EVENT>Wednesday Open Pairs                                            |Page> 1
------------------------,---------------------,----------------------- ---------
DATE>September 27, 2017 |CLUB NO.>273557      | 09/27/2017 15:42
---------------------,-- --------------------- -----------,---------------------
DIR> Marianne Van Gel|RATING>Club Masterpoint (Open)      |GAME>WIN-LOSS
----------,---------- ,-------------------------,--------- ---------------------
ROUNDS> 3 |BDS/RD>  8 |MP LIMITS>None           |CLUB>Wednesday Open
---------- ----------- ------------------------- -------------------------------
PAIRS>   4
----------------------------------,--------,------------------------------,--------,---------,-------,---------,
                                  | Master |                              | Master |         |       | Overall |
 No         Name                  | Points |        Name                  | Points |    Wins | Score |   Rank  |
---------------------------------- -------- ------------------------------ -------- --------- ------- --------- 
  1 K235501 Jackie Stewart          0.36    P904231 Jill Leach              0.36         3       6.00       
            Pebble Beach CA                         Carmel CA                                 

  2 M676483 Kurt Schnebele          0.06    K695243 Arlene Seckel           0.06         0.50    1.00       
            Seaside CA                              Seaside CA                                

  3 N604605 Lauren Upson            0.06    J154435 Ron Coffee              0.06         0.50    1.00       
            Carmel CA                               Seaside CA                                

  4 R395709 Nancy Borucki           0.24    7674708 Bill Hankison           0.24         2       4.00       
            Monterey CA                             Pebble Beach CA                           

                                                                               TOTALS    6.00   12.00


Sep 27, 2017 Game Result The Common Game Home Page

- Wednesday - September 27, 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: 1539 MP  Geomean: 1352 MP
(based on 8 players)
★ ★ ★  Masterpoint Winners  ★ ★ ★
Partnership Pct MP
EVENT>Wednesday Open           |SESSION>Wednesday    |SECTION> C
------------------------,------ ------------,-------- --------------------------
DATE>September 27, 2017 |CLUB NO.>273557    | 09/27/2017 17:34
---------------------,-- ------------------- -------------,---------------------
DIR> M Van Gelder    |RATING>                             |MOVEMENT>ONE WINNER
------------,-------- ,-------------------------,--------- ---------------------
AVE>   12.0 |TOP>   1                           |CLUB>Wednesday Open
------------ --------- ------------------------- -------------------------------
PAIRS>  4                                        ,------------,------,
-------------------------------------------------|   Section  |      |
No Name                   Name                   | Rank|Score | Pct  |
------------------------------------------------- ----- ------ ------
 1 Jackie Stewart         Jill Leach               1     14.00  58.33
 2 Kurt Schnebele         Arlene Seckel                  11.00  45.83
 3 Lauren Upson           Ron Coffee                     11.00  45.83
 4 Nancy Borucki          Bill Hankison            2     12.00  50.00
                                          Totals         48.00

Hands and Results
1 ♠A97
QJ8
QJ53
♣A76
Dlr: North
Vul: None
♠J4
T54
A86
♣QT932
♠Q5
A72
KT974
♣KJ8
♠KT8632
K963
2
♣54
14
713
6
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 4 4♠ 1NT  ♣6 ♦6
EW: 1♣ 1  ♥3 ♠2 NT3
LoTT: 17 - 17 = 0
Par: +420 4♠-NS/4-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  170          0.50   0.50  2♠ S +2   C3-Upson-Coffee vs C2-Schnebele-Seckel
  170          0.50   0.50  2♠ S +2   C4-Borucki-Hankison vs C1-Stewart-Leach

Kenny Horneman Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
 1Pass1
Pass1NTPass2
All pass   

It's hard to see how N/S can get to 4 on this hand, even though it's a decent contract, that will always make when trump are 2-2 and will sometimes make even when trump are 3-1. North will open 1 at most tables, and this will remove any chance of East bidding. After South bids 1 and North rebids 1NT, South isn't strong enough to do anything other than rebid 2. It isn't that South can't see that game might make opposite the right hand, but if North doesn't have secondary values in s, then the three level will often be too high, and the chances of North both having a perfect fit, and N/S being able to identify it on the bidding are too small to risk getting too high. Some N/S pairs might have the ability for South to bid 2 followed by 2 to show a mildly invitational hand but these pairs will be few, and for the reasons mentioned above, this would be a questionable choice by South in any case. A very, very few pairs might be able to show a hand with six s, four s and mildly invitational and then, just maybe North will bid game. Do you get the impression that I don't think many pairs will be in game?

