EVENT>Wednesday Morning Pairs                                         |Page> 1
------------------------,---------------------,----------------------- ---------
DATE>May 24, 2017       |CLUB NO.>273557      | 05/24/2017 15:39
---------------------,-- --------------------- -----------,---------------------
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 Anthony Muller          0.36    Lauren Upson            0.36         3       3.00       
    Pebble Beach CA                 Carmel CA                                 

  2 Dennis Vanmiddlesworth           Maja                                0       0.00       
    Carmel CA                       Marina CA                                 

  3 Arlene Seckel           0.12    James Wood              0.12         1       1.00       
    Seaside CA                      Monterey CA                               

  4 Jill Leach              0.24    Jackie Stewart          0.24         2       2.00       
    Carmel CA                       Pebble Beach CA                           

                                                               TOTALS    6.00    6.00

                                  Wednesday Morning Pairs                                   

                                         **ROUND**                                          
TEAM #         1         2         3
  \/
   1>        v4 3      v3 3      v2 3   
               W         W         W

   2>       v3 -3     v4 -3     v1 -3   
               L         L         L

   3>        v2 3     v1 -3     v4 -3   
               W         L         L

   4>       v1 -3      v2 3      v3 3   
               L         W         W



May 24, 2017 Game Result The Common Game Home Page

- Wednesday Aft - May 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
Field strength:  Mean: 1177 MP  Geomean: 993 MP
(based on 8 players)
★ ★ ★  Masterpoint Winners  ★ ★ ★
Partnership Pct MP
EVENT>Pairs                    |SESSION>Wednesday Aft|SECTION> C
------------------------,------ ------------,-------- --------------------------
DATE>May 24, 2017       |CLUB NO.>273557    | 05/24/2017 17:36
---------------------,-- ------------------- -------------,---------------------
DIR> M Van Gelder    |RATING>                             |MOVEMENT>ONE WINNER
------------,-------- ,-------------------------,--------- ---------------------
AVE>   12.0 |TOP>   1                           |CLUB>Wednesday Open Pairs
------------ --------- ------------------------- -------------------------------
PAIRS>  4                                        ,------------,------,
-------------------------------------------------|   Section  |      |
No Name                   Name                   | Rank|Score | Pct  |
------------------------------------------------- ----- ------ ------
 1 Anthony Muller         Lauren Upson             1     13.50  56.25
 2 Dennis Vanmiddlesworth  Maja                          11.50  47.92
 3 Arlene Seckel          James Wood                     10.50  43.75
 4 Jill Leach             Jackie Stewart           2     12.50  52.08
                                          Totals         48.00

