Hands and Results
| 1 |
♠98
♥AQT2
♦KJ43
♣KJ8
|
Dlr: North
Vul: None |
|
♠T54
♥953
♦T
♣AT7643
|
♠AK32
♥KJ
♦Q98752
♣2
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
| NS: 2♥ 2NT ♣6 ♦6 ♠6 |
| EW: 1♣ 1♦ 1♠ ♥4 NT4 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract Ld
100 6.00 0.00 2♦ E -2 ♠6 A6-Riggs-Minor vs A3-McGrew-Lawther
90 5.00 1.00 1N N ♦7 A3-Cox-Kneisl vs A4-Meryash-Pond
100 3.50 2.50 4♥ S -2 ♣A A7-McIntyre-Reed vs A5-Moxley-Weir
100 3.50 2.50 2♥ S -2 ♣A A1-Block-Soskins vs A1-Mehra-Barnard
140 2.00 4.00 2♠ E +1 ♦A A8-Garvin-Garvin vs A7-Green-Mok
150 1.00 5.00 3♥ N -3 ♠A A5-Conley-Noor vs A8-Sendell-Stern
200 0.00 6.00 3♥ S -4 ♣A A4-Lux-Ferrante vs A6-Heller-Heller
|
| Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis | West | North | East | South | | | 1♦ | 1♠ | Dbl | | 2♠ | 2NT1 | Pass | 3♣2 | | Pass | 3♥ | Pass | Pass | | Pass | | | | - Good-Bad 2NT
- More or less the expected response. With good diamonds, 3♦ permitted.
|
The "Lawrence" 1♠ overcall, coupled with West's raise, did its dirty work. In his book, "The Complete Book On Overcalls, Michael Lawrence recommends overcalling strong four card suits when holding five cards in RHO's suit. Six must be better! The idea is that with so many cards in that other suit removed from the possibility of being dealt to partner, the greater the opportunity for partner to have a fit for the four-bagger. This deal supports the theory and provides positive reinforcement. South doubles negatively and West happily raises to 2♠, EW's best spot. North's desire to raise seems fully justified, the focus turning on the method of doing so. A handy convention named "Good-Bad 2NT" provides a way to differentiate a minimum raise from a game-invitational raise in competition. Bidding 2NT in competition when an opponent has made the last call loses all natural meaning, and is treated very much the same as Lebensohl , requesting a relay to 3♣. The 2NT bidder's partner may ignore the relay with a better idea, but since the idea may be to play 3♣, hands such as South's will obediently take the relay. After the 3♣ bid, the auction might end abruptly, or the next bid will define the nature of the relayer's hand. 3♦ to play 3♦, 3♥ to show a minimum hand with four card heart support. Perfect! Well, almost. Unfortunately, the competition has driven the contract to a level too high. The operation was a success, but the patient died. Where have I heard that before? At least there was no possibility of getting to game in hearts! Should South have passed 2NT?! Another feather in the cap of Good-Bad?
****************************************
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 |
♠JT
♥Q94
♦T532
♣AK84
|
Dlr: East
Vul: N-S |
|
♠Q9632
♥AJ732
♦4
♣T5
|
♠AK75
♥K86
♦QJ
♣QJ97
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
| NS: 2♦ ♣6 ♥4 ♠4 NT6 |
| EW: 1♣ 3♥ 3♠ ♦4 NT5 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract Ld
50 4.00 2.00 2N E -1 ♦A A8-Garvin-Garvin vs A7-Green-Mok
50 4.00 2.00 4♠ W -1 ♣A A1-Block-Soskins vs A1-Mehra-Barnard
50 4.00 2.00 4♠ E -1 ♦K A5-Conley-Noor vs A8-Sendell-Stern
50 4.00 2.00 4♥ W -1 ♣A A3-Cox-Kneisl vs A4-Meryash-Pond
50 4.00 2.00 4♥ E -1 ♦A A6-Riggs-Minor vs A3-McGrew-Lawther
140 1.00 5.00 3♥ W ♣A A7-McIntyre-Reed vs A5-Moxley-Weir
420 0.00 6.00 4♠ E ♦A A4-Lux-Ferrante vs A6-Heller-Heller
|
| Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis | West | North | East | South | | | | 1NT | Pass | | 2♥ | Pass | 2♠ | Pass | | 4♥ | Pass | 4♠ | All pass | A seemingly straightforward auction, West offering a choice of games. In reality, a fury of controversy! There are those for whom the 4♥ bid after transferring to spades shows a singleton heart! Honestly, I ran into one regular partner who took a preference to spades holding four hearts! Another regular partner described the 4♥ bid as a Splinter with six spades and slam interest. That's two of my regular partners, with whom the subject has never arisen. Mind you, with those partners we do NOT play immediate 3♥ and 3♠ bids in response to 1NT as 5-5 major suit hands, respectfully invitational and game forcing. For THOSE folks, the Splinter concept for the 4♥ bid would be reasonable. Apparently when we moved from the 5-5 meanings a decade or so ago to the currently popular approach that 1NT - 3♥ shows a game-forcing hand with a singleton heart and three spades, while 1NT-3♠ shows a singleton spade and three hearts, there was no discussion of the effect of that agreement on related auctions, and each partner was expected to sort it all out without discussion. The caution from here is to discuss, discuss, discuss, your methods and if at any time you choose to change a method, be sure to discuss the effect on related auctions! My personal choice for proceeding with 5-5 major-suited hands after partner opens 1NT: Very weak -- employ Garbage Stayman . Over 2♦, bid 2♥, pass or correct.