On the actual hand, of course, ten tricks will make easily with the trump suit breaking. The suit is also cooperating, but this will not matter, as declarer will not be able to pitch two s from the North hand even if the defense doesn't lead the suit. A lead is most likely, and with that lead, there is no chance for an overtrick, but let's say West leads a and East wins and continues the suit. Declarer can win, draw trump and lead a from the South hand. Now, no matter which defender wins the , declarer has the ability to set up a trick to pitch their loser. The result is the same if East wins the trick and plays s or s next. East will have to make the unlikely play of ducking the first or winning and leading a in order for the defense to end up with all three tricks. +200 for making five will be a rare but high scoring result, and should be more common than pairs bidding and making game.



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

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

CLICK HERE or email me directly at krhorneman11@gmail.com

2 ♠J832
8
A654
♣AK65
Dlr: East
Vul: N-S
♠Q9765
AQ96
K93
♣T
♠KT4
K
T7
♣QJ98743
♠A
JT75432
QJ82
♣2
12
119
8
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3 2  ♣5 ♠5 NT6
EW: 1♣ 2♠ 1NT  ♦4 ♥5
LoTT: 17 - 16 = +1
Par: +100 3♠*-EW-1
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  300          1.00   0.00  4♣* E -2  C4-Borucki-Hankison vs C1-Stewart-Leach
        300    0.00   1.00  3N N -3   C3-Upson-Coffee vs C2-Schnebele-Seckel

Kenny Horneman Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
  PassPass
1Pass23
All pass   

It's hard to predict where this hand will play, as both East hand South have seven card suits, but neither hand is great for preempting. If either of them do preempt the stronger of their opponents is also the one with length in their suit, so there is a good chance that they will play in their preempt undoubled. So, 3 by East and 2 or 3 by South are both possible contracts. You might be wondering why the East and South hands are unsuitable for a preempt, given that they both have a seven card suit, both have shortness and both are weak in high card points. The main problem with the East hand is having two outside Kings. Opposite an unpassed hand, especially at favorable vulnerability, this will be unexpected, and a NT game might be missed. Of course, if West has a honor and stoppers in the other suits, they might take a chance on 3NT anyway, but the East hand is still unexpectedly strong, and also has better defense than a preempt would normally. Certainly, if West were a passed hand, the East hand would be an easy preempt. The South hand has even more flaws. For one, South is in second seat, which is the worst seat for being undisciplined with your preempts. Combined with the unfavorable vulnerability South needs to have a good suit to preempt, and the South suit is certainly not that. If North has a hand with some red suit honors, then a preempt from South might well work out well, but the point is that preempting is a much more random gamble with a poor suit, in second seat.

As mentioned already, if East opens 3, or South opens 2 or 3, they may end up playing there. If they both pass, West will open 1, East will raise, and South might decide to come in with 3, hoping that the North has a fit, as E/W have found a fit. Alas, North doesn't have a fit, but West might not be able to double, as this would be a "maximal" double for many pairs, showing an invitational hand in s. Other possibilities are that East will use Drury to show his hand as invitational and South will get to bid just 2, or that South will pass over 2 and it will pass out there, or that North will bid 2NT showing both minors and South will end up playing 3.

What will be the result in some of these contracts? At first it looks like 3 will be destined to go off one, as there are four trump losers and a loser. However, the defense has a chance to err. Let's say that West leads a . If declarer wins and leads a trump and East leads another , South can pitch a . Now, if West ruffs this, declarer will later be able to pitch another on the other high and will lose only four trump tricks. This takes some defensive errors though, and eight tricks seem more likely in a contract. A contract is tricky. Five losers look likely, but both the defense and declarer have the chance for errors, and so both seven and nine tricks are possible. A contract has only two immediate losers, but with the defense ability to overruff in two suits, it's not clear how many tricks declarer will take. A contract will be held to seven tricks if South leads the Ace and then switches to a high . As with many partscore hands, anything better than +100 in either direction should score well.



