- Saturday Morn - August 10, 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
Field strength:  Mean: 627 MP  Geomean: 479 MP
(based on 11 players, 1 non ACBL player ignored)
★ ★ ★  Masterpoint Winners  ★ ★ ★
Partnership Pct Masterpoints
Joan Roberts - Keith Hedlund 56.00 2.07 Red, 2.06 Blk
Leon Heller - Patricia Heller 54.00 1.55 Red, 1.55 Blk
EVENT>Saturday Morning Pairs (None/2500/500)   |SESSION>Saturday Morn|SECTION> O
------------------------,------ ------------,-------- --------------------------
DATE>August 10, 2019    |CLUB NO.>150680    | 08/10/2019 12:47
---------------------,-- ------------------- -------------,---------------------
DIR> Alan Hedegard   |RATING>Club - North American Pairs  |MOVEMENT>ONE WINNER
------------,-------- ,-------------------------,--------- ---------------------
AVE>   25.0 |TOP>   2 |MP LIMITS>None/2500/500  |CLUB>H & H Saturday
------------ --------- ------------------------- -------------------------------
PAIRS IN STRAT A=6/B=6/C=1                       ,---,------------,-----------------,-------------------------,------,---------,
-------------------------------------------------|   | Qualifiers |      Overall    |           Section       |      |Final    |
No Name                   Name                   |Flt| A   B   C  |Rnk-A|Rnk-B|Rnk-C|Rnk-A|Rnk-B|Rnk-C| Score | Pct  |Awards   |
------------------------------------------------- --- ------------ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ------- ------ ---------
 1 Barbara Callaway       Jeff Weed                C           Q    .     .     .   |   .     .     .     20.50  41.00
 2 Patricia Heller        Leon Heller              B   Q   Q        2     2     .   |   2     2     .     27.00  54.00  1.55Red
                                                                                                                        1.55Blk
 3 Janet Hedlund          Donna Jett               B                .     .     .   |   .     .     .     23.00  46.00
 4 Charles Rauch          Alan Hedegard            B   Q   Q        .     .     .   |   .     .     .     26.50  53.00
 5 Jeannette Stern        Carol Sendell            B   Q   Q        .     .     .   |   .     .     .     25.00  50.00
 6 Joan Roberts           Keith Hedlund            B   Q   Q        1     1     .   |   1     1     .     28.00  56.00  2.07Red
                                                                                                                        2.06Blk
                                          Totals                                                         150.00

Hands and Results
1 ♠Q3
J752
KT864
♣KT
Dlr: North
Vul: None
♠AT72
Q9
A7
♣QJ542
♠KJ95
AK63
92
♣A86
♠864
T84
QJ53
♣973
9
1315
3
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣1 ♦5 ♥2 ♠1 NT1
EW: 6♣ 2 4 6♠ 4NT
LoTT: 17 - 17 = 0
Par: -980 6♠-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
        400    2.00   0.00  3N E      Q  O6-Roberts-Hedlund vs O1-Callaway-Weed
        430    1.00   1.00  3N E +1   3  O5-Stern-Sendell vs O3-Hedlund-Jett
        480    0.00   2.00  4♠ E +2   ♠4  O4-Rauch-Hedegard vs O2-Heller-Heller

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
 Pass1NTPass
2Pass2Pass
3NTPass4All pass

With immense good fortune this game contract can actually gather in twelve tricks! To accomplish that result, declarer finds hearts breaking, find the Q (a two-way guess), and both red suits favorably distributed in the West hand to afford a losing diamond discard without preparatory work. The club suit takes care of itself without assistance, any 3-2 break holding the loss to one trick -- note that taking the finesse is not the right play, for lack of the T or 9 in the declarer's combined assets.

Bidding slam is beyond the pale. Finding the Q will be good enough for about 2/3 of the matchpoints unless South decides to lead trumps...



