- Saturday Morn - September 30, 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: 472 MP  Geomean: 177 MP
(based on 18 players)
★ ★ ★  Masterpoint Winners  ★ ★ ★
Partnership Pct Rank MP
Barbara Callaway - Ron Lawson 59.53 1st A 0.90
Richard Papst - Terry Handley 58.74 2/3rd A 0.54
Dennis Vanmiddlesworth - Kate Lach 58.74 2/3rd A 0.54
Amy Pofcher - Janet Hedlund 54.76 4th A 0.32
Joan Roberts - Joe Norton 51.58 2nd C 0.21
EVENT>Sat Morning Open Game    |SESSION>Saturday Morn|SECTION> O
------------------------,------ ------------,-------- --------------------------
DATE>September 30, 2017 |CLUB NO.>150680    | 09/30/2017 15:03
---------------------,-- ------------------- -------------,---------------------
DIR> Alan Hedegard   |RATING>Club Masterpoint (100%, 70%, 60% Open)|MOVEMENT>ONE WINNER
------------,-------- ,-------------------------,--------- ---------------------
AVE>   36.0 |TOP>   3 |MP LIMITS>None/200/50    |CLUB>H & H  Saturday
------------ --------- ------------------------- -------------------------------
PAIRS IN STRAT A=9/B=8/C=5                       ,---,-------------------------,------,---------,
-------------------------------------------------|   |           Section       |      |Section  |
No Name                   Name                   |Flt|Rnk-A|Rnk-B|Rnk-C| Score | Pct  |Awards   |
------------------------------------------------- --- ----- ----- ----- ------- ------ ---------
 1 Doris Jones            Elizabeth Sebring        C    .     .     .     22.00  30.56
 2 Richard Vreeland       Debeliah Anthony         C    .     .     .     32.57  45.24
 3 Kate Lach              Dennis Vanmiddlesworth   B   2/3   2/3    .     42.29  58.74  0.54(A)
 4 Terry Handley          Richard Papst            B   2/3   2/3    .     42.29  58.74  0.54(A)
 6 Janet Street           William Putnam           A    .     .     .     31.43  43.65
 7 Ron Lawson             Barbara Callaway         C    1     1     1     42.86  59.53  0.90(A)
 8 Richard McCormick      Keith Hedlund            C    .     .     .     36.00  50.00
 9 Janet Hedlund          Amy Pofcher              B    4     .     .     39.43  54.76  0.32(A)
10 Joan Roberts           Joe Norton               C    .     .     2     37.14  51.58  0.21(C)
                                          Totals                         326.01

Hands and Results
1 ♠KT74
A95
QT7
♣T96
Dlr: North
Vul: None
♠632
J3
KJ843
♣A54
♠A8
762
A92
♣KQ873
♠QJ95
KQT84
65
♣J2
9
913
9
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2 2♠  ♣3 ♦3 NT5
EW: 3♣ 3 2NT  ♥5 ♠5
LoTT: 17 - 16 = +1
Par: -100 3♠*-NS/3*-NS-1
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  110          3.00   0.00  2 S      ♣A  O3-Lach-Vanmiddlesworth vs O6-Street-Putnam
         50    2.00   1.00  3♠ N -1   A  O7-Lawson-Callaway vs O8-McCormick-Hedlund
         90    1.00   2.00  2 E      K  O10-Roberts-Norton vs O1-Jones-Sebring
        130    0.00   3.00  3♣ E +1   ♠5  O2-Vreeland-Anthony vs O4-Handley-Papst

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
 Pass12
Pass2PassPass
Pass   

When Mike Michaels Cue Bid presented his weak major takeout cue bid to the public, his article in The Bridge World Magazine catered specifically to 5-4 major suited hands. The 5-5 requirement is a development from that idea, not necessarily the original concept. Showing otherwise difficult to describe competitive hands was the goal.

South's hand qualifies for the original concept! If South overcalls 1, there is insufficient ammunition to venture another call. An immediate 2 major suited takeout finds the spade suit and makes life very difficult for EW.



