- Weak or strong notrump? (95% weak in Scotland)
- 4- or 5-card majors? (95% 4-card majors in Scotland, bidding minors before majors)
- What is 2NT over a one-level opener?
- Opening 2-bids? (60% Benj Acol, 40% three weak 2s)
- 2NT relay asks for feature/quality/points/shortage?
- Transfers over 1NT: what does 2♠ mean? (can be traditional 4-way transfers, minor suit takeout (SAYC style), transfer to clubs, puppet to 2NT, etc.)
- Transfers over 2NT: what does 3♠ mean? (minor suit swiss or 5 spades and 4 hearts)
- Puppet Stayman over 2NT? Always yes!
- Carding? Standard count, reverse attitude on A/Q is popular here for signals and discards.
- Jump overcalls? Intermediate fairly popular here.
- Defence to 1NT? Normally Asptro or Landy.
- Checkback? Almost always yes, always in clubs.
- Lebensohl? Normally fast arrival denies a stop.
- Blackwood? 3041/1430/traditional
- If we double their 1NT and the next hand escapes to 2♦, what does double mean?
Wednesday, 27 June 2007
Building a bridge partnership ... for the evening
As you've seen I play with a lot of different partners over the summer. If I'm lucky we get a quick 10 minutes before the game to discuss a system, so I thought it might be of interest to share the points I try to cover.
Searching for matchpoints
Tim was searching for matchpoints in the pub last night. He had estimated 60% for our game at the club, but the computer said it was 52%. Unfortunately he did not find any lying about.
Have you discussed this sequence with your partner?
Unlikely, even in an established partnership. Our South forgot that partner had passed and just blasted 7NT, when North intended the bid as Baron, asking for suits up the line. In fact, as I found the killing diamond lead, even 6NT was going down for a good score for us.
We received more gifts than we gave but missed a few slams. One, when Tim passed a 4441 13-count first-in-hand, was fortunate as normal lines went down and the other slams were mostly flat as they were low point count efforts (one board was completely flat in 4♥ making thirteen tricks).
I wasn't sure if I did the right thing on this hand:
With a weakish spade suit I was happy to double 1NT initially. And I hoped that my subsequent 2♠, instead of doubling, would show this type of hand. Passing Tim's double was also aggressive but it was matchpoints. We were not alone in -530!
Finally, 'style' issues caused another missed game:
Not for the first time in the evening Tim passed a hand that I'd have opened. Tim's not known as a conservative bidder so this caused some concern and hilarity in the bar later, but I'm sure it's my fault.
But this was not the problem. On this auction I was concerned Tim may only have 3 spades. Likewise he was worried I may only have three too, so we languished in the partscore. Faults on both sides.
Have you discussed this sequence with your partner?
| West | North | East | South |
| p | p | p | 2NT |
| p | 5NT | p | ? |
Unlikely, even in an established partnership. Our South forgot that partner had passed and just blasted 7NT, when North intended the bid as Baron, asking for suits up the line. In fact, as I found the killing diamond lead, even 6NT was going down for a good score for us.
We received more gifts than we gave but missed a few slams. One, when Tim passed a 4441 13-count first-in-hand, was fortunate as normal lines went down and the other slams were mostly flat as they were low point count efforts (one board was completely flat in 4♥ making thirteen tricks).
I wasn't sure if I did the right thing on this hand:
|
| West | North | East | South |
| Tim | Iain | Paul | Laura |
| 1♥ | |||
| p | 1NT | X | 2♣ |
| p | 2♥ | 2♠ | 3♥ |
| X | p | p | p |
With a weakish spade suit I was happy to double 1NT initially. And I hoped that my subsequent 2♠, instead of doubling, would show this type of hand. Passing Tim's double was also aggressive but it was matchpoints. We were not alone in -530!
Finally, 'style' issues caused another missed game:
| ||||||||
|
| West | North | East | South |
| Paul | Tim | ||
| p | |||
| p | 1♥ | p | 2♣ |
| p | 2♥ | p | 2♠ |
| p | 3♠ | p | p |
| p |
Not for the first time in the evening Tim passed a hand that I'd have opened. Tim's not known as a conservative bidder so this caused some concern and hilarity in the bar later, but I'm sure it's my fault.
But this was not the problem. On this auction I was concerned Tim may only have 3 spades. Likewise he was worried I may only have three too, so we languished in the partscore. Faults on both sides.
