- Saturday Morn - June 24, 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 25
Field strength:  Mean: 835 MP  Geomean: 261 MP
(based on 20 players)
★ ★ ★  Masterpoint Winners  ★ ★ ★
Partnership Pct Masterpoints
Elizabeth Nasr - Michel Nasr 60.00 1.41 Red, 1.40 Blk
Katherine Gray - Richard McCormick 55.50 1.06 Red, 1.05 Blk
Richard Papst - Terry Handley 54.88 0.79 Red, 0.79 Blk
Janet Street - William Putnam 52.38 0.60 Red, 0.59 Blk
EVENT>Sat Morning Open Game    |SESSION>Saturday Morn|SECTION> O N-S
------------------------,------ ------------,-------- --------------------------
DATE>June 24, 2017      |CLUB NO.>150680    | 06/24/2017 14:31
---------------------,-- ------------------- -------------,---------------------
DIR> Alan Hedegard   |RATING>Club - North American Pairs  |MOVEMENT>MITCHELL
------------,-------- ,-------------------------,--------- ---------------------
AVE>   50.0 |TOP>   4 |MP LIMITS>None/2500/500  |CLUB>H & H  Saturday
------------ --------- ------------------------- -------------------------------
PAIRS IN STRAT A=5/B=3/C=0                       ,---,------------,-----------------,-------------------------,------,---------,
-------------------------------------------------|   | 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 Elizabeth Nasr         Michel Nasr              A   Q            1     .     .   |   1     .     .     60.00  60.00  1.41Red
                                                                                                                        1.40Blk
 2 Joan Roberts           Barbara Callaway         B       Q        .     .     .   |   .     .     .     43.75  43.75
 3 Richard Vreeland       Debeliah Anthony         B                .     .     .   |   .     .     .     42.63  42.63
 4 Carol Maggipinto       Mark Maggipinto          A   Q            .     .     .   |   .     .     .     48.50  48.50
 5 Terry Handley          Richard Papst            B   Q   Q        3     2     .   |   2     1     .     54.88  54.88  0.79Red
                                                                                                                        0.79Blk
                                          Totals                                                         249.76

EVENT>Sat Morning Open Game    |SESSION>Saturday Morn|SECTION> O E-W
------------------------,------ ------------,-------- --------------------------
AVE>   50.0 |TOP>   4 |MP LIMITS>None/2500/500  |CLUB>H & H  Saturday
------------ --------- ------------------------- -------------------------------
PAIRS IN STRAT A=5/B=5/C=2                       ,---,------------,-----------------,-------------------------,------,---------,
-------------------------------------------------|   | 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 Janet Street           William Putnam           B   Q   Q        4     3     .   |   2     2     .     52.38  52.38  0.60Red
                                                                                                                        0.59Blk
 2 Judith Ritchie         Suzanne Taunt            C   Q   Q   Q    .     .     .   |   .     .     .     51.50  51.50
 3 Katherine Gray         Richard McCormick        B   Q   Q        2     1     .   |   1     1     .     55.50  55.50  1.06Red
                                                                                                                        1.05Blk
 4 Elizabeth Sebring      Doris Jones              C           Q    .     .     .   |   .     .     .     43.23  43.23
 5 Janet Hedlund          Nooria Noor              B                .     .     .   |   .     .     .     47.13  47.13
                                          Totals                                                         249.74

Hands and Results
1 ♠4
QT95
J76
♣QT643
Dlr: North
Vul: None
♠AT5
3
A9843
♣A952
♠932
K762
T52
♣KJ8
♠KQJ876
AJ84
KQ
♣7
5
127
16
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3 2♠ 1NT  ♣6 ♦5
EW: 1♣ 2  ♥4 ♠4 NT6/5
LoTT: 17 - 16 = +1
Par: +140 3-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  170          2.50   1.50  3♠ S +1   3  O5-Handley-Papst vs O4-Sebring-Jones
  170          2.50   1.50  2♠ S +2   3  O2-Roberts-Callaway vs O3-Gray-McCormick
  170          2.50   1.50  2♠ S +2   3  O3-Vreeland-Anthony vs O5-Hedlund-Noor
  170          2.50   1.50  1♠ S +3   3  O4-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs O2-Ritchie-Taunt
         50    0.00   4.00  4♠ S -1   4  O1-Nasr-Nasr vs O1-Street-Putnam

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
 PassPass1
Pass1NTPass2
PassPassPass 

South's rebid is of some interest. Should South bid 2? 3? 3? The general question was posed in 2005 by Steve Robinson (three world championships and twenty-four ACBL national championships to his credit) posed the question to a panel of select and top level experts: What should opener rebid with 6 spades and 4 hearts after 1 - 1NT? Read it here: http://www.districtsixbridge.org/Articles/Article%202005-12.aspx

Several would "always" bid 2 with four hearts, even on 5432. Others, probably more sensibly, require some heart values. Others would rebid hearts if the suit quality equals or exceeds the quality of the spade suit, including comments on the interior quality of the spades as crucial.

