John and Martin, our team mates from earlier this year, had a terrific weekend at the Lederer Memorial Trophy finishing third in the all-star field (full result).
The Lederer is an invitation event played at the Young Chelsea Bridge Club with eight teams from England and overseas. John and Martin qualified by winning the YC Knockout Cup, probably the toughest club competition in the world, and played against some of the world's top pairs including Crouch/Liggins, Hanlon/McGann, Forrestor/Bakhshi, Hackett twins, Coyle/Matheson, Auken/Von Arnim and Gold/Townsend.
I am particularly impressed by their performance as the team started poorly and is inexperienced at the highest levels. Clearly they coped with the pressure and strain at this level extremely well to play their top game.
Well done!
Monday, 30 October 2006
Thursday, 26 October 2006
The run continues ...
The second half of the BBO League quarter-final was a quiet affair but Anne, Graham, Mike and Nigel scored consistently to overturn the 4 IMPs deficit into a 28 IMPs win.
Both sides missed two good, but difficult to bid, slams but the third set only came alive with the last four boards, with Blue Lightning now leading by 11 IMPs.
On board 9 Mike and Nigel missed a game contract that needed two finesses, a 3-3 break plus a doubleton queen (with five out), so that was 7 IMPs out. Hard to blame them for this!
On the next hand, despite both having passed, Anne and Graham doubled a 2♠ contract and defended well to hold it to eight tricks, another 11 IMPs gone and now we are behind again.
However these two good results seemed to make the opposition over-confident as they redoubled a 2♦ contract on board 11. I thought Anne's double was aggressive (she had a 4 count but was good for a passed hand) but she picked a good time as Graham had a monster. Declarer could have played the hand for 2 off, but the defence was excellent again to make the most of the actual line to take the contract 3 down for +1000 and 13 IMPs.
The last hand saw East-West fighting in poor contracts, but unsurprisingly the 6-2 fit selected by Anne and Graham was more successful than the 5-1 fit at the other table, especially with Mike and Nigel's excellent defence, and we finished the set with another 5 IMPs and a 11 IMPs lead going into the last 12 boards.
The final set was a tense affair but the boards were unexciting with only two major swings.
On board 6 Mike and Nigel had a simple auction to the best contract:
Board 6; IMPs; Dealer East; EW Game
North
♠ J 9 7 5 4
♥ A Q 9 4
♦ A
♣ K 9 7
South
♠ A K 3
♥ J 8 3
♦ Q J 9 8 7 4
♣ 6
West East
___1♦
1♠ 2♠
4♠ Pass
At the other table opener rebid diamonds and they played in a hopeless 3NT contract, so we gained 12 IMPs.
The final stake in Nightingale's coffin came on board 11, when Nigel found the lead to beat the 4♠ contract and win another 10 IMPs when Graham made no mistake (on a friendlier lead) in the other room.
The final score was Blue Lightning 128:96 Nightingale.
The team has exceeded all my expectations in getting through to the semi-finals. When the league started I thought we would be over-achievers if we qualified in the top four spots in our division. We are now in the last four, despite the vast array of stars who have been in the tournament, but our target is now the final!
Both sides missed two good, but difficult to bid, slams but the third set only came alive with the last four boards, with Blue Lightning now leading by 11 IMPs.
On board 9 Mike and Nigel missed a game contract that needed two finesses, a 3-3 break plus a doubleton queen (with five out), so that was 7 IMPs out. Hard to blame them for this!
On the next hand, despite both having passed, Anne and Graham doubled a 2♠ contract and defended well to hold it to eight tricks, another 11 IMPs gone and now we are behind again.
However these two good results seemed to make the opposition over-confident as they redoubled a 2♦ contract on board 11. I thought Anne's double was aggressive (she had a 4 count but was good for a passed hand) but she picked a good time as Graham had a monster. Declarer could have played the hand for 2 off, but the defence was excellent again to make the most of the actual line to take the contract 3 down for +1000 and 13 IMPs.
The last hand saw East-West fighting in poor contracts, but unsurprisingly the 6-2 fit selected by Anne and Graham was more successful than the 5-1 fit at the other table, especially with Mike and Nigel's excellent defence, and we finished the set with another 5 IMPs and a 11 IMPs lead going into the last 12 boards.
The final set was a tense affair but the boards were unexciting with only two major swings.
On board 6 Mike and Nigel had a simple auction to the best contract:
Board 6; IMPs; Dealer East; EW Game
North
♠ J 9 7 5 4
♥ A Q 9 4
♦ A
♣ K 9 7
South
♠ A K 3
♥ J 8 3
♦ Q J 9 8 7 4
♣ 6
West East
___1♦
1♠ 2♠
4♠ Pass
At the other table opener rebid diamonds and they played in a hopeless 3NT contract, so we gained 12 IMPs.
The final stake in Nightingale's coffin came on board 11, when Nigel found the lead to beat the 4♠ contract and win another 10 IMPs when Graham made no mistake (on a friendlier lead) in the other room.
The final score was Blue Lightning 128:96 Nightingale.
The team has exceeded all my expectations in getting through to the semi-finals. When the league started I thought we would be over-achievers if we qualified in the top four spots in our division. We are now in the last four, despite the vast array of stars who have been in the tournament, but our target is now the final!
Tuesday, 24 October 2006
BBO League Quarter Final
Blue Lightning continues its adventures in the BBO League with a quarter final match against the Bulgarian team, Nightingale. Alex, Graham, Anne and I played the first half last night and we emerged 4 IMPs behind, so it may be a tense affair on Wednesday when the match continues.
