer can pitch a club loser on a diamond herself.



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

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

CLICK HERE or email me directly at michael@larryco.com

2 ♠T9
984
JT
♣JT8743
Dlr: East
Vul: N-S
♠82
T5
AK732
♣KQ96
♠AKJ643
K732
85
♣A
♠Q75
AQJ6
Q964
♣52
2
1215
11
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣5 ♦3 ♥5 ♠2 NT3
EW: 2♣ 4/3 2 4♠ 4/3NT
LoTT: 15 - 16 = -1
Par: -430 4NT-E
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
   50          3.00   0.00  4♠ E -1   B5-Fitzgerald-Lang vs B6-Carrier-Schroeder
        420    2.00   1.00  4♠ E      B8-Maclean-Webster vs B1-Thompson-Bernbaum
        450    0.50   2.50  4♠ E +1   B2-Klein-Steward vs B4-Rea-Eckhout
        450    0.50   2.50  4♠ E +1   B3-Thomson-Torres vs B7-Bartlett-Masi

Michael Berkowitz Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
  1Pass
2Pass2Pass
2NTPass3Pass
3NTAll pass  

West`s hand is just good enough to make a game-forcing bid in a Two Over One Game Force system. East should show hearts before rebidding spades to show a specific pattern of 6-4. Now West has to choose whether to play in 3NT or 4. At matchpoints, opting for 3NT is reasonable and partner could also convert 3NT to 4.

On the likely club lead, declarer must not cash the A before crossing to dummy! There are a couple of reasons for this, but the biggest is that if you do and then the finesse loses, you can no longer reach the East hand. (The other is that a 4-1 split with a stiff queen will cause a similar problem anyway). South probably wishes she could telepathically ask partner for a heart lead, but that`s not how life works. If the East-West pair plays in spades, declarer can cash the A and then go to dummy to finesse.



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

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

CLICK HERE or email me directly at michael@larryco.com

3 ♠KJ8
62
A85
♣QJT52
Dlr: South
Vul: E-W
♠Q974
KQJ4
KQ2
♣83
♠A63
875
J763
♣K94
♠T52
AT93
T94
♣A76
11
138
8
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3♣ 1 1 3NT  ♠6
EW:  ♣4 ♦6 ♥6 ♠6 NT4
LoTT: 15 - 15 = 0
Par: +400 3NT-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  300          2.00   1.00  2N E -3   B2-Klein-Steward vs B4-Rea-Eckhout
  300          2.00   1.00  3 W -3   B5-Fitzgerald-Lang vs B6-Carrier-Schroeder
  300          2.00   1.00  2 E -3   B3-Thomson-Torres vs B7-Bartlett-Masi
         90    0.00   3.00  1N E      B8-Maclean-Webster vs B1-Thompson-Bernbaum

Michael Berkowitz Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
   Pass
1Pass1NTAll pass

West opens 1, and North passes--I don't particularly like overcalling with such a middling suit and only 11 points on the two-level. East bids 1NT and after two passes, the auction reverts to North. Is now the time for 2? It's close, but this auction usually means that the responder (East) has clubs, which might scare me off. An additional consideration is the vulnerability. With your opponents vulnerable, you will score better defeating a contract than making 2.

South will likely lead a major-suit, and declarer will have to do a lot of work. North should switch to clubs whenever she eventually gets in, and declarer might guess how to block the suit (ducking twice). The results will be all over the place, but down one seems most likely. The double dummy says N-S can make 3NT, but that's an analysis you can completely ignore unless you enjoy those kind of problems.