****************************************
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 ♠Q
AK9864
A8732
♣4
Dlr: East
Vul: N-S
♠K652
J72
J5
♣9832
♠AJ74
QT53
96
♣KQ6
♠T983
-
KQT4
♣AJT75
13
512
10
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3♣ 6 4 1♠ 3NT
EW:  ♣4 ♦0 ♥3 ♠5 NT4
LoTT: 17 - 17 = 0
Par: +1370 6-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  130          2.00   0.00  3 S +1   ♠2  O4-Rauch-Hedegard vs O2-Heller-Heller
        100    0.50   1.50  4 N -1   ♣K  O6-Roberts-Hedlund vs O1-Callaway-Weed
        100    0.50   1.50  3 N -1   ♠A  O5-Stern-Sendell vs O3-Hedlund-Jett

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
  1Pass
1Dbl23
Pass3Pass4
Pass4Pass6
All pass   

It's always fun to bid slams when the opponents are both bidding -- it takes a highly distributional hand to accomplish the feat, and both North and South think their hands fill that requirement -- North's 6-5 distribution with two singletons and control-rich long suits fills the bill from that standpoint, and South's void in one opponent's suit, four in the raised suit, an ace in the fourth and three honors in diamonds all press the "Go" button for South. Suit agreement and a handful of control bids convince South that the slam should be bid.



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

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

CLICK HERE or email me directly at rcraigh@aol.com

3 ♠J8
AKJ6
Q52
♣Q532
Dlr: South
Vul: E-W
♠AQ953
973
T3
♣AJ6
♠K76
QT42
J876
♣T9
♠T42
85
AK94
♣K874
13
116
10
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3♣ 2 1 1NT  ♠5
EW: 1♠  ♣4 ♦5 ♥6 NT6
LoTT: 16 - 16 = 0
Par: +110 3♣-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  110          1.50   0.50  3♣ S      ♠5  O6-Roberts-Hedlund vs O1-Callaway-Weed
  110          1.50   0.50  2♣ N +1   ♠7  O4-Rauch-Hedegard vs O2-Heller-Heller
   90          0.00   2.00  2♣ N      ♣T  O5-Stern-Sendell vs O3-Hedlund-Jett

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
   Pass
1Dbl2?

Without a partnership agreement, South will have to take a stab at the best contract. 3 will work, 3 not. What else is there? The only choices other than picking a suit and bidding it are pass (not to be contemplated), double, and 2NT.

Double would be "responsive," and that is a suitable call so long as partner does not believe it incorporates hearts necessarily. Getting to 3 in a 4-2 fit would be embarrassing. 2NT should be for the minors after East takes a call, not natural. It is hardly ever right to play notrump after the opponents have bid and raised a major suit (too narrow a target to try for specifically an eight trick contract and too narrow a range of stoppers in the opponents' suit). So use it either as a relay as in Lebensohl situations or for the minors.

The above considerations regarding the methods of competing for the contract against opponents who have opened the bidding and found a fit is crucial to good tournament bridge. Have a discussion with partner about this bread and butter auction -- designate a meaning for 2NT -- is it minors? A relay for picking a suit for a weak competitive hand? (Lebensohl). Does a double imply or deny specifically the unbid major (hearts?).

As usual, any agreement is better (by far!) than no agreement.



****************************************
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 ♠KJT732
J4
T83
♣Q9
Dlr: West
Vul: Both
♠98
98
QJ952
♣A854
♠Q64
KT2
AK74
♣J76
♠A5
AQ7653
6
♣KT32
7
713
13
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1♣ 4 4♠  ♦6 NT6
EW: 1 1/-NT
       ♣5 ♥3 ♠3 NT7/6
LoTT: 17 - 17 = 0
Par: +620 4♠-NS/4-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  620          1.50   0.50  4♠ N      A  O5-Stern-Sendell vs O3-Hedlund-Jett
  620          1.50   0.50  4 S      5  O6-Roberts-Hedlund vs O1-Callaway-Weed
        100    0.00   2.00  3 S -1   Q  O4-Rauch-Hedegard vs O2-Heller-Heller

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
PassPass11
22PassPass
Pass   

North's hand is really inadequate to open second seat vulnerable with a weak two bid. Better by far to keep the second seat vulnerable requirements at the very upper limits of a weak two bid (do you play 6-11 HCP weak two's, as many do? Then the wider range is only sensible if you vary the range to a narrower focus depending on position at the table and vulnerability. Second seat vulnerable should be 8+ - 11).