Invitational -- transfer to spades and bid 3♥
Minimum game force -- transfer to spades and bid 4♥, pass or correct
Possible slam -- bid 3♦, get a preference, and start control bidding or Roman Keycard Blackwood , depending on the strength of the hand. The benefit is getting the right suit at the three level, leaving room for more definition below game. And how does that effect "other uses" of 3♦? If you use that now as strong minors, consider transferring to clubs and "reversing" into diamonds! That, of course, has another effect on the use of that sequence, but it seems only to lose showing a singleton, so of minimal frequency.
****************************************
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 |
♠KQ98
♥832
♦2
♣KJ954
|
Dlr: South
Vul: E-W |
|
♠5
♥KQ965
♦J86
♣QT83
|
♠A73
♥T4
♦KQ953
♣A76
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
| NS: 2♠ ♣5/6 ♦4 ♥5 NT6 |
| EW: 2♦ 1NT ♣6 ♥6 ♠4 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract Ld
500 6.00 0.00 4♦* E -2 ♣2 A8-Garvin-Garvin vs A7-Green-Mok
170 5.00 1.00 2♠ S +2 ♥K A7-McIntyre-Reed vs A5-Moxley-Weir
140 4.00 2.00 2♠ S +1 ♥K A5-Conley-Noor vs A8-Sendell-Stern
50 2.00 4.00 4♠ S -1 ♦6 A4-Lux-Ferrante vs A6-Heller-Heller
50 2.00 4.00 3♠ S -1 ♥K A1-Block-Soskins vs A1-Mehra-Barnard
50 2.00 4.00 3♠ S -1 ♦J A3-Cox-Kneisl vs A4-Meryash-Pond
100 0.00 6.00 4♠ S -2 ♥K A6-Riggs-Minor vs A3-McGrew-Lawther
|
| Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis | West | North | East | South | | | | | Pass | | Pass | 1♣ | 1♦ | 1♠ | | Dbl!1 | 2♠ | Pass | Pass | | 3♦ | Pass | Pass | Dbl | | Pass | 3♠ | All pass | | - Snapdragon, showing a diamond tolerance, but bringing a five card heart suit into focus without actually having to bid hearts!
|
3♦ looks to be a good contract, but Deep Finesse tells us it can be defeated. The play appears complex, but the easy to see problem is that EW have two club losers, a heart loser, and one or two diamonds. The terribly annoying 4-1 trump split is, as usual, a menace. East will have to ruff two spades, and that will weaken the trumps beyond repair. So South's double, having passed a near-opener, is sound. However, North might have remorse for having opened the bidding and seeing diminished defensive values in the spade honors (right!), and based on those evaluations, pull the double to a "safer" 3♠ contract. Down 1, rather than plus 200. Bridge seems so unfair at times. How was North to know that his clubs were so perfectly placed over dummy's, that East would have three clubs, and that the club position, coupled with partner's having passed a near-opener, were the critical factors? I do not blame North. The rather wild idea of opening 1♠ in third seat to preempt the opponents and provide lead direction would backfire, for South could not possibly be restrained from bidding 4♠, even after a negative response to Drury , should the auction come to that.
