- Saturday Morn - July 15, 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: 1019 MP  Geomean: 532 MP
(based on 16 players)
★ ★ ★  Masterpoint Winners  ★ ★ ★
Partnership Pct Rank MP
Ellen Lux - Robert Sokol 59.72 1st A 0.80
Carol Maggipinto - Mark Maggipinto 59.03 2nd A 0.56
Marcia Phelps - Marianne Van Gelder 54.86 3rd A 0.40
EVENT>Sat Morning Open Game    |SESSION>Saturday Morn|SECTION> OO
------------------------,------ ------------,-------- --------------------------
DATE>July 15, 2017      |CLUB NO.>150680    | 07/15/2017 14:43
---------------------,-- ------------------- -------------,---------------------
DIR> Alan Hedegard   |RATING>Club Masterpoint (100%, 80%, 60% Open)|MOVEMENT>ONE WINNER
------------,-------- ,-------------------------,--------- ---------------------
AVE>   36.0 |TOP>   3 |MP LIMITS>None/300/100   |CLUB>H & H  Saturday
------------ --------- ------------------------- -------------------------------
PAIRS IN STRAT A=8/B=6/C=5                       ,---,-------------------------,------,---------,
-------------------------------------------------|   |           Section       |      |Section  |
No Name                   Name                   |Flt|Rnk-A|Rnk-B|Rnk-C| Score | Pct  |Awards   |
------------------------------------------------- --- ----- ----- ----- ------- ------ ---------
 1 Ellen Lux              Robert Sokol             C    1     1     1     43.00  59.72  0.80(A)
 2 Richard Vreeland       Debeliah Anthony         C    .     .     .     33.00  45.83
 3 Janet Hedlund          Scott Hanham             C    .     .     .     39.00  54.17
 4 Marianne Van Gelder    Marcia Phelps            C    3     2     2     39.50  54.86  0.40(A)
 5 Doris Jones            Joan Roberts             C    .     .     .     26.50  36.81
 6 Janet Street           William Putnam           B    .     .     .     37.50  52.08
 7 Carol Maggipinto       Mark Maggipinto          A    2     .     .     42.50  59.03  0.56(A)
 8 Elizabeth Nasr         Michel Nasr              A    .     .     .     27.00  37.50
                                          Totals                         288.00

Hands and Results
1 ♠T854
83
Q852
♣J53
Dlr: North
Vul: None
♠7
KQ9
AKT43
♣T762
♠K9
JT52
976
♣AK84
♠AQJ632
A764
J
♣Q9
3
1211
14
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3♠  ♣4 ♦4 ♥5 NT5
EW: 3♣ 2 2 1/-NT
       ♠4 NT7/6
LoTT: 18 - 18 = 0
Par: +100 4♣*-EW-1
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  140          3.00   0.00  2♠ S +1   A  OO4-Van Gelder-Phelps vs OO6-Street-Putnam
  100          2.00   1.00  4 W -2   8  OO7-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs OO5-Jones-Roberts
   50          1.00   2.00  4 W -1   ♠4  OO2-Vreeland-Anthony vs OO3-Hedlund-Hanham
        100    0.00   3.00  3♠ S -2   A  OO8-Nasr-Nasr vs OO1-Lux-Sokol

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
 PassPass1
23PassPass
Pass   

South has a nice enough hand, and might be tempted to bid 4 on a gamble, but the 3 bid is preemptive, and there is no compelling reason to risk a minus score, holding the Boss Suit. Those minor honors are a negative, also.

3 making three should be fairly routine, whether obtained in this preemptive manner or otherwise, but why should NS give the opponents room to converse regarding their prospects? North has a message to convey: four card support and a weak hand. Tell the story and don't dither about it.