****************************************
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 ♠Q4
AQ832
AKT9
♣JT
Dlr: East
Vul: N-S
♠K9
KT954
Q6
♣8632
♠AJT87
-
8732
♣AKQ5
♠6532
J76
J54
♣974
16
814
2
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣3 ♦5 ♥6 ♠4 NT4
EW: 4♣ 2 1 3♠ 1NT
LoTT: 16 - 16 = 0
Par: -140 3♠-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
   50          3.00   0.00  4♠ E -1   4  O3-Lach-Vanmiddlesworth vs O6-Street-Putnam
        140    2.00   1.00  3♠ E      6  O10-Roberts-Norton vs O1-Jones-Sebring
        430    1.00   2.00  3N W +1   3  O7-Lawson-Callaway vs O8-McCormick-Hedlund
        450    0.00   3.00  4♠ E +1   4  O2-Vreeland-Anthony vs O4-Handley-Papst

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
  1Pass
1NTDbl2Pass
2PassPassPass

North's double is better than a unilateral 2 bid on a mediocre five card suit. Instead, the double provides more flexibility. If necessary, North is prepared to bid 2 over 2, a bit of a stretch for the pattern of an Equal Level Conversion Double , but passing seems a bit rich, while a cue bid of 2 surely is, and deserves punishment. A 2 overcall by North would be crushed by East's negative/takeout double for those who play that way, or by West's penalty double, for those who do not! EW need to have clear understandings to deal with this sort of hand. They should be able to "get" North, but must define their doubles and wield the axe with confidence. Any agreement is better than no agreement! By this is meant that if East passes North's 2 overcall, will also West's double be passed?

If East bids 2 (whether North doubles or passes), West should bid 2 with honor doubleton in the five card suit.



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

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

CLICK HERE or email me directly at rcraigh@aol.com

3 ♠AT2
QJ84
AJ2
♣943
Dlr: South
Vul: E-W
♠K9854
72
KQ843
♣A
♠J
A
T9765
♣KQ8752
♠Q763
KT9653
-
♣JT6
12
1210
6
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3  ♣3 ♦3 ♠5 NT5
EW: 4/3♣ 4  ♥4 ♠6 NT4
LoTT: 19 - 20 = -1
Par: -100 4*-NS-1
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  420          3.00   0.00  4 N      ♠J  O3-Lach-Vanmiddlesworth vs O6-Street-Putnam
  400          2.00   1.00  5** W -1 Q  O7-Lawson-Callaway vs O8-McCormick-Hedlund
        100    1.00   2.00  4* N -1  ♠J  O2-Vreeland-Anthony vs O4-Handley-Papst
        130    0.00   3.00  3 W +1   Q  O10-Roberts-Norton vs O1-Jones-Sebring

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
   Pass
1Pass1NTPass
2PassPass3
PassPassPass 

North - South would have to have more enterprise than I to take a bid on this auction, but even if they were to bid to the three level, EW will bid 4 for sure, at which point NS "can" but "Won't" bid 4.



****************************************
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 ♠T4
J9
AJT85
♣A943
Dlr: West
Vul: Both
♠KQ875
AKQ842
3
♣8
♠632
763
42
♣KQJ76
♠AJ9
T5
KQ976
♣T52
10
146
10
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2 1NT  ♣6 ♥3 ♠4
EW: 1♣ 4 3♠  ♦5 NT6
LoTT: 18 - 19 = -1
Par: -620 4-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
        620    2.00   1.00  4 W      ♠T  O8-McCormick-Hedlund vs O1-Jones-Sebring
        620    2.00   1.00  4 W      ♠T  O10-Roberts-Norton vs O2-Vreeland-Anthony
        620    2.00   1.00  4 W      8  O4-Handley-Papst vs O7-Lawson-Callaway
        710    0.00   3.00  5 W +2   ♠5  O9-Hedlund-Pofcher vs O6-Street-Putnam

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
1Pass2Pass
4All pass  

NS won't get any style points or matchpoints for sacrificing in diamonds, but EW can and should bid game in hearts. Not spades! Open your longer suit first. It is also significantly stronger. West's plan was to reverse into spades unless hearts were raised. No point at all in bidding spades after the raise. Why telegraph to the opponents?



