- Saturday Morn - November 18, 2017

? 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
Field strength:  Mean: 3186 MP  Geomean: 869 MP
(based on 14 players)
★ ★ ★  Masterpoint Winners  ★ ★ ★
Partnership Pct Rank MP
Ellie Hanlon - Mary Savko 71.25 1st A 1.10
Elizabeth Nasr - Michel Nasr 58.75 2nd A 0.77
Joan Roberts - Richard McCormick 56.25 2/3rd B 0.48
Christine Furnas - Janet Hedlund 56.25 2/3rd B 0.48
EVENT>Sat Morning Open Game    |SESSION>Saturday Morn|SECTION> O
------------------------,------ ------------,-------- --------------------------
DATE>November 18, 2017  |CLUB NO.>150680    | 11/18/2017 14:36
---------------------,-- ------------------- -------------,---------------------
DIR> Alan Hedegard   |RATING>Club Masterpoint (100%, 80%, 70% Open)|MOVEMENT>ONE WINNER
------------,-------- ,-------------------------,--------- ---------------------
AVE>   24.0 |TOP>   2 |MP LIMITS>None/500/200   |CLUB>H & H  Saturday
------------ --------- ------------------------- -------------------------------
PAIRS IN STRAT A=7/B=6/C=4                       ,---,-------------------------,------,---------,
-------------------------------------------------|   |           Section       |      |Section  |
No Name                   Name                   |Flt|Rnk-A|Rnk-B|Rnk-C| Score | Pct  |Awards   |
------------------------------------------------- --- ----- ----- ----- ------- ------ ---------
 1 Peter De Gregorio      Doris Jones              C    .     .     .     21.60  45.00
 3 Ellie Hanlon           Mary Savko               B    1     1     .     34.20  71.25  1.10(A)
 4 Janet Street           William Putnam           B    .     .     .     12.00  25.00
 5 Leon Heller            Patricia Heller          C    .     .     .     19.00  39.58
 6 Janet Hedlund          Christine Furnas         C   3/4   2/3   1/2    27.00  56.25  0.48(B)
 7 Joan Roberts           Richard McCormick        C   3/4   2/3   1/2    27.00  56.25  0.48(B)
 8 Elizabeth Nasr         Michel Nasr              A    2     .     .     28.20  58.75  0.77(A)
                                          Totals                         169.00

Hands and Results
1 ♠543
A
AKQJT2
♣Q32
Dlr: North
Vul: None
♠AKQ72
T7
65
♣K874
♠T8
QJ6532
43
♣A95
♠J96
K984
987
♣JT6
16
127
5
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1  ♣5 ♥4 ♠4 NT6
EW: 1♣ 3 2♠  ♦4 NT5
LoTT: 16 - 17 = -1
Par: -140 3-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  500          2.00   0.00  4* E -3  ♣J  O8-Nasr-Nasr vs O1-De Gregorio-Jones
         50    1.00   1.00  4 N -1   Q  O7-Roberts-McCormick vs O5-Heller-Heller
        100    0.00   2.00  4 N -2   Q  O4-Street-Putnam vs O6-Hedlund-Furnas

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
 12Pass
Pass3PassPass
3PassPassPass

East would like a better collection of interior cards (spot cards), but was not dealt such. Bid anyway! Not vulnerable, passing with such hands is much too passive, despite some risk. South passes due to general weakness, including flat aspect. West passes, but is happy (sort of compelled) to continue to compete when North rebids 3.

By this time everyone has exhausted the potential of the hand. Should South double with a bit more then a trick in hearts? No.

Is there any fine point in the play that would reward study? Yes! Revert to the statement about interior spots. East must take extreme care in the play of the trump suit. If trumps are 3-2, there should be no worries: Two and only two trump losers. However, if there is a singleton honor "out there," then it would be best to avoid losing a spot card (T, to be precise) to it. Thus, when able to begin the task of drawing trumps, East should cross to a spade and lead a LOW heart toward hand. Bingo! Pessimism paid off! When trumps are next led, the T will force the K, or win the trick, and the remaining QJ will push out the king while holding the trump losers to just the inevitable ace and king.

A small but very important point for proper declarer play.



