- Saturday Morn - August 4, 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
Field strength:  Mean: 784 MP  Geomean: 444 MP
(based on 11 players, 1 non ACBL player ignored)
★ ★ ★  Masterpoint Winners  ★ ★ ★
Partnership Pct Rank MP
Carol Maggipinto - Mark Maggipinto 60.50 1st A 1.50
Jie Bai - Leon Heller 53.50 2nd A 1.13
Doris Jones - Janet Hedlund 50.50 2nd B 0.28
Carol Sendell - Jeannette Stern 48.96 2nd C 0.22
EVENT>Saturday Morning Pairs (None/1000/500)   |SESSION>Saturday Morn|SECTION> O
------------------------,------ ------------,-------- --------------------------
DATE>August 4, 2018     |CLUB NO.>150680    | 08/04/2018 13:07
---------------------,-- ------------------- -------------,---------------------
DIR> Alan Hedegard   |RATING>Club Masterpoint (100%, 80%, 80% Open)|MOVEMENT>ONE WINNER
------------,-------- ,-------------------------,--------- ---------------------
AVE>   25.0 |TOP>   2 |MP LIMITS>None/1000/500  |CLUB>H & H Saturday
------------ --------- ------------------------- -------------------------------
PAIRS IN STRAT A=6/B=5/C=4                       ,---,-------------------------,------,---------,
-------------------------------------------------|   |           Section       |      |Section  |
No Name                   Name                   |Flt|Rnk-A|Rnk-B|Rnk-C| Score | Pct  |Awards   |
------------------------------------------------- --- ----- ----- ----- ------- ------ ---------
 1 Mark Maggipinto        Carol Maggipinto         A    1     .     .     30.25  60.50  1.50(A)
 2 Bill Breen             James Pond               C    .     .     .     19.25  38.50
 3 Leon Heller            Jie Bai                  C    2     1     1     26.75  53.50  1.13(A)
 4 Jeannette Stern        Carol Sendell            C    .     .     2     24.48  48.96  0.22(C)
 5 R.Terry Handley        Louise Barnard           C    .     .     .     23.96  47.92
 6 Doris Jones            Janet Hedlund            B    .     2     .     25.25  50.50  0.28(B)
                                          Totals                         149.94

Hands and Results
1 ♠KT3
84
AT987
♣AQ8
Dlr: North
Vul: None
♠8642
AJ95
KJ3
♣94
♠AQ95
Q73
Q52
♣T63
♠J7
KT62
64
♣KJ752
13
910
8
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2♣ 1  ♥5 ♠4 NT6
EW: 2 3♠ 1NT  ♣5 ♦6
LoTT: 17 - 16 = +1
Par: -140 3♠-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
         50    1.50   0.50  2N N -1   ♠5  O5-Handley-Barnard vs O3-Heller-Bai
         50    1.50   0.50  2N N -1   ♠5  O6-Jones-Hedlund vs O1-Maggipinto-Maggipinto
        100    0.00   2.00  3N N -2   ♣3  O4-Stern-Sendell vs O2-Breen-Pond

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
 1Pass1
Pass1NTPassPass
Pass   

All the finesses work in favor of EW, but they haven't the power or distribution to get into the bidding. 3 is there for them, but that plus 140 will elude virtually everyone -- the means of getting into the action eludes my imagination. So it is on to the defense!

East will no doubt lead a spade, for the only unbid suit is clubs, and Txx is not recommended, especially when the opponents did not bid or seek a spade contract. At first blush it might appear that the spade lead gives up a trick, but it is one to which declarer is entitled, and the expenditure or the tempo bestowed by the opening lead provides an instant avenue to three spade tricks. What else good can come?

Well, declarer racks up that spade trick plus five clubs and the A, making 1NT!

But wait! The computer's double-dummy analysis says that EW, not NS, can make 1NT, and it makes no sense that by virtue of the opening lead the advantage should tilt to North! What gives?

The answer lies not in the starts but in ourselves. As attractive as the spade lead was, logic-based, it gave away a tempo. As it turns out, any lead other than a spade will provide the opportunity to defeat this contract! So much for fourth from your longest and strongest!

Sooner or later the defense must lead hearts, where the fortuitous positioning of the J9 over the T and the preponderance of heart honors for the defense will prevail.