Hands and Results
1 ♠KT7532
J
J9874
♣2
Dlr: North
Vul: None
♠A
864
KQT2
♣QJT97
♠J984
A97
53
♣K853
♠Q6
KQT532
A6
♣A64
5
128
15
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1 1 2/3♠ 1NT  ♣4
EW: 3♣  ♦5 ♥5 ♠4 NT5
LoTT: 18 - 17 = +1
Par: +100 4♣*-EW-1
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
         50    0.50   0.50  3♠ N -1   C3-Seckel-Wood vs C2-Vanmiddlesworth-Maja
         50    0.50   0.50  3 S -1   C4-Leach-Stewart vs C1-Muller-Upson
2 ♠942
JT765
T
♣AJ54
Dlr: East
Vul: N-S
♠AT3
Q3
AJ764
♣KT7
♠876
982
Q9852
♣98
♠KQJ5
AK4
K3
♣Q632
6
142
18
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 4♣ 4/5 5♠ 1/2NT  ♦6
EW: 1  ♣3 ♥2 ♠2 NT2
LoTT: 18 - 18 = 0
Par: +650 5♠-NS/5-N
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  650          1.00   0.00  4 N +1   C4-Leach-Stewart vs C1-Muller-Upson
        100    0.00   1.00  5 N -1   C3-Seckel-Wood vs C2-Vanmiddlesworth-Maja
3 ♠AT3
AKJ4
K96
♣A92
Dlr: South
Vul: E-W
♠4
63
A832
♣KQJT86
♠J9652
T987
J54
♣7
♠KQ87
Q52
QT7
♣543
19
102
9
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1 4 3♠ 3NT  ♣6
EW:  ♣6 ♦5 ♥2 ♠2 NT2
LoTT: 16 - 14 = +2
Par: +420 4-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  400          1.00   0.00  3N N      C4-Leach-Stewart vs C1-Muller-Upson
        100    0.00   1.00  3♠ S -2   C3-Seckel-Wood vs C2-Vanmiddlesworth-Maja
4 ♠76
QT543
Q2
♣AQ32
Dlr: West
Vul: Both
♠K
K9872
AJ4
♣KJT7
♠Q932
A6
K875
♣864
♠AJT854
J
T963
♣95
10
159
6
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1♠  ♣4 ♦5 ♥5 NT4
EW: 2/3♣ 2 2 2NT  ♠5/6
LoTT: 16 - 15 = +1
Par: -120 2NT-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  300          1.00   0.00  3N W -3   C3-Seckel-Wood vs C2-Vanmiddlesworth-Maja
  200          0.00   1.00  3N W -2   C4-Leach-Stewart vs C1-Muller-Upson
5 ♠854
KT954
A8
♣983
Dlr: North
Vul: N-S
♠KT2
J3
J7652
♣A62
♠A9763
6
943
♣KQT7
♠QJ
AQ872
KQT
♣J54
7
99
15
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2  ♣4 ♦5 ♠4 NT4
EW: 3♣ 2 3♠  ♥4 NT5
LoTT: 17 - 18 = -1
Par: -140 3♠-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  140          0.50   0.50  3 S      C3-Seckel-Wood vs C2-Vanmiddlesworth-Maja
  140          0.50   0.50  2 S +1   C4-Leach-Stewart vs C1-Muller-Upson
6 ♠KT43
965
K643
♣Q6
Dlr: East
Vul: E-W
♠A965
A2
AT975
♣A2
♠QJ2
T43
Q2
♣J9874
♠87
KQJ87
J8
♣KT53
8
166
10
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2  ♣6 ♦4 ♠5/4 NT6
EW: 1♣ 2 2♠ 1NT  ♥5
LoTT: 16 - 15 = +1
Par: -100 3*-NS-1
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  110          1.00   0.00  2 S      C4-Leach-Stewart vs C1-Muller-Upson
        150    0.00   1.00  1N W +2   C3-Seckel-Wood vs C2-Vanmiddlesworth-Maja
7 ♠QJ63
J43
KQ
♣KJ97
Dlr: South
Vul: Both
♠A7
QT65
J2
♣T6543
♠K82
-
AT976543
♣Q8
♠T954
AK9872
8
♣A2
13
79
11
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1♣ 2 3/2♠  ♦3 NT6
EW: 4  ♣5 ♥4 ♠4 NT4
LoTT: 18 - 19 = -1
Par: -130 4-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  620          1.00   0.00  4 S      C3-Seckel-Wood vs C2-Vanmiddlesworth-Maja
        100    0.00   1.00  4♠ N -1   C4-Leach-Stewart vs C1-Muller-Upson
8 ♠AQ3
T93
8753
♣Q75
Dlr: West
Vul: None
♠K9
KQ87542
962
♣8
♠JT8
AJ
AJ4
♣AJT62
♠76542
6
KQT
♣K943
8
816
8
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1♣ 1♠  ♦6 ♥3 NT4
EW: 3 3NT  ♣6 ♦6 ♠5
LoTT: 16 - 17 = -1
Par: -400 3NT-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  100          1.00   0.00  4 W -2   C3-Seckel-Wood vs C2-Vanmiddlesworth-Maja
        420    0.00   1.00  4 W      C4-Leach-Stewart vs C1-Muller-Upson
9 ♠Q5
Q853
865
♣QJ94
Dlr: North
Vul: E-W
♠T43
K92
QT732
♣32
♠K987
JT64
A
♣A876
♠AJ62
A7
KJ94
♣KT5
7
512
16
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2♣ 2 1 1♠ 2NT
EW:  ♣5 ♦5 ♥5 ♠5 NT5
LoTT: 13 - 14 = -1
Par: +120 2NT-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  150          1.00   0.00  1N S +2   C4-Leach-Stewart vs C2-Vanmiddlesworth-Maja
   90          0.00   1.00  1N S      C1-Muller-Upson vs C3-Seckel-Wood
10 ♠A7
K965
T52
♣AKQ5
Dlr: East
Vul: Both
♠953
T843
K973
♣J4
♠QT862
2
J86
♣T982
♠KJ4
AQJ7
AQ4
♣763
16
43
17
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 5♣ 4 6 3♠ 5NT
EW:  ♣2 ♦3 ♥1 ♠4 NT2
LoTT: 16 - 16 = 0
Par: +1430 6-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
 1440          1.00   0.00  6N S      C1-Muller-Upson vs C3-Seckel-Wood
  650          0.00   1.00  4 S +1   C4-Leach-Stewart vs C2-Vanmiddlesworth-Maja