****************************************
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 ♠82
A652
KJT9
♣T74
Dlr: East
Vul: N-S
♠T65
T83
873
♣AQ96
♠KJ74
QJ9
6542
♣K5
♠AQ93
K74
AQ
♣J832
8
610
16
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3♣ 2 2 2♠ 3NT
EW:  ♣3 ♦4 ♥4 ♠5 NT4
LoTT: 14 - 14 = 0
Par: +600 3NT-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  630          2.00   0.00  3N S +1   ♣6  O7-Roberts-McCormick vs O5-Heller-Heller
  600          1.00   1.00  3N S      ♣6  O4-Street-Putnam vs O6-Hedlund-Furnas
  120          0.00   2.00  1N S +1   ♣A  O8-Nasr-Nasr vs O1-De Gregorio-Jones

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
  Pass1NT
Pass2Pass2
Pass2NTPass3NT
All pass   

Some flat 8-counts don't deserve invitational status in response to a 15-17 1NT opening. Others do. The factors that elevate this hand are the presence of a four card major, two four card suits, a couple of tens and a very nice sequence of diamond spots in conjunction with the J. It's almost like holding KJJJ!

Well, not quite, but when those diamonds face AQ, you must (must, I say) appreciate the value of the T, at least. It is worth an entire trick with this holding.

And that gives a nice play for game, which just happens to make.



****************************************
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 ♠J98762
JT
2
♣K543
Dlr: South
Vul: E-W
♠AKQT
Q43
JT3
♣J72
♠43
K982
K765
♣AQ9
♠5
A765
AQ984
♣T86
5
1312
10
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣5 ♦4 ♥3 ♠6 NT3
EW: 2♣ 3 3/2 1♠ 4NT
LoTT: 15 - 14 = +1
Par: -630 4NT-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  200          2.00   0.00  4 E -2   ♣7  O8-Nasr-Nasr vs O1-De Gregorio-Jones
        150    1.00   1.00  2N E +1   ♠5  O7-Roberts-McCormick vs O5-Heller-Heller
        630    0.00   2.00  3N E +1   8  O4-Street-Putnam vs O6-Hedlund-Furnas

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
   Pass
1Pass1Pass
1Pass3NTAll pass

East's twelve includes a nice mixture including honors in partner's opening bid suit, so 3NT with just 12 HCP is justified. Don't put pressure on partner to make a decision unless you have to. Accept some responsibility, while expressing confidence in his declarer play. Meanwhile, provide the opponents with as little information and as much fear as possible.



****************************************
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 ♠76432
8
AQT6
♣986
Dlr: West
Vul: Both
♠T9
AKJT
852
♣QJT7
♠AQ5
9743
7
♣K5432
♠KJ8
Q652
KJ943
♣A
6
119
14
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 4 3♠  ♣3 ♥3 NT6
EW: 2♣ 3  ♦3 ♠3 NT4
LoTT: 18 - 18 = 0
Par: +140 3♠-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  130          2.00   0.00  2 S +2   A  O7-Roberts-McCormick vs O5-Heller-Heller
  110          1.00   1.00  2 S +1   A  O4-Street-Putnam vs O6-Hedlund-Furnas
        130    0.00   2.00  3♣ E +1   5  O8-Nasr-Nasr vs O1-De Gregorio-Jones

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
1Pass1Dbl
223Pass
Pass3All pass 

When West opened the bidding on that balanced mini, all of the hand's power was exhausted by the upgrade for honors working together, but when partner bid 1, holding four honors certainly gave West an incentive to raise (well, any four would do, really, but the enthusiasm level would be less).

South made a nice double, showing competitive values without "promising" four spades, just "adequate support." Three to two honors and an outside singleton fills the bill.

North knows there is a double fit and with five spades feels justified in competing to the three level, perhaps believing the LAW prescribes. True for times when South holds four spades, not today. However, the LAW's dictates are overridden today by the fortunate spade position and the double fits for both sides.

Doubtful if EW could stomach 4, vulnerable, which South must double to lay claim to his rightful ownership of the hand, else EW would get away with theft. A matchpoint double, paying dividends if given the opportunity.