Alex and I started well when I held ♠ 9xxx ♥ K10xxx ♦ Jx ♣ Kx and raised his spade overcall to the 3-level. This was doubled but made 9 tricks for an 11 IMPs gain.
I handed this back a few boards later when I doubled 3NT after a competitive auction, partly hoping to scare them out of the contract. Unfortunately (!) they held our suits and were not too worried as they rattled up the overtricks for a 9 IMPs loss.
The rest of the action was at the other table where Anne and Graham bid two poor slams. One had no play, the other was very poor and should have been made, but when they both failed we were down 14:41 IMPs after the first 12 of 48 boards.
Anne and Graham bounced back immediately in the second set:
Board 1; IMPs; Dealer North; Love All
West
♠ A Q J 10 9 5 4 3
♥ A K
♦ -
♣ A 8 6
East
♠ K
♥ 4
♦ A K J 10 9
♣ K 10 9 5 4 2
West East
...1♦
1♠ 2♣
4NT 5♠ (2 keycards)
5NT 6♣ (♣K)
7♠ Pass
An excellent sequence that gained 11 IMPs. However on the next board I made a poor decision in the auction that led to us missing 3NT (and going down in 5♣ instead) to hand 12 IMPs back.
Alex and I redeemed ourselves a little by bidding a solid slam 2 boards later that was missed in the other room. The final big swing also went our way on a wild hand:
Board 7; IMPs; Dealer South; Game All
_________North
_________♠ Q
_________♥ K Q 9 7 6 5 4 2
_________♦ Q 4
_________♣ 9 3
WestEast
♠ 5___________________♠ K J 9 4
♥ 3___________________♥ A 10 8
♦ K J 10 9 8 7 3______♦ A 6 5
♣ K J 10 5____________♣ Q 7 2
_________South
_________♠ A 10 8 7 6 3 2
_________♥ J
_________♦ 2
_________♣ A 8 6 4
Table 1
West___North__East___South
_______Paul_________Alex
_____________________1♠
3♦_____4♥_____All pass
Table 2
West___North__East___South
Anne_________Graham
_____________________1♠
2♦_____4♥_____Pass___4♠
5♦_____Pass___Pass___Double
All pass
Poor defence failed to put Anne to the test and we gained 12 IMPs when she made her contract.
Each side missed a game on the run in and the set finished 48:25 IMPs, an aggregate score of 62:66 IMPs.
Alex and I started well when I held ♠ 9xxx ♥ K10xxx ♦ Jx ♣ Kx and raised his spade overcall to the 3-level. This was doubled but made 9 tricks for an 11 IMPs gain.
I handed this back a few boards later when I doubled 3NT after a competitive auction, partly hoping to scare them out of the contract. Unfortunately (!) they held our suits and were not too worried as they rattled up the overtricks for a 9 IMPs loss.
The rest of the action was at the other table where Anne and Graham bid two poor slams. One had no play, the other was very poor and should have been made, but when they both failed we were down 14:41 IMPs after the first 12 of 48 boards.
Anne and Graham bounced back immediately in the second set:
Board 1; IMPs; Dealer North; Love All
West
♠ A Q J 10 9 5 4 3
♥ A K
♦ -
♣ A 8 6
East
♠ K
♥ 4
♦ A K J 10 9
♣ K 10 9 5 4 2
West East
...1♦
1♠ 2♣
4NT 5♠ (2 keycards)
5NT 6♣ (♣K)
7♠ Pass
An excellent sequence that gained 11 IMPs. However on the next board I made a poor decision in the auction that led to us missing 3NT (and going down in 5♣ instead) to hand 12 IMPs back.
Alex and I redeemed ourselves a little by bidding a solid slam 2 boards later that was missed in the other room. The final big swing also went our way on a wild hand:
Board 7; IMPs; Dealer South; Game All
_________North
_________♠ Q
_________♥ K Q 9 7 6 5 4 2
_________♦ Q 4
_________♣ 9 3
WestEast
♠ 5___________________♠ K J 9 4
♥ 3___________________♥ A 10 8
♦ K J 10 9 8 7 3______♦ A 6 5
♣ K J 10 5____________♣ Q 7 2
_________South
_________♠ A 10 8 7 6 3 2
_________♥ J
_________♦ 2
_________♣ A 8 6 4
Table 1
West___North__East___South
_______Paul_________Alex
_____________________1♠
3♦_____4♥_____All pass
Table 2
West___North__East___South
Anne_________Graham
_____________________1♠
2♦_____4♥_____Pass___4♠
5♦_____Pass___Pass___Double
All pass
Poor defence failed to put Anne to the test and we gained 12 IMPs when she made her contract.
Each side missed a game on the run in and the set finished 48:25 IMPs, an aggregate score of 62:66 IMPs.
Autumn in Peebles
Last weekend was my first congress at Peebles. The SBU runs four major events there and the Autumn Congress is the first of the bridge season.
I played with Jenny and joined up with Diana and Sam for the teams. The girls usually play with Tim, a Welsh international, but he decided to play in Bournemouth this year so I was adopted as 'virtual Tim' for the weekend. I maintained Tim's reputation for pointing out all their errors in the bar afterwards but only admitting to a few of my own: perhaps the difference is Tim would only have made a few errors!
Friday afternoon is the Mens and Womens teams. My refusal to play in drag and undergo the sex test meant that I had to play in the Mens event. I had turned up early to find a partner and team and eventually found myself sitting opposite Peter. We finished a little above average with a couple of style differences preventing us from doing better.