****************************************
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 ♠AJT6
62
KT8
♣9854
Dlr: East
Vul: N-S
♠Q2
KJ4
QJ97
♣AQT7
♠K974
QT975
54
♣J6
♠853
A83
A632
♣K32
8
156
11
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣5/6 ♦6 ♥4 ♠6 NT5
EW: 1♣ 1 3 1♠ 1/2NT
LoTT: 15 - 15 = 0
Par: -140 3-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
        110    2.00   0.00  2 W      6  O4-Stern-Sendell vs O2-Breen-Pond
        140    1.00   1.00  2 W +1   2  O6-Jones-Hedlund vs O1-Maggipinto-Maggipinto
        200    0.00   2.00  2 W +3   ♣4  O5-Handley-Barnard vs O3-Heller-Bai

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
  PassPass
1NTPass2Pass
2Pass2Pass
PassPass  

Garbage Stayman at its finest! There are some who would simply transfer to hearts and be done with it. Query -- are these the same folks who open 1NT with five card majors? What if today West had opened 1NT on AJ532 84 QJ97 AK? Or even with simply a four card spade suit and still a doubleton heart? My own experiences with opening 1NT with five card majors is that all too often a major suit contract is missed when partner has a weak hand and a fit for that major. I have sworn off the bad habit.... well I admit that last week I fell from grace again, and again I was punished, missing a nine card spade fit, allowing the opponents to play 3 when our side could make ten tricks in spades. My partner had five points. . . "never again."

Back to this hand. I related those matters to show why bidding Stayman with the East hand is a good idea. If partner actually holds a major, say spades, then a good spot is assured. It is worth trying for the spade fit, I say. When partner disappoints with 2, then 2 is non-forcing and non-invitational, demanding that opener pick a major with whichever three card major he fancies. Once in a while the wrong suit is picked, but usually whichever suit is chosen is superior to playing 1NT opposite this degree of weakness.

Today it does not matter whether East transfers into 2 or Garbage Staymans it there. Either way the final contract will be 2

It would appear that plus 140s will dot the scoresheet.



****************************************
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 ♠J964
JT
T954
♣KJ9
Dlr: South
Vul: E-W
♠Q85
852
AJ876
♣86
♠T73
KQ6
Q32
♣AQT2
♠AK2
A9743
K
♣7543
6
713
14
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣5 ♦4 ♥6 ♠5 NT4/5
EW: 1/-♣ 3/2 1 1/-♠ 2NT
       ♣7/6 ♠7/6
LoTT: 15 - 15 = 0
Par: -120 2NT-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
         50    2.00   0.00  1♠ N -1   2  O4-Stern-Sendell vs O2-Breen-Pond
        150    1.00   1.00  2♠ N -3   ♠3  O5-Handley-Barnard vs O3-Heller-Bai
        200    0.00   2.00  3♠ N -4   ♠3  O6-Jones-Hedlund vs O1-Maggipinto-Maggipinto

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
   1
Pass1Pass2
Pass2PassPass
Pass   

A club lead will make declarer's lot very uncomfortable, the club honors and pattern and generally the hand as a whole being conducive to effecting and rather easy defense.

Most Norths will declare and fail, through no fault of their own. This time the fault does lie in the stars, Cassius.



****************************************
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 ♠A6
-
Q73
♣KQJT8652
Dlr: West
Vul: Both
♠T42
KT87
AJ542
♣A
♠Q98
AQ542
K98
♣43
♠KJ753
J963
T6
♣97
12
1211
5
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 4♣  ♦2 ♥2 ♠5 NT2
EW: 2/3 3 1♠ 2NT  ♣3
LoTT: 19 - 19 = 0
Par: +130 4♣-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  200          1.50   0.50  5 E -2   ♣9  O4-Stern-Sendell vs O2-Breen-Pond
  200          1.50   0.50  5 E -2   ♣9  O6-Jones-Hedlund vs O1-Maggipinto-Maggipinto
  100          0.00   2.00  4 W -1   ♠A  O5-Handley-Barnard vs O3-Heller-Bai

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
122Pass
34PassPass
4All pass  

West will take the push to 4 despite the minimum values (East's 2 was not a Game Force , of course, although showing relatively good values, it is permissible on hands in East's point range, 11 being a comfortable, permissible evaluation).

It's a rather unfortunate circumstance that even if declarer plays the hand double-dummy (or inspired), by playing the heart suit correctly, finessing or at least preserving the option to finesse against the J, while leading the J from the table (North MUST COVER!!), the combination of a 4-0 heart split plus diamond blockage, plus the long trump defender's having just two diamonds, will ultimately defeat the contract for want of transportation.

Bummer.