****************************************
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 |
♠KT94
♥KQ9754
♦T2
♣4
|
Dlr: West
Vul: Both |
|
♠Q7532
♥J
♦J87
♣AT73
|
♠6
♥A63
♦KQ965
♣KQ65
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
| NS: 3♥ ♣3 ♦3 ♠6 NT5 |
| EW: 4♣ 3♦ ♥3 ♠6 NT5 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract Ld
200 6.00 0.00 3♠ W -2 ♣4 A7-McIntyre-Reed vs A4-Meryash-Pond
170 5.00 1.00 2♥ N +2 ♠6 A8-Garvin-Garvin vs A6-Heller-Heller
140 3.50 2.50 3♥ N ♠6 A4-Lux-Ferrante vs A5-Moxley-Weir
140 3.50 2.50 2♥ N +1 ♠6 A5-Conley-Noor vs A7-Green-Mok
110 2.00 4.00 2♥ N ♠6 A6-Riggs-Minor vs A1-Mehra-Barnard
110 1.00 5.00 3♦ E ♥8 A2-Sokol-Primrose vs A2-Williams-Williams
130 0.00 6.00 2♦ E +2 ♣9 A1-Block-Soskins vs A8-Sendell-Stern
|
| Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis | West | North | East | South | | Pass | Pass | 1♦ | Pass | | 1♠ | Pass | 2♣ | Pass | | Pass | 2♥ | Pass | Pass | | 3♣ | Pass | Pass | 3♥ | | All pass | | | | South's thoughts: The opponents have at least eight clubs, so East has probably 5-6♦s and 4♣, and few major suit cards, certainly fewer than three spades. North probably has six hearts and few minor suit cards. Upon this card placement through the bidding, perhaps optimistic that the opponents are so reliable, 3♥ with two aces and a fit, should make the contract playable. In fact, EW will have to negotiate the spade ruff to defeat 4♥! There may be some 730 scores for NS as East doubles with his secondary quick tricks, the club suit honors turning out to have no value after West's ace. One diamond, one club, one heart, and one spade ruff are all that is available to the defense against a heart 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 |
♠JT83
♥A54
♦95
♣Q962
|
Dlr: North
Vul: N-S |
|
♠4
♥Q9
♦AQ83
♣AK8754
|
♠K76
♥76
♦KJT62
♣JT3
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
| NS: 5♥ 5♠ ♣4 ♦4 NT6 |
| EW: 3♣ 3/2♦ ♥1 ♠1 NT2 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract Ld
650 6.00 0.00 4♥ S +1 ♠6 A2-Sokol-Primrose vs A2-Williams-Williams
620 4.50 1.50 4♥ S ♣A A7-McIntyre-Reed vs A4-Meryash-Pond
620 4.50 1.50 4♥ S ♣A A8-Garvin-Garvin vs A6-Heller-Heller
300 3.00 3.00 5♣* W -2 ♥A A6-Riggs-Minor vs A1-Mehra-Barnard
230 2.00 4.00 3♠ S +3 ♣A A4-Lux-Ferrante vs A5-Moxley-Weir
50 1.00 5.00 4♣ W -1 ♥A A1-Block-Soskins vs A8-Sendell-Stern
100 0.00 6.00 4♥ S -1 ♣A A5-Conley-Noor vs A7-Green-Mok
|
| Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis | West | North | East | South | | | Pass | Pass | 1♠ | | 2♣ | 2♠ | 3♣ | 4♥ | | 5♣ | Dbl | Pass | 5♥ | | Pass | 5♠ | All pass | | Another example of fearing partner's double based on extreme distribution, this time correct, but perhaps luckily so. The result depends entirely on the spade finesse. Are EW likely to pull the contract from 5♥ back to 6♣, having already been doubled at the five level? Not. A wild hand, not likely to have many identical auctions, from table to table. A lively source of merriment and depression for discussions after the game. "Let me tell you about board 5!" "No, I have got a better story than that!"
****************************************
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 |
♠A862
♥87
♦Q98532
♣5
|
Dlr: East
Vul: E-W |
|
♠QJ97
♥95
♦T4
♣QT964
|
♠KT43
♥Q4
♦KJ7
♣AJ82
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
| NS: 4♦ 4♥ 3NT ♣6 ♠6 |
| EW: 1♣ 1♠ ♦3 ♥2 NT3 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract Ld
450 5.50 0.50 4♥ S +1 ♠Q A4-Lux-Ferrante vs A5-Moxley-Weir
450 5.50 0.50 4♥ S +1 ♠7 A7-McIntyre-Reed vs A4-Meryash-Pond
300 4.00 2.00 4♣ E -3 ♥A A1-Block-Soskins vs A8-Sendell-Stern
260 3.00 3.00 2♥ S +5 ♣Q A5-Conley-Noor vs A7-Green-Mok
200 1.00 5.00 3♥ S +2 ♠Q A6-Riggs-Minor vs A1-Mehra-Barnard
200 1.00 5.00 3♥ S +2 ♣8 A2-Sokol-Primrose vs A2-Williams-Williams
200 1.00 5.00 3♥ S +2 ♣6 A8-Garvin-Garvin vs A6-Heller-Heller
|
| Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis | West | North | East | South | | | | 1♣ | Dbl | | 1♠ | 2♦ | 2♠ | 4♥ | | All pass | | | | Everyone has something to say and South listened intently. The heart suit being basically independent, South likes the diamond bid from North, but it is not so much that suit that works for South, rather the ♠A and the singleton club! On the expected spade lead, North's ace wins and a club hits the table, ensuring one top club trick and one ruff in that suit. When the heart suit splits 2-2, queen onside, that will be eleven tricks for South. Why does the computer show ten tricks as the maximum? Because the computer leads a trump, denying declarer the club ruff! Deep Finesse peeks! Deep Finesse cheats! It is not the purpose of the computer to duplicate human play, rather to tell us what is possible in theory. Eleven tricks will be the norm.