Friday, 22 June 2007
Back to Quito
By coincidence, last night the Funky Gibbons played the Ecuador national team that Carl faced a couple of weeks ago. Alex and I were again on the bench (due to the late start) but I watched Martin and John produce additional blogging material.
Martin's leap to 3♠ did most of the damage although the 5♥ bid looks ill-judged. The contract was three down for 9 IMPs when 4♥ was undoubled in the other room.
Both Souths were asleep on the next board:
1 15-17
The auction was similar at both tables but both Souths missed the obvious inferences. East's sequence shows 4 spades and 5+ diamonds; the 1NT opener has 2 or 3 spades. So double, lead the ♠A and give partner a ruff. Perhaps doubling is a bit much (as they can escape to 5NT though this is tough) but it is clear to beat the contract. However both Souths led the ♣K and the contract made.
The second match was a lot quieter and we had to wait until the end for some excitement.
Open Room
1 9-13pts, 4+ clubs, 4+ diamonds
Closed Room
This cost 9 IMPs when Martin went three down. John's decision to save was probably right although the club slam does not make and it would need a heart lead to beat 6♦.
In the end honours were almost shared. We won the first match 43:10 IMPs but lost the second 13:30 IMPs.
| ||||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
| West | North | East | South |
| Martin | John | ||
| 1♥ | |||
| 3♠ | 4♥ | 4♠ | 5♥ |
| p | p | X | p |
| p | p |
Martin's leap to 3♠ did most of the damage although the 5♥ bid looks ill-judged. The contract was three down for 9 IMPs when 4♥ was undoubled in the other room.
Both Souths were asleep on the next board:
|
| West | North | East | South |
| Nigel D | Mike | ||
| 1NT1 | p | 2♣ | p |
| 2♥ | p | 3♦ | p |
| 4♦ | p | 5♦ | p |
| p | p |
1 15-17
The auction was similar at both tables but both Souths missed the obvious inferences. East's sequence shows 4 spades and 5+ diamonds; the 1NT opener has 2 or 3 spades. So double, lead the ♠A and give partner a ruff. Perhaps doubling is a bit much (as they can escape to 5NT though this is tough) but it is clear to beat the contract. However both Souths led the ♣K and the contract made.
The second match was a lot quieter and we had to wait until the end for some excitement.
| ||||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
Open Room
| West | North | East | South |
| Mike | Nigel D | ||
| p | 2♣1 | ||
| 3♠ | 5♦ | p | p |
| p |
1 9-13pts, 4+ clubs, 4+ diamonds
Closed Room
| West | North | East | South |
| Martin | John | ||
| p | p | ||
| 3♠ | X | 4♠ | 5♠ |
| p | 6♣ | 6♠ | X |
| p | p | p |
This cost 9 IMPs when Martin went three down. John's decision to save was probably right although the club slam does not make and it would need a heart lead to beat 6♦.
In the end honours were almost shared. We won the first match 43:10 IMPs but lost the second 13:30 IMPs.
Thursday, 21 June 2007
Our Man in Lima
From Carl
It has been a great honour to play for Peru. I have only been practising with my partner for eight weeks and the other members of the team are inexperienced, so we didn't expect to do well in the main event and qualify for the semi finals. However there is a great team spirit. A lot of training is needed for the major events in the coming years. Peru now has the "ganas" [will] to improve things significantly. I am of course ready to help in any way that I can. We need desperately more people playing bridge here and, of course, young people. We need a dynamic program and dynamic teachers to make this a reality.
The bridge club in Lima is just superb. You couldn't ask for better playing conditions. We also play with screens on Thursday evenings.
Don't let the kids see this
I was not playing but the Funky Gibbons match against a good Polish team contained some adult-only material.
We had lost the first match so Martin and John were gunning for revenge in the second affair. A misclick on board 3 caused confusion in the Polish ranks.
1 Polish Club
2 Shows one major
3 Misclick, intended to bid 2♥
4 Forcing according to North
Missing this game meant a 6 IMP swing when Nigel and Mike bid 3NT in the Open Room.
Martin followed this up with a well-timed psych.
1 Polish Club
2 Opening hand with clubs or balanced 11-13 or any game force
3 4+ spades !!
4 3-card spade support, minimum
I think the -800 offered on the previous hand meant that the Polish believed that Martin had stepped out of line again, but he made an overtrick when the defence made a slight error. This was worth 7 IMPs when 3NT failed in the other room.