****************************************
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 ♠AJ952
86
T983
♣A6
Dlr: North
Vul: N-S
♠Q74
KQJ
KQJ6
♣J32
♠KT3
A53
A54
♣KQ87
♠86
T9742
72
♣T954
9
1516
0
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣2 ♦2 ♥4 ♠4 NT2
EW: 4♣ 5 3 3♠ 5NT
LoTT: 15 - 14 = +1
Par: -460 5NT-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
        460    1.00   1.00  5N E      T  O5-Handley-Barnard vs O3-Heller-Bai
        460    1.00   1.00  3N E +2   4  O4-Stern-Sendell vs O2-Breen-Pond
        460    1.00   1.00  3N E +2   4  O6-Jones-Hedlund vs O1-Maggipinto-Maggipinto

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
 Pass1NTPass
3NTPassPassPass

West has no cause to get excited about this hand beyond bidding game, and the simple auction is all that is required.

Clubs and spades need to be negotiated, and here's the scoop:

In the club suit the correct play is clearly to lead small from the West hand toward the KQ87 TWICE. The textbooks tell you that is true, as well as why, and also that the play is dependent on having ample entries elsewhere. Why, this hand could be used in the textbooks! Perfect.

That will ensure three club tricks along with the three hearts and four diamonds, and that makes ten. One spade trick will get to eleven, the best most folks can do missing two aces.

So pay attention to your textbooks and play this club suit correctly. (When you lead toward the KQxx and the king wins, that's technically a finesse. Repeat finesses that work).



****************************************
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 ♠KT4
94
T732
♣KJ42
Dlr: East
Vul: E-W
♠A96
76
K85
♣AQT97
♠532
QT85
Q94
♣865
♠QJ87
AKJ32
AJ6
♣3
7
134
16
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2♣ 3 3 3♠ 3NT
EW:  ♣5 ♦4 ♥4 ♠3 NT4
LoTT: 14 - 15 = -1
Par: +400 3NT-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  140          2.00   0.00  3 S      3  O6-Jones-Hedlund vs O2-Breen-Pond
  120          1.00   1.00  2N N      ♠3  O1-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs O5-Handley-Barnard
  110          0.00   2.00  2 S      ♣A  O4-Stern-Sendell vs O3-Heller-Bai

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
  Pass1
2PassPassDbl
PassPassPass 

If you pay attention to all of the commentators in the Common Game, there is a thread regarding overcalls at the two level, and the point of that thread is that you generally should have a six card suit, and a really good hand when vulnerable, for fear of the dreaded penalty.

Here West violated the admonition and can and should be punished. South eschews Flannery for having a bit too much in HCP -- this is a GOOD 16. When West interferes with 2, South has an easy reopening double, intended for takeout. North, having sharpened his defensive bidding skills by reading "Wielding the Axe" and "Demon Defense and Demon Doubling" by August Boehm, counts defensive tricks, trump length, side quick tricks, and shortage in partner's suit, and doubles. Having four cards in the opponent's suit is also a plus for defending.

It should not be difficult for NS to achieve eight tricks in defense, for plus 800.

West might feel aggrieved, for the typical North defender at the club level will think only in terms of finding the best contract to declare, and is not so much in tune with extracting penalties. Let's start loving defense!