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

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

CLICK HERE or email me directly at michael@larryco.com

4 ♠KQJ
T65
QT932
♣97
Dlr: West
Vul: Both
♠A53
KQ82
KJ865
♣4
♠962
A3
4
♣AKJ8653
♠T874
J974
A7
♣QT2
8
1312
7
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣2 ♦4 ♥5 ♠5 NT2
EW: 4♣ 3 2 2♠ 2NT
LoTT: 15 - 15 = 0
Par: -130 4♣-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  300          3.00   0.00  3N W -3   B5-Fitzgerald-Lang vs B6-Carrier-Schroeder
  200          2.00   1.00  3N W -2   B8-Maclean-Webster vs B1-Thompson-Bernbaum
  100          1.00   2.00  3N W -1   B2-Klein-Steward vs B4-Rea-Eckhout
        110    0.00   3.00  3 W      B3-Thomson-Torres vs B7-Bartlett-Masi

Michael Berkowitz Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
1Pass2Pass
2Pass3Pass
3NTAll pass  

West opens 1 and East has only 12 HCP, but way too much playing strength not to Game Force . After 2, West could try 2. The West hand is unbalanced enough to want to explore for a minor-suit game or slam and 2 will convince partner of shape later on (even if she will think you might be 6-4). Now partner's rebid of 3 will usually deny a four-card major and 3NT seems the likely spot.

This hand shows the problem with misfits as 3NT is going down on a normal-looking spade lead. Is it possible to make? Sure, if North doesn't lead a spade or if the defenders don't signal carefully at the end, then declarer may sneak by. Expect a hard-earned bad result if your opponents are in 3NT making.



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

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

CLICK HERE or email me directly at michael@larryco.com

5 ♠Q9874
83
KT
♣AJT4
Dlr: North
Vul: N-S
♠5
KT7
AQJ8652
♣73
♠AKJ632
J42
4
♣865
♠T
AQ965
973
♣KQ92
10
109
11
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3♣ 1  ♦4/5 ♠6 NT6
EW: 2 1♠  ♣4 ♥6 NT6
LoTT: 17 - 16 = +1
Par: +100 3*-EW-1
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  150          2.17   0.83  5 W -3   B3-Thomson-Torres vs B5-Fitzgerald-Lang
  150          2.17   0.83  5 W -3   B6-Carrier-Schroeder vs B7-Bartlett-Masi
   50          0.17   2.83  3 W -1   B8-Maclean-Webster vs B2-Klein-Steward

Michael Berkowitz Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
 Pass2Dbl
33NTAll pass 

If bridge players say they never wind up in bad contracts, they're either lying or cheating. After a 2 opening, South could pass or bid 3. Pass could miss out on game if West raises spades, and 3 could go for a big number. Double is the most flexible option. West should bid 3, although you need partnership agreement for what bids in the auction should mean. Some play it would promise spade support, others don't. I might do it anyway and rebid diamonds if my partner bid more spades. North has to make a guess. 3NT could be right, and partner should have something in diamonds, right?

Dummy comes down, and yikes! This is a ridiculous contract. I count 6 tricks for the declarer. Mostly, North will hope her opponents give some tricks away at some point, but it is an ugly looking spot. Whenever in a bad contract, don't give up. The difference between down two and down three could be a lot of matchpoints on this board. I would think -100 for N-S might be an okay score.



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

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

CLICK HERE or email me directly at michael@larryco.com

6 ♠8762
76
AKT65
♣Q6
Dlr: East
Vul: E-W
♠93
AQT
J8432
♣982
♠AQT54
J43
9
♣AJ53
♠KJ
K9852
Q7
♣KT74
9
712
12
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1  ♣5 ♥6 ♠5 NT5
EW: 2♣ 2♠ 1/-NT
       ♦5 ♥6 NT7/6
LoTT: 15 - 14 = +1
Par: -110 2♠-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  100          2.83   0.17  3♠ E -1   B6-Carrier-Schroeder vs B7-Bartlett-Masi
        100    0.83   2.17  2 S -2   B3-Thomson-Torres vs B5-Fitzgerald-Lang
        100    0.83   2.17  2 S -2   B8-Maclean-Webster vs B2-Klein-Steward

Michael Berkowitz Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
  1Pass
1NTPass2Pass
2All pass  

I love light overcalls, but there are some important ideas for when it's okay to make them. Good times for light overcalls are when you are on the one-level, when you (and/or partner) are passed hands, or when you know the opponents are going to a game. The South hand has some strength, but the terrible suit quality should prevent you from making noise. Is 2 the worst bid ever? No. It's a matter of style, but I prefer the pass shown. After a semi-forcing 1NT pass 2, you might try to bid 2 now, but pass is still fine when the opponents could be going anywhere. A preference back to 2 (technically a false-preference, but playing in spades looks better from West's perspective) returns the auction to South in balancing-seat. Am I really going to pass three times with a five-card suit and a 12 count? Yup. The opponents likely have only 7 trumps, which speaks to playing defense.

