The Funky Gibbons played Northwest Blues in the BBO League last night. After winning the first match by a comfortable 33 IMPs, I was an eleventh hour substitute in the second match (actually it was a tenth hour and twelveth hour too!) and played with Martin for the first time.
We had an interesting start:
Board 1; IMPs; Dealer North; Love All
East
♠ J 8
♥ 9 2
♦ A J 9 7 2
♣ A J 10 5
West...North..East...South
Martin........Paul
........1♠....Pass....2♠
Pass...Pass....?
I decided to balance with 2NT and we played in 3♣. This went four (!) down when Martin had a balanced 4 points, but of course they had missed game so we gained 6 IMPs.
Northwest earned these IMPs back when they found a good lead against Mike and Nigel's game, and played in the safe part score against us. Then we lost 11 IMPs when they bid a slam that needed a 3-3 heart break, a finesse and a misdefence to let it make (no names, but it wasn't us).
We got those IMPs back when the defence eventually allowed Martin to squeeze them in a tricky 3NT contract. Definition of tricky? Well GIB says it is two down on any passive lead and one down if you lead from your longest and strongest, and you have to defend pretty poorly after that.
A couple of part score swings either way left the match close and then Martin and I had a lucky escape. Holding ♠10xxx ♥AKxx ♦Jx ♣Qxx I chose to respond 2♥ to Martin's 4th seat 1♠ opener. We had no real system in place and I thought it would help with game/slam ambitions if I showed my values. Unfortunately Martin passed and I did not make the most of the play and went down two. Fortunately the same happens if we bid the spade game so it was a flat board.
The last big swing went to the opposition when Martin misread a queen lead (actually from KQ10x) and went down in game, so the final result was a loss by 7 IMPs.
Friday, 25 May 2007
Wednesday, 23 May 2007
Russell trials
Another night at the Carlton but I'll start with a quiz. How many tricks do you think a Scottish International would make playing 4♥ from the East seat on a club lead?
Board 14; Pairs; Dealer East; Love All
.........North
.........♠ A K
.........♥ 10 9 7 x x
.........♦ x
.........♣ K Q J x x
West................East
♠ J x x x...........♠ 10 x
♥ -.................♥ A K J 8 x x x
♦ 10 x x x..........♦ A Q J
♣ A x x x x.........♣ x
.........South
.........♠ Q x x x x
.........♥ Q
.........♦ K x x x x
.........♣ x x
More on this later.
I played with Diana and nothing seemed to go right from the very start of the session. We never did anything too outrageous, but every decision we made was incorrect and every finesse seemed to fail. Of course you'd hope that these finesses would fail for the other players too, but whenever there was a choice we'd be there getting it wrong.
We finished in the second half of the field but we played in good spirit and did not have any system misunderstandings despite the complex methods we were playing - we were using the card that I play with Sam, Diana's professional partner, so it was a case of what I could remember combined with Diana's lack of knowledge of those areas I may have changed!
Defensively I slopped a few overtricks that were costly but we'd have done a lot better at IMP scoring, often the case for a new partnership.
Diana judged well on board 16:
Board 16; Pairs; Dealer West; EW Game
North
♠ K x
♥ Q 10
♦ K Q 9 x
♣ Q J 9 x x
West...North..East...South
.......Diana.........Paul
.1♠....Pass....2♠.....3♥
Pass....?
Diana's lack of top tricks persuaded her to pass, a good decision when I only held ♠Ax ♥AJxxxx ♦Jx ♣10xx and we made precisely nine tricks when the heart finesse failed and they did not find the club ruff.
On the first hand, our opponents had a strange sequence that ended with West playing the contract and she went down three. I think Liz did the best by only going down one but our unnamed hero managed to only make 5 tricks on this hand - sufficient to say that N/S made FIVE trump tricks.
We finished the evening down the pub discussing the hands and Kazakhstan.
Board 14; Pairs; Dealer East; Love All
.........North
.........♠ A K
.........♥ 10 9 7 x x
.........♦ x
.........♣ K Q J x x
West................East
♠ J x x x...........♠ 10 x
♥ -.................♥ A K J 8 x x x
♦ 10 x x x..........♦ A Q J
♣ A x x x x.........♣ x
.........South
.........♠ Q x x x x
.........♥ Q
.........♦ K x x x x
.........♣ x x
I played with Diana and nothing seemed to go right from the very start of the session. We never did anything too outrageous, but every decision we made was incorrect and every finesse seemed to fail. Of course you'd hope that these finesses would fail for the other players too, but whenever there was a choice we'd be there getting it wrong.