****************************************
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 ♠T8543
K8752
A3
♣J
Dlr: East
Vul: N-S
♠KJ
A
KQJT95
♣AK85
♠A6
QJT93
64
♣QT73
♠Q972
64
872
♣9642
8
219
2
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣1 ♦1 ♥2 ♠6 NT1
EW: 6♣ 6 4 5NT  ♠6
LoTT: 18 - 17 = +1
Par: -920 6-EW/6♣-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  100          3.00   0.00  6N* E -1  6  OO2-Vreeland-Anthony vs OO3-Hedlund-Hanham
        400    2.00   1.00  5 W      ♣J  OO4-Van Gelder-Phelps vs OO6-Street-Putnam
        420    0.50   2.50  5 W +1   ♣J  OO7-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs OO5-Jones-Roberts
        420    0.50   2.50  5 W +1   ♣J  OO8-Nasr-Nasr vs OO1-Lux-Sokol

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
  PassPass
1Pass1Pass
3Pass3Pass
4Pass5Pass
6All pass  

2 might work out, but having opened 1, a response is music to West's ear, and a strong jump shift gets East's attention. 3 is a strong bid, not quite sure what else to do, but surely encouraging. When West eschews 3NT, East gets the message and can show the strong club support. West need not do anything fancy here: If East has two aces on this auction and fails to bid a grand slam, then woe is us.



****************************************
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 ♠AT2
K
A42
♣JT5432
Dlr: South
Vul: E-W
♠KQJ64
J982
KJ
♣97
♠873
A64
T9875
♣K8
♠95
QT753
Q63
♣AQ6
12
117
10
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 4♣ 1 2 3NT  ♠6
EW:  ♣2 ♦6 ♥5 ♠6 NT3
LoTT: 16 - 17 = -1
Par: +400 3NT-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  200          3.00   0.00  3♠ W -2   K  OO4-Van Gelder-Phelps vs OO6-Street-Putnam
  140          2.00   1.00  3 S      K  OO8-Nasr-Nasr vs OO1-Lux-Sokol
  130          1.00   2.00  3♣ N +1   ♠6  OO7-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs OO5-Jones-Roberts
        100    0.00   3.00  5♣* N -1  ♠7  OO2-Vreeland-Anthony vs OO3-Hedlund-Hanham

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
   Pass
Pass1Pass1
1223
All pass   

2 might have been dicey, but that was hard to detect by anyone, and 3 seems a clear result. On the other hand, 3NT would not be a good bet even if North knew the K were onside. The spades will be led and established -- alas, there is no entry.

Stop dreaming! 3 making four is all that is justified.



****************************************
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 ♠9832
K74
T73
♣J74
Dlr: West
Vul: Both
♠AQT65
AT85
A42
♣9
♠KJ
Q2
K9865
♣Q652
♠74
J963
QJ
♣AKT83
4
1411
11
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣6 ♦2 ♥5 ♠3 NT3
EW: 1♣ 5 2 4♠ 2NT
LoTT: 17 - 16 = +1
Par: -620 4♠-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  100          2.50   0.50  4♠ W -1   ♣4  OO7-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs OO5-Jones-Roberts
  100          2.50   0.50  3 W -1   ♣J  OO8-Nasr-Nasr vs OO1-Lux-Sokol
        140    1.00   2.00  2♠ W +1   4  OO4-Van Gelder-Phelps vs OO6-Street-Putnam
        710    0.00   3.00  4♠ W +3   4  OO2-Vreeland-Anthony vs OO3-Hedlund-Hanham

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
1Pass1NTPass
2Pass2NTPass
3Pass3Pass
4All pass  

The 3 bid is a nice touch, showing clearly the singleton (possibly void) club, along with extra values, or at least sufficient values in response to the 2NT invitation.

3 should be at least honor doubleton, and West, full of aces and playing values, goes to game, rewarded when the diamond suit sets up for four winners.

Now, then: Can West play this game? A club lead is marked, and let's give the defense a helping hand, just to avoid gifts. Let's say that North leads the J! Effective, although unorthodox. Effective, that is, to prevent a mishap. On the second club, West ruffs and tests spades, expecting a stroll in the park when trumps break 3-2. Alas, on the second trump, South shows out, and West frets. There isn't must else to do but continue with the plan of setting up diamonds and using a trump to stop the club avalanche. All that can be hoped is that the club suit cannot thereafter be continued and that the defense will have a difficulty untangling their entries. In fact, this is a rather rare circumstance that the defense winds up with the only trump extant and yet cannot prevail because the use of that card endplays him.