Kenny Horneman Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
  Pass1NT
Pass2Pass2
Pass41Pass4NT2
Pass6All pass 
  1. Asking for Keycards
  2. 2 Keycards and the Queen of s

With 33 HCP between them, a 4-4 fit and both hands holding well placed honor cards, N/S should be in 6 on this hand, although it will not be as easy to make it as it will be to bid it. South has a 1NT opening for most pairs, and with 16 very nice HCP, North should immediately be thinking about slam. After using Stayman and finding a fit how should North proceed? North needs to ask about keycards, as there could easily be an Ace and the Queen of trump missing. It might seem like 4NT is the way to do this, but 4NT should be a "quantitative" bid over 2, denying a fit (and confirming a four card suit, incidentally), and inviting slam. For this reason, it's important to have either another way to ask for keycards, or a way to confirm a fit while making a forcing bid, so that a later 4NT bid will be a keycard bid. One common set of agreements among experts after a major suit response to Stayman is to use a three level bid of the other major to show unspecified shortness, a fit for the major and slam interest, and to use a 4 bid as the keycard asking bid, and to use 4 to show a balanced slam try. This is an area of bidding worth discussing with your regular partnerships. After finding out that South has all the missing keycards, North can bid 6. Note that IF the South hand were not narrowly limited in strength, it would be important for North to confirm all of the keycards were accounted for by asking about Kings even if North has no interest in a grand slam, as South might still want to bid a grand. In this case, since South is limited, North can just bid 6 once it is clear that all the keycards are present.

How will a contract play? If trump were 3-2, the hand would be easy, as declarer could pull trump, and take the finesse and the finesse and as long as one of the finesses works, will make their slam. It might at first seem that taking the finesse is strange, as this might create a loser that could be ruffed in the North hand, but declarer has a loser anyway that can be pitched on the King even if the finesse loses. The suit might also provide a pitch for South's loser, but the communication on the hand will start to get tricky if declarer is going to try all of their possibilities. A further complication is the possibility of a 4-1 break. Depending on the opening lead, declarer can, just barely, handle all of the possibilities. A or lead will help declarer, so let's say that West leads a . Declarer can win the Ace and should immediately take the finesse before touching trump. West can win and continue a minor suit. Declarer wins, pulls two rounds of trump ending with the King. If trump break 3-2, declarer is planning to then finish pulling trump, check for a 3-3 break and if that fails, take the finesse. When trump actually break 4-1, declarer should not risk checking for a break, but should now play the Ace, and then the Jack and King pitching a , ruff a in the North hand, and lead North's remaining trump to pull trump and claim 12 tricks. The key to the hand is taking an early finesse before working on trump, to retain communication between the two hands. I expect many to try to pull trump too early and to go down on the hand. If declarer does pull two rounds of trump, and then take the finesse, West will need to exit a trump in order to bollix up declarer's communication, so 12 tricks will be made at some tables due to misdefense as well, though the contract is cold if an early finesse is taken. For sure, bidding and making slam will score very well for N/S.



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

11 ♠AJ5
AJT842
-
♣QT93
Dlr: South
Vul: None
♠874
Q9
AJT8
♣K874
♠QT632
K7653
76
♣J
♠K9
-
KQ95432
♣A652
12
106
12
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 4♣ 2/3 3 1♠ 1NT
EW:  ♣3 ♦4 ♥4 ♠6 NT6
LoTT: 16 - 16 = 0
Par: +140 3-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  140          1.00   0.00  3 N      C1-Muller-Upson vs C3-Seckel-Wood
        100    0.00   1.00  4 N -2   C4-Leach-Stewart vs C2-Vanmiddlesworth-Maja

Kenny Horneman Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
   1
Pass1Pass2
Pass3All pass 