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

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

CLICK HERE or email me directly at krhorneman11@gmail.com

3 ♠T86
J953
83
♣QJ63
Dlr: South
Vul: E-W
♠AJ932
KT8
AKJ
♣AK
♠Q
AQ642
Q542
♣742
♠K754
7
T976
♣T985
4
2310
3
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣4 ♦1 ♥0 ♠1 NT1
EW: 3♣ 6 7 6♠ 6NT
LoTT: 17 - 16 = +1
Par: -2210 7-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
        630    1.00   0.00  3N W +1   C3-Upson-Coffee vs C2-Schnebele-Seckel
        680    0.00   1.00  4 E +2   C4-Borucki-Hankison vs C1-Stewart-Leach

Kenny Horneman Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
   Pass
2Pass21Pass
2NT2Pass33Pass
34Pass3Pass
4NTPass5Pass
5Pass6All pass
  1. Waiting, game forcing
  2. 22-23 HCP
  3. Transfer
  4. Accepting s as trump

E/W should be able to bid to the good 6 slam on this hand, though for many pairs, there might be a lot of artificial bidding along the way. The West hand is too strong to start with 2NT and will open 2 at most tables that aren't using a strong system. From here, though, the bidding will diverge depending on the specific E/W agreements. Some pairs will be using 2 as a waiting bid and 2 as an immediate showing of a poor hand, and will start with 2. Other pairs will bid 2 right away, promising a game forcing hand a five card suit with two of the top three honors. By the way, if you do play that suit bids over 2 promise two of the top three honors, do you know what later Blackwood bidding should look like? Having already promised two top honors, you can be more efficient with later slam bidding agreements, but that is some pretty deep bidding concepts and should only be discussed with very serious partnerships. If East does make a waiting bid, and West then bids 2NT, East can transfer into s. You might think that
West's response should always be 3, unless they have a super hand for s, just as if they had opened 2NT, but good pairs should realize that this situation is different. Because East has promised a game forcing hand, there is no reason for West to accept the transfer unless he wants to play in s. This allows s to be set as the trump suit early, making slam bidding much easier. Notice on the actual hand that if 3 establishes trump immediately, then West can show their control. Or, if E/W prefer to only cue bid Aces an Kings opposite a strong NT hand, then East can still bid 3NT to show slam interest, but nothing to cue bid, implying a hand with a strong trump holding.

In any case, as long as East shows some slam interest, West should be able to take over and ask for keycards, and eventually end up in 6, when East has no Kings. Declarer will have some play for making all 13 tricks, planning to ruff a , but when the bad trump break comes to light, will almost always finish with just 12 tricks. With the communication problems, declarer needs to go for the ruff before pulling trump. If declarer doesn't look far enough ahead and decides to pull trump first, they might as well start with the King and then lead the 10. North shouldn't be fooled by this and should duck the 10, but if North does cover with the Jack, declarer can now see that a trump loser can be avoided, and by taking the finesse with careful play might end up with 13 tricks. Any who end up playing in 6 NT will likely find themselves a trick short when the bad break is revealed.



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

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

CLICK HERE or email me directly at krhorneman11@gmail.com

4 ♠873
T43
9763
♣T32
Dlr: West
Vul: Both
♠AT4
96
JT542
♣KQ6
♠QJ65
AQ72
K8
♣J95
♠K92
KJ85
AQ
♣A874
0
1013
17
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣4 ♦3 ♥5 ♠3 NT4
EW: 2♣ 3 2/1 3/2♠ 2NT
LoTT: 14 - 14 = 0
Par: -140 3♠-E
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  100          1.00   0.00  3 W -1   C4-Borucki-Hankison vs C1-Stewart-Leach
        110    0.00   1.00  2 W +1   C3-Upson-Coffee vs C2-Schnebele-Seckel

Kenny Horneman Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
PassPass11NT
Dbl2PassPass
DblRdblPass2
PassPassDblAll pass

N/S may well end up in trouble on this hand. After two passes, East has a normal 1 opening, and South is likely to bid 1NT. Facing a third seat opener in the East hand, West might not want to double 1NT, but should recognize that East will not have opened light unless they have a good suit, which seems impossible given West's holding and the 1NT bid. If West does double, North will know that their side is in trouble, and will use whatever methods are available to find a better spot. One possibility is to bid 2, planning to play there if it is undoubled, but if it is doubled, planning to redouble, showing tolerance for all three other suits. As it happens, 2 is the hardest contract for E/W to double, as neither of them has a four card suit, but West, knowing that N/S are in at most a seven card fit, and holding several honors, should go ahead and double. In any event, N/S will be very lucky if they are able to play anywhere at all without being doubled, and will likely come out best at tables where West chooses not to double 1NT and it passes out there. In a NT contract, West will lead a , and declarer does best to win and start working on s. With the Ace offside, though, the best that declarer will be able to do is to scrape together four red suit tricks and the Ace. Two level suit contracts will not fare much better against best defense. Any N/S who manage to escape for only -200 may be surprised to discover they have a decent result on the hand.