****************************************
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 |
♠KJ73
♥AKQ94
♦42
♣JT
|
Dlr: South
Vul: Both |
|
♠AT96
♥JT7
♦A987
♣K4
|
♠Q8542
♥6
♦QT6
♣A982
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
| NS: 1♣ 3♥ ♦5 ♠4 NT6 |
| EW: 2/1♦ 3♠ ♣6 ♥4 NT6 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract Ld
500 6.00 0.00 4♠* E -2 ♥2 A7-McIntyre-Reed vs A2-Williams-Williams
200 5.00 1.00 4♠* E -1 ♥5 A2-Sokol-Primrose vs A1-Mehra-Barnard
170 4.00 2.00 3♥ N +1 ♦Q A3-Cox-Kneisl vs A3-McGrew-Lawther
140 3.00 3.00 3♥ N ♠2 A8-Garvin-Garvin vs A5-Moxley-Weir
100 2.00 4.00 3♠ E -1 ♥2 A6-Riggs-Minor vs A8-Sendell-Stern
140 1.00 5.00 3♠ E ♥8 A1-Block-Soskins vs A7-Green-Mok
170 0.00 6.00 2♠ E +2 ♦3 A5-Conley-Noor vs A6-Heller-Heller
|
| Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis | West | North | East | South | | | | | Pass | | 1♦ | 1♥ | 1♠ | 3♥ | | 3♠ | Pass | 4♠ | All pass | There has to be some benefit to South's preemptive raise, and that would be pushing East too high. If West passes 3♥, that will end the auction and 3♥ making will be a tie for top for NS. If West takes the push to 3♠, East cannot know whether West has a minimum or maximum hand, and should take the push with these all good factors pushing in that direction: five spades, four card support from partner, a singleton in the opponents' suit, QTx in partner's opening bid suit, and the ♣A. If East does not bid game with all of that, there is something wrong. So let's hear it for South's preemptive raise. North deems the result justice, having been deprived of the opportunity to bid Flannery THAT would have kept the opponents out of game in spades! Should North double 4♠? The thinking is that North should not give away the show. Besides, it is South's diamonds that help to set the contract, not a sure thing.
****************************************
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 |
| 8 |
♠KJ97
♥A83
♦AQ72
♣JT
|
Dlr: West
Vul: None |
|
♠3
♥J
♦8643
♣AK85432
|
♠AQT6
♥T9742
♦J9
♣Q9
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
| NS: 1♦ 1♠ ♣4 ♥6 NT4 |
| EW: 3♣ ♦6 ♥6 ♠5 NT6 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract Ld
50 6.00 0.00 3♣ W -1 ♥8 A6-Riggs-Minor vs A8-Sendell-Stern
110 4.50 1.50 3♣ W ♥A A8-Garvin-Garvin vs A5-Moxley-Weir
110 4.50 1.50 3♣ W ♦2 A7-McIntyre-Reed vs A2-Williams-Williams
130 3.00 3.00 3♣ W +1 ♠7 A1-Block-Soskins vs A7-Green-Mok
150 2.00 4.00 3♥ S -3 ♣A A2-Sokol-Primrose vs A1-Mehra-Barnard
200 0.50 5.50 3N N -4 ♥T A3-Cox-Kneisl vs A3-McGrew-Lawther
200 0.50 5.50 4♥ S -4 ♣A A5-Conley-Noor vs A6-Heller-Heller
|
| Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis | West | North | East | South | | 3♣ | Dbl | Pass | 3♥ | | Dbl | All pass | | | Preempts are a matter of style. West's hand is perfect for some folks, much too strong for others, who don't like having even the ace of the long suit, let alone AK. The idea behind that is two-fold, with the primary function of preempts according to the obstructionist school making life difficult for the opponents, while for the traditional, constructive school, the goal is to paint a picture for partner that can be relied upon to make a decision for determining a contract for the preemptor's side! So 3♣ is fine if you are a constructive preemptor, but dangerous for the other camp, who might miss game opposite a strong notrump in the East hand, for the partner in the obstructionist camp should pass, expecting nothing so good, rather ♣Q98432 and out! North will generally gain by doubling 3♣ of either camp, but today is not that day. East doubles what is under his nose, and a bonanza has arrived! NS must console themselves that at matchpoints it is only one board
****************************************
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 |
| 9 |
♠K873
♥J82
♦A2
♣K952
|
Dlr: North
Vul: E-W |
|
♠AJ9
♥T654
♦JT863
♣A
|
♠T64
♥Q7
♦K9754
♣864
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
| NS: 4♣ 3♥ 3♠ 1NT ♦4 |
| EW: 3♦ ♣3 ♥4 ♠4 NT5 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract Ld
140 6.00 0.00 1♠ N +2 ♦9 A7-McIntyre-Reed vs A2-Williams-Williams
80 5.00 1.00 1♠ N ♦4 A8-Garvin-Garvin vs A5-Moxley-Weir
50 4.00 2.00 5♣ S -1 ♦6 A2-Sokol-Primrose vs A1-Mehra-Barnard
90 2.50 3.50 2♦ W ♠8 A3-Cox-Kneisl vs A3-McGrew-Lawther
90 2.50 3.50 2♦ E ♣2 A1-Block-Soskins vs A7-Green-Mok
100 0.50 5.50 3N N -2 ♦K A5-Conley-Noor vs A6-Heller-Heller
100 0.50 5.50 3♠ N -2 ♥Q A6-Riggs-Minor vs A8-Sendell-Stern
|
| |
| 10 |
♠K9
♥KQ2
♦KQT3
♣T763
|
Dlr: East
Vul: Both |
|
♠AQ3
♥AJ3
♦A954
♣K85
|
♠J752
♥976
♦6
♣AQJ92
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
| NS: ♣3 ♦6 ♥5 ♠4 NT3 |
| EW: 3♣ -/1♦ 1♥ 3♠ 3NT ♦6/7 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract Ld
200 6.00 0.00 2♠ E -2 ♥4 A6-Riggs-Minor vs A7-Green-Mok
100 5.00 1.00 3N W -1 ♦3 A7-McIntyre-Reed vs A1-Mehra-Barnard
120 4.00 2.00 2N W ♦3 A3-Cox-Kneisl vs A2-Williams-Williams
150 3.00 3.00 2N W +1 ♦3 A8-Garvin-Garvin vs A3-McGrew-Lawther
180 2.00 4.00 2N W +2 ♣3 A2-Sokol-Primrose vs A8-Sendell-Stern
600 1.00 5.00 3N W ♦K A1-Block-Soskins vs A6-Heller-Heller
660 0.00 6.00 3N W +2 ♥4 A4-Lux-Ferrante vs A4-Meryash-Pond
|
| |
| 11 |
♠842
♥KQ64
♦8
♣AJ862
|
Dlr: South
Vul: None |
|
♠A7
♥J93
♦AKT964
♣K7
|
♠Q5
♥A52
♦Q532
♣QT53
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
| NS: 3♠ ♣6 ♦2 ♥6 NT2 |
EW: -/1♣ 4♦ -/1♥ 4/2NT
♣6/7 ♥6/7 ♠4 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract Ld
50 5.50 0.50 5♦ W -1 ♠8 A3-Cox-Kneisl vs A2-Williams-Williams
50 5.50 0.50 4♦ W -1 ♠8 A6-Riggs-Minor vs A7-Green-Mok
50 4.00 2.00 4♠ S -1 ♦A A4-Lux-Ferrante vs A4-Meryash-Pond
100 3.00 3.00 3♠ S -2 ♦A A8-Garvin-Garvin vs A3-McGrew-Lawther
110 2.00 4.00 3♦ W ♠2 A7-McIntyre-Reed vs A1-Mehra-Barnard
150 1.00 5.00 4♠ S -3 ♦A A2-Sokol-Primrose vs A8-Sendell-Stern
210 0.00 6.00 1N E +4 ♠J A1-Block-Soskins vs A6-Heller-Heller
|
| |
| 12 |