With two opening bid hands, both with a void in their partner's primary suit, it's hard to tell where this hand is most likely to be played. I can see contracts including 3, 3NT declared either way, 4, 4, 4 and with any high level contract possibly doubled as well. The first three bids will be pretty normal for N/S. Note that East should not bid their suit once North has bid 1, as the hand is minimal and the suit is likely to have a lot of losers. If E/W do end up bidding, N/S are likely to have the same dilemma, as neither hand is likely to double a 2 contract by E/W. Assuming E/W are passing, what should North do over South's 2 rebid? Most experts I know play that 3 would be game forcing. Is the North hand worth that? In the old days of solid 13-15 HCP opening bids, the North hand would be a clear Game Force . However, with the current trend of opening all 12 HCP and many 11 HCP hands, it's important to apply some judgment in deciding when to call an 11-13 HCP hand a Game Force. It is certainly no longer true the old adage that "an opening hand opposite an opening hand means game." With a void in South's six card or longer suit, North has another reason to take a conservative approach, so rebidding 3 rather than 3 is not unreasonable. What will South do over this? The void is, of course, terrible, and South will suspect that 4 is a better contract. However, South's suit is not that great so it isn't clear which red suit will play better. 3NT looks like a very poor bid, as North is likely short in s, the defense will certainly be able to set up one of the black suits. If North starts with 3, South is likely to bid 3, and then should choose 4 over 3, eschewing 3NT for the same reasons mentioned above. If South gets to 4, West might well recognize that it is time to start doubling, and East will be happy to double 4.

None of the N/S contracts will play particularly well, but can anything make it all? Stopping in 3 is most likely to work out best. Let's say East leads the Jack. North should recognize that this is from shortness and should win the Ace and immediately lead the King. Assuming West covers, East can ruff, lead the Ace, and then the Jack. East should duck this, but some will go up with the King, which will allow declarer to make 10 tricks. Assuming East ducks, West can win the Queen, cash the King and give East a ruff, but now declarer is in firm control. West will still score the trump King, but the only losers on the hand will be the trump King and Queen, the King and a ruff. Anyone going plus with the N/S hands should score above average.



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

12 ♠Q75
93
JT94
♣KT93
Dlr: West
Vul: N-S
♠T2
KJ6
K876
♣Q642
♠AK864
Q54
A32
♣A5
♠J93
AT872
Q5
♣J87
6
917
8
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣6 ♦4 ♥5 ♠4 NT4
EW: 1♣ 2/3 2 3♠ 2/3NT
LoTT: 15 - 14 = +1
Par: -400 3NT-W
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
   50          1.00   0.00  3N W -1   C1-Muller-Upson vs C3-Seckel-Wood
        120    0.00   1.00  2N W      C4-Leach-Stewart vs C2-Vanmiddlesworth-Maja

Kenny Horneman Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
PassPass1Pass
1NTPass2NTPass
3NTAll pass  

With four quick tricks and a good five card suit, the East hand looks too strong to open 1NT, though some will certainly do so. The final contract is likely to be 3NT either way, though it will be declared by West if East opens 1 instead of 1NT. No matter who declares 3NT, declarer will have to be careful, especially against good defenders. In theory, if East is the declarer, a lead from South will give declarer no play for the contract, but this seems an unlikely lead. Assuming South leads a , or North leads a minor suit, declarer needs to try to set up the suit without letting South in to lead a . (Notice that a lead from North is not dangerous.) This can be done by leading s twice from the West hand, ducking if North ever goes up with the Queen, otherwise leading a third round of the suit. Of course, declarer might also get home if they duck a to south and South fails to lead a . Good defenders will be using suit preference when North follows to the , helping South find the switch, but of course, good declarers will attempt to foil this by playing the 6 instead of the 4. In any case, with the suit breaking, four trick, two tricks two tricks and one trick are available, so declarer will make as long as South doesn't lead s earlier. A few declarers might make 10 tricks if North leads a , but the defense doesn't set up the rest of the suit, and this should be good for a top for E/W. Any N/S pair who defeat 3NT will do very 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

13 ♠A543
AK5
J74
♣876
Dlr: North
Vul: Both
♠KQJ7
QJ843
AT5
♣5
♠98
T9
KQ8
♣KQ9432
♠T62
762
9632
♣AJT
12
1310
5
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣5 ♦5 ♥4 ♠5 NT5
EW: 2♣ 2 3 2♠ 2NT
LoTT: 14 - 14 = 0
Par: -140 3-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  100          1.00   0.00  4 W -1   C4-Leach-Stewart vs C2-Vanmiddlesworth-Maja
        140    0.00   1.00  2 W +1   C1-Muller-Upson vs C3-Seckel-Wood