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

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

CLICK HERE or email me directly at krhorneman11@gmail.com

5 ♠QJT982
96
654
♣J4
Dlr: North
Vul: N-S
♠A6
KT842
A7
♣T963
♠43
A753
Q83
♣A852
♠K75
QJ
KJT92
♣KQ7
4
1110
15
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2 1♠  ♣4 ♥4 NT4
EW: 3♣ 3 2NT  ♦5 ♠5
LoTT: 16 - 18 = -2
Par: -140 3-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  110          1.00   0.00  2♠ S      C4-Borucki-Hankison vs C1-Stewart-Leach
        100    0.00   1.00  3♠ N -1   C3-Upson-Coffee vs C2-Schnebele-Seckel
6 ♠7642
KQ75
AT
♣K75
Dlr: East
Vul: E-W
♠A9853
94
3
♣A9842
♠K
AJ8
Q7652
♣QJ63
♠QJT
T632
KJ984
♣T
12
813
7
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1  ♣2 ♥6 ♠4 NT5
EW: 4♣ 2♠ 2NT  ♦6 ♥5
LoTT: 16 - 17 = -1
Par: -130 4♣-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  100          1.00   0.00  5♣ E -1   C3-Upson-Coffee vs C2-Schnebele-Seckel
        110    0.00   1.00  3♣ E      C4-Borucki-Hankison vs C1-Stewart-Leach
7 ♠AJ43
9853
AJ6
♣J9
Dlr: South
Vul: Both
♠Q7
AKJT62
95
♣A85
♠9865
7
K8
♣Q76432
♠KT2
Q4
QT7432
♣KT
11
145
10
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3 1♠  ♣3 ♥4 NT5
EW: 3♣ 3 2NT  ♦4 ♠6
LoTT: 18 - 18 = 0
Par: -140 3-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  110          1.00   0.00  3 S      C3-Upson-Coffee vs C2-Schnebele-Seckel
        140    0.00   1.00  2 W +1   C4-Borucki-Hankison vs C1-Stewart-Leach
8 ♠73
K9865
732
♣AK3
Dlr: West
Vul: None
♠T54
J
AKJ9654
♣Q2
♠KQJ8
T74
Q
♣JT765
♠A962
AQ32
T8
♣984
10
119
10
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3  ♣6 ♦4 ♠5 NT6
EW: 1♣ 3 1♠  ♥4 NT5
LoTT: 18 - 17 = +1
Par: +100 4*-EW-1
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  170          1.00   0.00  3 N +1   C3-Upson-Coffee vs C2-Schnebele-Seckel
         50    0.00   1.00  4 N -1   C4-Borucki-Hankison vs C1-Stewart-Leach
9 ♠653
K9653
AKJ
♣72
Dlr: North
Vul: E-W
♠8
AQ2
QT865
♣T864
♠KQ2
JT87
732
♣KQJ
♠AJT974
4
94
♣A953
11
812
9
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1♣ 1 4♠ 2NT  ♦6
EW:  ♣6 ♦6 ♥5 ♠2 NT4
LoTT: 16 - 17 = -1
Par: +420 4♠-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  170          1.00   0.00  2♠ S +2   C4-Borucki-Hankison vs C2-Schnebele-Seckel
        150    0.00   1.00  4♠ S -3   C1-Stewart-Leach vs C3-Upson-Coffee
10 ♠AK75
AT6
A8
♣KT62
Dlr: East
Vul: Both
♠3
943
J743
♣AJ873
♠64
QJ8
KQT965
♣Q4
♠QJT982
K752
2
♣95
18
610
6
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1♣ 5 5♠ 3NT  ♦5
EW: 2  ♣6 ♥2 ♠2 NT3
LoTT: 19 - 20 = -1
Par: +650 5♠-NS/5-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  650          0.50   0.50  4♠ S +1   C1-Stewart-Leach vs C3-Upson-Coffee
  650          0.50   0.50  4♠ S +1   C4-Borucki-Hankison vs C2-Schnebele-Seckel
11 ♠AQT94
Q987
96
♣A7
Dlr: South
Vul: None
♠8752
KJ
KJ53
♣643
♠-
6432
AQ7
♣QJ9852
♠KJ63
AT5
T842
♣KT
12
89
11
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2/1 4♠ 2NT  ♣3 ♦6
EW: 3♣  ♦6 ♥5 ♠3 NT5