♠Q94
♥K8653
♦K6
♣J62
|
Dlr: West
Vul: N-S |
|
♠J753
♥AT
♦9753
♣AK9
|
♠AKT
♥72
♦T82
♣87543
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
| NS: 1♥ ♣4 ♦6 ♠5 NT5 |
| EW: 2♣ 1♦ 1♠ 1NT ♥5 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract Ld
110 5.00 1.00 2♥ N ♠A A3-Cox-Kneisl vs A2-Williams-Williams
110 5.00 1.00 2♥ N ♠K A2-Sokol-Primrose vs A8-Sendell-Stern
110 5.00 1.00 2♥ N ♦2 A7-McIntyre-Reed vs A1-Mehra-Barnard
90 2.50 3.50 1N E ♥Q A1-Block-Soskins vs A6-Heller-Heller
90 2.50 3.50 1N E ♦A A6-Riggs-Minor vs A7-Green-Mok
100 0.50 5.50 3♥ N -1 ♠A A4-Lux-Ferrante vs A4-Meryash-Pond
100 0.50 5.50 3♥ N -1 ♠A A8-Garvin-Garvin vs A3-McGrew-Lawther
|
| |
| 13 |
♠Q532
♥KQ85
♦73
♣854
|
Dlr: North
Vul: Both |
|
♠KJT7
♥432
♦A954
♣J2
|
♠94
♥76
♦KJT6
♣AT763
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
| NS: 3♥ 1♠ 1NT ♣5 ♦4 |
| EW: 2♣ 3♦ ♥4 ♠6 NT6 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract Ld
140 5.50 0.50 2♥ S +1 ♣J A4-Lux-Ferrante vs A3-McGrew-Lawther
140 5.50 0.50 2♥ N +1 ♣6 A2-Sokol-Primrose vs A7-Green-Mok
120 3.50 2.50 1N S +1 ♠7 A8-Garvin-Garvin vs A2-Williams-Williams
120 3.50 2.50 1N S +1 ♦4 A1-Block-Soskins vs A4-Meryash-Pond
110 2.00 4.00 2♥ S ♣J A3-Cox-Kneisl vs A1-Mehra-Barnard
90 1.00 5.00 1N S ♠J A7-McIntyre-Reed vs A8-Sendell-Stern
100 0.00 6.00 3N S -1 ♠7 A5-Conley-Noor vs A5-Moxley-Weir
|
| |
| 14 |
♠9875
♥A532
♦72
♣Q62
|
Dlr: East
Vul: None |
|
♠KQ
♥KQ986
♦-
♣KJ9754
|
♠J6432
♥T7
♦AT943
♣A
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
| NS: ♣3 ♦6 ♥3 ♠4 NT5 |
| EW: 4♣ 1/-♦ 4♥ 3♠ 2NT ♦7/6 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract Ld
150 6.00 0.00 4♠ E -3 ♦K A7-McIntyre-Reed vs A8-Sendell-Stern
110 5.00 1.00 2♦ S +1 ♣3 A2-Sokol-Primrose vs A7-Green-Mok
100 4.00 2.00 2N E -2 ♦6 A8-Garvin-Garvin vs A2-Williams-Williams
50 3.00 3.00 3N E -1 ♦K A3-Cox-Kneisl vs A1-Mehra-Barnard
140 1.50 4.50 2♥ W +1 ♦7 A1-Block-Soskins vs A4-Meryash-Pond
140 1.50 4.50 2♥ W +1 ♦7 A4-Lux-Ferrante vs A3-McGrew-Lawther
170 0.00 6.00 2♥ W +2 ♦7 A5-Conley-Noor vs A5-Moxley-Weir
|
| |
| 15 |
♠962
♥QJT
♦KJ32
♣AJ2
|
Dlr: South
Vul: N-S |
|
♠AJ43
♥543
♦A64
♣Q43
|
♠QT8
♥A987
♦85
♣T875
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
| NS: 2♦ 1NT ♣6 ♥6 ♠6 |
| EW: 1♣ 1♥ 1♠ ♦5 NT6 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract Ld
150 6.00 0.00 2N S +1 ♥5 A1-Block-Soskins vs A4-Meryash-Pond
120 5.00 1.00 2N S ♠3 A4-Lux-Ferrante vs A3-McGrew-Lawther
90 4.00 2.00 2♦ N ♥9 A8-Garvin-Garvin vs A2-Williams-Williams
PASS 2.00 4.00 Pass Out A2-Sokol-Primrose vs A7-Green-Mok
PASS 2.00 4.00 Pass Out A5-Conley-Noor vs A5-Moxley-Weir
PASS 2.00 4.00 Pass Out A7-McIntyre-Reed vs A8-Sendell-Stern
100 0.00 6.00 2N S -1 ♠3 A3-Cox-Kneisl vs A1-Mehra-Barnard
|
| |
| 16 |
♠Q9654
♥-
♦AQ8
♣KJT32
|
Dlr: West
Vul: E-W |
|
♠8
♥AKJT87
♦7652
♣98
|
♠AT72
♥9643
♦J
♣A654
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
| NS: 2♣ 3♦ 4♠ ♥2 NT5 |
| EW: 4/5♥ 2NT ♣4 ♦4 ♠3 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract Ld