For more detail, including card-by-card play, copy this link into your browser:

http://tinyurl.com/y75cv44x

If you like this sort of thing, here is another I recently put into the software:

http://tinyurl.com/yct48gqx

A notrump endplay in a trump 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

5 ♠K954
A942
AKJ7
♣A
Dlr: North
Vul: N-S
♠T7
J85
T9843
♣Q95
♠AQJ86
KT63
6
♣874
♠32
Q7
Q52
♣KJT632
19
310
8
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3♣ 3 2/1 2/1♠ 2NT
EW:  ♣3 ♦4 ♥4 ♠5 NT5
LoTT: 14 - 14 = 0
Par: +120 2NT-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  600          2.50   0.50  3N N      ♠Q  OO3-Hedlund-Hanham vs OO4-Van Gelder-Phelps
  600          2.50   0.50  3N N      7  OO8-Nasr-Nasr vs OO2-Vreeland-Anthony
        100    0.50   2.50  3N N -1   ♠8  OO5-Jones-Roberts vs OO1-Lux-Sokol
        100    0.50   2.50  3N N -1   ♠6  OO7-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs OO6-Street-Putnam

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
 11Pass
Pass1NTPass3NT
All pass   

South will want to bid the first time, but 2 would show a stronger hand and 3 a weaker hand! No doubt there will be many who choose one or the other, but in the absence of a clearly descriptive bid, pass often works.

North's 1NT in balancing seat shows 18-19 HCP, for with 12-14, there is no reason to bid notrump, and with 15-17, the opening bid would have been 1NT! South invites or bids game on the point count and long suit.

Now the spotlight is on East. There are nine cards available on opening lead that defeat this contract, and only four that fail. The failing choice of the K is not among his options, of course, but the AQJ choices will fail because they block the spade suit.

That old standby, fourth best, works wonders when partner shows up with the magical ten, setting up four spade tricks while the K will assuredly become the setting trick.

NS are a tad unlucky that the long club suit cannot be set up in time, nor the Q drop, but there is the hope of a defensive error, such as the lead of the Q. On that lead the 9 becomes a second stopper for the defense if North takes the king on the first trick, or if North chooses to duck that trick, the second trick can be ducked when West plays the T on the second round.



****************************************
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 ♠K85
J93
K9865
♣J2
Dlr: East
Vul: E-W
♠T97
A865
J2
♣KQ53
♠J42
T
AT4
♣A98764
♠AQ63
KQ742
Q73
♣T
8
109
13
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2 3 1♠  ♣4 NT5
EW: 3♣ 2NT  ♦4 ♥4 ♠4
LoTT: 18 - 18 = 0
Par: +140 3-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  420          3.00   0.00  4 S      J  OO7-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs OO6-Street-Putnam
  170          2.00   1.00  2 N +2   ♣6  OO8-Nasr-Nasr vs OO2-Vreeland-Anthony
  140          1.00   2.00  2 S +1   ♣K  OO3-Hedlund-Hanham vs OO4-Van Gelder-Phelps
        130    0.00   3.00  4♣ E      Q  OO5-Jones-Roberts vs OO1-Lux-Sokol

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
  Pass2!
Pass2All pass 

A simple Flannery auction, speeding up the game. South caps his high card points, much as in Precision , while describing the length of nine of his cards in the major suits for partner's benefit, at the expense of the opponents' bidding space! North, of course, has no desire to bid beyond a part score, and simply chooses the best contract. By the way, the 2 bid is alertable as non-forcing!

In a standard or 2/1 auction, the bidding would be P 1 P 2, at which point East, having passed, might well double to bring the other three suits into focus for competition, and 3 might well be reached. One of the benefits of Flannery is that the spade suit is removed from the equation, and East, seeing that spades do not provide an option and with rather short diamonds, will probably pass, as will West for those same reasons.