We finished in the second half of the field but we played in good spirit and did not have any system misunderstandings despite the complex methods we were playing - we were using the card that I play with Sam, Diana's professional partner, so it was a case of what I could remember combined with Diana's lack of knowledge of those areas I may have changed!
Defensively I slopped a few overtricks that were costly but we'd have done a lot better at IMP scoring, often the case for a new partnership.
Diana judged well on board 16:
Board 16; Pairs; Dealer West; EW Game
North
♠ K x
♥ Q 10
♦ K Q 9 x
♣ Q J 9 x x
West...North..East...South
.......Diana.........Paul
.1♠....Pass....2♠.....3♥
Pass....?
Diana's lack of top tricks persuaded her to pass, a good decision when I only held ♠Ax ♥AJxxxx ♦Jx ♣10xx and we made precisely nine tricks when the heart finesse failed and they did not find the club ruff.
On the first hand, our opponents had a strange sequence that ended with West playing the contract and she went down three. I think Liz did the best by only going down one but our unnamed hero managed to only make 5 tricks on this hand - sufficient to say that N/S made FIVE trump tricks.
We finished the evening down the pub discussing the hands and Kazakhstan.
Monday, 21 May 2007
Farquarson frolics
The Farquarson Trophy is a simple one-day pairs event for subscribers of SBU News. As last year I played with Jenny and, as last year, we came third. This was a lot better than my score estimate but the field is a very mixed standard and you need to a fair run of luck to get a good score. However the cream rose to the top of the field as Dee "I'm not a Scrabble player" and Alan stormed to a huge win followed by Sam and Cathy.
We combined well in the auction and play on board 18:
Board 18; Pairs; Dealer East; NS Game
.........North
.........♠ J 8
.........♥ K 9 7 2
.........♦ A Q 9 4 2
.........♣ 4 2
West................East
♠ K 9 6 5...........♠ A T 2
♥ -.................♥ Q J T 6 4
♦ 10 8 6 5 3........♦ K
♣ K Q 10 8..........♣ A 9 6 5
.........South
.........♠ Q 7 4 3
.........♥ A 8 5 3
.........♦ J 7
.........♣ J 7 3
West...North..East...South
Paul..........Jenny
...............1♥....Pass
.1♠.....2♦....Dble...All Pass
North's bid was ill-judged but typical of pairs bidding. We took full advantage when North played the ♥A on Jenny's lead of the ♥Q. I switched to the ♣K and continued the suit and declarer eventually lost control to go two down for -500 with no game available for us.
Jenny had an instructive lead problem a couple of hands later:
Board 21; Pairs; Dealer North; NS Game
South
♠ A K 9 3
♥ K 8 4
♦ Q 5 3 2
♣ K 4
West...North..East...South
.......Paul..........Jenny
.......Pass....2NT...Pass
.3♣1....Pass....3♥....Pass
.3NT...All Pass
1 5-card Stayman
Holding 15 points means that partner almost certainly holds a bust, so your aim should be establish tricks for yourself rather than hoping to hit a high card opposite. So I think the ♠A is a stand out lead and then reassess after seeing dummy: you never know, partner may have 5 low spades when they are splitting 2-2. On this occasion that doesn't happen, but the high lead will mean that you make some tricks. After a low spade lead Jenny was persistently squeezed and failed to take any tricks in the end.
Finally a play problem that I failed to solve on board 41.
Board 41; Pairs; Dealer North; EW Game
.........North
.........♠ 10 8 5 3
.........♥ K
.........♦ K 10 9 3
.........♣ Q J 8 7
West................East
♠ K J 6 4...........♠ A
♥ Q 9 3 2...........♥ A 8 5 4
♦ Q 8 4.............♦ A J 7 5
♣ A 5...............♣ 6 4 3 2
.........South
.........♠ Q 9 7 2
.........♥ J 10 8 7
.........♦ 6 2
.........♣ K 10 9
West...North..East...South
Paul...Cathy..Jenny..Sam
.......Pass....1♦....Pass
.1♥....Pass....2♥....Pass
.3NT...Pass....4♥....All Pass
Cathy led the ♣Q and continued with a small one when I ducked. I took the diamond finesse and cashed the ♠A and ruffed a club back to hand. A diamond discard on the ♠K was followed by a spade ruff. I then cashed the ♦A in case Sam had a doubleton and played dummy's final club. Sam discarded the ♠Q, so I ruffed small and now played ♠J, discarding dummy's final diamond, that Sam was forced to ruff. She now played a small heart and I had to decide whether to rise with ♥Q or play small.