****************************************
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 ♠A9876
652
62
♣K94
Dlr: South
Vul: Both
♠52
AKJ93
9543
♣76
♠KQJ4
Q
AT7
♣AJT85
♠T3
T874
KQJ8
♣Q32
7
817
8
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣3 ♦4 ♥3 ♠5/4 NT5/3
EW: 4♣ 2 3 2♠ 2NT
LoTT: 15 - 14 = +1
Par: -140 3-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  100          2.00   0.00  1N E -1   ♠T  O1-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs O5-Handley-Barnard
        150    1.00   1.00  2N E +1   ♠T  O6-Jones-Hedlund vs O2-Breen-Pond
        630    0.00   2.00  3N E +1   ♠T  O4-Stern-Sendell vs O3-Heller-Bai
8 ♠K764
K973
T8
♣QT7
Dlr: West
Vul: None
♠J985
AQ8
4
♣K9652
♠QT3
T654
Q65
♣A43
♠A2
J2
AKJ9732
♣J8
8
108
14
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 4 4NT  ♣5 ♥6 ♠6
EW: 1♣ 1♠  ♦3 ♥6 NT3
LoTT: 17 - 17 = 0
Par: +430 4NT-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  110          1.50   0.50  2 S +1   ♠9  O1-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs O5-Handley-Barnard
  110          1.50   0.50  2 S +1   ♣5  O4-Stern-Sendell vs O3-Heller-Bai
         50    0.00   2.00  3 S -1   ♣2  O6-Jones-Hedlund vs O2-Breen-Pond
9 ♠KQT63
T87
KQ862
♣-
Dlr: North
Vul: E-W
♠A98
2
AJ4
♣AQT742
♠754
KQ964
73
♣KJ8
♠J2
AJ53
T95
♣9653
10
159
6
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3 1 1♠  ♣2 NT4
EW: 4♣ 3NT  ♦4 ♥5 ♠4
LoTT: 19 - 17 = +2
Par: -100 4*-NS-1
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
        100    2.00   0.00  3 S -2   ♣A  O6-Jones-Hedlund vs O2-Breen-Pond
        110    0.50   1.50  3♣ W      ♠K  O1-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs O5-Handley-Barnard
        110    0.50   1.50  3♣ W      ♠K  O4-Stern-Sendell vs O3-Heller-Bai
10 ♠754
7
QJ8543
♣T72
Dlr: East
Vul: Both
♠AKT8
AKJT85
T2
♣J
♠Q93
932
A97
♣8643
♠J62
Q64
K6
♣AKQ95
3
166
15
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2♣ 1  ♥2 ♠2 NT2
EW: 5 5♠ 2NT  ♣5 ♦6
LoTT: 19 - 17 = +2
Par: -650 5♠-EW/5-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
        170    1.50   0.50  3 W +1   ♣T  O4-Stern-Sendell vs O3-Heller-Bai
        170    1.50   0.50  2 W +2   Q  O1-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs O5-Handley-Barnard
        620    0.00   2.00  4 W      ♣T  O6-Jones-Hedlund vs O2-Breen-Pond
11 ♠A62
T965
KQ5
♣K92
Dlr: South
Vul: None
♠QJ97
J
T72
♣AT876
♠KT85
AQ4
A963
♣Q4
♠43
K8732
J84
♣J53
12
815
5
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1  ♣4 ♦5 ♠3 NT5
EW: 3♣ 2 3♠ 2NT  ♥6
LoTT: 16 - 17 = -1
Par: -140 3♠-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  110          2.00   0.00  2 S      ♠Q  O5-Handley-Barnard vs O4-Stern-Sendell
   50          1.00   1.00  3N E -1   J  O6-Jones-Hedlund vs O3-Heller-Bai
        170    0.00   2.00  2♠ W +2   T  O2-Breen-Pond vs O1-Maggipinto-Maggipinto
12 ♠53
J7
A98763
♣T94
Dlr: West
Vul: N-S
♠QT2
5
KQT52
♣Q872
♠AJ64
AQT3
J4
♣AJ3
♠K987
K98642
-
♣K65
5
917
9
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣3 ♦5 ♥6 ♠3 NT3
EW: 4/2♣ 2 2/1 4/3♠ 4/3NT
LoTT: 16 - 15 = +1
Par: -430 4NT-E
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  100          2.00   0.00  4♠ E -2   9  O6-Jones-Hedlund vs O3-Heller-Bai
   50          1.00   1.00  3N E -1   6  O2-Breen-Pond vs O1-Maggipinto-Maggipinto
        430    0.00   2.00  3N E +1   6  O5-Handley-Barnard vs O4-Stern-Sendell
13 ♠JT8543
A4
AJ94
♣5
Dlr: North
Vul: Both
♠AK7
KT53
Q52
♣KT7