****************************************
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 ♠K865
4
J753
♣AQJT
Dlr: South
Vul: Both
♠Q7
QJ632
86
♣K643
♠AJ932
K75
KQT
♣72
♠T4
AT98
A942
♣985
11
813
8
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1♣ 2  ♥5 ♠6/5 NT6
EW: 2 1♠ 1NT  ♣6 ♦4/5
LoTT: 16 - 16 = 0
Par: -110 2-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
         90    3.00   0.00  1N W      ♣Q  OO3-Hedlund-Hanham vs OO4-Van Gelder-Phelps
        100    2.00   1.00  3♣ N -1   ♠2  OO8-Nasr-Nasr vs OO2-Vreeland-Anthony
        110    0.50   2.50  2♠ E      ♣9  OO5-Jones-Roberts vs OO1-Lux-Sokol
        110    0.50   2.50  2 W      3  OO7-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs OO6-Street-Putnam
8 ♠AJT
A532
74
♣KJT8
Dlr: West
Vul: None
♠986
T8
JT5
♣97632
♠K7542
KJ76
KQ82
♣-
♠Q3
Q94
A963
♣AQ54
13
112
14
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 4/3♣ 2/1 3/2 3NT
       ♠6/5
EW: 1♠  ♣3 ♦5 ♥4 NT4
LoTT: 17 - 16 = +1
Par: +400 3NT-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  400          2.00   1.00  3N S      ♠9  OO3-Hedlund-Hanham vs OO4-Van Gelder-Phelps
  400          2.00   1.00  3N S      ♠4  OO5-Jones-Roberts vs OO1-Lux-Sokol
  400          2.00   1.00  3N S      J  OO7-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs OO6-Street-Putnam
         50    0.00   3.00  3N S -1   J  OO8-Nasr-Nasr vs OO2-Vreeland-Anthony
9 ♠J32
AQ
K54
♣KT876
Dlr: North
Vul: E-W
♠AKT964
T743
93
♣2
♠5
K85
Q87
♣AJ9543
♠Q87
J962
AJT62
♣Q
13
710
10
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2 3/2NT  ♣6 ♥6 ♠6
EW: 1♠  ♣6 ♦4 ♥6 NT4
LoTT: 15 - 15 = 0
Par: +400 3NT-S
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  430          3.00   0.00  3N S +1   ♠A  OO7-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs OO1-Lux-Sokol
  300          1.50   1.50  4♠ W -3   A  OO4-Van Gelder-Phelps vs OO5-Jones-Roberts
  300          1.50   1.50  3♠ W -3   K  OO6-Street-Putnam vs OO2-Vreeland-Anthony
  180          0.00   3.00  2N S +2   ♠T  OO8-Nasr-Nasr vs OO3-Hedlund-Hanham
10 ♠AJ872
754
T7
♣T85
Dlr: East
Vul: Both
♠Q5
KT9
J642
♣AJ72
♠943
A63
85
♣KQ963
♠KT6
QJ82
AKQ93
♣4
5
119
15
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3 2 3♠  ♣5 NT6
EW: 2♣  ♦4 ♥5/4 ♠4 NT5
LoTT: 17 - 17 = 0
Par: +140 3♠-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  170          3.00   0.00  2♠ N +2   8  OO4-Van Gelder-Phelps vs OO5-Jones-Roberts
  140          2.00   1.00  2♠ N +1   8  OO7-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs OO1-Lux-Sokol
        100    0.50   2.50  4♠ N -1   ♣K  OO8-Nasr-Nasr vs OO3-Hedlund-Hanham
        100    0.50   2.50  2 S -1   ♣A  OO6-Street-Putnam vs OO2-Vreeland-Anthony
11 ♠65
Q976
42
♣KQT98
Dlr: South
Vul: None
♠8743
T5
AT976
♣32
♠K
KJ82
KQJ85
♣A74
♠AQJT92
A43
3
♣J65
7
417
12
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3♣ 1/- 4/3♠ 1NT
       ♦2 ♥7/5
EW: 4  ♣3 ♥6 ♠3 NT6
LoTT: 20 - 18 = +2
Par: +100 5*-EW-1
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  450          3.00   0.00  4♠ S +1   ♣2  OO8-Nasr-Nasr vs OO3-Hedlund-Hanham
  200          2.00   1.00  2♠ S +3   A  OO4-Van Gelder-Phelps vs OO5-Jones-Roberts
        130    0.50   2.50  4 E      ♠6  OO6-Street-Putnam vs OO2-Vreeland-Anthony
        130    0.50   2.50  4 E      3  OO7-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs OO1-Lux-Sokol
12 ♠Q82
K32
-
♣Q965432
Dlr: West
Vul: N-S
♠AJ963
AJ
T932
♣T7
♠7
Q98764
K8654
♣K
♠KT54
T5
AQJ7
♣AJ8
7
108
15
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 4♣ 2♠ 4NT  ♦5 ♥6
EW: 2 1  ♣2 ♠4/5 NT3
LoTT: 18 - 19 = -1
Par: +500 5*-EW-3