At this point I know that hearts were 2-3 or (likely) 4-1, so clearly it is right to play Sam for the ♥K as it only loses in the precise layout above but wins against all 3-2 and all other 4-1 breaks. For the winners, Alan played a similar line and also went down.
It feels like I should do better, but I haven't found a definitely better line yet - comments welcome!
We combined well in the auction and play on board 18:
Board 18; Pairs; Dealer East; NS Game
.........North
.........♠ J 8
.........♥ K 9 7 2
.........♦ A Q 9 4 2
.........♣ 4 2
West................East
♠ K 9 6 5...........♠ A T 2
♥ -.................♥ Q J T 6 4
♦ 10 8 6 5 3........♦ K
♣ K Q 10 8..........♣ A 9 6 5
.........South
.........♠ Q 7 4 3
.........♥ A 8 5 3
.........♦ J 7
.........♣ J 7 3
West...North..East...South
Paul..........Jenny
...............1♥....Pass
.1♠.....2♦....Dble...All Pass
North's bid was ill-judged but typical of pairs bidding. We took full advantage when North played the ♥A on Jenny's lead of the ♥Q. I switched to the ♣K and continued the suit and declarer eventually lost control to go two down for -500 with no game available for us.
Jenny had an instructive lead problem a couple of hands later:
Board 21; Pairs; Dealer North; NS Game
South
♠ A K 9 3
♥ K 8 4
♦ Q 5 3 2
♣ K 4
West...North..East...South
.......Paul..........Jenny
.......Pass....2NT...Pass
.3♣1....Pass....3♥....Pass
.3NT...All Pass
1 5-card Stayman
Holding 15 points means that partner almost certainly holds a bust, so your aim should be establish tricks for yourself rather than hoping to hit a high card opposite. So I think the ♠A is a stand out lead and then reassess after seeing dummy: you never know, partner may have 5 low spades when they are splitting 2-2. On this occasion that doesn't happen, but the high lead will mean that you make some tricks. After a low spade lead Jenny was persistently squeezed and failed to take any tricks in the end.
Finally a play problem that I failed to solve on board 41.
Board 41; Pairs; Dealer North; EW Game
.........North
.........♠ 10 8 5 3
.........♥ K
.........♦ K 10 9 3
.........♣ Q J 8 7
West................East
♠ K J 6 4...........♠ A
♥ Q 9 3 2...........♥ A 8 5 4
♦ Q 8 4.............♦ A J 7 5
♣ A 5...............♣ 6 4 3 2
.........South
.........♠ Q 9 7 2
.........♥ J 10 8 7
.........♦ 6 2
.........♣ K 10 9
West...North..East...South
Paul...Cathy..Jenny..Sam
.......Pass....1♦....Pass
.1♥....Pass....2♥....Pass
.3NT...Pass....4♥....All Pass
Cathy led the ♣Q and continued with a small one when I ducked. I took the diamond finesse and cashed the ♠A and ruffed a club back to hand. A diamond discard on the ♠K was followed by a spade ruff. I then cashed the ♦A in case Sam had a doubleton and played dummy's final club. Sam discarded the ♠Q, so I ruffed small and now played ♠J, discarding dummy's final diamond, that Sam was forced to ruff. She now played a small heart and I had to decide whether to rise with ♥Q or play small.
At this point I know that hearts were 2-3 or (likely) 4-1, so clearly it is right to play Sam for the ♥K as it only loses in the precise layout above but wins against all 3-2 and all other 4-1 breaks. For the winners, Alan played a similar line and also went down.
It feels like I should do better, but I haven't found a definitely better line yet - comments welcome!
Sunday, 13 May 2007
Scrabble ... and bridge players
Hels has just phoned from Perth to say that she has retained her Scottish Open Scrabble title (I think I'm meant to say woo-hoo! at this point). She only blogged a short note last year but keep watching Country Strife to get this year's report.
A top Edinburgh bridge player was key to her win. Simon, who earlier let Hels beat him by over 200 points, beat main rival Allan in the last round.
Hels finished a game clear with the best spread (10 wins/12, +1102).
A top Edinburgh bridge player was key to her win. Simon, who earlier let Hels beat him by over 200 points, beat main rival Allan in the last round.
Hels finished a game clear with the best spread (10 wins/12, +1102).
Blue Lightning web site
You can follow the progress of the Blue Lightning and Funky Gibbons on-line teams, and download all the matches on BBO if you so wish, on their web site.
Scottish Cup Plate final
Bereavement meant that Harry's team needed a substitute for the final of the Scottish Cup Plate yesterday. As one of the few players who had not already played in the competition to date, Harry had asked if I could partner him during the Spring Fours last weekend.