In the evening is the first qualifying round of the pairs. Jenny and I started poorly with two bottoms in the first three boards. And we finished poorly with another two bottoms in the final round, but in-between we scored well and qualified easily with 58%. Sam and Diana had a below-average session that was made worse by not playing the two pairs who had scores in the 20-30% range, so they failed to qualify for either of the semi-finals.
Saturday morning is free of cards and an opportunity to explore Peebles. It is a small town typical of the Borders with a mix of old and new shops. I just wandered around seeing bridge couples all over the place and certainly meeting all the Berwick players. I'm not sure it will be so exciting next time.
Qualification for the main teams final is tough with only two going through from each 10-team round robin group. We did not play well and, with our imprecise slam bidding, finished one point below average. Surprisingly this was sufficient to finish third and qualify for the consolation final.
Saturday evening is the pairs semi-final. Our play was inconsistent and we missed loads of opportunities, which meant it was disappointing to just miss a place in the final. Meanwhile Sam and Diana were playing in the open pairs and narrowly missed their target of 68%.
The Charity 2-board KO teams on the Sunday morning is an event that I'd only heard about and presume is a Scottish phenomenon. Sam was clearly keen to play and, when Jenny and Diana took one step backwards, I was left as the volunteer. We drew consistent winners of this event as team-mates and, despite only discussing the first 90 pages of her system, we launched forth.
We played the only other decent team in the quarter-final and won this when they played in a Moysian fit instead of 3NT. The semi-final was won easily and we were into the three-board final. With two flattish boards this was decided on a distributional 3NT hand: our opponents took a poor line and finished three down; our team-mates were doubled but the normal line brought in ten tricks and my first Scottish title! Pictures can be seen on the SBU results page.
Sam, Diana and Jenny (with Tim) were holders of the consolation teams and we should have retained this on Sunday afternoon. Jenny and I had a series of poor scores but we still finished third, rueing missed opportunities.
While the good players were playing in the pairs finals, we sat down for the four match Swiss Teams in the evening. Three wins pushed us into sixth place but it is not a serious competition and the drinks had reached the table well before the end.
The congress is not all about bridge and it provides a great opportunity to meet and greet. We never left the bar until the wee hours and I'm starting to feel part of the Scottish scene. I even met my school maths teacher: Audrey still lives in Essex but has been playing in this congress for the last eight years and out-performed us in the pairs. She did not remember me, which perhaps is not surprising as it was the late seventies and I only spent three years in her maths and further maths classes ... and there were 8 (!) in the class.
Other memories of the weekend:
I'll be back in Peebles for the Winter Foursomes in February. Apparently not as the Winter Foursomes is in Falkirk.
I played with Jenny and joined up with Diana and Sam for the teams. The girls usually play with Tim, a Welsh international, but he decided to play in Bournemouth this year so I was adopted as 'virtual Tim' for the weekend. I maintained Tim's reputation for pointing out all their errors in the bar afterwards but only admitting to a few of my own: perhaps the difference is Tim would only have made a few errors!
Friday afternoon is the Mens and Womens teams. My refusal to play in drag and undergo the sex test meant that I had to play in the Mens event. I had turned up early to find a partner and team and eventually found myself sitting opposite Peter. We finished a little above average with a couple of style differences preventing us from doing better.
In the evening is the first qualifying round of the pairs. Jenny and I started poorly with two bottoms in the first three boards. And we finished poorly with another two bottoms in the final round, but in-between we scored well and qualified easily with 58%. Sam and Diana had a below-average session that was made worse by not playing the two pairs who had scores in the 20-30% range, so they failed to qualify for either of the semi-finals.
Saturday morning is free of cards and an opportunity to explore Peebles. It is a small town typical of the Borders with a mix of old and new shops. I just wandered around seeing bridge couples all over the place and certainly meeting all the Berwick players. I'm not sure it will be so exciting next time.
Qualification for the main teams final is tough with only two going through from each 10-team round robin group. We did not play well and, with our imprecise slam bidding, finished one point below average. Surprisingly this was sufficient to finish third and qualify for the consolation final.
Saturday evening is the pairs semi-final. Our play was inconsistent and we missed loads of opportunities, which meant it was disappointing to just miss a place in the final. Meanwhile Sam and Diana were playing in the open pairs and narrowly missed their target of 68%.
The Charity 2-board KO teams on the Sunday morning is an event that I'd only heard about and presume is a Scottish phenomenon. Sam was clearly keen to play and, when Jenny and Diana took one step backwards, I was left as the volunteer. We drew consistent winners of this event as team-mates and, despite only discussing the first 90 pages of her system, we launched forth.
We played the only other decent team in the quarter-final and won this when they played in a Moysian fit instead of 3NT. The semi-final was won easily and we were into the three-board final. With two flattish boards this was decided on a distributional 3NT hand: our opponents took a poor line and finished three down; our team-mates were doubled but the normal line brought in ten tricks and my first Scottish title! Pictures can be seen on the SBU results page.
Sam, Diana and Jenny (with Tim) were holders of the consolation teams and we should have retained this on Sunday afternoon. Jenny and I had a series of poor scores but we still finished third, rueing missed opportunities.
While the good players were playing in the pairs finals, we sat down for the four match Swiss Teams in the evening. Three wins pushed us into sixth place but it is not a serious competition and the drinks had reached the table well before the end.
The congress is not all about bridge and it provides a great opportunity to meet and greet. We never left the bar until the wee hours and I'm starting to feel part of the Scottish scene. I even met my school maths teacher: Audrey still lives in Essex but has been playing in this congress for the last eight years and out-performed us in the pairs. She did not remember me, which perhaps is not surprising as it was the late seventies and I only spent three years in her maths and further maths classes ... and there were 8 (!) in the class.