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  630          3.00   0.00  3N S +1   T  OO4-Van Gelder-Phelps vs OO5-Jones-Roberts
   50          2.00   1.00  3 E -1   5  OO7-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs OO1-Lux-Sokol
        110    1.00   2.00  2 E      ♠4  OO6-Street-Putnam vs OO2-Vreeland-Anthony
        500    0.00   3.00  3 S -5   A  OO8-Nasr-Nasr vs OO3-Hedlund-Hanham
13 ♠A9
A9832
75
♣KT97
Dlr: North
Vul: Both
♠KT74
JT6
AQ4
♣A83
♠J8653
4
KT82
♣QJ2
♠Q2
KQ75
J963
♣654
11
147
8
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1♣ 2  ♦5 ♠3 NT6
EW: 2 4♠  ♣5/6 ♥5 NT6
LoTT: 18 - 18 = 0
Par: -620 4♠-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
        100    3.00   0.00  4 N -1   ♠3  OO5-Jones-Roberts vs OO6-Street-Putnam
        170    1.50   1.50  3♠ E +1   K  OO2-Vreeland-Anthony vs OO7-Maggipinto-Maggipinto
        170    1.50   1.50  2♠ W +2   ♣7  OO1-Lux-Sokol vs OO3-Hedlund-Hanham
        620    0.00   3.00  4♠ E      K  OO8-Nasr-Nasr vs OO4-Van Gelder-Phelps
14 ♠842
T8632
T876
♣8
Dlr: East
Vul: None
♠9765
K97
43
♣Q543
♠AT3
QJ
AKQ952
♣96
♠KQJ
A54
J
♣AKJT72
0
516
19
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2♣ 2  ♦5 ♠6 NT5
EW: 1 1♠ 1NT  ♣5 ♥4
LoTT: 15 - 16 = -1
Par: +100 2NT*-EW/2♠*-EW-1
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
         50    3.00   0.00  3♣ S -1   4  OO1-Lux-Sokol vs OO3-Hedlund-Hanham
        100    2.00   1.00  4♣ S -2   4  OO8-Nasr-Nasr vs OO4-Van Gelder-Phelps
        300    0.50   2.50  4♣* S -2  4  OO5-Jones-Roberts vs OO6-Street-Putnam
        300    0.50   2.50  4♣* S -2  3  OO2-Vreeland-Anthony vs OO7-Maggipinto-Maggipinto
15 ♠J9765
763
JT64
♣5
Dlr: South
Vul: N-S
♠Q83
T
AK852
♣JT87
♠AKT4
J9852
Q7
♣KQ
♠2
AKQ4
93
♣A96432
2
1015
13
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣6 ♦3 ♥5 ♠4 NT4
EW: 1♣ 4 1 3♠ 3NT
LoTT: 16 - 14 = +2
Par: -400 3NT-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
        100    3.00   0.00  2 S -1   5  OO1-Lux-Sokol vs OO3-Hedlund-Hanham
        110    2.00   1.00  2 E      2  OO2-Vreeland-Anthony vs OO7-Maggipinto-Maggipinto
        130    1.00   2.00  3 W +1   ♣5  OO5-Jones-Roberts vs OO6-Street-Putnam
        430    0.00   3.00  3N W +1   ♠6  OO8-Nasr-Nasr vs OO4-Van Gelder-Phelps
16 ♠J7
QJ87
T53
♣AJ74
Dlr: West
Vul: E-W
♠QT5
65
J872
♣T952
♠A643
AK93
A4
♣Q86
♠K982
T42
KQ96
♣K3
9
317
11
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1 1 1NT  ♣6 ♠6
EW: 1♣ 1♠  ♦6 ♥6/5 NT6
LoTT: 14 - 14 = 0
Par: +90 1NT-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  100          2.50   0.50  1N E -1   K  OO8-Nasr-Nasr vs OO4-Van Gelder-Phelps
  100          2.50   0.50  1N E -1   5  OO1-Lux-Sokol vs OO3-Hedlund-Hanham
         90    0.50   2.50  1N E      9  OO5-Jones-Roberts vs OO6-Street-Putnam
         90    0.50   2.50  1N E      6  OO2-Vreeland-Anthony vs OO7-Maggipinto-Maggipinto
17 ♠KQ
86
Q764
♣T8752
Dlr: North
Vul: None
♠AJ97
KQ97
9
♣AQ63
♠T8
AJT4
KT8532
♣4
♠65432
532
AJ
♣KJ9
7
168
9
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣5 ♦3 ♥1 ♠4 NT4
EW: 2♣ 4 5 3♠ 3NT
LoTT: 16 - 16 = 0
Par: -450 5-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  100          3.00   0.00  3N W -2   ♣2  OO6-Street-Putnam vs OO1-Lux-Sokol
   50          2.00   1.00  4 E -1   ♠3  OO2-Vreeland-Anthony vs OO4-Van Gelder-Phelps
        400    1.00   2.00  3N W      ♠K  OO8-Nasr-Nasr vs OO5-Jones-Roberts
        420    0.00   3.00  4 E      A  OO3-Hedlund-Hanham vs OO7-Maggipinto-Maggipinto
18 ♠KQ52
642
Q543
♣62
Dlr: East
Vul: N-S
♠J864
KT5
A82
♣JT5
♠AT
J987
T6
♣AK983
♠973
AQ3
KJ97
♣Q74