****************************************
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 ♠J98
T43
J92
♣KJ76
Dlr: North
Vul: N-S
♠-
J8
653
♣AQT98532
♠7643
K765
AKQ84
♣-
♠AKQT52
AQ92
T7
♣4
6
712
15
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1 3♠ 2/1NT  ♣4 ♦5
EW: 3♣ 2  ♥5 ♠3 NT5
LoTT: 18 - 17 = +1
Par: +100 4♣*-EW-1
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  300          2.50   0.50  5♣* W -2  ♠J  O9-Hedlund-Pofcher vs O6-Street-Putnam
  300          2.50   0.50  5♣* W -2  ♠8  O8-McCormick-Hedlund vs O1-Jones-Sebring
  100          1.00   2.00  5♣ W -2   ♠J  O4-Handley-Papst vs O7-Lawson-Callaway
   50          0.00   3.00  4♣ W -1   ♠J  O10-Roberts-Norton vs O2-Vreeland-Anthony

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
 Pass1Dbl
3DblPass3
PassPassPass 

So just because the diagram and I agree that North should pass the 3 bid, showing a strong hand with really good spades does not mean that the pass is always going to produce a great score, but really, what can North expect to provide to South other than protection against a bad trump split? The answer is zero, nada, nothing! If South cannot haul off and bid game based on North's penalty double, then North has not a single trick to help.

Nice stop.



****************************************
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 ♠A763
73
JT
♣KJ643
Dlr: East
Vul: E-W
♠J
T642
AK6
♣AT975
♠982
KQJ95
Q8532
♣-
♠KQT54
A8
974
♣Q82
9
128
11
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1♣ 1♠  ♦2 ♥2 NT6
EW: 5 5  ♣6 ♠4 NT6
LoTT: 18 - 18 = 0
Par: -650 5-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  420          3.00   0.00  4♠ S      A  O8-McCormick-Hedlund vs O1-Jones-Sebring
  300          2.00   1.00  4♣ W -3   ♠A  O9-Hedlund-Pofcher vs O6-Street-Putnam
  170          1.00   2.00  3♠ S +1   A  O4-Handley-Papst vs O7-Lawson-Callaway
  140          0.00   3.00  2♠ S +1   T  O10-Roberts-Norton vs O2-Vreeland-Anthony

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
  Pass1
Dbl2NT14Pass
PassPass  
  1. Jordan -- a limit raise or better of spades. Barely, but adequate.

If pushed by 4, EW have three choices, two of which are winners. Pass is not one of the winners. Double collects 500 and is the better of the two positive results, but 5 will do in a pinch.

Not much for EW to sweat about. Just don't crawl into a shell and hide. Stand up and be counted!



****************************************
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 ♠AK93
KJT62
763
♣3
Dlr: South
Vul: Both
♠T7652
74
QJT
♣K62
♠4
Q93
K954
♣AJT97
♠QJ8
A85
A82
♣Q854
11
610
13
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1 4 3♠ 4NT  ♣5
EW: 2♣  ♦6 ♥3 ♠4 NT3
LoTT: 18 - 16 = +2
Par: +630 4NT-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  790          3.00   0.00  4* N     4  O9-Hedlund-Pofcher vs O7-Lawson-Callaway
  630          2.00   1.00  3N S +1   Q  O10-Roberts-Norton vs O3-Lach-Vanmiddlesworth
        100    1.00   2.00  4 N -1   ♣A  O4-Handley-Papst vs O6-Street-Putnam
        200    0.00   3.00  4 N -2   ♠4  O1-Jones-Sebring vs O2-Vreeland-Anthony

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
   1
Pass1Pass1NT
Pass2Pass2
Pass4All pass 

Oh, well. It's a good game with reasonable chances of success. Unlucky that normal play won't bring home the score. If East leads an obviously singleton 4, will that be enough to convince at least a few thoughtful declarers to take the correct trump finesse? After all, it IS pretty much a two way finesse, isn't it? Oh, sure, leading to the A and leading a heart back to the KJTx remaining caters to 4-1 splits, but if West has a likely five card spade suit, that probability is severely diminished -- to the point that a lead of the K followed by running the J is not a bad idea at all. But who will stand and take the abnormal play, whether indicated or not?

Who? Who, I say.

But why is East leading a singleton, holding a likely trump trick? What is the point? No one having presented a decent argument, let's go back to the drawing board on that opening lead decision. Chalk the singleton temptation up to being a bad idea. Lead a diamond. YES, away from a king. Yes, indeed, if you want to defeat contracts, you have to live a little, attack!

Now let declarer guess the trump queen. Ain't happenin'.