Other memories of the weekend:
- Making a lot of low point-count Moysian contracts with endplays
- Team-mates abuse for most of my bidding
- Being asked, by so many people, about playing with Peter!
- Jenny's reaction to being told that breakfast finished at 9am in our B&B, "Oh my god, you're kidding!"
- Archie's description of (team mate) Barbara Hackett's reaction when going through the boards, "I knew we should never have done that last board"
- The Wilkinsons describing scoring up in the teams qualifying. They were going to make the main final until the last board: "+920", "Lose 16 IMPs", "No, we made the slam", "I know, we didn't make ours, lose 16!" [Unsurprisingly this was the same board that Archie had his adventure]
I'll be back in Peebles for the Winter Foursomes in February. Apparently not as the Winter Foursomes is in Falkirk.
Thursday, 19 October 2006
Defence to strong and multi-way club openers
Alex and I have traditionally played the Truscott defence to Strong Club openers (Precision and Blue Club being the most popular), where the suit overcalled showed that suit and the next higher suit.
On-line play has led to significantly more exposure to the multi-way club systems, such as Polish Club. Here the 1♣ opener may be natural, a weak 1NT opener or any strong hand, or a combination of such things. We did not wish to play the Truscott defence to this type of system as you need to have more constructive sequences available, and treating the bid as natural seems to hand over too much space when they are strong, so a compromise was needed.
It seemed the best play to look was at the Polish themselves - how do they compete over it? We found the defence used by Balicki-Zmudminski and have been using that ever since. And we have now decided to use this against all strong club systems too, so that we only have to remember one defence.
The defence overview is:
Pass: no suitable bid or strong (16+ HCP) hand
Double: 5+ hearts, 8-15 HCP
1♦: 5+ spades or 4-4 majors without shortage, 8-15 HCP
1♥: two suits, same shape (other), 8-15 HCP
1♠: two suits, same colour, 8-15 HCP
1NT: two suits, same rank, 8-15 HCP
2X: natural, 8-15 HCP
Over the two-suited bids, the next step is a relay and other bids are pass or correct.
On-line play has led to significantly more exposure to the multi-way club systems, such as Polish Club. Here the 1♣ opener may be natural, a weak 1NT opener or any strong hand, or a combination of such things. We did not wish to play the Truscott defence to this type of system as you need to have more constructive sequences available, and treating the bid as natural seems to hand over too much space when they are strong, so a compromise was needed.
It seemed the best play to look was at the Polish themselves - how do they compete over it? We found the defence used by Balicki-Zmudminski and have been using that ever since. And we have now decided to use this against all strong club systems too, so that we only have to remember one defence.
The defence overview is:
Pass: no suitable bid or strong (16+ HCP) hand
Double: 5+ hearts, 8-15 HCP
1♦: 5+ spades or 4-4 majors without shortage, 8-15 HCP
1♥: two suits, same shape (other), 8-15 HCP
1♠: two suits, same colour, 8-15 HCP
1NT: two suits, same rank, 8-15 HCP
2X: natural, 8-15 HCP
Over the two-suited bids, the next step is a relay and other bids are pass or correct.
Saturday, 14 October 2006
Friday the Thirteenth - Part 2
No horror stories for us in the first half but one for Proff at the start of the second. The auction on board two was:
West North East South
...........1♣.. 1♦
Dbl..1♥....Dbl...All pass
As West my double showed 4+ hearts but North decided to ignore this. Alex's double showed 17-19 balanced and this contract went two down for -500. As I only had 3 points and Alex had a flat 17 count, this was worth 9 IMPs against the 1NT contract in the other room.
Then a mishap, or more accurately, a misclick by me meant that we played in 2NT losing the first seven tricks instead of the normal 4♥. The game will go down too but unfortunately Graham and Anne sacrificed so we lost 12 IMPs.
The match was settled on boards 7 and 8.
Board 7; IMPs; Dealer South; Game All
West
♠ A K Q J 2
♥ K 9 7
♦ 9 6 4 2
♣ 9
East
♠ 10 8
♥ J 8
♦ A Q J 3
♣ A K 8 7 3
West East
1♠ 2♣ (natural or balanced or good fit)
2♦ (any minimum w/o 4 hearts) 3♦ (natural, 4+♦, 5+♣)
4♦ 5♦ (stronger than 4NT)
6♦ Pass
I was hoping that the spade suit would make this a reasonable slam with the auction protecting the king of hearts, but the layout meant that only the ♥A lead allowed the contract to make when the diamond finesse worked. In the other room they played in 4♠ so a lucky gain.
Board 8 dealt me a big hand:
West
♠ A K Q 10
♥ A J 10 7
♦ K Q J 10 7
♣ -
After I opened 1♦, North overcalled 1♠ and Alex made a weak diamond raise. I decided that 3NT was more likely to make than 5♦ especially as there may be no entries to dummy, and made 10 tricks when Alex had the ♦A.
In the other room North doubled the opener and West eventually selected chose the route to 5♦ after the simple diamond raise. This failed by a trick so another 10 IMPs to the team.
Another 12 IMPs to us when the opponents gave us 500 against our non-making part score and the match was ours. We won the second set by 32 IMPs for a final result of 96-70 IMPs.
West North East South
...........1♣.. 1♦
Dbl..1♥....Dbl...All pass
As West my double showed 4+ hearts but North decided to ignore this. Alex's double showed 17-19 balanced and this contract went two down for -500. As I only had 3 points and Alex had a flat 17 count, this was worth 9 IMPs against the 1NT contract in the other room.