Kenny Horneman Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
 1PassPass
DblAll pass  

N/S may well end up in a doubled contract on this hand, either 1 or 1NT. Despite the suit being "better", I suspect most experts will open 1 on this hand, preferring to have four s to open 1. Those who do open 1 are likely to come out much better, as it will be harder for E/W to double. Whether South passes, or bids 1NT, West can double. With a good four card suit, a relatively poor five card suit, and reasonable tolerance for s, doubling looks better than overcalling 1. If South has bid 1NT and West doubles, then East can pass this, strongly suggesting that East had a penalty double of s. Whether N/S are playing 1 doubled or 1NT doubled, they only have five tricks available, four top tricks and a slow trick. In fact, in 1NT, if declarer tries to get too fancy by attempting to set up a trick instead of working on s, they might never get their slow trick and end up going down three. With four top losers in s, and five losers in NT, E/W cannot make game anywhere. So, N/S will not fare well even if they are undoubled and go off only two, but -200 will certainly not be a bottom as there will be -500 and even a few -800 scores in the N/S column.



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

14 ♠872
T642
762
♣764
Dlr: East
Vul: None
♠AK53
8
AQJ3
♣T985
♠QJT96
KQ973
K
♣J3
♠4
AJ5
T9854
♣AKQ2
0
1412
14
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣5 ♦5 ♥4 ♠1 NT4
EW: 2♣ 1 2 4♠ 3NT
LoTT: 15 - 17 = -2
Par: -420 4♠-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
   50          0.50   0.50  5♠ E -1   C1-Muller-Upson vs C3-Seckel-Wood
   50          0.50   0.50  5♠ E -1   C4-Leach-Stewart vs C2-Vanmiddlesworth-Maja
15 ♠T9632
AK7
Q53
♣J7
Dlr: South
Vul: N-S
♠7
JT4
JT742
♣A542
♠AKJ
Q9865
6
♣KQ83
♠Q854
32
AK98
♣T96
10
615
9
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2♠  ♣4 ♦6 ♥3 NT5
EW: 3♣ 3  ♦6 ♠5 NT6
LoTT: 17 - 17 = 0
Par: -140 3-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
        100    1.00   0.00  3♠ N -1   C1-Muller-Upson vs C3-Seckel-Wood
        500    0.00   1.00  4♠* S -2  C4-Leach-Stewart vs C2-Vanmiddlesworth-Maja
16 ♠985
A954
KJ
♣Q742
Dlr: West
Vul: E-W
♠AJT62
KQ32
54
♣83
♠3
JT6
QT863
♣AKJT
♠KQ74
87
A972
♣965
10
1011
9
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣5 ♦5 ♥4 ♠5/4 NT5/4
EW: 1/2♣ 2 2/3 1♠ 2NT
LoTT: 14 - 14 = 0
Par: -140 3-W
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  100          1.00   0.00  2 W -1   C4-Leach-Stewart vs C2-Vanmiddlesworth-Maja
        180    0.00   1.00  2N E +2   C1-Muller-Upson vs C3-Seckel-Wood
17 ♠AQ8
T985
KJ
♣T987
Dlr: North
Vul: None
♠T973
Q2
Q8532
♣32
♠K6
AK763
AT4
♣J65
♠J542
J4
976
♣AKQ4
10
415
11
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2♣ 1♠  ♦4 ♥6 NT6
EW: 3 1  ♣4 ♠5 NT5
LoTT: 17 - 16 = +1
Par: -110 3-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  150          1.00   0.00  1N N +2   C4-Leach-Stewart vs C3-Seckel-Wood
   90          0.00   1.00  2♣ N      C2-Vanmiddlesworth-Maja vs C1-Muller-Upson
18 ♠J732
KT43
-
♣AK743