****************************************
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 ♠A983
J8752
KQ4
♣Q
Dlr: West
Vul: None
♠74
KT93
AT8
♣9643
♠J2
Q6
J952
♣KJ852
♠KQT65
A4
763
♣AT7
12
78
13
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1♣ 2 3 5♠ 3NT
EW:  ♣6 ♦4 ♥4 ♠2 NT3
LoTT: 17 - 18 = -1
Par: +450 5♠-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  450          2.00   1.00  4♠ S +1   A  O1-Jones-Sebring vs O2-Vreeland-Anthony
  450          2.00   1.00  4♠ S +1   ♣9  O10-Roberts-Norton vs O3-Lach-Vanmiddlesworth
  450          2.00   1.00  4♠ S +1   ♣3  O9-Hedlund-Pofcher vs O7-Lawson-Callaway
  420          0.00   3.00  4♠ S      A  O4-Handley-Papst vs O6-Street-Putnam

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
Pass21Pass4
Pass4PassPass
Pass   
  1. Flannery

My good friend, Mr. Flannery has been absent for a time, and welcome back!

South has a clear game bid, perhaps even worth a slam invite, but for those who wish to explore the virtues of this convention, I commend the diagrammed auction for consideration. South may see a benefit in having North be the declarer. Imagination, I mean, not perception. Suppose that North were to hold the Kx(x). Then it would be wonderful to protect that king from opening lead attack. South can force North to declarer spades, unlike the rest of the field!

The Flannery convention incorporates the South African Transfer convention! After 2, the opening Flannery bid showing 45xx pattern, South can transfer to hearts with 4 and to 4 with 4, reserving unto himself the option of bidding 4 or 4 as declarer. The latter two options, and 4 in particular on the present hand, would be the choice holding Kxx, to protect that king from a nasty opening lead.

Flannery hath charms to soothe the savage beast. If South gets the slam bug on this one, he can bid 2 - 3 (slam-interest relay to 3); 3 - 3 (spades are trump: please control bid); 4 - 4; 4 (no interest) Pass (Oh, all right, then)