One aspect of the panel's discussion was the comment that after 1 - 1NT; 2 - 2NT; 3 would be forcing, which suggests that the 2 bid might be made on a quite good hand, expecting partner to pass only with a very poor hand and a strong preference for hearts over spades. (See the present hand!) This South hand is pretty darned good. Could it be right to bid just 2, with 3 in reserve showing a good hand? EUREKA! The panel wins, having almost all taken a strong interest in bidding 2 rather than spades. General principles would suggest bidding 2 by responder with two spades and only three hearts. All well and good for minimum opening bids. Granted, the panel did not mention a hand as good as South's, specifically, but a bidding issue good enough to obtain varying opinions from world champions and national champions is well worth study.

2 obtains nine tricks, while spades are limited to eight, although good defense appears necessary to achieve that good result -- heart lead from west, east withholding the king, suit preference 2 when declarer leads trump, leading to West's underleading his A to east, a heart return, ruffed, and preventing an entry to dummy for the heart finesse. How routine! Ho-hum.



****************************************
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 ♠KQJT85
6
K53
♣Q53
Dlr: East
Vul: N-S
♠7
KQT
AQJ9
♣AT972
♠A9
J8753
764
♣864
♠6432
A942
T82
♣KJ
11
165
8
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3♠ 1NT  ♣4 ♦5 ♥4
EW: 3♣ 1 2  ♠3 NT6
LoTT: 18 - 18 = 0
Par: +100 4♣*-EW-1
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  300          4.00   0.00  5♣* W -2  ♠K  O1-Nasr-Nasr vs O1-Street-Putnam
  140          2.00   2.00  3♠ N      ♣6  O4-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs O2-Ritchie-Taunt
  140          2.00   2.00  2♠ S +1   ♣6  O2-Roberts-Callaway vs O3-Gray-McCormick
  140          2.00   2.00  2♠ N +1   ♣4  O5-Handley-Papst vs O4-Sebring-Jones
        200    0.00   4.00  4♠* N -1  ♣8  O3-Vreeland-Anthony vs O5-Hedlund-Noor

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
  PassPass
11Pass2
Dbl3PassPass
Pass   

If EW wind up playing a heart contract, perhaps doubled, the best defense consists in leading the K, else eight tricks are makeable. Of course, since NS can make 3, EW might wind up in 4, not a good idea, but it will happen. Doubled, it behooves NS to better + 140, and only by leading he K can that be achieved. Not likely, so the tumultuous competitive bidding must be punished by a most unlikely -- nay, impossible -- lead, and those who bid 4 will escape their due.



****************************************
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 ♠Q874
A53
J75
♣AT9
Dlr: South
Vul: E-W
♠K92
KQ9
AQ3
♣Q753
♠AJ5
J86
K8
♣KJ864
♠T63
T742
T9642
♣2
11
1613
0
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣2 ♦5 ♥3 ♠3 NT2
EW: 5♣ 2 3 2♠ 5NT
LoTT: 16 - 17 = -1
Par: -660 5NT-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  100          4.00   0.00  3N W -1   ♠4  O1-Nasr-Nasr vs O1-Street-Putnam
        630    3.00   1.00  3N W +1   ♠2  O3-Vreeland-Anthony vs O5-Hedlund-Noor
        660    1.00   3.00  3N W +2   ♠4  O2-Roberts-Callaway vs O3-Gray-McCormick
        660    1.00   3.00  3N W +2   ♠4  O4-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs O2-Ritchie-Taunt
        660    1.00   3.00  3N W +2   ♠4  O5-Handley-Papst vs O4-Sebring-Jones

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
   Pass
1Pass3NTPass
4NTAll pass  

West has a flat hand and a weak long suit, so it would not at all be unreasonable for a downgrade and a 1NT opening bid, but most will open 1, wanting desperately to show the 18-count. When East bids 3NT, showing 13-15, West can dream of slam, but should be content with a quantitative 4NT, inviting slam opposite the maximum 15 point hand in East's range. East will decline.

Off two aces.