In any event, bidding game may be on the horizon, but basically is a very lucky make and precise play.

Plus 140 in hearts or spades is more likely.



****************************************
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 ♠-
KQJT95
KQJ4
♣Q76
Dlr: North
Vul: N-S
♠Q4
862
T7532
♣K98
♠AKT32
73
A98
♣T43
♠J98765
A4
6
♣AJ52
14
511
10
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 4♣ 1 5 1♠ 2NT
EW:  ♣2 ♦5 ♥2 ♠6 NT4
LoTT: 16 - 16 = 0
Par: +650 5-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  650          1.50   0.50  4 N +1   ♠A  O5-Stern-Sendell vs O3-Hedlund-Jett
  650          1.50   0.50  4 N +1   ♠A  O6-Roberts-Hedlund vs O1-Callaway-Weed
  170          0.00   2.00  2 N +2   ♠A  O4-Rauch-Hedegard vs O2-Heller-Heller

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
 11Pass
Pass2Pass4
All pass   

Admittedly a strange auction by South, but is there any sensible alternative? After North rebids 2, the south hand's value is clarified. With a ruffing value and a proven 8 card heart fit, along with two aces and probably few, if any, spade losers, game seems a highly probable make.

South would have preferred, perhaps, a reopening double, but North's hand is better described by a 2 rebid and leads to a better result. It is precisely the reliance on North's judged rebid that leads South to the best contract.