420 5.00 1.00 4♠ N ♥8 A2-Sokol-Primrose vs A5-Moxley-Weir
420 5.00 1.00 4♠ N ♥3 A4-Lux-Ferrante vs A2-Williams-Williams
420 5.00 1.00 4♠ N ♦J A5-Conley-Noor vs A4-Meryash-Pond
170 3.00 3.00 2♠ N +2 ♥3 A8-Garvin-Garvin vs A1-Mehra-Barnard
140 2.00 4.00 3♠ S ♥A A3-Cox-Kneisl vs A8-Sendell-Stern
140 1.00 5.00 2♥ W +1 ♠4 A1-Block-Soskins vs A3-McGrew-Lawther
500 0.00 6.00 4♠* N -3 ♦J A6-Riggs-Minor vs A6-Heller-Heller
|
| |
| 17 |
♠J92
♥73
♦86
♣AKT985
|
Dlr: North
Vul: None |
|
♠KQ6
♥QJ965
♦J73
♣Q7
|
♠AT7
♥KT84
♦T94
♣J63
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
| NS: 3♣ 3♦ 2♠ 2NT ♥6 |
| EW: 1♥ ♣2 ♦4 ♠4 NT4 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract Ld
100 6.00 0.00 3♥ W -2 ♦8 A8-Garvin-Garvin vs A1-Mehra-Barnard
50 5.00 1.00 2♥ W -1 ♣A A1-Block-Soskins vs A3-McGrew-Lawther
100 2.50 3.50 3N S -2 ♥5 A4-Lux-Ferrante vs A2-Williams-Williams
100 2.50 3.50 2N S -2 ♥6 A5-Conley-Noor vs A4-Meryash-Pond
100 2.50 3.50 4♦ S -2 ♥9 A2-Sokol-Primrose vs A5-Moxley-Weir
100 2.50 3.50 5♣ N -2 ♠A A3-Cox-Kneisl vs A8-Sendell-Stern
110 0.00 6.00 2♥ W ♦8 A6-Riggs-Minor vs A6-Heller-Heller
|
| |
| 18 |
♠J5
♥T753
♦AJT9
♣T74
|
Dlr: East
Vul: N-S |
|
♠KQ8
♥J8
♦KQ762
♣QJ2
|
♠A42
♥AK
♦853
♣AK853
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
| NS: ♣2 ♦3 ♥6 ♠4 NT2 |
| EW: 5♣ 4♦ 3♠ 5NT ♥6 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract Ld
50 5.00 1.00 6N E -1 ♥4 A3-Cox-Kneisl vs A8-Sendell-Stern
50 5.00 1.00 6N E -1 ♦4 A5-Conley-Noor vs A4-Meryash-Pond
50 5.00 1.00 5♦ W -1 ♠J A4-Lux-Ferrante vs A2-Williams-Williams
430 3.00 3.00 3N E +1 ♥8 A2-Sokol-Primrose vs A5-Moxley-Weir
460 1.00 5.00 3N E +2 ♠T A1-Block-Soskins vs A3-McGrew-Lawther
460 1.00 5.00 3N E +2 ♥4 A8-Garvin-Garvin vs A1-Mehra-Barnard
460 1.00 5.00 3N E +2 ♥2 A6-Riggs-Minor vs A6-Heller-Heller
|
| |
| 19 |
♠AT92
♥AKT4
♦T
♣Q432
|
Dlr: South
Vul: E-W |
|
♠53
♥65
♦Q7642
♣AK65
|
♠KJ7
♥973
♦AK3
♣J987
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
| NS: 3♥ 3♠ ♣5 ♦5 NT6 |
| EW: 2♣ 2♦ ♥4 ♠4 NT6 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract Ld
170 6.00 0.00 2♥ S +2 ♣A A7-McIntyre-Reed vs A7-Green-Mok
140 5.00 1.00 1♥ S +2 ♣A A3-Cox-Kneisl vs A6-Heller-Heller
110 3.50 2.50 2♥ S ♠5 A4-Lux-Ferrante vs A1-Mehra-Barnard
110 3.50 2.50 2♥ S ♣A A1-Block-Soskins vs A2-Williams-Williams
100 1.00 5.00 1N S -2 ♣5 A5-Conley-Noor vs A3-McGrew-Lawther
100 1.00 5.00 4♥ S -2 ♣A A2-Sokol-Primrose vs A4-Meryash-Pond
100 1.00 5.00 3♥ S -2 ♣A A6-Riggs-Minor vs A5-Moxley-Weir
|
| |
| 20 |
♠KQ9
♥A76
♦AQ54
♣J93
|
Dlr: West
Vul: Both |
|
♠T62
♥982
♦J93
♣Q864
|
♠AJ83
♥QT
♦KT86
♣KT2
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
NS: 1/-♣ 1/-♦ 2♥ 2NT
♣7/6 ♦7/6 ♠6 |
| EW: ♣6 ♦6 ♥5 ♠6 NT5 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract Ld
630 6.00 0.00 3N N +1 ♠6 A2-Sokol-Primrose vs A4-Meryash-Pond
600 5.00 1.00 3N N ♦6 A3-Cox-Kneisl vs A6-Heller-Heller
150 3.50 2.50 2N N +1 ♠3 A7-McIntyre-Reed vs A7-Green-Mok