****************************************
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 ♠KJ43
AJ32
QJ
♣AJ8
Dlr: West
Vul: Both
♠T8
K4
AT765
♣T743
♠AQ9652
Q
832
♣KQ2
♠7
T98765
K94
♣965
17
713
3
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3/2 1NT  ♣5 ♦4 ♠5
EW: 2♣ 3 2♠  ♥4 NT5/6
LoTT: 18 - 18 = 0
Par: +140 3-S
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  100          3.50   0.50  2♠ E -1   T  O4-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs O2-Ritchie-Taunt
  100          3.50   0.50  3 W -1   ♣8  O3-Vreeland-Anthony vs O5-Hedlund-Noor
        100    1.50   2.50  4 S -1   ♠T  O1-Nasr-Nasr vs O1-Street-Putnam
        100    1.50   2.50  4 S -1   ♠T  O5-Handley-Papst vs O4-Sebring-Jones
        110    0.00   4.00  2♠ E      T  O2-Roberts-Callaway vs O3-Gray-McCormick

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
Pass1NT22NT1
Pass3Pass3
All pass   
  1. Lebensohl, forcing 3 to effect a signoff sequence.

Nice catch, South!

South, vulnerable, ought not venture out into the jungle, of course, but if he were to do so, Lebensohl is the method of choice, distinguishing a game forcing hand (not!) from a weak hand desiring only to play a part score (Boy, Howdy!).

So 2 is likely to be the final contract against a sensible, law-abiding South, and the opening lead will likely be the T, setting up a heart trick for a diamond discard. A diamond lead is possible, and better for the defense.

At such time as East deems it appropriate to lead trumps, North should be played for the strength, and thus run the T or 8, as preferred.



****************************************
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 ♠87
98
AQ6543
♣765
Dlr: North
Vul: N-S
♠965432
AQ63
K
♣K9
♠KQJT
JT74
98
♣J42
♠A
K52
JT72
♣AQT83
6
128
14
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 4/5♣ 4/5 2NT  ♥3/5 ♠3
EW: 2 4♠  ♣2 ♦2 NT2
LoTT: 21 - 20 = +1
Par: +100 5♠*-EW-1
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
        100    4.00   0.00  5 S -1   ♠2  O1-Nasr-Nasr vs O1-Street-Putnam
        170    3.00   1.00  3♠ W +1   ♣7  O5-Handley-Papst vs O4-Sebring-Jones
        200    1.50   2.50  3N S -2   ♠4  O4-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs O2-Ritchie-Taunt
        200    1.50   2.50  5* N -1  ♠K  O3-Vreeland-Anthony vs O5-Hedlund-Noor
        420    0.00   4.00  4♠ W      A  O2-Roberts-Callaway vs O3-Gray-McCormick

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis

5 is lucky, lucky, lucky, and takes more than mere skill to make.

I would be leery of opening a weak 2 in first seat, vulnerable, but there is one thing to be said for it -- it's now or never for the diamond suit! Further, it might take the opponents out. However, there is the risk that partner might get overly excited, and only good methods will allow the contract to rest below the high risk level.

Of course, the bridge gods have set this hand as making 5, contrarily, and if North does not open the bidding 2, West will have an easy time bidding over South's 1 opening bid, while North is now shut out, having lost his one reasonable opportunity. Now EW will play a spade contract, but game seems out of reach.

It's the fortuitous positioning of the heart and club honors that permits 4 to make, but along with that are the good heart intermediates held by East. Instead, 9542 Would prevent 4 from making.

So it's a crap shoot, and to the valiant will go the spoils of conquest. West has some inking of the beneficial positioning of his round honors and should be a bit aggressive.



****************************************
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 ♠62
AT54
862
♣9542
Dlr: East
Vul: E-W
♠AJ74
K92
93
♣AJT6
♠T985
QJ873
Q
♣K73
♠KQ3
6
AKJT754
♣Q8
4
138
15
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 4 2NT  ♣4 ♥3 ♠4
EW: 3♣ 3 3♠  ♦3 NT5
LoTT: 19 - 18 = +1
Par: +130 4-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  130          3.00   1.00  3 S +1   ♣A  O1-Nasr-Nasr vs O5-Hedlund-Noor
  130          3.00   1.00  3 S +1   ♣6  O4-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs O1-Street-Putnam
  130          3.00   1.00  2 S +2   ♠7  O5-Handley-Papst vs O3-Gray-McCormick
  110          1.00   3.00  3 S      K  O2-Roberts-Callaway vs O2-Ritchie-Taunt
        620    0.00   4.00  4♠ E      6  O3-Vreeland-Anthony vs O4-Sebring-Jones

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
  Pass1
DblPass13
PassPass3Pass
Pass4PassPass
Pass   

West will offer to contest, East will not quite jump with his hand, but South will opine that he has a good hand with a good suit. Agreed!

North, holding the A in the opponents' suit along with surprising support for a suit jump-rebid, can do no less than compete to 4.

Perfectimento!