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

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

CLICK HERE or email me directly at rcraigh@aol.com

6 ♠AK543
K
K7
♣KQT74
Dlr: East
Vul: E-W
♠8
AT4
QT98
♣AJ532
♠QJ762
63
A65432
♣-
♠T9
QJ98752
J
♣986
18
117
4
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2/1♣ 2  ♦2 ♠4 NT5
EW: 5 1♠ 2NT  ♣5 ♥5
LoTT: 19 - 18 = +1
Par: -500 5*-NS-3
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  420          2.00   0.00  4 S      Q  O4-Rauch-Hedegard vs O3-Hedlund-Jett
  200          0.50   1.50  6* E -1  Q  O1-Callaway-Weed vs O5-Stern-Sendell
  200          0.50   1.50  5* E -1  ♠T  O6-Roberts-Hedlund vs O2-Heller-Heller
7 ♠62
96
K753
♣AJ763
Dlr: South
Vul: Both
♠T8
732
J864
♣KT52
♠3
KQJ4
AQT92
♣Q84
♠AKQJ9754
AT85
-
♣9
8
414
14
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1/- 5♠ 4/2NT
       ♣6 ♦5/4 ♥7/5
EW: 1/-♣ 2  ♣7/6 ♥5 ♠2 NT3
LoTT: 19 - 19 = 0
Par: +650 5♠-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  680          2.00   0.00  4♠ S +2   7  O6-Roberts-Hedlund vs O2-Heller-Heller
  650          1.00   1.00  4♠ S +1   J  O4-Rauch-Hedegard vs O3-Hedlund-Jett
  620          0.00   2.00  4♠ S      ♣2  O1-Callaway-Weed vs O5-Stern-Sendell
8 ♠AT32
J8742
42
♣K5
Dlr: West
Vul: None
♠KJ86
AK9
73
♣AT62
♠Q4
-
KJ986
♣QJ8743
♠975
QT653
AQT5
♣9
8
159
8
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2  ♣3 ♦6 ♠6 NT5
EW: 3♣ 1 1♠ 1NT  ♥4
LoTT: 17 - 20 = -3
Par: -100 3*-NS-1
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  100          1.00   1.00  3N W -2   4  O1-Callaway-Weed vs O5-Stern-Sendell
  100          1.00   1.00  5♣ W -2   ♠A  O6-Roberts-Hedlund vs O2-Heller-Heller
  100          1.00   1.00  5♣ E -2   ♣9  O4-Rauch-Hedegard vs O3-Hedlund-Jett
9 ♠AQT9
92
J96
♣Q984
Dlr: North
Vul: E-W
♠J8
AKJ743
K8
♣AJ2
♠K53
T865
Q753
♣T3
♠7642
Q
AT42
♣K765
9
175
9
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2♣ 2♠  ♦6 ♥3 NT4
EW: 4 3NT  ♣5 ♦6 ♠5
LoTT: 18 - 18 = 0
Par: -300 4♠*-NS-2
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
        170    2.00   0.00  3 W +1   9  O6-Roberts-Hedlund vs O2-Heller-Heller
        620    0.50   1.50  4 W      ♠A  O4-Rauch-Hedegard vs O3-Hedlund-Jett
        620    0.50   1.50  4 W      ♣Q  O1-Callaway-Weed vs O5-Stern-Sendell
10 ♠875
A9632
K7
♣Q94
Dlr: East
Vul: Both
♠KT3
85
AJ5
♣JT853
♠A94
KJT
QT9843
♣K
♠QJ62
Q74
62
♣A762
9
913
9
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1  ♣5 ♦3 ♠6 NT5
EW: 1♣ 4 1♠  ♥5 NT6
LoTT: 17 - 17 = 0
Par: -130 4-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  110          2.00   0.00  2 N      T  O4-Rauch-Hedegard vs O3-Hedlund-Jett
        110    1.00   1.00  3 E      ♠2  O1-Callaway-Weed vs O5-Stern-Sendell
        130    0.00   2.00  3 E +1   Q  O6-Roberts-Hedlund vs O2-Heller-Heller
11 ♠KQJT8
Q5
QT8
♣K96
Dlr: South
Vul: None
♠9
JT642
764
♣QJ85
♠64
AK987
J5
♣T743
♠A7532
3
AK932
♣A2
13
48
15
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 6 6♠ 2NT  ♣5 ♥5
EW: 1♣ 1  ♦1 ♠0 NT1
LoTT: 19 - 20 = -1
Par: +980 6♠-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  980          2.00   0.00  6♠ N      4  O6-Roberts-Hedlund vs O3-Hedlund-Jett
  510          1.00   1.00  4♠ S +3   ♣Q  O2-Heller-Heller vs O1-Callaway-Weed
  480          0.00   2.00  4♠ N +2   ♣2  O5-Stern-Sendell vs O4-Rauch-Hedegard

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
   1
Pass2NT1Pass32
Pass33Pass4NT4
Pass55Pass56
Pass67Pass6
All pass   
  1. Jacoby 2NT
  2. Singleton -- a choice
  3. waiting, not dismayed by the singleton bid
  4. 1430 RKCB
  5. 1 or 4 keycards
  6. Q?
  7. Yes, and the K

We were all taught that after a 2NT game forcing major suit raise using Jacoby 2NT that a jump to 4 of a suit showed a good five card side suit and that showing the singleton was secondary. This hand suggests that method has flaws. If South had bid 4 rather than 3, then North would have been forced to bid 4, or to adopt yet another convention where 4 would have been a generally strong bid, but without reference to hearts. That convention, popular in some circles, is known as "Last Train." The idea is that when space is limited to one bid or a signoff, the bid that is a non-signoff should show general slam interest. While a cute idea after a fashion, the lack of clarity puts me off, It would work here, for after Last Train, South would be in a position to bid 4NT. But so could he have done so directly over 2NT, so "Last Train" has little to gain.

This hand will drive to slam regardless, and the diagrammed bidding shows suggested bidding. How does South know about the Q? He does not, but the 3 bid by North suggests a hand appropriate for slam investigation, so North's judgement in selecting that bid should be sufficient encouragement to South.