****************************************
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 ♠9765432
92
8
♣Q87
Dlr: North
Vul: N-S
♠J8
Q764
KQ962
♣AJ
♠AQ
KJT85
J7
♣9653
♠KT
A3
AT543
♣KT42
2
1311
14
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1♣ 3♠  ♦5 ♥4 NT5
EW: 1 2 1/-NT
       ♣6 ♠3 NT7/6
LoTT: 17 - 18 = -1
Par: +140 3♠-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  170          2.00   0.00  2♠ N +2   5  O3-Hanlon-Savko vs O4-Street-Putnam
        420    1.00   1.00  4 E      ♠K  O5-Heller-Heller vs O1-De Gregorio-Jones
        450    0.00   2.00  4 E +1   ♠K  O7-Roberts-McCormick vs O6-Hedlund-Furnas

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
 Pass1Pass
2NTPass4All pass

Poor South has no sensible bid. Doubling with just two spades is out, as is overcalling 2 on that horrendous (for a two-level overcall) is out as well. 2NT unusual has multiple flaws: wrong pattern, poor suits, scattered values. There is no inherent penalty for passing hands that fit no describable action!

West will take East seriously and propel to game,

NS will have to play well to defeat 4, but getting a diamond ruff. South should lead a club (conceding heart control by A and another fails to understand the power of that card). the club lead will succeed in one of several ways: If West wins the A, North will encourage, after which South can lead a club to the queen and a spade back ensures the set.



****************************************
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 ♠J4
8653
AQ432
♣74
Dlr: East
Vul: E-W
♠QT82
KQ9
K7
♣KT92
♠97
A74
985
♣AQJ85
♠AK653
JT2
JT6
♣63
7
1311
9
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2 1  ♣4 ♠6 NT5
EW: 3♣ 1♠  ♦5 ♥6 NT6
LoTT: 17 - 17 = 0
Par: -100 3*-NS-1
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
        110    1.50   0.50  3♣ W      8  O5-Heller-Heller vs O1-De Gregorio-Jones
        110    1.50   0.50  3♣ W      7  O3-Hanlon-Savko vs O4-Street-Putnam
        630    0.00   2.00  3N E +1   ♠5  O7-Roberts-McCormick vs O6-Hedlund-Furnas

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
  11
3NTAll pass  

North leads the J, overtaken by the king, and the rather obvious diamond shift defeats the contract by three vulnerable tricks!! Down 300. Who is to blame?

East made a rather light opening bid, but with a good suit, two and a half quick tricks, and wanting a club lead, I don't criticize East for the opening bid.

West has thirteen HCP, a double spade stop, and good club honors, likely solidifying the club suit for a source of tricks.

I don't blame either East or West.

Rather, I decry the unfairness of the Great Shuffler in the Sky, who ought to have provided South with the A for his overcall. Then ten tricks would be assured. Or perhaps South could have been given the JT doubleton, in which case the diamond suit would have blocked!

But no...... Time to punish EW for reasonable bidding. Once in a while it happens. I think good players are much more likely to obtain this result. The meek may inherit the earth and they will assuredly do better on this hand, but I rather want to be in game with the EW cards, thank you.

Shrug and move on.