****************************************
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 ♠2
Q52
T84
♣AT9653
Dlr: South
Vul: Both
♠AQJT95
A964
K6
♣2
♠8763
KT
AJ953
♣K8
♠K4
J873
Q72
♣QJ74
6
1411
9
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣5 ♦0 ♥3/2 ♠0 NT0
EW: 1♣ 6 3 6♠ 6NT
LoTT: 17 - 20 = -3
Par: -1440 6NT-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
        650    3.50   0.50  5♠ W      ♣A  O3-Vreeland-Anthony vs O4-Sebring-Jones
        650    3.50   0.50  4♠ W +1   ♣A  O1-Nasr-Nasr vs O5-Hedlund-Noor
        680    1.50   2.50  4♠ W +2   ♣A  O2-Roberts-Callaway vs O2-Ritchie-Taunt
        680    1.50   2.50  4♠ W +2   ♣A  O5-Handley-Papst vs O3-Gray-McCormick
        710    0.00   4.00  4♠ W +3   2  O4-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs O1-Street-Putnam

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
   Pass
1Pass2NTPass
3Pass3Pass
3Pass4Pass
4NTPass5Pass
5PassPassPass

Thoughtfully bid, but perhaps timid. EW found out that they are missing two key cards -- Either two aces or the K and an ace. If you will look closely at the auction, it is clear to West that the A and the K are missing. Now the hand is rather much reduced to whether the K is onside or not, and that is a 50-50 proposition. Since we are told by the mathematicians that a 50-50 slam is worth bidding on average, it would not be a bad prospect to bid the slam! (See Hugh Kelsey, "Slam Bidding" -- "a small slam is a reasonable proposition if it is as likely to succeed as to fail. Any slam offering better than a 50-50 chance of success . . . should be bid." On that basis, this slam is reasonable to bid -- a tossup. With ten trumps and many entries to the board from which to choose, lead and run the 8, succeeding any time the K is in the South hand. When it is, plus 1430 . If the A is not led, declarer can take all thirteen tricks by setting up the diamond suit for the discard of one club. There are no other issues, it would seem.

Well, yes, there are, but they are system dependent. If the partnership is playing Serious 3NT, then East could bid 3NT over the 3 bid, after which West would bid 4, simultaneously denying a club void and showing the K. Then East, with the crucial third round control of hearts, would be fully justified in being the key-card inquirer with 4NT. A better auction, but East will not know for sure about the quality six card spade suit.

Another concept: For those playing the variation of Jacoby Transfers in which 3 in response to 2NT is any minimum, 3 a maximum without shortness, 3/3/3NT show extras and //other major shortness. Here the bid would be 3, when East would have to start control bidding at the four level, and valuable space has been consumed in return for West's generalized opinion about holding a non-minimum. This system, lovingly called Yacoby (The method has Swedish origins) gains space for singletons, but loses space when neither player has shortness.



****************************************
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 ♠AQJ853
42
AQ2
♣AQ
Dlr: West
Vul: None
♠K94
J3
87
♣KJ8653
♠T62
KQ65
KT65
♣72
♠7
AT987
J943
♣T94
19
88
5
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1♣ 4 4 4♠ 4NT
EW:  ♣6 ♦3 ♥3 ♠3 NT3
LoTT: 16 - 15 = +1
Par: +430 4NT-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  420          3.50   0.50  4♠ N      K  O5-Handley-Papst vs O3-Gray-McCormick
  420          3.50   0.50  4♠ N      ♣2  O4-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs O1-Street-Putnam
  400          2.00   2.00  3N N      K  O3-Vreeland-Anthony vs O4-Sebring-Jones
  170          0.50   3.50  3♠ N +1   ♣7  O1-Nasr-Nasr vs O5-Hedlund-Noor
  170          0.50   3.50  3♠ N +1   ♣7  O2-Roberts-Callaway vs O2-Ritchie-Taunt

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
Pass1Pass1NT
Pass4All pass 

Oh, certainly there are other ways to bid the North hand -- a conventionally game forcing 2NT over 1NT forcing comes to mind, followed by rebidding 3, but that will serve little purpose other than to challenge the partnership and risk an accident. North cannot seriously entertain the possibility of slam with all of the holes in his hand. Make a practical 4 bid!

Basically, when the club finesse works, all is well. Perhaps some defensive slip will provide an avenue to eleven tricks, but that would be painful to watch.