****************************************
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 ♠KT73
A5
KQ5
♣AJ87
Dlr: West
Vul: N-S
♠5
T942
A9864
♣T43
♠AQJ96
KJ3
J7
♣K65
♠842
Q876
T32
♣Q92
17
415
4
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1/-♠ 1/-NT
       ♣6 ♦6/5 ♥5 ♠7/6 NT7/6
EW: 1 2  ♣6 ♠6 NT6
LoTT: 15 - 14 = +1
Par: -110 2-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
   50          2.00   0.00  2 W -1   K  O5-Stern-Sendell vs O4-Rauch-Hedegard
        110    1.00   1.00  2♠ E      6  O2-Heller-Heller vs O1-Callaway-Weed
        200    0.00   2.00  2N N -2   J  O6-Roberts-Hedlund vs O3-Hedlund-Jett
13 ♠8
A97642
83
♣K832
Dlr: North
Vul: Both
♠4
KQJT5
A54
♣T654
♠KQJT965
3
T962
♣7
♠A732
8
KQJ7
♣AQJ9
7
106
17
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 4♣ 2 3 3NT  ♠6
EW: 1♠  ♣2 ♦4 ♥4 NT4
LoTT: 17 - 16 = +1
Par: +600 3NT-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  600          2.00   0.00  3N S      T  O6-Roberts-Hedlund vs O3-Hedlund-Jett
  200          1.00   1.00  3♠ E -2   8  O2-Heller-Heller vs O1-Callaway-Weed
  150          0.00   2.00  2N S +1   K  O5-Stern-Sendell vs O4-Rauch-Hedegard
14 ♠-
QT87
9875
♣AQJ82
Dlr: East
Vul: None
♠QJ76
A9652
Q6
♣64
♠K54
KJ3
AJ32
♣T93
♠AT9832
4
KT4
♣K75
9
912
10
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2♣ 1/2 1♠ 1NT  ♥5
EW: 1  ♣4 ♦5 ♠6 NT6
LoTT: 15 - 16 = -1
Par: +90 1NT-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  100          2.00   0.00  4 W -2   ♣A  O5-Stern-Sendell vs O4-Rauch-Hedegard
         50    0.50   1.50  3♠ S -1   Q  O6-Roberts-Hedlund vs O3-Hedlund-Jett
         50    0.50   1.50  2♠ S -1   ♣6  O2-Heller-Heller vs O1-Callaway-Weed
15 ♠Q62
754
Q653
♣J65
Dlr: South
Vul: N-S
♠AJ
AKJT96
J7
♣K84
♠T875
Q32
AK
♣QT92
♠K943
8
T9842
♣A73
5
1711
7
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1  ♣1 ♥1 ♠5 NT1
EW: 5♣ 5 2♠ 4/5NT  ♦6
LoTT: 18 - 18 = 0
Par: -460 5NT-W
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
        420    1.50   0.50  4 W      ♠2  O5-Stern-Sendell vs O4-Rauch-Hedegard
        420    1.50   0.50  4 W      7  O6-Roberts-Hedlund vs O3-Hedlund-Jett
        480    0.00   2.00  4 W +2   3  O2-Heller-Heller vs O1-Callaway-Weed
16 ♠943
75
62
♣AKJ975
Dlr: West
Vul: E-W
♠KQT85
8643
943
♣2
♠AJ72
AQJT
A87
♣T4
♠6
K92
KQJT5
♣Q863
8
516
11
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 4♣ 3  ♥3 ♠4 NT6
EW: 3 3♠ 1NT  ♣3 ♦3
LoTT: 19 - 19 = 0
Par: +130 4♣-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  510          2.00   0.00  4♣* N     ♣T  O2-Heller-Heller vs O5-Stern-Sendell
  100          1.00   1.00  4♠ W -1   ♣A  O3-Hedlund-Jett vs O1-Callaway-Weed