South will probably lead a low heart, and declarer will have some issues. After winning in dummy and running the 9, another heart may force declarer to try to drop a spade honor. If not, North can potentially get a heart ruff. All sorts of results are possible and this is a classic matchpoint board where any plus score should be good.



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

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

CLICK HERE or email me directly at michael@larryco.com

7 ♠T54
Q8
985
♣JT543
Dlr: South
Vul: Both
♠8
AK5
KQT43
♣AQ98
♠K932
T9764
AJ7
♣K
♠AQJ76
J32
62
♣762
3
1811
8
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣4 ♦2 ♥2 ♠5 NT2
EW: 3♣ 5 5 2♠ 5/4NT
LoTT: 16 - 16 = 0
Par: -660 5NT-E
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
        200    2.83   0.17  3 E +2   B8-Maclean-Webster vs B2-Klein-Steward
        600    1.50   1.50  5 W      B3-Thomson-Torres vs B5-Fitzgerald-Lang
        690    0.17   2.83  3N W +3   B6-Carrier-Schroeder vs B7-Bartlett-Masi

Michael Berkowitz Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
   Pass
1Pass11
Dbl1Pass3Pass
4All pass  
  1. Support Double(s)

After P 1 P 1, South should overcall. I listed some criteria for light overcalls on the prior board, and this meets two of my preferred situations-- it's on the one-level, and you are a passed hand. West makes a Support Double and East has some tough choices to make. How much is that hand worth? The K isn't a great holding, and might lead you to think about notrump, but the singleton club is a problem. I think 3 is about right. West might bid 3 on the way to game, but East's lousy trumps will probably convince her to sign off in 4.

This is one of those hands where it's hard to imagine anyone in a heart contract not taking exactly 11 tricks. That said, I've been surprised before. I think anyone taking more tricks probably has a funny story and anyone taking fewer has a sad one.



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

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

CLICK HERE or email me directly at michael@larryco.com

8 ♠AJ97
82
AQ4
♣K732
Dlr: West
Vul: None
♠-
A97654
K76
♣Q986
♠KT632
KQJ3
T52
♣J
♠Q854
T
J983
♣AT54
14
910
7
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3♣ 2 2♠  ♥4 NT6
EW: 3 1NT  ♣4 ♦5 ♠5
LoTT: 18 - 18 = 0
Par: -100 3♠*-NS/4♣*-NS-1
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
   50          2.83   0.17  4 W -1   B8-Maclean-Webster vs B2-Klein-Steward
        140    1.50   1.50  2 W +1   B6-Carrier-Schroeder vs B7-Bartlett-Masi
        420    0.17   2.83  4 W      B3-Thomson-Torres vs B5-Fitzgerald-Lang

Michael Berkowitz Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
2Dbl4?

This 2 bid breaks the "rule" about not opening a preempt with a void, but rules aren't important when it comes to preempts. The only thing that's important is style, and you want to make sure your partner understands what to expect regarding your style. Some players open very light in some seats and very sound in others, or open very light 3-level preempts, but sound 2-level preempts. In most of my partnerships, this West hand looks like a non-vulnerable first seat preempt. North doubles and East bids 4. Now what? South is a little light for 4, but has some shape.

If South passes, 4 is touch-and-go. North might lead a club and now finding all of the defense's tricks isn't clear. It turns out that the defenders need to play very passively to defeat this contract, but the dummy doesn't make that immediately clear. If South bids to 4, East is probably going to double. Notice how important it is for the preempter to let partner decide what to do. Preempting and bidding again is almost never right. Spades will not be fun for declarer.