Then a mishap, or more accurately, a misclick by me meant that we played in 2NT losing the first seven tricks instead of the normal 4♥. The game will go down too but unfortunately Graham and Anne sacrificed so we lost 12 IMPs.
The match was settled on boards 7 and 8.
Board 7; IMPs; Dealer South; Game All
West
♠ A K Q J 2
♥ K 9 7
♦ 9 6 4 2
♣ 9
East
♠ 10 8
♥ J 8
♦ A Q J 3
♣ A K 8 7 3
West East
1♠ 2♣ (natural or balanced or good fit)
2♦ (any minimum w/o 4 hearts) 3♦ (natural, 4+♦, 5+♣)
4♦ 5♦ (stronger than 4NT)
6♦ Pass
I was hoping that the spade suit would make this a reasonable slam with the auction protecting the king of hearts, but the layout meant that only the ♥A lead allowed the contract to make when the diamond finesse worked. In the other room they played in 4♠ so a lucky gain.
Board 8 dealt me a big hand:
West
♠ A K Q 10
♥ A J 10 7
♦ K Q J 10 7
♣ -
After I opened 1♦, North overcalled 1♠ and Alex made a weak diamond raise. I decided that 3NT was more likely to make than 5♦ especially as there may be no entries to dummy, and made 10 tricks when Alex had the ♦A.
In the other room North doubled the opener and West eventually selected chose the route to 5♦ after the simple diamond raise. This failed by a trick so another 10 IMPs to the team.
Another 12 IMPs to us when the opponents gave us 500 against our non-making part score and the match was ours. We won the second set by 32 IMPs for a final result of 96-70 IMPs.
Friday the Thirteenth - Part 1
Friday the Thirteenth and Blue Lightning takes on Proff (Italy) for a place in the BBO League quarter finals. I continued the policy of playing established pairs if possible so Anne, Graham, Alex and I played the match.
My problems started on board 2.
IMPs; Dealer East; NS Game
North
♠ -
♥ Q x
♦ Q 9 x x x
♣ A Q 8 x x x
West North East South
...........1♠ Pass
3♠ ?
The response was preemptive but the vulnerability and poor suits convinced me to pass. When 3♠ became the final contract I knew it was bad and partner duly turned up with a balanced 12 count and minor cards, so both minor suit games made with a diamond finesse through opener. In the other room, South doubled a weak 1NT opener and North tried to play in clubs at the lowest possible level. Team-mates could have passed them out below game but, unsurprisingly, they only succeeded in pushing them into game so we lost 11 IMPs.
Anne and Graham did a lot better than our opponents on board 8.
IMPs; Dealer West; Love All
West
♠ A 9 8 4
♥ A Q 10 8
♦ A
♣ A 6 5 4
East
♠ K Q 7 5 3
♥ K J 4 2
♦ K 6 5
♣ 7
West East
1♥ 3♣
3♦ 3♥
3NT 4♦
4♠ 5♣
5♦ 5♠
6♦ 7♥
I believe 3♣ was a mini-splinter, 3♦ RKCB 1430 and 3NT showed the ♥Q but denied any kings, with the rest being cue bids.
With all suits breaking there was an easy thirteen tricks. In our room hearts were never bid and there was no slam investigation, so we gained 14 IMPs.
This was the second slam in the set bid by Graham and Anne that was missed in our room. They tried a third when missing a cashing ace and king, but unfortunately the killing lead was fairly obvious so we only won the slam battles 2.5-1.5!
A couple of small swings to Proff meant that we ended the first 16 boards with a small deficit, 41-47 IMPs.
My problems started on board 2.
IMPs; Dealer East; NS Game
North
♠ -
♥ Q x
♦ Q 9 x x x
♣ A Q 8 x x x
West North East South
...........1♠ Pass
3♠ ?
The response was preemptive but the vulnerability and poor suits convinced me to pass. When 3♠ became the final contract I knew it was bad and partner duly turned up with a balanced 12 count and minor cards, so both minor suit games made with a diamond finesse through opener. In the other room, South doubled a weak 1NT opener and North tried to play in clubs at the lowest possible level. Team-mates could have passed them out below game but, unsurprisingly, they only succeeded in pushing them into game so we lost 11 IMPs.
Anne and Graham did a lot better than our opponents on board 8.
IMPs; Dealer West; Love All
West
♠ A 9 8 4
♥ A Q 10 8
♦ A
♣ A 6 5 4
East
♠ K Q 7 5 3
♥ K J 4 2
♦ K 6 5
♣ 7
West East
1♥ 3♣
3♦ 3♥
3NT 4♦
4♠ 5♣
5♦ 5♠
6♦ 7♥
I believe 3♣ was a mini-splinter, 3♦ RKCB 1430 and 3NT showed the ♥Q but denied any kings, with the rest being cue bids.
With all suits breaking there was an easy thirteen tricks. In our room hearts were never bid and there was no slam investigation, so we gained 14 IMPs.
This was the second slam in the set bid by Graham and Anne that was missed in our room. They tried a third when missing a cashing ace and king, but unfortunately the killing lead was fairly obvious so we only won the slam battles 2.5-1.5!
A couple of small swings to Proff meant that we ended the first 16 boards with a small deficit, 41-47 IMPs.
Wednesday, 11 October 2006
A quiet night at the club
Back at Berwick as a substitute in the Scott Cup, the club's principal team event. I played with George, who is responsible for the club web site, and he had prepared a full convention card for us. After scratching out Crowhurst - slightly ironic as I played in the same club as Eric for twenty years - we got down to business.