        140    0.00   2.00  3♠ W      ♣A  O6-Roberts-Hedlund vs O4-Rauch-Hedegard
17 ♠A54
K86
T987
♣872
Dlr: North
Vul: None
♠QJ3
QJT973
K5
♣KQ
♠986
A52
32
♣JT954
♠KT72
4
AQJ64
♣A63
7
145
14
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3 2/1♠  ♣5 ♥4/5 NT5
EW: 2♣ 2  ♦4 ♠5 NT6
LoTT: 17 - 18 = -1
Par: +100 3*-EW/3♣*-EW-1
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
        140    2.00   0.00  3 W      T  O3-Hedlund-Jett vs O1-Callaway-Weed
        170    1.00   1.00  3 W +1   T  O6-Roberts-Hedlund vs O4-Rauch-Hedegard
        420    0.00   2.00  4 W      T  O2-Heller-Heller vs O5-Stern-Sendell
18 ♠3
QT73
K875
♣T852
Dlr: East
Vul: N-S
♠AKQJ9864
J6
A2
♣9
♠T72
5
T63
♣KQJ763
♠5
AK9842
QJ94
♣A4
5
156
14
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3 4  ♣5 ♠2 NT4
EW: 2♣ 4♠  ♦3 ♥3 NT6
LoTT: 20 - 21 = -1
Par: -200 5*-NS-1
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
        420    2.00   0.00  4♠ W      5  O2-Heller-Heller vs O5-Stern-Sendell
        450    0.50   1.50  4♠ W +1   Q  O3-Hedlund-Jett vs O1-Callaway-Weed
        450    0.50   1.50  4♠ W +1   ♣T  O6-Roberts-Hedlund vs O4-Rauch-Hedegard
19 ♠J9642
T843
6
♣T75
Dlr: South
Vul: E-W
♠QT3
K765
AK743
♣K
♠A87
AQJ9
85
♣AJ63
♠K5
2
QJT92
♣Q9842
1
1516
8
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣5 ♦3 ♥1 ♠3 NT2
EW: 2♣ 4/3 6 4♠ 4NT
LoTT: 17 - 16 = +1
Par: -1430 6-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  300          2.00   0.00  6 E -3   Q  O3-Hedlund-Jett vs O1-Callaway-Weed
  200          1.00   1.00  6 E -2   2  O2-Heller-Heller vs O5-Stern-Sendell
        650    0.00   2.00  4 E +1   Q  O6-Roberts-Hedlund vs O4-Rauch-Hedegard
20 ♠K8543
A8
AT3
♣973
Dlr: West
Vul: Both
♠JT
K52
Q964
♣AQ42
♠AQ62
QJ63
K72
♣K5
♠97
T974
J85
♣JT86
11
1215
2
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣3 ♦3 ♥3/2 ♠4/3 NT3/2
EW: 4♣ 4 4 3♠ 4NT
LoTT: 14 - 14 = 0
Par: -630 4NT-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
        140    2.00   0.00  2 E +1   ♠9  O3-Hedlund-Jett vs O1-Callaway-Weed
        600    1.00   1.00  3N E      ♠9  O6-Roberts-Hedlund vs O4-Rauch-Hedegard
        630    0.00   2.00  3N W +1   ♠4  O2-Heller-Heller vs O5-Stern-Sendell
21 ♠J82
7
QJT65
♣J865
Dlr: North
Vul: N-S
♠Q65
QJ854
A987
♣T
♠KT7
AK962
2
♣AQ42
♠A943
T3
K43
♣K973
5
916
10
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣6 ♦5 ♥1 ♠5 NT4
EW: 1♣ 1 6 2♠ 3NT
LoTT: 18 - 18 = 0
Par: -980 6-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
        480    1.50   0.50  4 E +2   T  O6-Roberts-Hedlund vs O5-Stern-Sendell
        480    1.50   0.50  4 E +2   ♣7  O1-Callaway-Weed vs O4-Rauch-Hedegard
        980    0.00   2.00  6 E      ♠A  O3-Hedlund-Jett vs O2-Heller-Heller