♠Q962
QJ96
3
♣J963
♠-
872
KT876
♣AQ842
10
156
9
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 5 1♠ 1NT  ♣6 ♥6
EW:  ♣5 ♦2/1 ♥6 ♠5 NT6
LoTT: 17 - 17 = 0
Par: +600 5-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  150          2.00   0.00  3 N +2   Q  O6-Jones-Hedlund vs O3-Heller-Bai
  100          1.00   1.00  3 W -1   ♣2  O2-Breen-Pond vs O1-Maggipinto-Maggipinto
        120    0.00   2.00  1N W +1   ♠J  O5-Handley-Barnard vs O4-Stern-Sendell
14 ♠9876
T75
-
♣A76543
Dlr: East
Vul: None
♠QJ3
A863
J875
♣J9
♠542
QJ9
AK63
♣KQ2
♠AKT
K42
QT942
♣T8
4
915
12
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1♣  ♦5 ♥5 ♠6 NT4
EW: 2 1/2 1♠ 2NT  ♣5/6
LoTT: 15 - 16 = -1
Par: -120 2NT-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  100          2.00   0.00  3N E -2   ♠T  O5-Handley-Barnard vs O4-Stern-Sendell
        400    1.00   1.00  3N E      4  O6-Jones-Hedlund vs O3-Heller-Bai
        430    0.00   2.00  3N E +1   T  O2-Breen-Pond vs O1-Maggipinto-Maggipinto
15 ♠6
QJT42
A96
♣AKQ2
Dlr: South
Vul: N-S
♠AK874
K96
543
♣T3
♠J3
A73
QJT87
♣964
♠QT952
85
K2
♣J875
16
108
6
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 4♣ 3 1♠  ♦6 NT6
EW: 1  ♣3 ♥3 ♠6 NT4
LoTT: 17 - 16 = +1
Par: +140 3-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  630          1.75   0.25  3N N +1   Q  O6-Jones-Hedlund vs O3-Heller-Bai
  120          0.25   1.75  1N N +1   Q  O2-Breen-Pond vs O1-Maggipinto-Maggipinto
16 ♠JT
T74
AK965
♣875
Dlr: West
Vul: E-W
♠98632
J2
J
♣QJT62
♠AQ54
AKQ83
T73
♣4
♠K7
965
Q842
♣AK93
8
515
12
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2 1NT  ♣5/6 ♥4 ♠2
EW: 1♣ 3 4♠  ♦5 NT6
LoTT: 18 - 18 = 0
Par: -500 4NT*-NS/5*-NS-3
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
   90          1.50   0.50  2 N      A  O3-Heller-Bai vs O1-Maggipinto-Maggipinto
   90          1.50   0.50  2 N      A  O6-Jones-Hedlund vs O4-Stern-Sendell
         50    0.00   2.00  3 N -1   A  O2-Breen-Pond vs O5-Handley-Barnard
17 ♠2
AT75
AT94
♣KQ86
Dlr: North
Vul: None
♠J4
9862
Q72
♣T754
♠753
KQJ4
K85
♣A93
♠AKQT986
3
J63
♣J2
13
313
11
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3♣ 4 2 5♠ 4/3NT
EW:  ♣4 ♦2/3 ♥5 ♠2 NT2
LoTT: 16 - 16 = 0
Par: +450 5♠-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  480          2.00   0.00  4♠ S +2   9  O2-Breen-Pond vs O5-Handley-Barnard
  150          1.00   1.00  1N N +2   K  O6-Jones-Hedlund vs O4-Stern-Sendell
         50    0.00   2.00  6♠ S -1   9  O3-Heller-Bai vs O1-Maggipinto-Maggipinto
18 ♠K974
AK3
KQ932
♣9
Dlr: East
Vul: N-S
♠A3
Q87
87
♣AQT654
♠QJ65
JT92
64
♣872
♠T82
654
AJT5
♣KJ3
15
124
9
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3 2♠ 2NT  ♣5/6 ♥6
EW: 1♣  ♦4 ♥6 ♠5 NT4/5
LoTT: 16 - 18 = -2
Par: +120 2NT-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  130          2.00   0.00  3 S +1   ♠A  O2-Breen-Pond vs O5-Handley-Barnard
  110          1.00   1.00  3 N      ♣2  O3-Heller-Bai vs O1-Maggipinto-Maggipinto
        240    0.00   2.00  1♣* W +1  A  O6-Jones-Hedlund vs O4-Stern-Sendell
19 ♠K65
J87
AK76
♣A53
Dlr: South
Vul: E-W
♠QJ972
A6
53
♣KJ64
♠8
95432
T942
♣Q98
♠AT43
KQT
QJ8
♣T72
15
112
12
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1♣ 3 2 1♠ 3NT
EW:  ♣5 ♦4 ♥5 ♠5 NT4
LoTT: 14 - 14 = 0
Par: +400 3NT-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  400          2.00   0.00  3N S      ♠Q  O3-Heller-Bai vs O1-Maggipinto-Maggipinto
  150          0.50   1.50  2N N +1   ♠8  O2-Breen-Pond vs O5-Handley-Barnard