So we spent the week building a system that would stand up to a 48-board match. In the end little of it actually came up, but we played with the confidence of an established partnership.
After the first 12-board segment we were leading by 6 IMPs, but were down by 10 IMPs at the half. However we broke the match wide open by winning the third segment by 72-12 IMPs and a quiet final set meant that we ran out winners by 64 IMPs.
There were three slams in the third quarter and we were on the right side of two of them. On the first I made a Lightner double of 6♥ but declarer ran to 6NT. He failed to make the inference that I had a void as the heart suit was so poor, but as I'd never double a failing slam like that he really should have made the contract; failing to do so cost 16 IMPs when Roy and David were in the better club slam.
Our opponents never investigated either minor-suit slam on the second occasion and would have gone done in their 3NT if Harry had led his stronger 5-card major (♠K10xxx vs ♥Q1098x). Once again Roy and David did the business to gain 12 IMPs, but they gave 10 IMPs back when they found the only lead to let a poor slam make on the last board of the set.
There were wild hands throughout (no computers here though). Harry held the following hand in the final set:
♠ A x x x
♥ -
♦ A 10 9 8 x x x x
♣ x
and opened the hand 1♦. His LHO bid 3♥ and I bid 3NT to leave Harry with an interesting problem. After some considerable thought he bid 5♦, I passed and tabled
♠ K 10 x x
♥ A x x x
♦ -
♣ A Q J x x
Spades were 4-1 and this contract drifted one off. In the other room they found the spade fit but could only stop at the five level. Down three (trying to make the contract) was another 5 IMPs to us.
Generally our bidding was sound and we defended well. A good result.
So we spent the week building a system that would stand up to a 48-board match. In the end little of it actually came up, but we played with the confidence of an established partnership.
After the first 12-board segment we were leading by 6 IMPs, but were down by 10 IMPs at the half. However we broke the match wide open by winning the third segment by 72-12 IMPs and a quiet final set meant that we ran out winners by 64 IMPs.
There were three slams in the third quarter and we were on the right side of two of them. On the first I made a Lightner double of 6♥ but declarer ran to 6NT. He failed to make the inference that I had a void as the heart suit was so poor, but as I'd never double a failing slam like that he really should have made the contract; failing to do so cost 16 IMPs when Roy and David were in the better club slam.
Our opponents never investigated either minor-suit slam on the second occasion and would have gone done in their 3NT if Harry had led his stronger 5-card major (♠K10xxx vs ♥Q1098x). Once again Roy and David did the business to gain 12 IMPs, but they gave 10 IMPs back when they found the only lead to let a poor slam make on the last board of the set.
There were wild hands throughout (no computers here though). Harry held the following hand in the final set:
♠ A x x x
♥ -
♦ A 10 9 8 x x x x
♣ x
and opened the hand 1♦. His LHO bid 3♥ and I bid 3NT to leave Harry with an interesting problem. After some considerable thought he bid 5♦, I passed and tabled
♠ K 10 x x
♥ A x x x
♦ -
♣ A Q J x x
Spades were 4-1 and this contract drifted one off. In the other room they found the spade fit but could only stop at the five level. Down three (trying to make the contract) was another 5 IMPs to us.
Generally our bidding was sound and we defended well. A good result.
Start of the league
Friday night was the start of the BBO Poland on-line league with Alex and I playing in the first 12-board match against the Turkish Black Sea team.
The first hand is flat in 4♠ but we got there in different ways. RHO opened 1♥ and I held:
♠ K Q
♥ A 7 6
♦ K Q 4
♣ K J 9 8 3
I preferred 1NT, at the other table double was chosen, but partner held six spades so it didn't matter this time.
On board 2 Alex and I found a good sacrifice that was missed at the other table when Graham a more aggressive view in the auction that prevented them uncovering the fit, so we gained 11 IMPs.
The next action was on board 6 where both Black Sea pairs took extremely strange views in the auction and, unsurprisingly, went negative in both rooms to give us 6 IMPs. We gained another 5 IMPs when the lead of a queen made it easy for Anne to locate that card where our declarer misguessed its location.
On the final board I overcalled 1♥ on
♠ 10 5 4
♥ K J 8 6 2
♦ Q 4
♣ 5 4 3
and this caused Alex to double a making 3NT. However they missed the game at the other table so it didn't really cost as we lost 12 IMPs.
The final score was 24-15 IMPs.
We didn't play in the second match, but the Funky Gibbons lost 12-39 IMPs in a disappointing display.