It proved to be a quiet night. Aside from one Blackwood accident we did little wrong and just took all the gifts thrown our way. And our accident gained us 18 IMPs, bidding 7NT missing an ace but with 18 tricks if they failed to cash it. This was our poor auction:
North
♠ A K Q J 10 9 8 7
♥ -
♦ 7 3
♣ K J 8
South
♠ -
♥ K J 8 7 3
♦ A K
♣ A Q 9 6 4
North South
2♣ 2♥
2♠ 3♣
4♠ 4NT
5♠ 5NT
6♦ 7NT
Playing Benjamised Acol, North showed an eight playing trick hand in spades, but we were playing different Blackwoods and the final punt to 7NT was due to this confusion. I think it is better for North to rebid 4♠ but reaching the grand slam confidently is not easy.
Only Reg's team beat us when he and Jean bid a slam missed by our team mates, despite our more vigorous competition. With thirteen tricks rolling in we lost 13 IMPs on this hand and the 4-board match by 9 IMPs.
But we won the other five matches comfortably (one by 33 IMPs) and finished with 95/120 VPs. This was sufficient to win the evening (by 22 VPs) and gives the team a good start to the competition.
I'll now be dropped but may sub in for other teams over the season.
It proved to be a quiet night. Aside from one Blackwood accident we did little wrong and just took all the gifts thrown our way. And our accident gained us 18 IMPs, bidding 7NT missing an ace but with 18 tricks if they failed to cash it. This was our poor auction:
North
♠ A K Q J 10 9 8 7
♥ -
♦ 7 3
♣ K J 8
South
♠ -
♥ K J 8 7 3
♦ A K
♣ A Q 9 6 4
North South
2♣ 2♥
2♠ 3♣
4♠ 4NT
5♠ 5NT
6♦ 7NT
Playing Benjamised Acol, North showed an eight playing trick hand in spades, but we were playing different Blackwoods and the final punt to 7NT was due to this confusion. I think it is better for North to rebid 4♠ but reaching the grand slam confidently is not easy.
Only Reg's team beat us when he and Jean bid a slam missed by our team mates, despite our more vigorous competition. With thirteen tricks rolling in we lost 13 IMPs on this hand and the 4-board match by 9 IMPs.
But we won the other five matches comfortably (one by 33 IMPs) and finished with 95/120 VPs. This was sufficient to win the evening (by 22 VPs) and gives the team a good start to the competition.
I'll now be dropped but may sub in for other teams over the season.
Monday, 9 October 2006
Falling at the last hurdle
After leading for 7 of 8 rounds, a heavy defeat in the last match meant that we only finished third in the National Swiss Teams. I was playing with Andrea, Jenny and Tony and we had a good run with most of our poor luck saved for the last seven boards.
There were two boards that would have won the event. Jenny and Tony bid the following cards to 6♠:
North
♠ 10 9 8 7 3 2
♥ A 8 2
♦ -
♣ K 6 5 2
South
♠ A K 4
♥ 7 5
♦ A Q J 8
♣ A Q J 3
But a heart lead, 3-1 spade break and failing ruffing finesse in diamonds condemned the contract. They did not bid this at our table.
The second board was a monster hand:
West
♠ A 7 6 5 3
♥ 9 8 7 6
♦ Q 10 6 5
♣ -
East
♠ 9
♥ 3
♦ K 9 4 3 2
♣ A K Q 9 6 4
After a strong 1NT opener by North, we bid to 4♦. In the other room, after a 1♥ opener, they bid to 5♦ doubled.
The hand revolves around the play of the diamond suit, in particular locating the ♦J. They found it, I didn't, so both contracts made precisely. If they fail to find it, then we win the event. As it happened our opponents finished with two maximums to storm past us and win the event. Congratulations to Les Steel, Bif McGeorge, Malcolm Cuthbertson and Dave Walker (who are the heart of the Scottish team).
So close, but so far.
There were two boards that would have won the event. Jenny and Tony bid the following cards to 6♠:
North
♠ 10 9 8 7 3 2
♥ A 8 2
♦ -
♣ K 6 5 2
South
♠ A K 4
♥ 7 5
♦ A Q J 8
♣ A Q J 3
But a heart lead, 3-1 spade break and failing ruffing finesse in diamonds condemned the contract. They did not bid this at our table.
The second board was a monster hand:
West
♠ A 7 6 5 3
♥ 9 8 7 6
♦ Q 10 6 5
♣ -
East
♠ 9
♥ 3
♦ K 9 4 3 2
♣ A K Q 9 6 4
After a strong 1NT opener by North, we bid to 4♦. In the other room, after a 1♥ opener, they bid to 5♦ doubled.
The hand revolves around the play of the diamond suit, in particular locating the ♦J. They found it, I didn't, so both contracts made precisely. If they fail to find it, then we win the event. As it happened our opponents finished with two maximums to storm past us and win the event. Congratulations to Les Steel, Bif McGeorge, Malcolm Cuthbertson and Dave Walker (who are the heart of the Scottish team).
So close, but so far.
Sunday, 8 October 2006
Playing with scissors
Last night Blue Lightning had a comfortable win in the round of 32 playoff for the BBO League. Graham (greyboots) and Anne (annne) were the anchor pair with Mike (mikeri) and Nigel (nige1) in the first half and Alex (gipsona) and I (paulg) for the second 16 boards. Despite their expert status we played far more solidly and emerged with a 119:39 IMPs victory.