****************************************
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 ♠KQ874
JT64
A62
♣9
Dlr: North
Vul: E-W
♠A
K3
JT9873
♣AK52
♠JT963
Q9
Q54
♣Q73
♠52
A8752
K
♣JT864
10
157
8
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3 1♠  ♣6 ♦4 NT6
EW: 1♣ 3  ♥3 ♠5 NT5
LoTT: 18 - 18 = 0
Par: +140 3-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  590          4.00   0.00  4* S     ♠A  O5-Handley-Papst vs O3-Gray-McCormick
  170          3.00   1.00  2 N +2   ♣3  O4-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs O1-Street-Putnam
  100          2.00   2.00  4 W -1   ♣9  O3-Vreeland-Anthony vs O4-Sebring-Jones
         50    1.00   3.00  4 S -1   ♠A  O1-Nasr-Nasr vs O5-Hedlund-Noor
        130    0.00   4.00  3 W +1   ♣9  O2-Roberts-Callaway vs O2-Ritchie-Taunt

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis

Is the North hand worth an opening bid of 1? There are those who extoll the Rule of 20 who would have to be consistent with their rule and pass [The hand only counts to nineteen in points and longest two suit lengths] -- or be hypocritical. Either the Rule works or it doesn't. Don't give me guidance and then not follow it! Can you guess that I don't use the Rule of Twenty? It's only benefit is to help inexperienced players appreciate the value of long suits. Otherwise, standard evaluation suffices. The Rule of Twenty was created to help push toward making a proper decision whether to open the bidding or not to do so when there is a close decision, but only for the dealer and second seat, not for third or fourth seats. Other than being unnecessary as a decision making tool for experienced players who understand the principles of hand evaluation, properly evaluating long suits, the RULE fails in several aspects:

1) You should tend to open marginal hands with length in both major suits
2) You should tend to open marginal hands when the suit to be opened has lead-directional value
3) You should tend to open marginal hands when you have adequate defensive values (2QT)
4) You should tend to open marginal hands when holding length in the spade suit

I like Frank Stewart's philosophy of opening the bidding: "(You) have some potential tricks (that's the bottom line), good defense, and an easy second bid. What more could you ask for? So
you're short a couple of Jacks. Big deal." "Better Bridge For the Advancing Player." p. 4. While you have Stewart's book open, flip over to page 38, where he evaluates T753 AQ954 Q5 KJ in fourth position. Focus on this aspect of his thinking: "If you had the minor suits instead [of the majors], you might toss the hand in, but not so here. ONE HEART, you open."

How does "traditional" evaluation evaluate this hand? Edgar Kaplan may be used as a guide here -- and there is a handy-dandy internet-accessible computerized version of his thinking at http://www.jeff-goldsmith.org/cgi-bin/knr.cgi. You won't have access to a computer or the Internet at the table, but you can do approximately as well -- the KR Evaluator just properly evaluates long suits, honors in long suits, devalues short suit honors, and considers honors working together rather than apart and suit solidity faster and more consistently. KR gives this hand 11.75, and not quite an opening bid. It also fails to consider the advantages of holding both major suits for competitive and constructive purposes.