The first hand is flat in 4♠ but we got there in different ways. RHO opened 1♥ and I held:
♠ K Q
♥ A 7 6
♦ K Q 4
♣ K J 9 8 3
I preferred 1NT, at the other table double was chosen, but partner held six spades so it didn't matter this time.
On board 2 Alex and I found a good sacrifice that was missed at the other table when Graham a more aggressive view in the auction that prevented them uncovering the fit, so we gained 11 IMPs.
The next action was on board 6 where both Black Sea pairs took extremely strange views in the auction and, unsurprisingly, went negative in both rooms to give us 6 IMPs. We gained another 5 IMPs when the lead of a queen made it easy for Anne to locate that card where our declarer misguessed its location.
On the final board I overcalled 1♥ on
♠ 10 5 4
♥ K J 8 6 2
♦ Q 4
♣ 5 4 3
and this caused Alex to double a making 3NT. However they missed the game at the other table so it didn't really cost as we lost 12 IMPs.
The final score was 24-15 IMPs.
We didn't play in the second match, but the Funky Gibbons lost 12-39 IMPs in a disappointing display.
Friday, 11 May 2007
RBS result
Reg and I won the RBS Championship Pairs and Marguerite presented us with the trophy at the club's AGM last night.
Photo: George Martin
Photo: George Martin
Thursday, 10 May 2007
Problems from the Spring Fours
mickyb and I have posted a number of problem hands from the Spring Fours on the Bridge Base Forums bulletin board. If you have registered on the forum then you can post your answers too.
- What to open with a weak 8-card suit?
- Going off in 3NT when 6♥ makes!
- Pre-empt or not?
- Pre-balancing action
- Do we rescue partner from his 5♦ overcall?
- Rebid question with four spades and seven clubs.
- Who does the five-level belong to?
Wednesday, 9 May 2007
Better slam bidding?
In our triad against DE BOTTON, Malinowski and Sandquist bid the following slam against us:
Board 27; IMPs; Love All; Dealer South
West
♠ Q
♥ K x x
♦ K 10 8 3
♣ K J 10 x x
East
♠ A 10 x x x x
♥ A x
♦ A Q 5
♣ A 3
West...North..East...South
.....................Pass
.1♦.....2♦....Dbl.....2♥
.3♣....Pass....3♠....Pass
.3NT...Pass....4♥....Pass
.5♣....Pass....6♦....All Pass
They were playing Polish Club, hence the opening bid.
Despite the controls this contract needs a bit of luck to come in. Malinowski thought for some considerable time before playing, but mindful of North's 2-suited overcall decided to play for a 5-1 diamond break. Winning the initial heart lead, he drew one round of trumps, cashed the spade ace, ruffed West's heart loser. He then finessed for the queen of clubs, ruffed a club. A spade was then ruffed and the winning club led to endplay South to lead into West's trumps.
Nicely played. Team mates missed this slam!
Board 27; IMPs; Love All; Dealer South
West
♠ Q
♥ K x x
♦ K 10 8 3
♣ K J 10 x x
East
♠ A 10 x x x x
♥ A x
♦ A Q 5
♣ A 3
West...North..East...South
.....................Pass
.1♦.....2♦....Dbl.....2♥
.3♣....Pass....3♠....Pass
.3NT...Pass....4♥....Pass
.5♣....Pass....6♦....All Pass
They were playing Polish Club, hence the opening bid.
Despite the controls this contract needs a bit of luck to come in. Malinowski thought for some considerable time before playing, but mindful of North's 2-suited overcall decided to play for a 5-1 diamond break. Winning the initial heart lead, he drew one round of trumps, cashed the spade ace, ruffed West's heart loser. He then finessed for the queen of clubs, ruffed a club. A spade was then ruffed and the winning club led to endplay South to lead into West's trumps.
Nicely played. Team mates missed this slam!
Slam bidding
We did not shine on this hand in the plate at the Spring Fours.
IMPs; Love All; Dealer West
North
♠ K x x x x x
♥ -
♦ K Q x x x
♣ x x
South
♠ A Q 10 x
♥ Q J x x
♦ A 10 x
♣ A K
West...North..East...South
Pass....1♠....Pass....2♣
Pass....2♦....Pass....2♥
Pass....3♥....Pass....3♠
Pass....4♥....Pass....4NT
Pass....5♦....Pass....6♠
All Pass
The first decision was the opening bid on the North hand, but once I had chosen 1♠ then Alex started a relay sequence. I actually got the system slightly wrong and showed six spades with four diamonds (when I can show the 6-5 distribution) in a minimum (11-14 HCP) hand. My 4♥ bid was a cue bid and a minimum hand within the context of the auction so far (so a minimum minimum).