****************************************
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 ♠K976
-
AQJT64
♣K64
Dlr: North
Vul: E-W
♠A5432
AT953
K7
♣9
♠QJ
K74
98532
♣832
♠T8
QJ862
-
♣AQJT75
13
116
10
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 6♣ 3 2♠ 2NT  ♥6
EW:  ♣1 ♦2 ♥6 ♠5 NT4
LoTT: 18 - 17 = +1
Par: +920 6♣-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  460          3.00   0.00  3N N +2   3  O4-Handley-Papst vs O6-Street-Putnam
  400          2.00   1.00  3N N      ♠Q  O10-Roberts-Norton vs O3-Lach-Vanmiddlesworth
         50    1.00   2.00  5♣ S -1   ♠2  O1-Jones-Sebring vs O2-Vreeland-Anthony
        300    0.00   3.00  5* N -2  ♣2  O9-Hedlund-Pofcher vs O7-Lawson-Callaway
10 ♠KQT94
95
J43
♣432
Dlr: East
Vul: Both
♠AJ8
J82
Q9875
♣A8
♠753
KT63
T6
♣T965
♠62
AQ74
AK2
♣KQJ7
6
123
19
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 4♣ 2/3 2 4♠ 2NT
EW:  ♣3 ♦4 ♥5 ♠2 NT4
LoTT: 15 - 14 = +1
Par: +620 4♠-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  650          3.00   0.00  4♠ N +1   K  O2-Vreeland-Anthony vs O3-Lach-Vanmiddlesworth
  600          2.00   1.00  3N S      9  O6-Street-Putnam vs O1-Jones-Sebring
  120          1.00   2.00  2N S      9  O10-Roberts-Norton vs O4-Handley-Papst
        100    0.00   3.00  3N S -1   9  O9-Hedlund-Pofcher vs O8-McCormick-Hedlund
11 ♠T9865
KT6
T4
♣KJ8
Dlr: South
Vul: None
♠QJ42
AQ5
AK92
♣T9
♠-
J92
Q86
♣AQ65432
♠AK73
8743
J753
♣7
7
169
8
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣2 ♦3 ♥4 ♠6 NT3
EW: 5♣ 3 3 1♠ 3NT
LoTT: 17 - 18 = -1
Par: -400 3NT-EW/5♣-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
        400    2.50   0.50  3N W      ♠6  O6-Street-Putnam vs O1-Jones-Sebring
        400    2.50   0.50  3N W      ♠5  O2-Vreeland-Anthony vs O3-Lach-Vanmiddlesworth
        420    1.00   2.00  5♣ E +1   ♠A  O9-Hedlund-Pofcher vs O8-McCormick-Hedlund
        430    0.00   3.00  3N W +1   ♠T  O10-Roberts-Norton vs O4-Handley-Papst
12 ♠QJ
K94
AQ98
♣KT98
Dlr: West
Vul: N-S
♠76
T73
J7532
♣A54
♠98432
AQ5
T6
♣J63
♠AKT5
J862
K4
♣Q72
15
57
13
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 4♣ 3 4 3♠ 4NT
EW:  ♣3 ♦4 ♥3 ♠4 NT3
LoTT: 14 - 14 = 0
Par: +630 4NT-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  600          2.00   1.00  3N N      ♠3  O9-Hedlund-Pofcher vs O8-McCormick-Hedlund
  600          2.00   1.00  3N N      ♠3  O10-Roberts-Norton vs O4-Handley-Papst
  600          2.00   1.00  3N N      3  O6-Street-Putnam vs O1-Jones-Sebring
        200    0.00   3.00  3N N -2   ♠3  O2-Vreeland-Anthony vs O3-Lach-Vanmiddlesworth
13 ♠J2
AJT
AJ96
♣Q932
Dlr: North
Vul: Both
♠AQ84
KQ9763
T5
♣K
♠KT965
-
8742
♣AT65
♠73
8542
KQ3
♣J874
13
147
6
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣6 ♦4 ♥3 ♠0 NT5
EW: 1♣ 1 3 5♠ 2NT
LoTT: 17 - 17 = 0