LoTT: 19 - 18 = +1
Par: +300 5♣*-EW-2
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  170          1.00   0.00  3♠ N +1   C1-Stewart-Leach vs C3-Upson-Coffee
         50    0.00   1.00  3♠ N -1   C4-Borucki-Hankison vs C2-Schnebele-Seckel
12 ♠QT954
AQT9
J83
♣T
Dlr: West
Vul: N-S
♠AK72
J753
94
♣973
♠-
64
KQ7652
♣AJ652
♠J863
K82
AT
♣KQ84
9
810
13
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3/2 4♠ 2NT  ♣5/3 ♦6/4
EW: 1♣  ♦6 ♥4 ♠3 NT4
LoTT: 17 - 17 = 0
Par: +620 4♠-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  730          1.00   0.00  3♠* N     C1-Stewart-Leach vs C3-Upson-Coffee
        100    0.00   1.00  4♠ N -1   C4-Borucki-Hankison vs C2-Schnebele-Seckel
13 ♠A9
K83
K75432
♣75
Dlr: North
Vul: Both
♠K74
T954
86
♣QJ32
♠QJ83
Q
AQJ
♣AT864
♠T652
AJ762
T9
♣K9
10
616
8
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2 1  ♣3 ♠5 NT5
EW: 4♣ 1♠ 1NT  ♦5 ♥6
LoTT: 18 - 17 = +1
Par: -130 4♣-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
        130    1.00   0.00  3♣ E +1   C1-Stewart-Leach vs C3-Upson-Coffee
        200    0.00   1.00  3 S -2   C4-Borucki-Hankison vs C2-Schnebele-Seckel
14 ♠K63
A8764
962
♣Q4
Dlr: East
Vul: None
♠Q982
5
AQJ
♣AJT92
♠AJT
KQ932
T
♣8765
♠754
JT
K87543
♣K3
9
1410
7
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣2 ♦5 ♥3 ♠2 NT2
EW: 5♣ 2 4 5♠ 5NT
LoTT: 16 - 18 = -2
Par: -460 5NT-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
        100    1.00   0.00  1* N -1  C1-Stewart-Leach vs C3-Upson-Coffee
        150    0.00   1.00  2♣ W +3   C4-Borucki-Hankison vs C2-Schnebele-Seckel
15 ♠T63
A865
75
♣J932
Dlr: South
Vul: N-S
♠KJ54
743
J832
♣87
♠Q982
JT2
964
♣T54
♠A7
KQ9
AKQT
♣AKQ6
5
53
27
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 7♣ 6 6 3♠ 6NT
EW:  ♣0 ♦1 ♥1 ♠4 NT1
LoTT: 17 - 16 = +1
Par: +2140 7♣-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  720          1.00   0.00  3N S +4   C4-Borucki-Hankison vs C2-Schnebele-Seckel
  690          0.00   1.00  4N S +2   C1-Stewart-Leach vs C3-Upson-Coffee
16 ♠K653
AK6432
5
♣Q5
Dlr: West
Vul: E-W
♠AJ8
87
KJ8
♣AJ872
♠QT9742
QT
AQT3
♣9
♠-
J95
97642
♣KT643
12
1410
4
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3  ♣6 ♦5 ♠3 NT6
EW: 1♣ 1 4♠  ♥4 NT6
LoTT: 19 - 18 = +1
Par: -300 5*-NS-2
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
        140    1.00   0.00  3♠ E      C4-Borucki-Hankison vs C2-Schnebele-Seckel
        500    0.00   1.00  5* N -3  C1-Stewart-Leach vs C3-Upson-Coffee
17 ♠K543
AT4
-
♣KJ8742
Dlr: North
Vul: None
♠8
K82
K9854
♣T653
♠AJ762
QJ5
QJ3
♣Q9
♠QT9
9763
AT762
♣A
11
613
10
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 4♣ 2 2♠ 1NT  ♦5
EW: 1  ♣3 ♥4/5 ♠4 NT5
LoTT: 17 - 15 = +2
Par: +130 4♣-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  110          1.00   0.00  2♣ N +1   C2-Schnebele-Seckel vs C1-Stewart-Leach
  100          0.00   1.00  2 W -2   C4-Borucki-Hankison vs C3-Upson-Coffee
18 ♠KQJ87
QT965
QT
♣9
Dlr: East
Vul: N-S
♠A9
AJ72
K973
♣Q72
♠T5
84
65
♣KT86543
♠6432
K3
AJ842
♣AJ