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

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

CLICK HERE or email me directly at michael@larryco.com

9 ♠KJ8
AT7
T983
♣976
Dlr: North
Vul: E-W
♠AQ654
632
A
♣AQT2
♠T9732
Q984
Q7
♣K3
♠-
KJ5
KJ6542
♣J854
8
167
9
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2 1NT  ♣6 ♥5 ♠4
EW: 1♣ 1 2♠  ♦5 NT6
LoTT: 16 - 20 = -4
Par: -100 2NT*-NS/3*-NS-1
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  300          2.83   0.17  5♠ W -3   B4-Rea-Eckhout vs B6-Carrier-Schroeder
  200          0.83   2.17  4♠ W -2   B7-Bartlett-Masi vs B1-Thompson-Bernbaum
  200          0.83   2.17  4♠ W -2   B8-Maclean-Webster vs B3-Thomson-Torres

Michael Berkowitz Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
 PassPass2
233Pass
4All pass  

Another unusual looking preempt, but in third-seat the range for preempts is wide. At third-seat favorable, anything could be going on. West bids 2 and North raises diamonds. With such a flat hand and defense in spades, it's not worth jumping to 4. East raises to 3 (again, flat hands with some defense shouldn't make preemptive jumps) and West will bid 4.

Unfortunately for declarer, there are three heart tricks and two spade tricks that the defense will always win (unless declarer takes a club finesse for some reason, which is unlikely). The best results for N-S will be for those pairs who played against East-Wests in love with vulnerability attempting to sacrifice in 5. Sacrifices are always iffy, but doing it when your hand has defense (as both North and South do) can lead to a lot of -300 against the opponent's part score.



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

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

CLICK HERE or email me directly at michael@larryco.com

10 ♠4
AKQ42
A9842
♣62
Dlr: East
Vul: Both
♠AK8
J983
76
♣AJ54
♠J9752
6
KJ
♣KQT97
♠QT63
T75
QT53
♣83
13
1310
4
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3 2  ♣2 ♠3 NT4
EW: 5♣ 4♠ 3NT  ♦4 ♥5
LoTT: 20 - 18 = +2
Par: -500 5*-NS-2
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  200          2.83   0.17  3♠ E -2   B7-Bartlett-Masi vs B1-Thompson-Bernbaum
        150    1.50   1.50  3♣ W +2   B8-Maclean-Webster vs B3-Thomson-Torres
        500    0.17   2.83  4* N -2  B4-Rea-Eckhout vs B6-Carrier-Schroeder

Michael Berkowitz Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
  1Pass
223Pass
4All pass  

Another hand where style matters. The East hand is certainly light. I considered showing pass here, but I think the devil on my shoulder would convince me to open. Once that happens, partner is going to force to 4. If East shows more discretion and passes, after a third seat 1 opening, North's 2NT might keep the E-W pair out of spades. The North hand presents an interesting case for whether or not to make a two-suited bid. On the auction shown, it might be best to bid hearts to convey to partner where you live (not to mention showing the lead you prefer). If West opens 1 instead, you might bid unusual 2NT to give partner more of a choice.

In 4, the play is complicated. but it will likely go down at least one due to the bad split in the spade suit. It's actually a decent contract. You'll hear phrases like that all the time in bridge writing (or conversation), but I know some people have no idea why a contract is decent or not. The primary thing to consider is whether you'd like to be in that contract looking only at the declarer/dummy hands. Here, declarer thinks she will lose one spade (and the Q might drop), one heart, and hopefully only one diamond. It's far from a cold contract (one that will always make), but it will make a lot of the time.