When Alex used Keycard I declined to show my void and so we missed the grand slam. Alex actually does better to cue bid 5♣ and then we'll bid the grand easily.
The result was that we lost 5 IMPs on the hand. A strange number you may think, but they also stopped in 6♠ at the other table. However Finlay doubled this and duly received a diamond lead that he ruffed. Unfortunately this was his only trick and so they made the doubled slam. I just made an undoubled overtrick.
This was the hand that decided the SPEARS-LIGGINS match in the main event. SPEARS reached the grand slam and was beaten by the ruff. LIGGINS stopped safely in game (!) and won 11 IMPs. It's a cruel game at times.
IMPs; Love All; Dealer West
North
♠ K x x x x x
♥ -
♦ K Q x x x
♣ x x
South
♠ A Q 10 x
♥ Q J x x
♦ A 10 x
♣ A K
West...North..East...South
Pass....1♠....Pass....2♣
Pass....2♦....Pass....2♥
Pass....3♥....Pass....3♠
Pass....4♥....Pass....4NT
Pass....5♦....Pass....6♠
All Pass
The first decision was the opening bid on the North hand, but once I had chosen 1♠ then Alex started a relay sequence. I actually got the system slightly wrong and showed six spades with four diamonds (when I can show the 6-5 distribution) in a minimum (11-14 HCP) hand. My 4♥ bid was a cue bid and a minimum hand within the context of the auction so far (so a minimum minimum).
When Alex used Keycard I declined to show my void and so we missed the grand slam. Alex actually does better to cue bid 5♣ and then we'll bid the grand easily.
The result was that we lost 5 IMPs on the hand. A strange number you may think, but they also stopped in 6♠ at the other table. However Finlay doubled this and duly received a diamond lead that he ruffed. Unfortunately this was his only trick and so they made the doubled slam. I just made an undoubled overtrick.
This was the hand that decided the SPEARS-LIGGINS match in the main event. SPEARS reached the grand slam and was beaten by the ruff. LIGGINS stopped safely in game (!) and won 11 IMPs. It's a cruel game at times.
Tuesday, 8 May 2007
Spring Fours
I've just spent the long weekend playing in the Spring Foursomes in Stratford-upon-Avon. I'll try to post some interesting hands later in the week, but fair to say that we did not do ourselves justice at the table. I was playing with Alex, Finlay and Harry and we were unseeded, presumably as three of us play in Scotland with no English Gold Points (this struck me as slightly unfair but I assume it was just incompetence - the other non-English players were more easily identified as foreign but they forgot to do this with the Scots).
This is the toughest event on the calendar and there were 46 teams entered this year. It is a double-elimination tournament and the first two 32-board rounds are played as a triad, with one team emerging unscathed and the other two losing a single life.
We were drawn against DE BOTTON (Hacketts, Burn, Malinoski, Sandquist) and HILLMAN. We started well against DE BOTTON and established a 20 IMPs lead after the first quarter. This caused the big guns to appear for the rest of the match and they slowly took control, so we lost by 36 IMPs at the end. HILLMAN were more successful and actually beat DE BOTTON by 7 IMPs, so the result of the group depended on their match with us. We slowly eked away at the 10 IMP first-quarter lead and reduced it by 1 IMP, then 2 IMPs and finally won the last quarter by 9 IMPs to gain a 2 IMP victory. With every team on one win, the group placings were decided by total IMPs and so DE BOTTON emerged with both lives intact. They would by defeated by DHONDY in Round 3 and lose their final life in Round 6 to HELLE. Meanwhile HILLMAN went on a great run and would beat TELTSCHER, TOWNSEND and BYRNE before also losing in Round 6 to REES.
Our third place meant that we were in one of the two triads in Round 3. This time two teams would emerge undefeated following 16-board matches. In a tight match we lost narrowly to TESHOME, but they also walloped MESTEL. Unfortunately we started very badly against MESTEL and were 23 IMPs down at the half subject to a director's ruling when they misexplained their bidding at one table. In the second half we got 18 IMPs back and were informed that the director had not ruled in our favour and so we had lost by 5 IMPs. We consulted with a couple of top players to see if they thought an appeal would be appropriate and both said that they saw sufficient doubt that there was a fair chance of getting a more advantageous ruling, so we appealed. The best possible result from the appeal would have seen us win the match by about 10 IMPs, but our advisors had said that they did not expect the ruling to be fully overturned but a split (weighted) decision was the likely outcome. Surprisingly to most the Appeals Committee did not change the result so we had lost our second life and were out of the main event.