Alex played this board better than his counterpart to gain a game swing, although the stakes were a lot higher in our room.
EW Game; IMPs; Dealer South
North
♠ Q 4
♥ 9 7 3
♦ A Q 10 9 5 3
♣ J 10
South
♠ K J 10 9 7 6 3
♥ K Q 4
♦ K
♣ 3 2
S W N E
1♠ Pass 1NT Pass
4♠ Dble All Pass
In the other room they played in 2♠ making an overtrick, so a major swing was certain. Although there are four top losers the defence started with HA and continued the suit. Alex overtook the ♦K and discarded a club on the ♦Q. Then the key play (as Andy Robson would write) as Alex played the ♦10 and, when East followed small, discarded his remaining club cutting communications between the defenders. This scissors coup was necessary to prevent West crossing to his partner's ♣K to receive a heart ruff. Despite trumps being 4-0 there were no remaining problems and Alex racked up +590.
In the other room they made nine tricks when they did not find the coup so we gained 10 IMPs.
Anne had no bidding problems with the following hand:
Love All; IMPs; Dealer South
North
♠ K J 9 5 4 2
♥ -
♦ 5 4 3
♣ K 10 4 2
S W N E
2NT Pass 3♥ Dble
4♣ 5♥ 7♠
All Pass
This is an excellent contract and made easily. In our room the auction started the same but Alex's bid of 4♦ (instead of 5♥) quelled North's ambitions and we gained 11 IMPs when they stopped in the small slam.
We will play an Italian team next week in the round of 16.
Alex played this board better than his counterpart to gain a game swing, although the stakes were a lot higher in our room.
EW Game; IMPs; Dealer South
North
♠ Q 4
♥ 9 7 3
♦ A Q 10 9 5 3
♣ J 10
South
♠ K J 10 9 7 6 3
♥ K Q 4
♦ K
♣ 3 2
S W N E
1♠ Pass 1NT Pass
4♠ Dble All Pass
In the other room they played in 2♠ making an overtrick, so a major swing was certain. Although there are four top losers the defence started with HA and continued the suit. Alex overtook the ♦K and discarded a club on the ♦Q. Then the key play (as Andy Robson would write) as Alex played the ♦10 and, when East followed small, discarded his remaining club cutting communications between the defenders. This scissors coup was necessary to prevent West crossing to his partner's ♣K to receive a heart ruff. Despite trumps being 4-0 there were no remaining problems and Alex racked up +590.
In the other room they made nine tricks when they did not find the coup so we gained 10 IMPs.
Anne had no bidding problems with the following hand:
Love All; IMPs; Dealer South
North
♠ K J 9 5 4 2
♥ -
♦ 5 4 3
♣ K 10 4 2
S W N E
2NT Pass 3♥ Dble
4♣ 5♥ 7♠
All Pass
This is an excellent contract and made easily. In our room the auction started the same but Alex's bid of 4♦ (instead of 5♥) quelled North's ambitions and we gained 11 IMPs when they stopped in the small slam.
We will play an Italian team next week in the round of 16.
Friday, 6 October 2006
Tweaking the system - Italian Ghestem
Alex and I have been playing the same basic system for many years although it is constantly changing, and now bears little resemblance to the original Lawrence 2/1 style. One of the change factors is watching top pairs play, either live (when playing in the Summer NABC) or on vugraph on BBO, and then using or adapting their methods.
One of the first things I learnt on arrival in Scotland was the chaos that Mike Lawrence had caused during a recent visit. His theory on 2-suited overcalls was that strength did not matter, it was all about shape. This has led to much confusion, with many partnerships split between the traditional 'either weak or strong' version and the new fangled 'any strength'.
The 'any strength' camp has been reinforced by support from Sabine Auken in her recent book - "I Love this Game" - and she also mentions that Meckstroth and Rodwell have adopted this method too.
We've been discussing this for a while and have now made a change. We are moving to Italian Ghestem, as played by all three top Italian partnerships, and will use it on most strength hands.
This is the basic structure:
1♣/1♦ – 2♦ = both majors
1♣/1♦ – 2NT = hearts and other minor
1♣/1♦ – 3♣ = spades and other minor
1♦ – 3♦ = strong spades and clubs
1♥/1♠ – 2♥/2♠ = clubs and other major
1♥/1♠ – 2NT = both minors
1♥/1♠ – 3♣ = diamonds and other major
The traditional issue with any form of Ghestem is forgetting that the 3♣ bid is a 2-suiter and not a weak jump overcall. Hopefully this will not happen too often.
One of the first things I learnt on arrival in Scotland was the chaos that Mike Lawrence had caused during a recent visit. His theory on 2-suited overcalls was that strength did not matter, it was all about shape. This has led to much confusion, with many partnerships split between the traditional 'either weak or strong' version and the new fangled 'any strength'.
The 'any strength' camp has been reinforced by support from Sabine Auken in her recent book - "I Love this Game" - and she also mentions that Meckstroth and Rodwell have adopted this method too.
We've been discussing this for a while and have now made a change. We are moving to Italian Ghestem, as played by all three top Italian partnerships, and will use it on most strength hands.
This is the basic structure:
1♣/1♦ – 2♦ = both majors
1♣/1♦ – 2NT = hearts and other minor
1♣/1♦ – 3♣ = spades and other minor
1♦ – 3♦ = strong spades and clubs
1♥/1♠ – 2♥/2♠ = clubs and other major
1♥/1♠ – 2NT = both minors
1♥/1♠ – 3♣ = diamonds and other major
The traditional issue with any form of Ghestem is forgetting that the 3♣ bid is a 2-suiter and not a weak jump overcall. Hopefully this will not happen too often.