7
912
12
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣4/3 ♦6 ♥4 ♠5 NT5
EW: 3♣ 1 3 1♠ 2NT
LoTT: 15 - 16 = -1
Par: -140 3-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
   50          2.50   0.50  2N W -1   A  OO3-Hedlund-Hanham vs OO7-Maggipinto-Maggipinto
   50          2.50   0.50  1♠ W -1   4  OO8-Nasr-Nasr vs OO5-Jones-Roberts
        100    1.00   2.00  2 S -1   ♠4  OO6-Street-Putnam vs OO1-Lux-Sokol
        150    0.00   3.00  1N E +2   7  OO2-Vreeland-Anthony vs OO4-Van Gelder-Phelps
19 ♠A
T9854
QT64
♣J54
Dlr: South
Vul: E-W
♠KJ962
32
AK3
♣K76
♠T43
76
9872
♣AT92
♠Q875
AKQJ
J5
♣Q83
7
144
15
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3  ♣5 ♦6 ♠5 NT5
EW: 1♣ 1 2♠ 1NT  ♥4
LoTT: 17 - 17 = 0
Par: +140 3-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  140          3.00   0.00  2 N +1   ♠4  OO6-Street-Putnam vs OO1-Lux-Sokol
         50    2.00   1.00  4 S -1   A  OO2-Vreeland-Anthony vs OO4-Van Gelder-Phelps
        110    1.00   2.00  2♠ W      T  OO3-Hedlund-Hanham vs OO7-Maggipinto-Maggipinto
        670    0.00   3.00  2♠* W     T  OO8-Nasr-Nasr vs OO5-Jones-Roberts
20 ♠9863
QT7
75
♣T753
Dlr: West
Vul: Both
♠AKT5
K842
Q82
♣A8
♠74
J95
AK9
♣J9642
♠QJ2
A63
JT643
♣KQ
2
169
13
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣3 ♦4 ♥3 ♠4 NT3
EW: 4♣ 3/2 4 3♠ 4NT
LoTT: 14 - 14 = 0
Par: -630 4NT-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  100          3.00   0.00  3N W -1   ♠9  OO2-Vreeland-Anthony vs OO4-Van Gelder-Phelps
        150    2.00   1.00  2N W +1   ♠3  OO8-Nasr-Nasr vs OO5-Jones-Roberts
        180    1.00   2.00  2N W +2   ♣3  OO6-Street-Putnam vs OO1-Lux-Sokol
        600    0.00   3.00  3N W      ♠3  OO3-Hedlund-Hanham vs OO7-Maggipinto-Maggipinto
21 ♠9
A742
AKQ9765
♣4
Dlr: North
Vul: N-S
♠AKJ8
K986
T3
♣T62
♠QT743
JT5
2
♣QJ73
♠652
Q3
J84
♣AK985
13
116
10
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1♣ 5 2NT  ♥6 ♠4
EW: 1 2♠  ♣6 ♦1 NT3
LoTT: 19 - 19 = 0
Par: +500 5♠*-EW-3
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  620          3.00   0.00  5 N +1   J  OO4-Van Gelder-Phelps vs OO7-Maggipinto-Maggipinto
  600          2.00   1.00  5 N      ♠4  OO3-Hedlund-Hanham vs OO5-Jones-Roberts
  170          1.00   2.00  3 N +3   ♠3  OO1-Lux-Sokol vs OO2-Vreeland-Anthony
        200    0.00   3.00  6 N -2   ♠3  OO8-Nasr-Nasr vs OO6-Street-Putnam
22 ♠Q5
7532
9754
♣KQ5
Dlr: East
Vul: E-W
♠T63
QJ9
AK82
♣J74
♠74
AKT4
QT63
♣A96
♠AKJ982
86
J
♣T832
7
1113
9
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2♠  ♣6 ♦3 ♥4 NT4
EW: 4 3 1NT  ♣5/6 ♠5
LoTT: 18 - 16 = +2
Par: -130 4-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  110          3.00   0.00  2♠ S      A  OO3-Hedlund-Hanham vs OO5-Jones-Roberts
         50    1.50   1.50  3♠ S -1   A  OO1-Lux-Sokol vs OO2-Vreeland-Anthony
         50    1.50   1.50  3♠ S -1   A  OO8-Nasr-Nasr vs OO6-Street-Putnam
        110    0.00   3.00  3 E      ♠A  OO4-Van Gelder-Phelps vs OO7-Maggipinto-Maggipinto
23 ♠K9753
K82
Q87
♣95
Dlr: South
Vul: Both
♠6
T753
96
♣AQT642
♠Q8
AQJ96
AKT2
♣K7
♠AJT42
4
J543
♣J83
8
619
7
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1♠  ♣0 ♦3 ♥0 NT0
EW: 6♣ 3 6 2NT  ♠5
LoTT: 19 - 19 = 0
Par: -1400 6♠*-NS-5
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  100          3.00   0.00  5 E -1   ♠A  OO1-Lux-Sokol vs OO2-Vreeland-Anthony
        640    2.00   1.00  5♣ W +2   ♣9  OO3-Hedlund-Hanham vs OO5-Jones-Roberts
        650    0.50   2.50  5 E      ♠A  OO4-Van Gelder-Phelps vs OO7-Maggipinto-Maggipinto
        650    0.50   2.50  5 E      ♠A  OO8-Nasr-Nasr vs OO6-Street-Putnam