Par: -650 5♠-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  100          3.00   0.00  4♠ E -1   ♣4  O7-Lawson-Callaway vs O2-Vreeland-Anthony
        200    2.00   1.00  1N N -2   ♠6  O3-Lach-Vanmiddlesworth vs O4-Handley-Papst
        620    1.00   2.00  4♠ E      K  O6-Street-Putnam vs O8-McCormick-Hedlund
       1100    0.00   3.00  3* S -4  ♠4  O1-Jones-Sebring vs O9-Hedlund-Pofcher
14 ♠65
AKQ632
Q9
♣AT4
Dlr: East
Vul: None
♠K9843
85
J543
♣72
♠Q2
JT94
AK72
♣K85
♠AJT7
7
T86
♣QJ963
15
413
8
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3♣ 2 1NT  ♦5 ♠6
EW: 2 1♠  ♣4 ♥4 NT5
LoTT: 17 - 16 = +1
Par: +100 3*-EW-1
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  170          3.00   0.00  3 N +1   A  O7-Lawson-Callaway vs O2-Vreeland-Anthony
  150          2.00   1.00  3N E -3   7  O3-Lach-Vanmiddlesworth vs O4-Handley-Papst
         50    0.50   2.50  3 N -1   A  O6-Street-Putnam vs O8-McCormick-Hedlund
         50    0.50   2.50  3♣ S -1   3  O1-Jones-Sebring vs O9-Hedlund-Pofcher
15 ♠KJ7
98754
JT3
♣J9
Dlr: South
Vul: N-S
♠542
AJ
K942
♣AQ64
♠AT96
Q63
AQ65
♣K2
♠Q83
KT2
87
♣T8753
6
1415
5
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣4 ♦2 ♥5 ♠2 NT2
EW: 3♣ 5 2 5♠ 4NT
LoTT: 16 - 16 = 0
Par: -450 5♠-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
        430    2.50   0.50  3N W +1   5  O1-Jones-Sebring vs O9-Hedlund-Pofcher
        430    2.50   0.50  3N W +1   5  O7-Lawson-Callaway vs O2-Vreeland-Anthony
        460    1.00   2.00  3N W +2   4  O6-Street-Putnam vs O8-McCormick-Hedlund
        490    0.00   3.00  3N W +3   5  O3-Lach-Vanmiddlesworth vs O4-Handley-Papst
16 ♠J98
J74
T54
♣KJT2
Dlr: West
Vul: E-W
♠T
A63
9832
♣AQ987
♠A5432
Q985
J
♣654
♠KQ76
KT2
AKQ76
♣3
6
107
17
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3 2♠ 3NT  ♣5 ♥5
EW: 2♣ 1/-  ♦3 ♥7/6 ♠5 NT4
LoTT: 17 - 16 = +1
Par: +400 3NT-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  210          3.00   0.00  1N S +4   ♣8  O7-Lawson-Callaway vs O1-Jones-Sebring
  110          1.50   1.50  3 S      ♠T  O10-Roberts-Norton vs O6-Street-Putnam
  110          1.50   1.50  2 S +1   ♠T  O8-McCormick-Hedlund vs O3-Lach-Vanmiddlesworth
        680    0.00   3.00  5 E +1   ♣Q  O2-Vreeland-Anthony vs O9-Hedlund-Pofcher
17 ♠Q853
3
T92
♣J8642
Dlr: North
Vul: None
♠T2
AQT5
AQ6
♣KT93
♠K
K97642
K875
♣A7
♠AJ9764
J8
J43
♣Q5
3
1513
9
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1♠  ♣4 ♦0 ♥0 NT1
EW: 2♣ 6 6 1NT  ♠6
LoTT: 19 - 20 = -1
Par: -980 6-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
        450    3.00   0.00  4 E +1   ♠A  O7-Lawson-Callaway vs O1-Jones-Sebring
        480    2.00   1.00  5 E +1   ♣Q  O2-Vreeland-Anthony vs O9-Hedlund-Pofcher
        490    1.00   2.00  3N W +3   ♣4  O10-Roberts-Norton vs O6-Street-Putnam
        510    0.00   3.00  4 E +3   ♣Q  O8-McCormick-Hedlund vs O3-Lach-Vanmiddlesworth