  150          0.50   1.50  2N N +1   ♠8  O6-Jones-Hedlund vs O4-Stern-Sendell
20 ♠A932
62
92
♣A9876
Dlr: West
Vul: Both
♠J6
AKJ74
KQ743
♣5
♠KQ75
T98
86
♣KT42
♠T84
Q53
AJT5
♣QJ3
8
148
10
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣6 ♦4/5 ♥3 ♠5 NT4
EW: 1♣ 2 4 2♠ 3/2NT
LoTT: 16 - 16 = 0
Par: -620 4-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  100          2.00   0.00  4 W -1   9  O6-Jones-Hedlund vs O4-Stern-Sendell
        110    1.00   1.00  2 W      9  O2-Breen-Pond vs O5-Handley-Barnard
        620    0.00   2.00  4 W      6  O3-Heller-Bai vs O1-Maggipinto-Maggipinto
21 ♠T43
T8
7654
♣A986
Dlr: North
Vul: N-S
♠K95
KQ5
JT2
♣KQ52
♠J872
AJ7632
AK
♣7
♠AQ6
94
Q983
♣JT43
4
1413
9
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣5 ♦5 ♥2 ♠3 NT3
EW: 1♣ 1 4 4♠ 3NT
LoTT: 15 - 17 = -2
Par: -420 4♠-EW/4-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
   50          2.00   0.00  5 E -1   ♣J  O3-Heller-Bai vs O2-Breen-Pond
        420    0.50   1.50  4 E      6  O1-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs O4-Stern-Sendell
        420    0.50   1.50  4 E      5  O6-Jones-Hedlund vs O5-Handley-Barnard
22 ♠Q83
K43
A4
♣Q7432
Dlr: East
Vul: E-W
♠J74
8
KT652
♣KJT8
♠T2
AQJ9752
93
♣A6
♠AK965
T6
QJ87
♣95
11
811
10
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1♣ 2♠ 2/1NT  ♦6 ♥5
EW: 1 2  ♣6 ♠5 NT5
LoTT: 16 - 16 = 0
Par: +120 2NT-S
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
        140    1.00   1.00  3 E      ♠A  O1-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs O4-Stern-Sendell
        140    1.00   1.00  3 E      ♠A  O6-Jones-Hedlund vs O5-Handley-Barnard
        140    1.00   1.00  3 E      ♠K  O3-Heller-Bai vs O2-Breen-Pond
23 ♠AJT53
-
QJT984
♣AQ
Dlr: South
Vul: Both
♠76
AKT86542
K
♣64
♠K
J7
76532
♣T9875
♠Q9842
Q93
A
♣KJ32
14
104
12
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 4♣ 7 7♠ -/5NT
       ♥4 NT5/11
EW: 2  ♣2/3 ♦0 ♠0 NT0
LoTT: 21 - 20 = +1
Par: +2210 7♠-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
 1460          2.00   0.00  6♠ S +1   K  O3-Heller-Bai vs O2-Breen-Pond
 1430          1.00   1.00  6♠ S      A  O1-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs O4-Stern-Sendell
  600          0.00   2.00  5 N      J  O6-Jones-Hedlund vs O5-Handley-Barnard
24 ♠654
JT863
QJ93
♣T
Dlr: West
Vul: None
♠AJT92
Q5
T6
♣Q952
♠KQ8
A97
K42
♣KJ86
♠73
K42
A875
♣A743
4
916
11
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2 2  ♣3 ♠3 NT3
EW: 4/3♣ 2♠ 3/1NT  ♦5/4 ♥4
LoTT: 18 - 16 = +2
Par: -300 4*-NS/4*-NS-2
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
        170    2.00   0.00  3♠ E +1   2  O1-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs O4-Stern-Sendell
        420    1.00   1.00  4♠ E      ♠3  O3-Heller-Bai vs O2-Breen-Pond
        430    0.00   2.00  3N E +1   A  O6-Jones-Hedlund vs O5-Handley-Barnard
25 ♠J5
KQ2
AKT7
♣KJ64
Dlr: North
Vul: E-W
♠AT974
A87
Q98
♣T7
♠K82
T96
J43
♣9853
♠Q63
J543
652
♣AQ2
17
104
9
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3♣ 3 3 1♠ 2NT
EW:  ♣4 ♦4 ♥4 ♠6 NT4
LoTT: 15 - 15 = 0
Par: +140 3-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  400          1.00   1.00  3N N      ♣9  O1-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs O4-Stern-Sendell
  400          1.00   1.00  3N N      ♣3  O3-Heller-Bai vs O2-Breen-Pond
  400          1.00   1.00  3N N      ♣3  O6-Jones-Hedlund vs O5-Handley-Barnard