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
   Pass
PassPass1Pass
2Pass2NTPass
3Pass3Pass
3Pass4NTPass
5Pass5All pass

Any calls by NS other than pass would be risky without chance of reward, futile, ineffective, and indicative of assets and distribution to the ultimate declarer, and worthy of losing partner's confidence on future boards and sessions.

West employs Drury , expressing appropriately his game interest with four trumps, good clubs, and singleton. 2NT is a nice tool, not universally known, suggesting slam interest while asking for a "source of tricks." Clubs would qualify, after which control bids in diamonds and spades ensue. 1430 Roman Keycard Blackwood discovers a major flaw -- there are two key cards missing and that means at best the slam is on at best a finesse for the trump king. Perhaps, after the 3 bid, East could write down on a piece of paper West's exact hand.

Slam makes, but it's lucky, and not the kind of undertaking one should willingly accept.



****************************************
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

24 ♠J8
KQ75
KJ542
♣AQ
Dlr: West
Vul: None
♠KT653
T2
9763
♣72
♠974
AJ8
AT8
♣T983
♠AQ2
9643
Q
♣KJ654
16
39
12
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 4♣ 2 3 1♠ 3NT
EW:  ♣3 ♦4 ♥3 ♠5 NT4
LoTT: 14 - 16 = -2
Par: +400 3NT-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  450          3.00   0.00  4 S +1   ♠3  OO1-Lux-Sokol vs OO2-Vreeland-Anthony
  420          1.50   1.50  4 N      ♣T  OO4-Van Gelder-Phelps vs OO7-Maggipinto-Maggipinto
  420          1.50   1.50  4 N      ♣3  OO3-Hedlund-Hanham vs OO5-Jones-Roberts
  400          0.00   3.00  3N N      ♣3  OO8-Nasr-Nasr vs OO6-Street-Putnam