Dlr: East
Vul: N-S
♠T
Q8
J9862
♣QJT98
♠AQ9
J96
AKQ753
♣2
♠K8654
A752
T4
♣65
11
616
7
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 4 4♠  ♣6 ♦3 NT5
EW: 1/-♣ 4 2NT  ♣7/6 ♥3 ♠3
LoTT: 20 - 20 = 0
Par: +100 5*-EW-1
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
        150    1.00   0.00  4 E +1   C4-Leach-Stewart vs C3-Seckel-Wood
        400    0.00   1.00  5 E      C2-Vanmiddlesworth-Maja vs C1-Muller-Upson
19 ♠J64
A
T652
♣KJ832
Dlr: South
Vul: E-W
♠KT32
J986
-
♣QT965
♠A87
K7542
AQ8
♣A7
♠Q95
QT3
KJ9743
♣4
9
617
8
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2  ♣5 ♥3 ♠4 NT5
EW: 2♣ 4 2♠ 1/-NT
       ♦4/5 NT7/6
LoTT: 18 - 19 = -1
Par: -500 5*-NS-3
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
        200    1.00   0.00  3 E +2   C4-Leach-Stewart vs C3-Seckel-Wood
        650    0.00   1.00  4 E +1   C2-Vanmiddlesworth-Maja vs C1-Muller-Upson
20 ♠J9
J94
KT854
♣J86
Dlr: West
Vul: Both
♠6542
T5
76
♣AQT52
♠KT
AK876
A932
♣73
♠AQ873
Q32
QJ
♣K94
6
614
14
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣5 ♦5 ♥5 ♠6 NT6
EW: 1♣ 2/1 1 1/-♠
       ♠7/5 NT5
LoTT: 13 - 14 = -1
Par: -90 2-E
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
        100    1.00   0.00  2♠ S -1   C2-Vanmiddlesworth-Maja vs C1-Muller-Upson
        110    0.00   1.00  2 E      C4-Leach-Stewart vs C3-Seckel-Wood
21 ♠652
K3
AQT842
♣K2
Dlr: North
Vul: N-S
♠KT9
975
K765
♣QJ9
♠AQ84
Q842
J3
♣875
♠J73
AJT6
9
♣AT643
12
99
10
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3♣ 3 3 1♠ 2NT
EW:  ♣3 ♦3 ♥3/4 ♠5 NT5
LoTT: 14 - 14 = 0
Par: +140 3-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  110          1.00   0.00  3 N      C4-Leach-Stewart vs C3-Seckel-Wood
        100    0.00   1.00  3 S -1   C2-Vanmiddlesworth-Maja vs C1-Muller-Upson
22 ♠Q852
AK72
J95
♣Q7
Dlr: East
Vul: E-W
♠64
Q64
AK76
♣T963
♠AT9
T983
QT4
♣J85
♠KJ73
J5
832
♣AK42
12
97
12
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1♣ 1 -/1 3♠ 2NT  ♥6/7
EW:  ♣6 ♦6 ♥6 ♠3 NT5
LoTT: 15 - 15 = 0
Par: +140 3♠-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
  140          0.50   0.50  3♠ S      C4-Leach-Stewart vs C3-Seckel-Wood
  140          0.50   0.50  2♠ S +1   C2-Vanmiddlesworth-Maja vs C1-Muller-Upson
23 ♠A42
Q92
JT5
♣T864
Dlr: South
Vul: Both
♠JT8
JT643
743
♣A7
♠Q9653
K
KQ62
♣KJ5
♠K7
A875
A98
♣Q932
7
614
13
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2♣ 1 1NT  ♦6 ♠5
EW: 1 2/1♠  ♣5/4 ♥6 NT6/5
LoTT: 16 - 16 = 0
Par: -110 2♠-E
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
        100    1.00   0.00  3♣ S -1   C2-Vanmiddlesworth-Maja vs C1-Muller-Upson
        300    0.00   1.00  1N N -3   C4-Leach-Stewart vs C3-Seckel-Wood
24 ♠42
9872
Q2
♣AKQJ5
Dlr: West
Vul: None
♠KT98
KJ4
A9653
♣9
♠A
QT3
KJ874
♣T864
♠QJ7653
A65
T
♣732
12
1110
7
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1♣  ♦2 ♥6 ♠6 NT6
EW: 5 1NT  ♣6 ♥6 ♠6
LoTT: 18 - 18 = 0
Par: -400 5-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract
        150    0.50   0.50  4 W +1   C2-Vanmiddlesworth-Maja vs C1-Muller-Upson
        150    0.50   0.50  4 W +1   C4-Leach-Stewart vs C3-Seckel-Wood