Thursday, 5 October 2006
Double blind spot
Playing in a short match on BBO last night, both declarers had the same blind spot and went down in a simple contract. The hand was bid unopposed to 4♠ by South and the lead was a small diamond in both rooms.
North
♠ A 9 x x
♥ A 9 8 x x x
♦ A J
♣ J
South
♠ K 10 x x
♥ J
♦ K Q x x
♣ Q x x x
My partner cashed three diamond tricks, throwing the club from dummy. When declarer played a small spade, West played the ♠J and the ace took the trick. Playing another spade partner went up with the ♠K and West showed out. At this point declarer has 5 tricks and should play to make two club ruffs in dummy, the ♥A and two heart ruffs, perhaps making the ♠10 en passant. Unfortunately partner played on hearts and went two down.
However, this was still worth a 3 IMP gain as declarer in the other room attempted to draw trumps but started with the ♠K. This passed trump control to the opponents and the hand fell apart.
There must be something about this hand that caused two competent players to make similar errors. But it will be comforting for my BIL crowd that everyone has their blind spot.
North
♠ A 9 x x
♥ A 9 8 x x x
♦ A J
♣ J
South
♠ K 10 x x
♥ J
♦ K Q x x
♣ Q x x x
My partner cashed three diamond tricks, throwing the club from dummy. When declarer played a small spade, West played the ♠J and the ace took the trick. Playing another spade partner went up with the ♠K and West showed out. At this point declarer has 5 tricks and should play to make two club ruffs in dummy, the ♥A and two heart ruffs, perhaps making the ♠10 en passant. Unfortunately partner played on hearts and went two down.
However, this was still worth a 3 IMP gain as declarer in the other room attempted to draw trumps but started with the ♠K. This passed trump control to the opponents and the hand fell apart.
There must be something about this hand that caused two competent players to make similar errors. But it will be comforting for my BIL crowd that everyone has their blind spot.
Wednesday, 4 October 2006
RBS Round 2
Second time at the Berwick club and I'm now starting to recognise people and, gasp, remember some first names.
Playing again with Reg we had a 60% session to maintain our reasonable start to the club championship. I felt a spectator for most of the evening as I only played two hands in the first eighteen although I did play three of the last four.
As well as directing this event, Reg is also responsible for getting the boards to the club and dealing with emergencies: for example, ensuring the movement does not fall apart just because one player has to go home feeling ill. Of course some may think that the sick deserve the attention but, obviously, only a non-bridge player would say that. However I am glad to report that she has recovered sufficiently to make her lunch appointment today!
All this, and having to declare eight of the first eighteen hands, was a little fraught and Reg's concentration naturally waivered but only once to our detriment. It did not stop us having a controlled auction on the following hand:
North
♠ J 10 9 x
♥ K Q 8 x x
♦ x x
♣ Q x
South
♠ A Q
♥ A 7 x
♦ A K J 9 x
♣ A 10 x
N S
- 2♣
2♦ 2NT
3♦ 3♥
3♠ 4♥
4NT Pass
Reg showed a balanced 22-23 HCP hand over which I showed five hearts and four spades, and then made a quantative 4NT. Reg sensibly passed and easily made twelve tricks when West's opening lead was away from the king of clubs and the hearts broke.
Later on Reg had another interesting notrump game to play.
North
♠ K J 9 x x x
♥ K x x x
♦ x
♣ Q x
South
♠ A 10
♥ A Q 9
♦ Q 10 9 x x
♣ A K x
N S
1♠ 2♦
2♠ 3NT
Pass
After a small heart lead to the ♥9, Reg played the top two spades (to protect his diamond holding) and conceded a spade to West, a play that did not cost as they split 4-1. When West failed to find the diamond switch he was home with twelve tricks.
There is a break from the pairs for a few weeks now.
Playing again with Reg we had a 60% session to maintain our reasonable start to the club championship. I felt a spectator for most of the evening as I only played two hands in the first eighteen although I did play three of the last four.
As well as directing this event, Reg is also responsible for getting the boards to the club and dealing with emergencies: for example, ensuring the movement does not fall apart just because one player has to go home feeling ill. Of course some may think that the sick deserve the attention but, obviously, only a non-bridge player would say that. However I am glad to report that she has recovered sufficiently to make her lunch appointment today!
All this, and having to declare eight of the first eighteen hands, was a little fraught and Reg's concentration naturally waivered but only once to our detriment. It did not stop us having a controlled auction on the following hand:
North
♠ J 10 9 x
♥ K Q 8 x x
♦ x x
♣ Q x
South
♠ A Q
♥ A 7 x
♦ A K J 9 x
♣ A 10 x
N S
- 2♣
2♦ 2NT
3♦ 3♥
3♠ 4♥
4NT Pass
Reg showed a balanced 22-23 HCP hand over which I showed five hearts and four spades, and then made a quantative 4NT. Reg sensibly passed and easily made twelve tricks when West's opening lead was away from the king of clubs and the hearts broke.
Later on Reg had another interesting notrump game to play.
North
♠ K J 9 x x x
♥ K x x x
♦ x
♣ Q x
South
♠ A 10
♥ A Q 9
♦ Q 10 9 x x
♣ A K x
N S
1♠ 2♦
2♠ 3NT
Pass
After a small heart lead to the ♥9, Reg played the top two spades (to protect his diamond holding) and conceded a spade to West, a play that did not cost as they split 4-1. When West failed to find the diamond switch he was home with twelve tricks.
There is a break from the pairs for a few weeks now.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)