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

10 ♠AT98
AT32
T532
♣9
Dlr: East
Vul: Both
♠75
J54
9876
♣AT85
♠J642
Q9
AKJ
♣KJ43
♠KQ3
K876
Q4
♣Q762
8
515
12
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3 1♠  ♣5 ♦6 NT5
EW: 2♣ 1 2/1NT  ♥4 ♠6
LoTT: 17 - 16 = +1
Par: +140 3-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  400          4.00   0.00  3♠ W -4   ♣9  O1-Nasr-Nasr vs O5-Hedlund-Noor
  200          3.00   1.00  2N W -2   2  O3-Vreeland-Anthony vs O4-Sebring-Jones
  140          2.00   2.00  2 N +1   ♣3  O4-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs O1-Street-Putnam
         90    1.00   3.00  1N E      ♣2  O5-Handley-Papst vs O3-Gray-McCormick
        120    0.00   4.00  1N E +1   6  O2-Roberts-Callaway vs O2-Ritchie-Taunt
11 ♠2
K4
AK85
♣AQJT76
Dlr: South
Vul: None
♠KJT8654
5
QT4
♣52
♠Q9
A98732
972
♣K9
♠A73
QJT6
J63
♣843
17
69
8
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 4♣ 4 1 4NT  ♠5
EW: 2♠  ♣2 ♦3 ♥5 NT3
LoTT: 18 - 18 = 0
Par: +430 4NT-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  400          4.00   0.00  5♣ N      A  O1-Nasr-Nasr vs O4-Sebring-Jones
  130          3.00   1.00  4♣ N      ♠Q  O2-Roberts-Callaway vs O1-Street-Putnam
         50    2.00   2.00  5♣ N -1   A  O5-Handley-Papst vs O2-Ritchie-Taunt
        100    0.50   3.50  5♣ N -2   ♠Q  O3-Vreeland-Anthony vs O3-Gray-McCormick
        100    0.50   3.50  5♣* N -1  A  O4-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs O5-Hedlund-Noor
12 ♠AQ7
742
KJ94
♣AT2
Dlr: West
Vul: N-S
♠KJ32
A93
AQ7
♣K94
♠T9854
KQJT6
3
♣85
♠6
85
T8652
♣QJ763
14
176
3
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2♣ 4  ♥3 ♠3 NT5
EW: 2 3/4♠ 1NT  ♣3/4 ♦2/3
LoTT: 20 - 18 = +2
Par: -200 5*-NS-1
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
   50          3.50   0.50  3N W -1   4  O2-Roberts-Callaway vs O1-Street-Putnam
   50          3.50   0.50  3N W -1   4  O4-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs O5-Hedlund-Noor
        170    2.00   2.00  3♠ W +1   ♣A  O1-Nasr-Nasr vs O4-Sebring-Jones
        420    1.00   3.00  4♠ E      ♠6  O5-Handley-Papst vs O2-Ritchie-Taunt
        590    0.00   4.00  4♠* W     9  O3-Vreeland-Anthony vs O3-Gray-McCormick
13 ♠AJ7
854
873
♣A963
Dlr: North
Vul: Both
♠98
KQJ73
AT95
♣J5
♠53
A96
KQ62
♣Q742
♠KQT642
T2
J4
♣KT8
9
1111
9
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1♣ 2♠  ♦3 ♥4 NT4
EW: 3 3  ♣6 ♠5 NT5
LoTT: 17 - 17 = 0
Par: -140 3-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  140          4.00   0.00  2♠ S +1   K  O5-Handley-Papst vs O2-Ritchie-Taunt
  110          3.00   1.00  2♠ N      K  O3-Vreeland-Anthony vs O3-Gray-McCormick
        140    1.50   2.50  3 W      ♠A  O4-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs O5-Hedlund-Noor
        140    1.50   2.50  2 W +1   ♠A  O1-Nasr-Nasr vs O4-Sebring-Jones
        170    0.00   4.00  3 W +1   ♠A  O2-Roberts-Callaway vs O1-Street-Putnam
14 ♠K85
KQJ74
T
♣8764
Dlr: East
Vul: None
♠J93
T93
AJ76543
♣-
♠Q72
A865
Q82
♣JT2
♠AT64
2
K9
♣AKQ953
9
69
16
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 5♣ 2/3 3♠  ♦4 NT5
EW: 3  ♣2 ♥4 ♠4 NT5
LoTT: 20 - 20 = 0
Par: +300 5*-EW-2
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  400          4.00   0.00  3N S      A  O5-Handley-Papst vs O2-Ritchie-Taunt
  300          3.00   1.00  5* W -2  K  O1-Nasr-Nasr vs O4-Sebring-Jones
  140          2.00   2.00  3♠ S      A  O2-Roberts-Callaway vs O1-Street-Putnam
        100    1.00   3.00  5♣ S -2   A  O3-Vreeland-Anthony vs O3-Gray-McCormick
        200    0.00   4.00  3N S -4   T  O4-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs O5-Hedlund-Noor