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

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

CLICK HERE or email me directly at michael@larryco.com

11 ♠KT8742
AJ74
93
♣J
Dlr: South
Vul: None
♠AQ653
KT
AQ842
♣5
♠9
Q653
J65
♣KQ843
♠J
982
KT7
♣AT9762
9
158
8
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1♠  ♣6 ♦4/5 ♥6 NT6
EW: 1/-♣ 2 1NT  ♣7/6 ♥6 ♠6
LoTT: 15 - 15 = 0
Par: -90 1NT-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  800          2.83   0.17  3♠* W -4  B8-Maclean-Webster vs B3-Thomson-Torres
  140          1.50   1.50  2 N +1   B7-Bartlett-Masi vs B1-Thompson-Bernbaum
  110          0.17   2.83  3♣ S      B4-Rea-Eckhout vs B6-Carrier-Schroeder
12 ♠KT87
QJ
AK72
♣854
Dlr: West
Vul: N-S
♠AJ965
T2
JT96
♣Q6
♠Q4
A98
Q854
♣AJT3
♠32
K76543
3
♣K972
13
813
6
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2  ♣6 ♦4 ♠5 NT5
EW: 2 2NT  ♣6 ♥4 ♠6
LoTT: 16 - 16 = 0
Par: -120 2NT-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  110          2.83   0.17  2♠ N      B4-Rea-Eckhout vs B6-Carrier-Schroeder
  100          1.50   1.50  2♠ W -2   B8-Maclean-Webster vs B3-Thomson-Torres
   90          0.17   2.83  1N N      B7-Bartlett-Masi vs B1-Thompson-Bernbaum
13 ♠AJ73
J2
765
♣K654
Dlr: North
Vul: Both
♠T854
A8654
T2
♣72
♠Q62
QT973
A84
♣T9
♠K9
K
KQJ93
♣AQJ83
9
48
19
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 5♣ 5 2♠ 1NT  ♥5
EW: 1  ♣1 ♦2 ♠5 NT6
LoTT: 18 - 19 = -1
Par: +600 5-NS/5♣-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  150          2.83   0.17  2♣ S +3   B1-Thompson-Bernbaum vs B2-Klein-Steward
  120          1.50   1.50  1N S +1   B8-Maclean-Webster vs B4-Rea-Eckhout
        100    0.17   2.83  2N N -1   B6-Carrier-Schroeder vs B3-Thomson-Torres
14 ♠AK7
QJ85
A52
♣T54
Dlr: East
Vul: None
♠J82
2
KQT86
♣KQ63
♠Q63
96
J974
♣J987
♠T954
AKT743
3
♣A2
14
114
11
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 5 5♠ 4NT  ♣6 ♦5
EW: 1♣ 2  ♥2 ♠1 NT2
LoTT: 19 - 19 = 0
Par: +450 5♠-NS/5-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  450          2.17   0.83  4 S +1   B1-Thompson-Bernbaum vs B2-Klein-Steward
  450          2.17   0.83  4 S +1   B6-Carrier-Schroeder vs B3-Thomson-Torres
  420          0.17   2.83  4 S      B8-Maclean-Webster vs B4-Rea-Eckhout
15 ♠KT864
9865
AJ4
♣K
Dlr: South
Vul: N-S
♠A5
AKQ4
7
♣T76542
♠QJ2
J7
KT9853
♣A3
♠973
T32
Q62
♣QJ98
11
1311
5
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣4 ♦3 ♥4 ♠5 NT4/3
EW: 3♣ 3 2 2♠ 2NT
LoTT: 14 - 16 = -2
Par: -120 2NT-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
   50          2.17   0.83  3 W -1   B1-Thompson-Bernbaum vs B2-Klein-Steward
   50          2.17   0.83  4♣ W -1   B6-Carrier-Schroeder vs B3-Thomson-Torres
        130    0.17   2.83  3♣ W +1   B8-Maclean-Webster vs B4-Rea-Eckhout
16 ♠K985
KQ6
T3
♣QT65
Dlr: West
Vul: E-W
♠A432
T432
J5
♣K72
♠QJ6
75
AK8762
♣83
♠T7
AJ98
Q94
♣AJ94
10
810
12
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3♣ 2 1♠ 1NT  ♦5