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
 Pass1Pass
2NTPass31Pass
4Pass4Pass
4NTPass52Pass
6All pass  
  1. Shortness.
  2. Two with the queen!!

Since the 2NT Jacoby forcing raise promises four trumps, East should show the extra trump by showing the queen! The tenth trump virtually assures that the adversely held queen will not take a trick, and at worst partner will "see" the sixth trump. This is rather much an accepted practice.

The only other problem with the hand is whether to show the singleton, since it is a king; the honor value will potentially be lost opposite, say, AQx, but on the other hand, today the value of the singleton is all that matters!

Smooth sailing into an ice-cold slam by showing the singleton, grave difficulties if East leaps to 4 to show a minimum. That leap is rather much a poor choice with control cards in every suit. The choice, using standard Jacoby 2NT methods, is one or the other, since both 3, showing extras, and 3NT, showing a balanced hand or medium-high values, are also flawed. Showing the singleton seems a rational choice among the alternatives, and rewards flow.



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

18 ♠Q
A987
J93
♣T8732
Dlr: East
Vul: N-S
♠JT97542
KQ
K6
♣KJ
♠A
643
AT752
♣AQ94
♠K863
JT52
Q84
♣65
7
1314
6
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣3 ♦3 ♥6 ♠2 NT2
EW: 3♣ 4 1 5♠ 3NT
LoTT: 17 - 16 = +1
Par: -450 5♠-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
   50          3.00   0.00  3N W -1   ♣2  O7-Lawson-Callaway vs O1-Jones-Sebring
        450    2.00   1.00  4♠ W +1   ♣8  O10-Roberts-Norton vs O6-Street-Putnam
        480    1.00   2.00  4♠ W +2   J  O8-McCormick-Hedlund vs O3-Lach-Vanmiddlesworth
       1400    0.00   3.00  5* N -5  ♠A  O2-Vreeland-Anthony vs O9-Hedlund-Pofcher
19 ♠K42
Q
T87
♣AQJ976
Dlr: South
Vul: E-W
♠J8
AJT7532
J
♣854
♠Q7653
98
532
♣K32
♠AT9
K64
AKQ964
♣T
12
75
16
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 4♣ 6 1 3♠ 5NT
EW:  ♣2 ♦0 ♥6 ♠4 NT2
LoTT: 18 - 18 = 0
Par: +920 6-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  400          1.50   1.50  5 S      ♠A  O3-Lach-Vanmiddlesworth vs O9-Hedlund-Pofcher
  400          1.50   1.50  5 S      ♠J  O1-Jones-Sebring vs O4-Handley-Papst
  400          1.50   1.50  5 S      A  O10-Roberts-Norton vs O7-Lawson-Callaway
  400          1.50   1.50  5♣ N      7  O8-McCormick-Hedlund vs O2-Vreeland-Anthony
20 ♠3
86532
QT65
♣K83
Dlr: West
Vul: Both
♠QJ98654
J
82
♣Q74
♠A2
QT97
KJ743
♣96
♠KT7
AK4
A9
♣AJT52
5
610
19
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 4♣ 2 4/3 4NT  ♠5
EW: 1♠  ♣3 ♦5 ♥3 NT3
LoTT: 17 - 17 = 0
Par: +630 4NT-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  800          3.00   0.00  4♠* W -3  ♠3  O10-Roberts-Norton vs O7-Lawson-Callaway
  620          2.00   1.00  4 N      ♠A  O3-Lach-Vanmiddlesworth vs O9-Hedlund-Pofcher
  500          1.00   2.00  4♠* W -2  ♣K  O8-McCormick-Hedlund vs O2-Vreeland-Anthony
        300    0.00   3.00  3N S -3   ♠Q  O1-Jones-Sebring vs O4-Handley-Papst
21 ♠Q532
AJ7653
7
♣Q8
Dlr: North
Vul: N-S
♠KT86
QT
AT93
♣J94
♠74
982
K654
♣T752
♠AJ9
K4
QJ82
♣AK63
9
103
18
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3/4♣ 2 5 4♠ 4NT
EW:  ♣3 ♦4 ♥2 ♠3 NT3
LoTT: 15 - 16 = -1
Par: +650 5-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  690          3.00   0.00  3N S +3   ♠6  O10-Roberts-Norton vs O7-Lawson-Callaway
  650          1.50   1.50  4 N +1   ♠A  O3-Lach-Vanmiddlesworth vs O9-Hedlund-Pofcher
  650          1.50   1.50  4 N +1   ♠7  O1-Jones-Sebring vs O4-Handley-Papst
  630          0.00   3.00  3N S +1   3  O8-McCormick-Hedlund vs O2-Vreeland-Anthony
22 ♠T2
AT3
A765
♣AK92
Dlr: East
Vul: E-W
♠AQ93
4
T93
♣JT873
♠K654
KQJ87
Q2
♣Q6
♠J87
9652
KJ84
♣54
15
713
5
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3/2 1NT  ♣6 ♥6 ♠5
EW: 1♣ 1♠  ♦4 ♥6 NT6
LoTT: 16 - 16 = 0
Par: +110 3-S
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  100          3.00   0.00  2♠ W -1   ♣A  O6-Street-Putnam vs O7-Lawson-Callaway
   90          2.00   1.00  2 S      4  O10-Roberts-Norton vs O8-McCormick-Hedlund
        110    1.00   2.00  2♠ W      ♣A  O4-Handley-Papst vs O9-Hedlund-Pofcher
        140    0.00   3.00  2♠ W +1   2  O1-Jones-Sebring vs O3-Lach-Vanmiddlesworth
23 ♠T72
KT85
T98
♣AKJ
Dlr: South
Vul: Both
♠KJ854
QJ6
7
♣QT53
♠Q96
43
AJ542
♣762
♠A3
A972
KQ63
♣984
11
97
13
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2♣ 3 4 2NT  ♠6
EW: 1♠  ♣5 ♦4 ♥3 NT4
LoTT: 17 - 16 = +1
Par: +620 4-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  200          3.00   0.00  3♠ W -2   ♣A  O10-Roberts-Norton vs O8-McCormick-Hedlund
  170          1.50   1.50  3 N +1   ♠6  O4-Handley-Papst vs O9-Hedlund-Pofcher
  170          1.50   1.50  2 N +2   4  O6-Street-Putnam vs O7-Lawson-Callaway
  100          0.00   3.00  3♠ W -1   ♣A  O1-Jones-Sebring vs O3-Lach-Vanmiddlesworth
24 ♠983
7642
J5
♣JT43
Dlr: West
Vul: None
♠J742
KQT95
AK8
♣5
♠A6
A83
T643
♣A862
♠KQT5
J
Q972
♣KQ97
2
1312
13
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣5 ♦3 ♥2 ♠5 NT3
EW: 1♣ 3 5 2♠ 3NT
LoTT: 16 - 16 = 0
Par: -450 5-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
        140    3.00   0.00  4 W -2   J  O1-Jones-Sebring vs O3-Lach-Vanmiddlesworth
        450    1.50   1.50  4 W +1   ♣J  O4-Handley-Papst vs O9-Hedlund-Pofcher
        450    1.50   1.50  4 W +1   ♣J  O10-Roberts-Norton vs O8-McCormick-Hedlund
       1080    0.00   3.00  4** E +1 J  O6-Street-Putnam vs O7-Lawson-Callaway