Friday, 15 September 2006

Dayton Apes (Match 2)

Having won the first match narrowly, we were disappointed to lose the second one by 29 IMPs (7-23 VPs).

There were four major swings. Anne and I found a better game on one to win 13 IMPs on board 5, and Mike and Nigel played in the wrong minor game on board 2 to hand 10 IMPs back.

The other two swings were largely the result of my new partnership. On the first hand I held ♠ J7 A5 QJ10753 ♣ Q98 and heard Anne open 1; I responded 2 and LHO overcalled 2♠ that Anne passed. RHO raised to 3♠ which I passed and eventually Anne bid 4♣. I thought this would show a weak 5-5 shape so passed, when in fact she held a weak 6-4 and 4 was making. In the other room there was no competition and it was a lot easier to find the right contract.

On the second hand I held ♠ AQ109xx Kxx AJ9x ♣ - and heard Anne open 1 playing 4-card majors.

I responded 1♠ and heard a 2♣ rebid. I used fourth suit forcing and Anne responded with 3NT. At this point I can probably bid 4 although this may lead to a confusing auction with no apparent trump suit agreed. With the concern that Anne may have a 1444 shape and 3NT may be showing a minimum, I decided to pass.

They had the same auction in the other room, albeit playing 5-card majors, and my hand bid 6 at this point. Although potentially a difficult contract all lines lead to 12 tricks so we lost 13 IMPs. It is hard to work out how good the slam is as the hand opposite is ♠ x AQ109x Q8x ♣ AQJ9 but a quick simulation suggests that 12 tricks are always likely to be available. Mea culpa.

The Apes just had the better of the minor skirmishes and ran out winners by 52:22 IMPs.

This marks the end of the round robin stage. There are a large number of outstanding matches so it will be some time before we discover if we have qualified to the A or B playoffs.
Post a Comment