****************************************
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 ♠T8754
J64
T9
♣J54
Dlr: South
Vul: Both
♠Q3
KT9853
AQ8
♣Q9
♠KJ9
A7
J752
♣AK86
♠A62
Q2
K643
♣T732
2
1316
9
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣2 ♦2 ♥2 ♠3 NT2
EW: 5♣ 5 5 3♠ 5NT
LoTT: 14 - 16 = -2
Par: -660 5NT-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
        650    1.50   0.50  5 W      ♠8  O7-Roberts-McCormick vs O6-Hedlund-Furnas
        650    1.50   0.50  4 W +1   T  O3-Hanlon-Savko vs O4-Street-Putnam
        660    0.00   2.00  3N E +2   3  O5-Heller-Heller vs O1-De Gregorio-Jones
8 ♠A3
T7
AT863
♣KJ43
Dlr: West
Vul: None
♠T84
A9
QJ54
♣T982
♠J975
J865
2
♣A765
♠KQ62
KQ432
K97
♣Q
12
76
15
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3♣ 4 3 3♠ 3NT
EW:  ♣4 ♦3 ♥4 ♠4 NT3
LoTT: 14 - 16 = -2
Par: +400 3NT-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  430          2.00   0.00  3N N +1   ♠5  O3-Hanlon-Savko vs O4-Street-Putnam
  400          1.00   1.00  3N N      ♣5  O5-Heller-Heller vs O1-De Gregorio-Jones
        100    0.00   2.00  3N S -2   ♠8  O7-Roberts-McCormick vs O6-Hedlund-Furnas
9 ♠KT852
AJ6
A942
♣4
Dlr: North
Vul: E-W
♠QJ9
954
KT73
♣KT2
♠A6
QT2
QJ865
♣863
♠743
K873
-
♣AQJ975
12
99
10
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 4/3♣ 1 4 5♠ 1NT
EW:  ♣3 ♦6 ♥3 ♠2 NT5
LoTT: 17 - 17 = 0
Par: +450 5♠-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  420          1.00   1.00  4♠ N      Q  O4-Street-Putnam vs O5-Heller-Heller
  420          1.00   1.00  4♠ N      Q  O8-Nasr-Nasr vs O3-Hanlon-Savko
  420          1.00   1.00  4♠ N      ♣3  O7-Roberts-McCormick vs O1-De Gregorio-Jones
10 ♠J64
8542
Q72
♣Q72
Dlr: East
Vul: Both
♠T9853
JT9
J98
♣AK
♠KQ7
KQ73
64
♣9863
♠A2
A6
AKT53
♣JT54
5
910
16
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1♣ 3 1NT  ♥5 ♠5
EW: 2 1♠  ♣5 ♦4 NT5
LoTT: 16 - 16 = 0
Par: +110 3-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  110          2.00   0.00  2 S +1   ♣A  O7-Roberts-McCormick vs O1-De Gregorio-Jones
   90          1.00   1.00  1N S      ♠9  O8-Nasr-Nasr vs O3-Hanlon-Savko
        100    0.00   2.00  3♣ S -1   ♠T  O4-Street-Putnam vs O5-Heller-Heller
11 ♠J62
K9874
AT8
♣32
Dlr: South
Vul: None
♠T987
5
KJ9732
♣T5
♠AK3
J32
Q4
♣AKQ96
♠Q54
AQT6
65
♣J874
8
419
9
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2 1NT  ♣5 ♦3 ♠4
EW: 2/1♣ 4 3♠  ♥5 NT6
LoTT: 18 - 17 = +1
Par: -140 3♠-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
   50          1.50   0.50  3N E -1   ♣4  O8-Nasr-Nasr vs O3-Hanlon-Savko
   50          1.50   0.50  2N E -1   6  O4-Street-Putnam vs O5-Heller-Heller
        120    0.00   2.00  2N E      ♣4  O7-Roberts-McCormick vs O1-De Gregorio-Jones
12 ♠62
QT3
Q43
♣AQ864
Dlr: West
Vul: N-S
♠KT853
A2
AT72
♣75
♠J
KJ9765
965
♣K92
♠AQ974
84
KJ8
♣JT3
10
118
11
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1♣  ♦4 ♥4 ♠5 NT4
EW: 2 3 1♠ 2NT  ♣6
LoTT: 16 - 16 = 0
Par: -140 3-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
        140    1.50   0.50  3 E      ♣J  O4-Street-Putnam vs O5-Heller-Heller
        140    1.50   0.50  2 E +1   ♣J  O7-Roberts-McCormick vs O1-De Gregorio-Jones