150 3.50 2.50 2N N +1 ♦6 A1-Block-Soskins vs A2-Williams-Williams
100 1.50 4.50 4♥ N -1 ♦6 A4-Lux-Ferrante vs A1-Mehra-Barnard
100 1.50 4.50 3♥ N -1 ♣2 A6-Riggs-Minor vs A5-Moxley-Weir
200 0.00 6.00 2N S -2 ♣4 A5-Conley-Noor vs A3-McGrew-Lawther
|
| |
| 21 |
♠Q97
♥AT
♦AT843
♣K73
|
Dlr: North
Vul: N-S |
|
♠KJ84
♥KJ3
♦Q75
♣985
|
♠T63
♥9876
♦62
♣AJ64
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
| NS: 3♣ 4♦ 3♥ 3♠ 4NT |
| EW: ♣4 ♦3 ♥4 ♠4 NT3 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract Ld
630 4.75 1.25 3N N +1 ♠6 A2-Sokol-Primrose vs A4-Meryash-Pond
630 4.75 1.25 3N N +1 ♣4 A5-Conley-Noor vs A3-McGrew-Lawther
630 4.75 1.25 3N N +1 ♣4 A7-McIntyre-Reed vs A7-Green-Mok
600 1.83 4.17 3N N ♥9 A4-Lux-Ferrante vs A1-Mehra-Barnard
600 1.83 4.17 3N N ♣4 A1-Block-Soskins vs A2-Williams-Williams
120 0.08 5.92 1N S +1 ♠4 A6-Riggs-Minor vs A5-Moxley-Weir
|
| |
| 22 |
♠AJ65
♥AJ7
♦KQ
♣AQJ5
|
Dlr: East
Vul: E-W |
|
♠Q743
♥KQT6
♦J53
♣KT
|
♠KT98
♥32
♦A962
♣974
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
| NS: 4♣ 1♦ 3♥ ♠5 NT6 |
EW: 1/2♠ -/1NT
♣2 ♦5 ♥3 NT6/7 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract Ld
150 6.00 0.00 2♣ N +3 ♦A A5-Conley-Noor vs A2-Williams-Williams
110 5.00 1.00 2♠ N ♣7 A6-Riggs-Minor vs A4-Meryash-Pond
50 4.00 2.00 2N N -1 ♠8 A8-Garvin-Garvin vs A8-Sendell-Stern
100 3.00 3.00 3N S -2 ♥6 A4-Lux-Ferrante vs A7-Green-Mok
150 1.00 5.00 3N N -3 ♠8 A3-Cox-Kneisl vs A5-Moxley-Weir
150 1.00 5.00 2N N -3 ♦A A7-McIntyre-Reed vs A6-Heller-Heller
150 1.00 5.00 4♠ N -3 ♥9 A2-Sokol-Primrose vs A3-McGrew-Lawther
|
| |
| 23 |
♠K872
♥J85
♦974
♣K92
|
Dlr: South
Vul: Both |
|
♠AQJT964
♥K
♦KJT
♣J6
|
♠53
♥Q763
♦865
♣Q875
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
| NS: 3♣ 3♦ 3/4♥ 2NT ♠6 |
| EW: 1♠ ♣4 ♦3 ♥3 NT4 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract Ld
620 6.00 0.00 4♥ S ♠A A2-Sokol-Primrose vs A3-McGrew-Lawther
200 5.00 1.00 3♠ W -2 ♥5 A7-McIntyre-Reed vs A6-Heller-Heller
100 4.00 2.00 3♠ W -1 ♥J A3-Cox-Kneisl vs A5-Moxley-Weir
110 3.00 3.00 1♠ W +1 ♦9 A5-Conley-Noor vs A2-Williams-Williams
140 1.50 4.50 3♠ W ♥5 A8-Garvin-Garvin vs A8-Sendell-Stern
140 1.50 4.50 2♠ W +1 ♦9 A6-Riggs-Minor vs A4-Meryash-Pond
400 0.00 6.00 3N N -4 ♠5 A4-Lux-Ferrante vs A7-Green-Mok
|
| |
| 24 |
♠AQ5
♥KQT7
♦Q5
♣KJT4
|
Dlr: West
Vul: None |
|
♠JT862
♥-
♦AKJ86
♣853
|
♠K94
♥J9863
♦973
♣96
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
| NS: 3♣ 2♥ 2NT ♦4 ♠4 |
| EW: 3♦ 3♠ ♣4 ♥5 NT5 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract Ld
110 6.00 0.00 2♥ N ♣9 A8-Garvin-Garvin vs A8-Sendell-Stern
50 5.00 1.00 2N S -1 ♦A A6-Riggs-Minor vs A4-Meryash-Pond
100 2.50 3.50 4♥ S -2 ♦A A5-Conley-Noor vs A2-Williams-Williams
100 2.50 3.50 4♥ N -2 ♦3 A7-McIntyre-Reed vs A6-Heller-Heller
100 2.50 3.50 4♥ N -2 ♣9 A3-Cox-Kneisl vs A5-Moxley-Weir
100 2.50 3.50 4♥ N -2 ♣6 A2-Sokol-Primrose vs A3-McGrew-Lawther
200 0.00 6.00 4♥ N -4 ♣9 A4-Lux-Ferrante vs A7-Green-Mok
|
| |