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis

West has just about the lowest high card values justifying a Splinter bid, but the distribution, trump quality, and high card quality justify using the conventional raise. West clearly wants to be in game, but simply bidding game is close to dereliction of duty in missing a potential slam.

How is this slam? An opening club lead from South makes the hand ice-cold, for a club loser disappears. Some players think that leading aces against slams is a fine idea, but let's add this hand to the considerably longer list of cases where the ace lead costs the contract.

On a red suit lead, declarer's analysis should be that only the position of the J should matter. While you and I can see that the hand can be made simply by playing a spade to the ten, let's look at a line of play designed to improve that chance:

Diamond lead, won by the ace.
Diamond ruff.
Trump to the queen.
Diamond ruff, dropping the K.
Trump to the jack.
Q.

Will South win and wonder what to do? If so, declarer calmly plays a spade to the ten and claims twelve tricks.

But South might win and shift to a club, when the spade finesse no longer matters.

In any event, the slam makes and can be bid.



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

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

CLICK HERE or email me directly at rcraigh@aol.com

22 ♠K5
T87
KJ983
♣A72
Dlr: East
Vul: E-W
♠QT73
J2
QT72
♣986
♠AJ842
A63
A
♣KT43
♠96
KQ954
654
♣QJ5
11
516
8
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1 3/2  ♣4 ♠3 NT6/5
EW: 2♣ 4♠  ♦6 ♥4 NT6
LoTT: 19 - 17 = +2
Par: -300 5*-S-2
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
         50    2.00   0.00  2 N -1   ♣3  O1-Callaway-Weed vs O4-Rauch-Hedegard
        140    0.50   1.50  3♠ E      6  O6-Roberts-Hedlund vs O5-Stern-Sendell
        140    0.50   1.50  2♠ E +1   5  O3-Hedlund-Jett vs O2-Heller-Heller
23 ♠AKT7
KJ4
8
♣AQ853
Dlr: South
Vul: Both
♠J52
872
KQ43
♣KJ6
♠Q964
A9653
AT72
♣-
♠83
QT
J965
♣T9742
17
1010
3
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 5♣ 1♠  ♦5 ♥5 NT6
EW: 2 2  ♣2 ♠6 NT4/5
LoTT: 19 - 18 = +1
Par: +600 5♣-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  300          2.00   0.00  3 E -3   ♣T  O6-Roberts-Hedlund vs O5-Stern-Sendell
  130          1.00   1.00  3♣ N +1   ♠4  O3-Hedlund-Jett vs O2-Heller-Heller
  100          0.00   2.00  3 W -1   ♠A  O1-Callaway-Weed vs O4-Rauch-Hedegard
24 ♠9865
63
AKJT7
♣42
Dlr: West
Vul: None
♠T2
QJT42
Q98
♣865
♠AK73
K987
654
♣AT
♠QJ4
A5
32
♣KQJ973
8
514
13
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3♣ 2 2♠  ♥5 NT6
EW: 2  ♣4 ♦3/4 ♠5 NT3
LoTT: 17 - 17 = 0
Par: +100 3*-EW-1
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
   50          1.00   1.00  3 W -1   A  O6-Roberts-Hedlund vs O5-Stern-Sendell
   50          1.00   1.00  3 W -1   ♣2  O1-Callaway-Weed vs O4-Rauch-Hedegard
   50          1.00   1.00  3 E -1   ♣K  O3-Hedlund-Jett vs O2-Heller-Heller
25 ♠-
T854
QT9543
♣T92
Dlr: North
Vul: E-W
♠3
AKQ
J62
♣AKJ765
♠QJ8752
96
8
♣Q843
♠AKT964
J732
AK7
♣-
2
185
15
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 4 3  ♣2 ♠6 NT4
EW: 5♣ 1♠  ♦3 ♥3 NT5
LoTT: 21 - 19 = +2
Par: -100 5*-NS-1
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
        100    2.00   0.00  4* N -1  9  O6-Roberts-Hedlund vs O5-Stern-Sendell
        750    1.00   1.00  5♣* E     ♠A  O1-Callaway-Weed vs O4-Rauch-Hedegard
       1100    0.00   2.00  4* N -5  8  O3-Hedlund-Jett vs O2-Heller-Heller