EW: 2  ♣4 ♥5 ♠6 NT5
LoTT: 17 - 16 = +1
Par: +110 2-NS/3♣-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  110          2.83   0.17  1 S +1   B6-Carrier-Schroeder vs B3-Thomson-Torres
  100          1.50   1.50  2 E -1   B1-Thompson-Bernbaum vs B2-Klein-Steward
         50    0.17   2.83  3 S -1   B8-Maclean-Webster vs B4-Rea-Eckhout
17 ♠7
KQT43
T97
♣Q632
Dlr: North
Vul: None
♠KT32
A9
J65
♣AK95
♠9854
75
KQ82
♣T87
♠AQJ6
J862
A43
♣J4
7
155
13
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2 1NT  ♣6 ♦6 ♠5
EW: 1♣ 2♠  ♦6 ♥4 NT6
LoTT: 16 - 17 = -1
Par: -100 2NT*-NS/3*-NS-1
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  110          1.95   1.65  2 N      B8-Maclean-Webster vs B5-Fitzgerald-Lang
         50    1.65   1.95  3 S -1   B7-Bartlett-Masi vs B4-Rea-Eckhout
18 ♠Q74
AT9
QT743
♣J3
Dlr: East
Vul: N-S
♠AJT52
KQ8
K8
♣T72
♠K8
J642
J962
♣KQ8
♠963
753
A5
♣A9654
9
1310
8
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣5 ♦5 ♥3 ♠3 NT3
EW: 2♣ 2 3 3♠ 3NT
LoTT: 14 - 14 = 0
Par: -400 3NT-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
         90    1.80   1.80  1N E      B7-Bartlett-Masi vs B4-Rea-Eckhout
         90    1.80   1.80  1N E      B8-Maclean-Webster vs B5-Fitzgerald-Lang
19 ♠JT3
Q653
83
♣A873
Dlr: South
Vul: E-W
♠A82
K842
KQ4
♣965
♠Q9754
T7
952
♣KJ4
♠K6
AJ9
AJT76
♣QT2
7
126
15
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2♣ 1 1/2  ♠5 NT6
EW: 1♠  ♣5 ♦5 ♥5 NT6
LoTT: 15 - 15 = 0
Par: +110 2-N
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
   90          1.95   1.65  1N S      B8-Maclean-Webster vs B5-Fitzgerald-Lang
         50    1.65   1.95  1N S -1   B7-Bartlett-Masi vs B4-Rea-Eckhout
20 ♠QT653
K32
82
♣AQ6
Dlr: West
Vul: Both
♠9842
85
AJ96
♣K97
♠K7
A64
QT7543
♣54
♠AJ
QJT97
K
♣JT832
11
89
12
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 5♣ 5 3♠  ♦5 NT6
EW: 1  ♣1 ♥2 ♠3 NT5
LoTT: 18 - 18 = 0
Par: +650 5-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  230          1.95   1.65  3 S +3   B7-Bartlett-Masi vs B4-Rea-Eckhout
  170          1.65   1.95  3 S +1   B8-Maclean-Webster vs B5-Fitzgerald-Lang
21 ♠JT65
985
T972
♣86
Dlr: North
Vul: N-S
♠742
T73
A63
♣KJ97
♠Q83
AKJ642
J
♣QT2
♠AK9
Q
KQ854
♣A543
1
813
18
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 4 1♠  ♣3 ♥3 NT3
EW: 2♣ 4/3 1NT  ♦3 ♠5/4
LoTT: 20 - 18 = +2
Par: -200 5*-NS-1
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  130          1.95   1.65  3 S +1   B7-Bartlett-Masi vs B2-Klein-Steward
        420    1.65   1.95  4 E      B1-Thompson-Bernbaum vs B5-Fitzgerald-Lang
22 ♠T9543
K975
T5
♣43
Dlr: East
Vul: E-W
♠AQ6
QT42
K873
♣T6
♠K7
83
AJ96
♣AJ982
♠J82
AJ6
Q42
♣KQ75
3
1113
13
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣4 ♦2 ♥4 ♠6 NT4
EW: 3♣ 4 3 1♠ 3NT
LoTT: 16 - 16 = 0
Par: -600 3NT-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
        600    1.80   1.80  3N W      B7-Bartlett-Masi vs B2-Klein-Steward
        600    1.80   1.80  3N E      B1-Thompson-Bernbaum vs B5-Fitzgerald-Lang