        170    0.00   2.00  2 E +2   ♠4  O8-Nasr-Nasr vs O3-Hanlon-Savko
13 ♠Q7
AQ8763
KT2
♣43
Dlr: North
Vul: Both
♠T543
J2
987
♣Q852
♠A96
T95
5
♣AKJT76
♠KJ82
K4
AQJ643
♣9
11
312
14
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 5 5 1♠  ♣5 NT6
EW: 2♣  ♦1 ♥1 ♠5 NT1
LoTT: 19 - 19 = 0
Par: +650 5-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  710          2.00   0.00  4 N +3   ♣A  O8-Nasr-Nasr vs O4-Street-Putnam
  600          1.00   1.00  5 S      ♣2  O1-De Gregorio-Jones vs O3-Hanlon-Savko
  170          0.00   2.00  2 N +2   7  O5-Heller-Heller vs O6-Hedlund-Furnas
14 ♠AJT8732
98
Q
♣Q76
Dlr: East
Vul: None
♠Q5
AQT7
KJ3
♣T543
♠96
2
T98742
♣AK82
♠K4
KJ6543
A65
♣J9
9
127
12
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1 3♠ 2NT  ♣3 ♦3
EW: 1♣ 3  ♥6 ♠4 NT5
LoTT: 18 - 18 = 0
Par: +100 4*-EW-1
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
         50    1.50   0.50  3♠ N -1   T  O8-Nasr-Nasr vs O4-Street-Putnam
         50    1.50   0.50  3 S -1   ♣5  O5-Heller-Heller vs O6-Hedlund-Furnas
        100    0.00   2.00  3 S -2   3  O1-De Gregorio-Jones vs O3-Hanlon-Savko
15 ♠A984
A92
532
♣J84
Dlr: South
Vul: N-S
♠T6
QJT87
KJT
♣732
♠Q7532
63
976
♣KT6
♠KJ
K54
AQ84
♣AQ95
9
75
19
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 4♣ 4 3/4 3♠ 4NT
EW:  ♣3 ♦3/2 ♥3 ♠4/3 NT3/2
LoTT: 14 - 14 = 0
Par: +630 4NT-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  630          2.00   0.00  3N S +1   Q  O5-Heller-Heller vs O6-Hedlund-Furnas
   90          1.00   1.00  1N S      8  O8-Nasr-Nasr vs O4-Street-Putnam
        100    0.00   2.00  2N S -1   Q  O1-De Gregorio-Jones vs O3-Hanlon-Savko
16 ♠Q9
AJ8
K76543
♣98
Dlr: West
Vul: E-W
♠K
975432
8
♣KJT42
♠8753
-
QJT92
♣A753
♠AJT642
KQT6
A
♣Q6
10
77
16
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2 2 3/2♠ 2NT  ♣3
EW: 4♣  ♦4 ♥4 ♠1 NT1
LoTT: 19 - 17 = +2
Par: -100 4♠*-S-1
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  420          2.00   0.00  4♠ S      8  O8-Nasr-Nasr vs O4-Street-Putnam
  140          1.00   1.00  2♠ N +1   7  O5-Heller-Heller vs O6-Hedlund-Furnas
         50    0.00   2.00  2♠ S -1   7  O1-De Gregorio-Jones vs O3-Hanlon-Savko
17 ♠T432
J865
QJ6
♣Q5
Dlr: North
Vul: None
♠KJ7
972
AK
♣KJ963
♠A5
AQT43
93
♣T842
♠Q986
K
T87542
♣A7
6
1510
9
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣1 ♦6 ♥2 ♠5 NT1
EW: 6♣ 1 5 2♠ 6NT
LoTT: 18 - 18 = 0
Par: -990 6NT-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
        100    2.00   0.00  3 S -2   9  O8-Nasr-Nasr vs O5-Heller-Heller
        130    1.00   1.00  4♣ W      Q  O3-Hanlon-Savko vs O7-Roberts-McCormick
        150    0.00   2.00  2N W +1   ♠2  O6-Hedlund-Furnas vs O1-De Gregorio-Jones
18 ♠AQJ62
2
QJ53
♣K32
Dlr: East
Vul: N-S
♠873
A74
K87
♣Q875
♠T95
KQ9
A964
♣AJ9
♠K4
JT8653
T2
♣T64
13
914
4
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣5 ♦5 ♥6 ♠6 NT5
EW: 2♣ 1 1 1♠ 2NT
LoTT: 14 - 14 = 0
Par: -120 2NT-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  100          2.00   0.00  3N W -2   ♠6  O8-Nasr-Nasr vs O5-Heller-Heller
        100    1.00   1.00  2♠ N -1   ♣A  O6-Hedlund-Furnas vs O1-De Gregorio-Jones