15 ♠J65
A93
96532
♣63
Dlr: South
Vul: N-S
♠K4
KJ72
AQT4
♣KQ5
♠A72
QT864
K7
♣J42
♠QT983
5
J8
♣AT987
5
1810
7
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣5 ♦4 ♥2 ♠6 NT2
EW: 2♣ 2 4 4NT  ♠6
LoTT: 16 - 17 = -1
Par: -430 4NT-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
        400    4.00   0.00  3N W      ♠J  O1-Nasr-Nasr vs O4-Sebring-Jones
        420    2.50   1.50  4 W      ♣6  O2-Roberts-Callaway vs O1-Street-Putnam
        420    2.50   1.50  4 E      ♣T  O5-Handley-Papst vs O2-Ritchie-Taunt
        450    0.50   3.50  4 W +1   ♠T  O4-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs O5-Hedlund-Noor
        450    0.50   3.50  4 E +1   J  O3-Vreeland-Anthony vs O3-Gray-McCormick
16 ♠KJ6
T52
753
♣AKT9
Dlr: West
Vul: E-W
♠8532
93
AQT82
♣J5
♠AQ94
KQ876
K9
♣64
♠T7
AJ4
J64
♣Q8732
11
714
8
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1♣  ♦3 ♥4 ♠2 NT6
EW: 3 2 3♠ 1NT  ♣6
LoTT: 16 - 17 = -1
Par: -140 3♠-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  200          4.00   0.00  4♠ E -2   ♣8  O3-Vreeland-Anthony vs O2-Ritchie-Taunt
         50    3.00   1.00  3♣ N -1   K  O1-Nasr-Nasr vs O3-Gray-McCormick
         90    2.00   2.00  1N W      ♣A  O2-Roberts-Callaway vs O5-Hedlund-Noor
        110    1.00   3.00  3 W      ♣A  O4-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs O4-Sebring-Jones
        140    0.00   4.00  2 E +1   ♠T  O5-Handley-Papst vs O1-Street-Putnam
17 ♠QT9
T94
KJ2
♣8532
Dlr: North
Vul: None
♠6
AQ865
9543
♣T97
♠J432
J732
T86
♣AQ
♠AK875
K
AQ7
♣KJ64
6
68
20
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 4♣ 1 4♠ 1NT  ♥5
EW: 1  ♣2 ♦5 ♠2 NT5
LoTT: 17 - 17 = 0
Par: +420 4♠-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  420          4.00   0.00  4♠ S      A  O2-Roberts-Callaway vs O5-Hedlund-Noor
  400          2.50   1.50  3N N      ♠2  O1-Nasr-Nasr vs O3-Gray-McCormick
  400          2.50   1.50  3N N      6  O5-Handley-Papst vs O1-Street-Putnam
  170          1.00   3.00  3♠ S +1   5  O3-Vreeland-Anthony vs O2-Ritchie-Taunt
         50    0.00   4.00  3N S -1   9  O4-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs O4-Sebring-Jones
18 ♠T
JT873
JT76
♣K93
Dlr: East
Vul: N-S
♠32
AKQ2
A532
♣Q87
♠J987654
64
KQ4
♣T
♠AKQ
95
98
♣AJ6542
5
156
14
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3♣ 1NT  ♦6 ♥6 ♠3
EW: 1 3♠  ♣4 ♥6 NT4
LoTT: 18 - 18 = 0
Par: -140 3♠-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  100          2.50   1.50  4♠* W -1  ♣K  O2-Roberts-Callaway vs O5-Hedlund-Noor
  100          2.50   1.50  4♠* E -1  ♠A  O4-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs O4-Sebring-Jones
  100          2.50   1.50  4♠* E -1  ♣A  O3-Vreeland-Anthony vs O2-Ritchie-Taunt
  100          2.50   1.50  4♠* E -1  ♣A  O5-Handley-Papst vs O1-Street-Putnam
        140    0.00   4.00  3♠ E      9  O1-Nasr-Nasr vs O3-Gray-McCormick
19 ♠QJ843
A
J876
♣952
Dlr: South
Vul: E-W
♠K652
KQT3
Q4
♣873
♠AT9
J86542
53
♣64
♠7
97
AKT92
♣AKQJT
8
105
17
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 6♣ 6 2♠ 5NT  ♥6
EW: 1  ♣1 ♦1 ♠5 NT2
LoTT: 19 - 19 = 0
Par: +920 6-NS/6♣-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  460          4.00   0.00  3N S +2   3  O1-Nasr-Nasr vs O3-Gray-McCormick
  440          3.00   1.00  5 S +2   T  O4-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs O4-Sebring-Jones
  420          2.00   2.00  5 S +1   3  O2-Roberts-Callaway vs O5-Hedlund-Noor
  170          1.00   3.00  4 S +2   K  O5-Handley-Papst vs O1-Street-Putnam
  130          0.00   4.00  3♣ S +1   Q  O3-Vreeland-Anthony vs O2-Ritchie-Taunt