23 ♠83
A982
K8532
♣T2
Dlr: South
Vul: Both
♠AJ97
T43
A76
♣Q86
♠KQ654
KJ75
Q
♣K97
♠T2
Q6
JT94
♣AJ543
7
1114
8
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2  ♣6 ♥5 ♠3 NT5
EW: 1♣ 2 4♠ 1NT  ♦5
LoTT: 18 - 18 = 0
Par: -620 4♠-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
        140    1.95   1.65  3♠ E      B7-Bartlett-Masi vs B2-Klein-Steward
        170    1.65   1.95  3♠ E +1   B1-Thompson-Bernbaum vs B5-Fitzgerald-Lang
24 ♠KQT5
98542
A92
♣2
Dlr: West
Vul: None
♠J94
-
K643
♣AQJT85
♠6
AKQT63
87
♣K764
♠A8732
J7
QJT5
♣93
9
1112
8
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1/2 3♠  ♣1 ♥4 NT3
EW: 4♣ 3  ♦5 ♠4 NT5
LoTT: 19 - 19 = 0
Par: -100 4♠*-NS-1
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  140          1.95   1.65  3♠ S      B7-Bartlett-Masi vs B2-Klein-Steward
        400    1.65   1.95  5♣ W      B1-Thompson-Bernbaum vs B5-Fitzgerald-Lang
25 ♠982
Q6
JT7632
♣75
Dlr: North
Vul: E-W
♠QT7
AJ9
AK854
♣64
♠KJ654
8742
Q9
♣K3
♠A3
KT53
-
♣AQJT982
3
149
14
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 4♣  ♦6 ♥5 ♠4 NT5
EW: 1/- 1♠  ♣2 ♦6 ♥7/6 NT4
LoTT: 17 - 17 = 0
Par: +130 4♣-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
         50    2.83   0.17  6♣ S -1   B4-Rea-Eckhout vs B5-Fitzgerald-Lang
        140    1.50   1.50  3♠ E      B1-Thompson-Bernbaum vs B3-Thomson-Torres
        620    0.17   2.83  4♠ E      B2-Klein-Steward vs B6-Carrier-Schroeder
26 ♠4
97
AKJT42
♣AQJ3
Dlr: East
Vul: Both
♠QJ85
652
93
♣8762
♠A9
AK83
Q875
♣T54
♠KT7632
QJT4
6
♣K9
15
313
9
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3♣ 3 3 2♠ 3NT
EW:  ♣4 ♦4 ♥4 ♠5 NT4
LoTT: 13 - 14 = -1
Par: +600 3NT-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  300          2.83   0.17  1 E -3   B2-Klein-Steward vs B6-Carrier-Schroeder
  110          1.50   1.50  2♠ S      B1-Thompson-Bernbaum vs B3-Thomson-Torres
        100    0.17   2.83  3♠ S -1   B4-Rea-Eckhout vs B5-Fitzgerald-Lang
27 ♠A93
KQ92
K8753
♣2
Dlr: South
Vul: None
♠KQJT84
T
Q42
♣AQT
♠652
876
6
♣K98753
♠7
AJ543
AJT9
♣J64
12
143
11
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 6 6 1NT  ♣5 ♠3
EW: 2♣ 2♠  ♦1 ♥1 NT2
LoTT: 20 - 18 = +2
Par: +800 6♠*-EW-4
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  450          2.83   0.17  4 S +1   B4-Rea-Eckhout vs B5-Fitzgerald-Lang
  190          1.50   1.50  4 N +3   B1-Thompson-Bernbaum vs B3-Thomson-Torres
        420    0.17   2.83  4♠ W      B2-Klein-Steward vs B6-Carrier-Schroeder
28 ♠J973
AQT4
AT2
♣J4
Dlr: West
Vul: N-S
♠AKQ5
K8
9743
♣A98
♠862
52
K86
♣K6532
♠T4
J9763
QJ5
♣QT7
12
166
6
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2 1NT  ♣5 ♦6 ♠6
EW: 2♣ 1 1♠  ♥5 NT6
LoTT: 16 - 17 = -1
Par: +100 2♠*-EW/3♣*-EW-1
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
   50          1.95   1.65  3♣ W -1   B4-Rea-Eckhout vs B5-Fitzgerald-Lang
         90    1.65   1.95  2 W      B2-Klein-Steward vs B6-Carrier-Schroeder