        120    0.00   2.00  2N W      ♠A  O3-Hanlon-Savko vs O7-Roberts-McCormick
19 ♠A65
JT842
8
♣AQ53
Dlr: South
Vul: E-W
♠Q7
AQ
K976
♣J9874
♠KJT83
K65
T432
♣T
♠942
973
AQJ5
♣K62
11
127
10
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1♣ 2  ♦4 ♠5 NT6
EW: 2 1♠ 1NT  ♣6 ♥4
LoTT: 16 - 16 = 0
Par: +110 2-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
         50    2.00   0.00  3 N -1   ♣T  O3-Hanlon-Savko vs O7-Roberts-McCormick
         90    1.00   1.00  2 W      J  O8-Nasr-Nasr vs O5-Heller-Heller
        140    0.00   2.00  2♠ E +1   9  O6-Hedlund-Furnas vs O1-De Gregorio-Jones
20 ♠K98743
J
976
♣AK2
Dlr: West
Vul: Both
♠AQT6
Q7
AQT5
♣T96
♠2
AT9543
42
♣Q543
♠J5
K862
KJ83
♣J87
11
146
9
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣4 ♦5 ♥3 ♠5 NT4
EW: 3♣ 2 4 2♠ 3NT
LoTT: 15 - 16 = -1
Par: -620 4-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  200          2.00   0.00  2N E -2   J  O6-Hedlund-Furnas vs O1-De Gregorio-Jones
  100          1.00   1.00  4 E -1   ♠J  O3-Hanlon-Savko vs O7-Roberts-McCormick
   80          0.00   2.00  1♠ N      2  O8-Nasr-Nasr vs O5-Heller-Heller
21 ♠Q87
832
QJ872
♣A6
Dlr: North
Vul: N-S
♠J64
97
AK654
♣T32
♠AK2
KQJT64
T3
♣Q9
♠T953
A5
9
♣KJ8754
9
815
8
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3♣ 1♠ 1NT  ♦6 ♥4
EW: 1 3  ♣4 ♠5 NT6
LoTT: 18 - 16 = +2
Par: -140 3-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
   50          2.00   0.00  4 E -1   ♠3  O8-Nasr-Nasr vs O6-Hedlund-Furnas
        110    1.00   1.00  2 E      9  O3-Hanlon-Savko vs O5-Heller-Heller
        140    0.00   2.00  2 E +1   9  O4-Street-Putnam vs O7-Roberts-McCormick
22 ♠K5
974
Q9542
♣AQ7
Dlr: East
Vul: E-W
♠T73
Q632
AK76
♣93
♠AJ42
AKJ8
JT
♣852
♠Q986
T5
83
♣KJT64
11
914
6
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1♣  ♦6 ♥4 ♠5 NT6
EW: 1 3 2♠ 1NT  ♣5
LoTT: 16 - 16 = 0
Par: -140 3-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
        140    2.00   0.00  3 W      4  O3-Hanlon-Savko vs O5-Heller-Heller
        170    0.50   1.50  2 W +2   5  O8-Nasr-Nasr vs O6-Hedlund-Furnas
        170    0.50   1.50  2 W +2   2  O4-Street-Putnam vs O7-Roberts-McCormick
23 ♠KJ875
AK5
9
♣J972
Dlr: South
Vul: Both
♠A96
Q94
T7542
♣T4
♠T3
J832
J63
♣AQ63
♠Q42
T76
AKQ8
♣K85
12
68
14
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3♣ 2 2 4♠ 3NT
EW:  ♣4 ♦5 ♥5 ♠3 NT3
LoTT: 15 - 16 = -1
Par: +620 4♠-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  630          2.00   0.00  3N S +1   4  O8-Nasr-Nasr vs O6-Hedlund-Furnas
  620          1.00   1.00  4♠ N      2  O3-Hanlon-Savko vs O5-Heller-Heller
  200          0.00   2.00  1♠ N +4   ♣T  O4-Street-Putnam vs O7-Roberts-McCormick
24 ♠97
QT2
975
♣AQ875
Dlr: West
Vul: None
♠QJ5
8653
Q62
♣T93
♠KT862
K974
A8
♣K2
♠A43
AJ
KJT43
♣J64
8
513
14
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3♣ 3 1NT  ♥5 ♠5
EW: 1 2/1♠  ♣4 ♦4 NT6
LoTT: 17 - 16 = +1
Par: +100 3♠*-E-1
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  100          2.00   0.00  3♠* E -1  ♣6  O3-Hanlon-Savko vs O5-Heller-Heller
   50          1.00   1.00  3♠ E -1   3  O4-Street-Putnam vs O7-Roberts-McCormick
        200    0.00   2.00  3N S -4   ♠Q  O8-Nasr-Nasr vs O6-Hedlund-Furnas