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
   1
Pass1Pass3
Pass3Pass4
Pass4Pass6
All pass   

It's the strong jump shift and the two control bids == 4 and 4 -- that make this slam biddable. No one was in position to ask for aces, and who needs that, anyway? Control bidding is an art in need of cultivation, and this is just the hand to begin the study.

Oh -- the slam is roughly 60%! 40% that the suit is 2-2, 12% that the queen is singleton, plus 5% that the suit is 4-0 with the Queen onside. Well worth bidding.



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

20 ♠95
J64
AKT6
♣KJ87
Dlr: West
Vul: Both
♠AK4
KQ7
QJ8
♣AT43
♠JT73
A53
43
♣Q952
♠Q862
T982
9752
♣6
12
197
2
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣3 ♦6 ♥5 ♠4 NT3
EW: 3/4♣ -/1 2 3♠ 3NT
       ♦6/7
LoTT: 16 - 16 = 0
Par: -600 3NT-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
        110    4.00   0.00  2♠ E      ♣6  O3-Vreeland-Anthony vs O2-Ritchie-Taunt
        120    3.00   1.00  2N W      6  O4-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs O4-Sebring-Jones
        180    2.00   2.00  1N* E     A  O2-Roberts-Callaway vs O5-Hedlund-Noor
        600    0.50   3.50  3N W      A  O1-Nasr-Nasr vs O3-Gray-McCormick
        600    0.50   3.50  3N W      A  O5-Handley-Papst vs O1-Street-Putnam
21 ♠A8
QT852
QT9
♣AQ2
Dlr: North
Vul: N-S
♠J976
KJ9
K65
♣T97
♠QT5
A76
A43
♣J653
♠K432
43
J872
♣K84
14
811
7
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1♣ 3 3 1♠ 1NT
EW:  ♣6 ♦4 ♥4 ♠6 NT5
LoTT: 15 - 14 = +1
Par: +140 3-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  140          4.00   0.00  1 N +2   ♣6  O1-Nasr-Nasr vs O2-Ritchie-Taunt
  120          3.00   1.00  2N N      ♣3  O2-Roberts-Callaway vs O4-Sebring-Jones
  110          2.00   2.00  1 N +1   ♣3  O3-Vreeland-Anthony vs O1-Street-Putnam
   90          0.50   3.50  1N N      ♣3  O4-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs O3-Gray-McCormick
   90          0.50   3.50  1N N      ♣3  O5-Handley-Papst vs O5-Hedlund-Noor
22 ♠A753
873
8
♣AT852
Dlr: East
Vul: E-W
♠KJ2
T9654
QJ5
♣76
♠Q864
AQ
A9743
♣K3
♠T9
KJ2
KT62
♣QJ94
8
715
10
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3♣  ♦4/5 ♥5 ♠6 NT6
EW: 2 1 1♠  ♣4 NT6
LoTT: 17 - 17 = 0
Par: +110 3♣-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  200          3.50   0.50  2♠ E -2   ♣Q  O5-Handley-Papst vs O5-Hedlund-Noor
  200          3.50   0.50  3 E -2   ♣Q  O4-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs O3-Gray-McCormick
  100          2.00   2.00  3♠ E -1   ♣Q  O2-Roberts-Callaway vs O4-Sebring-Jones
         90    1.00   3.00  1 E +1   ♠T  O3-Vreeland-Anthony vs O1-Street-Putnam
        110    0.00   4.00  2♠ E      ♣Q  O1-Nasr-Nasr vs O2-Ritchie-Taunt
23 ♠A95
QT54
Q5
♣AK73
Dlr: South
Vul: Both
♠KJ7
KJ6
JT2
♣Q965
♠832
A92
K864
♣JT8
♠QT64
873
A973
♣42
15
118
6
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1♣ 1 2 2♠  NT6
EW: -/1NT
       ♣6 ♦5/6 ♥5 ♠5 NT6/7
LoTT: 14 - 14 = 0
Par: +110 2♠-NS/2-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  120          3.50   0.50  1N N +1   4  O4-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs O3-Gray-McCormick
  120          3.50   0.50  1N N +1   ♣J  O2-Roberts-Callaway vs O4-Sebring-Jones
  110          2.00   2.00  2♠ S      J  O3-Vreeland-Anthony vs O1-Street-Putnam
         90    1.00   3.00  1N E      3  O1-Nasr-Nasr vs O2-Ritchie-Taunt
        100    0.00   4.00  3♠ S -1   6  O5-Handley-Papst vs O5-Hedlund-Noor
24 ♠Q862
K7
AKJ
♣JT62
Dlr: West
Vul: None
♠AK943
AT98
T42
♣3
♠-
6543
97653
♣Q754
♠JT75
QJ2
Q8
♣AK98
14
112
13
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3/2♣ 1 3♠ 3NT  ♥6
EW:  ♣3 ♦5 ♥6 ♠4 NT3
LoTT: 15 - 16 = -1
Par: +400 3NT-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  430          4.00   0.00  3N S +1   ♠A  O5-Handley-Papst vs O5-Hedlund-Noor
  400          3.00   1.00  3N S      ♠9  O1-Nasr-Nasr vs O2-Ritchie-Taunt
         50    1.50   2.50  4♠ S -1   ♣3  O2-Roberts-Callaway vs O4-Sebring-Jones
         50    1.50   2.50  4♠ S -1   ♣3  O4-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs O3-Gray-McCormick
        150    0.00   4.00  5♣ N -3   3  O3-Vreeland-Anthony vs O1-Street-Putnam
25 ♠A98
8753
KQT
♣432
Dlr: North
Vul: E-W
♠KT63
KT62
8754
♣J
♠QJ54
A
63
♣AQT975
♠72
QJ94
AJ92
♣K86
9
713
11
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣4 ♦5 ♥6 ♠2 NT6
EW: 2♣ 1 4♠  ♥6 NT6
LoTT: 16 - 16 = 0
Par: -620 4♠-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  300          3.88   0.13  2N W -3   K  O5-Handley-Papst vs O5-Hedlund-Noor
  200          2.00   2.00  4♠ E -2   ♠6  O1-Nasr-Nasr vs O2-Ritchie-Taunt
  200          2.00   2.00  4♠ E -2   ♠3  O4-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs O3-Gray-McCormick
        140    0.13   3.88  2♠ E +1   J  O3-Vreeland-Anthony vs O1-Street-Putnam