10
143
13
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3 3 3♠  ♣4 NT5
EW: 3♣ 1NT  ♦4 ♥4 ♠3
LoTT: 18 - 19 = -1
Par: +100 4♣*-EW-1
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  620          0.50   0.50  4♠ N      C2-Schnebele-Seckel vs C1-Stewart-Leach
  620          0.50   0.50  4♠ N      C4-Borucki-Hankison vs C3-Upson-Coffee
19 ♠J7542
85
QJT43
♣A
Dlr: South
Vul: E-W
♠T963
KJ42
5
♣KT85
♠AK8
6
AK876
♣J742
♠Q
AQT973
92
♣Q963
8
715
10
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣3 ♦5 ♥6 ♠5 NT4
EW: 4♣ 2 1 2♠ 3NT
LoTT: 16 - 16 = 0
Par: -600 3NT-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  470          1.00   0.00  2* S     C4-Borucki-Hankison vs C3-Upson-Coffee
        150    0.00   1.00  3 S -3   C2-Schnebele-Seckel vs C1-Stewart-Leach
20 ♠53
43
AKJT4
♣Q754
Dlr: West
Vul: Both
♠QT962
7
Q9
♣JT863
♠AJ874
AKJ2
832
♣9
♠K
QT9865
765
♣AK2
10
513
12
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1♣ 3 3  ♠2 NT6
EW: 4♠  ♣6 ♦3 ♥4 NT5
LoTT: 19 - 18 = +1
Par: -500 5*-NS/5*-NS-2
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
        140    1.00   0.00  3♠ E      C4-Borucki-Hankison vs C3-Upson-Coffee
        620    0.00   1.00  4♠ E      C2-Schnebele-Seckel vs C1-Stewart-Leach
21 ♠2
KQ9862
AK53
♣J2
Dlr: North
Vul: N-S
♠AQT87
J
T9
♣KQ965
♠K6543
54
J84
♣T83
♠J9
AT73
Q762
♣A74
13
124
11
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 6 5 2NT  ♣4 ♠4
EW: 2♣ 3♠  ♦1 ♥2 NT2
LoTT: 20 - 20 = 0
Par: +500 6♠*-EW-3
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  650          0.50   0.50  4 N +1   C2-Schnebele-Seckel vs C1-Stewart-Leach
  650          0.50   0.50  4 N +1   C4-Borucki-Hankison vs C3-Upson-Coffee
22 ♠63
AJ4
KT52
♣K765
Dlr: East
Vul: E-W
♠QT95
T976
876
♣T3
♠AKJ84
K3
3
♣AQJ98
♠72
Q852
AQJ94
♣42
11
218
9
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2  ♣3 ♥6 ♠2 NT5
EW: 3♣ 5♠ 1NT  ♦5 ♥6
LoTT: 19 - 18 = +1
Par: -650 5♠-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
        650    0.50   0.50  4♠ E +1   C2-Schnebele-Seckel vs C1-Stewart-Leach
        650    0.50   0.50  4♠ E +1   C4-Borucki-Hankison vs C3-Upson-Coffee
23 ♠K2
AK972
A4
♣KQ43
Dlr: South
Vul: Both
♠QJ743
QT4
73
♣J72
♠86
J853
T96
♣AT96
♠AT95
6
KQJ852
♣85
19
65
10
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3♣ 6 3 3♠ 5NT
EW:  ♣3 ♦1 ♥3 ♠4 NT2
LoTT: 16 - 15 = +1
Par: +1370 6-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
 1440          1.00   0.00  6N N      C4-Borucki-Hankison vs C3-Upson-Coffee
  660          0.00   1.00  3N N +2   C2-Schnebele-Seckel vs C1-Stewart-Leach
24 ♠K2
K74
963
♣85432
Dlr: West
Vul: None
♠AJ9843
J5
75
♣AK7
♠QT5
8
QJT842
♣J96
♠76
AQT9632
AK
♣QT
6
136
15
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2♣ 4 3NT  ♦4 ♠4
EW: 3 3♠  ♣5 ♥3 NT4
LoTT: 19 - 19 = 0
Par: +100 4♠*-EW-1
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
   50          0.50   0.50  4♠ W -1   C2-Schnebele-Seckel vs C1-Stewart-Leach
   50          0.50   0.50  4♠ W -1   C4-Borucki-Hankison vs C3-Upson-Coffee