Of course the Plate competition is also one of the tougher events and our early demise meant that we were playing a full day round robin. We won five of the six matches, playing a lot better than previously, and qualified for the KO stages. Unfortunately, on the Monday morning, another 5 IMP defeat meant that the event was essentially over for us. We played a few rounds of the Swiss without enthusiasm and then departed.
It has been a few years since we played this event but it was as enjoyable as ever. Alex and I played with Harry in the Winter Fours earlier this year but he and Finlay were a new partnership to us; we all seemed to get on well and thoroughly enjoyed the event and just needed to play consistently better.
I'm sure we'll be back!
This is the toughest event on the calendar and there were 46 teams entered this year. It is a double-elimination tournament and the first two 32-board rounds are played as a triad, with one team emerging unscathed and the other two losing a single life.
We were drawn against DE BOTTON (Hacketts, Burn, Malinoski, Sandquist) and HILLMAN. We started well against DE BOTTON and established a 20 IMPs lead after the first quarter. This caused the big guns to appear for the rest of the match and they slowly took control, so we lost by 36 IMPs at the end. HILLMAN were more successful and actually beat DE BOTTON by 7 IMPs, so the result of the group depended on their match with us. We slowly eked away at the 10 IMP first-quarter lead and reduced it by 1 IMP, then 2 IMPs and finally won the last quarter by 9 IMPs to gain a 2 IMP victory. With every team on one win, the group placings were decided by total IMPs and so DE BOTTON emerged with both lives intact. They would by defeated by DHONDY in Round 3 and lose their final life in Round 6 to HELLE. Meanwhile HILLMAN went on a great run and would beat TELTSCHER, TOWNSEND and BYRNE before also losing in Round 6 to REES.
Our third place meant that we were in one of the two triads in Round 3. This time two teams would emerge undefeated following 16-board matches. In a tight match we lost narrowly to TESHOME, but they also walloped MESTEL. Unfortunately we started very badly against MESTEL and were 23 IMPs down at the half subject to a director's ruling when they misexplained their bidding at one table. In the second half we got 18 IMPs back and were informed that the director had not ruled in our favour and so we had lost by 5 IMPs. We consulted with a couple of top players to see if they thought an appeal would be appropriate and both said that they saw sufficient doubt that there was a fair chance of getting a more advantageous ruling, so we appealed. The best possible result from the appeal would have seen us win the match by about 10 IMPs, but our advisors had said that they did not expect the ruling to be fully overturned but a split (weighted) decision was the likely outcome. Surprisingly to most the Appeals Committee did not change the result so we had lost our second life and were out of the main event.
Of course the Plate competition is also one of the tougher events and our early demise meant that we were playing a full day round robin. We won five of the six matches, playing a lot better than previously, and qualified for the KO stages. Unfortunately, on the Monday morning, another 5 IMP defeat meant that the event was essentially over for us. We played a few rounds of the Swiss without enthusiasm and then departed.
It has been a few years since we played this event but it was as enjoyable as ever. Alex and I played with Harry in the Winter Fours earlier this year but he and Finlay were a new partnership to us; we all seemed to get on well and thoroughly enjoyed the event and just needed to play consistently better.
I'm sure we'll be back!
Wednesday, 2 May 2007
Back at the Carlton
Another round of the Russell Cup and I am playing with Archie for the first time. In the small number of weekend congresses that I've played in Scotland, a fair number have concluded discussing hands with Archie in the wee hours so I knew that it would be a fun evening. He is a good player but prone to take wild mood swings during the bidding which can lead to a succession of non-average scores.
Archie e-mailed me a potential system at 5pm last night. It arrived about ten minutes after I'd shut down the computer in order to leave, so some sheets were thrown at me when he arrived two ticks before the start of the evening. As it happened very little system came up during the evening, so sorting out our carding was the major thing to do.
The evening went very well. Archie became a little erratic as a cigarette approached but all of his 'views' worked out. This was one effort that he is not so impressed with now but got the matchpoints. We were playing 4-card majors, 12-14 NT and weak two-bids in three suits:
Bd 21; Pairs; NS Game; Dealer North
West
♠ A Q
♥ A K Q J x
♦ K 3 2
♣ A 10 x
East
♠ x x x
♥ 9 x x x
♦ 10 8 7 6
♣ J x
West...North..East...South
.......Pass....2♣....Pass
.2♥....All Pass
The 2♣ bid was game forcing (unless he rebid 2NT) and my 2♥ showed any hand with 0-4 HCP. Archie's pass is anti-systemic and really means that he should not have opened with a game-forcing bid in the first place. However, North led the ♦J and got a ruff, but established my diamond for a spade discard and making 9 tricks was a clear top.
One hand that scored poorly was a little unfortunate:
Bd 13; Pairs; Game All; Dealer North
South
♠ K x
♥ A Q 9 x
♦ Q 10 8 7 6
♣ x x
West...North..East...South
........1♠....Pass....2♦
Dble....2♠....All Pass
I was all set to raise to 3♠ but West's double strongly suggested that my hearts were poorly positioned so I passed Archie's bid. In theory this was right, as Archie had 7222 distribution and we had four top losers. Unfortunately he had the ♥K and made ten tricks on the heart lead. As few, if any, Wests had doubled most pairs had bid to the spade game and made it on the natural heart lead (West held ace-king in both minors).
Bd 20; Pairs; Game All; Dealer West
West
♠ J x
♥ A x x x x
♦ 3 2
♣ A Q 10 x
East
♠ x
♥ Q J x
♦ K Q 10 8
♣ K J 9 x x
West...North..East...South
.1♥.....1♠....Dble...Pass
.2♣.....2♠.....3♠....Pass
.4♣.....4♠.....5♣....Dble
All Pass
Despite the 4-0 club break, I was able to hold this to three losers for -200. This was a top for us as everyone else was playing in 4♠. Iain's slow approach, holding eight spades, did not work well when an immediate 4♠ would have put the pressure on us, although Archie showed excellent judgement to bid 5♣ in the actual auction.
We finished in first place with 63.99% (8% clear of second). We only had seven minus scores in 28 hands, always a good sign at matchpoints, and we took all the gifts offered. I did think that we defended particularly well for a first-time partnership, and our opening leads seemed to be hitting gold.
A good fun evening ... as expected!
Archie e-mailed me a potential system at 5pm last night. It arrived about ten minutes after I'd shut down the computer in order to leave, so some sheets were thrown at me when he arrived two ticks before the start of the evening. As it happened very little system came up during the evening, so sorting out our carding was the major thing to do.
The evening went very well. Archie became a little erratic as a cigarette approached but all of his 'views' worked out. This was one effort that he is not so impressed with now but got the matchpoints. We were playing 4-card majors, 12-14 NT and weak two-bids in three suits:
Bd 21; Pairs; NS Game; Dealer North
West
♠ A Q
♥ A K Q J x
♦ K 3 2
♣ A 10 x
East
♠ x x x
♥ 9 x x x
♦ 10 8 7 6
♣ J x
West...North..East...South
.......Pass....2♣....Pass
.2♥....All Pass
The 2♣ bid was game forcing (unless he rebid 2NT) and my 2♥ showed any hand with 0-4 HCP. Archie's pass is anti-systemic and really means that he should not have opened with a game-forcing bid in the first place. However, North led the ♦J and got a ruff, but established my diamond for a spade discard and making 9 tricks was a clear top.
One hand that scored poorly was a little unfortunate:
Bd 13; Pairs; Game All; Dealer North
South
♠ K x
♥ A Q 9 x
♦ Q 10 8 7 6
♣ x x
West...North..East...South
........1♠....Pass....2♦
Dble....2♠....All Pass
I was all set to raise to 3♠ but West's double strongly suggested that my hearts were poorly positioned so I passed Archie's bid. In theory this was right, as Archie had 7222 distribution and we had four top losers. Unfortunately he had the ♥K and made ten tricks on the heart lead. As few, if any, Wests had doubled most pairs had bid to the spade game and made it on the natural heart lead (West held ace-king in both minors).
Bd 20; Pairs; Game All; Dealer West
West
♠ J x
♥ A x x x x
♦ 3 2
♣ A Q 10 x
East
♠ x
♥ Q J x
♦ K Q 10 8
♣ K J 9 x x
West...North..East...South
.1♥.....1♠....Dble...Pass
.2♣.....2♠.....3♠....Pass
.4♣.....4♠.....5♣....Dble
All Pass
Despite the 4-0 club break, I was able to hold this to three losers for -200. This was a top for us as everyone else was playing in 4♠. Iain's slow approach, holding eight spades, did not work well when an immediate 4♠ would have put the pressure on us, although Archie showed excellent judgement to bid 5♣ in the actual auction.
We finished in first place with 63.99% (8% clear of second). We only had seven minus scores in 28 hands, always a good sign at matchpoints, and we took all the gifts offered. I did think that we defended particularly well for a first-time partnership, and our opening leads seemed to be hitting gold.
A good fun evening ... as expected!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)