Two boards later the Polish offered their own huge penalty, but Martin and John failed to take advantage.
South was determined to get something back but his psych was going to backfire and lose -300 on a partscore until John pulled the second double. Most experts would have left that double with a balanced hand so perhaps Martin and John have some strong agreements here (as John is certainly an expert). The contract lost -500 and 9 IMPs.
The second match finished at 23-17 IMPs, but overall we lost by 24-36 VPs.
We had lost the first match so Martin and John were gunning for revenge in the second affair. A misclick on board 3 caused confusion in the Polish ranks.
| ||||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
| West | North | East | South |
| Martin | John | ||
| 1♣1 | |||
| 2♦2 | X | 3♦3 | X |
| 3♥ | p4 | p | 3♠ |
| p | 4♣4 | p | p |
| p |
1 Polish Club
2 Shows one major
3 Misclick, intended to bid 2♥
4 Forcing according to North
Missing this game meant a 6 IMP swing when Nigel and Mike bid 3NT in the Open Room.
Martin followed this up with a well-timed psych.
| ||||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
| West | North | East | South |
| Martin | John | ||
| p | 1♣1 | X2 | XX |
| 1♥3 | p | 1♠4 | p |
| p | X | p | p |
| 2♦ | p | p | X |
| p | p | p |
1 Polish Club
2 Opening hand with clubs or balanced 11-13 or any game force
3 4+ spades !!
4 3-card spade support, minimum
I think the -800 offered on the previous hand meant that the Polish believed that Martin had stepped out of line again, but he made an overtrick when the defence made a slight error. This was worth 7 IMPs when 3NT failed in the other room.
Two boards later the Polish offered their own huge penalty, but Martin and John failed to take advantage.
| ||||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
| West | North | East | South |
| Martin | John | ||
| p | 1♥ | ||
| X | 4♥ | p | p |
| X | p | 4♠ | p |
| p | X | p | p |
| p |
South was determined to get something back but his psych was going to backfire and lose -300 on a partscore until John pulled the second double. Most experts would have left that double with a balanced hand so perhaps Martin and John have some strong agreements here (as John is certainly an expert). The contract lost -500 and 9 IMPs.
The second match finished at 23-17 IMPs, but overall we lost by 24-36 VPs.
Wednesday, 20 June 2007
Second time less lucky
Archie and I were back. Not as successfully as last time, but the 55% score was a fair relection of our performance.
There were some interesting hands.
We weren't on totally firm ground during the auction but I think we took sensible views at each point. West could have defeated the contract by leading a trump, and then the 4-0 diamond break would have done us, but a heart lead meant that I could cross ruff the hand for +550.
Board 24 gave me a bidding competition problem.
My choice of rebid was between 2NT and 3♠. With such a poor suit I thought 2NT was better. Some others did try 3♠ and I think they were lucky that partner did not pass. On a slight misdefence Archie made 12 tricks for a top.
I was less happy with the auction on 29 although it was duplicated a few times.
My rebid is classic 'expert', hoping to be able to bid 2♠ on the next round to show my strength and distribution. That assumes that there will be a next round! 3NT has play but I believe both of us took the percentage action.
Overall we didn't play as well as last time. I let a few overtricks through, Les psyched a 1NT overcall that we didn't pick, and we didn't lead as well as before. But still an enjoyable evening.
There were some interesting hands.
| ||||||||
|
| West | North | East | South |
| Archie | Paul | ||
| p | 1♦ | ||
| p | 1♠ | X | p |
| 2♣ | 3♣ | p | 3♦ |
| p | 3♥ | p | 3NT |
| p | 5♦ | p | p |
| X | p | p | p |
We weren't on totally firm ground during the auction but I think we took sensible views at each point. West could have defeated the contract by leading a trump, and then the 4-0 diamond break would have done us, but a heart lead meant that I could cross ruff the hand for +550.
Board 24 gave me a bidding competition problem.
| ||||||||
|
| West | North | East | South |
| Archie | Paul | ||
| p | p | p | 1♠ |
| p | 1NT | p | 2NT |
| p | 3NT | p | p |
| p |
My choice of rebid was between 2NT and 3♠. With such a poor suit I thought 2NT was better. Some others did try 3♠ and I think they were lucky that partner did not pass. On a slight misdefence Archie made 12 tricks for a top.
I was less happy with the auction on 29 although it was duplicated a few times.
| ||||||||
|
| West | North | East | South |
| Archie | Paul | ||
| p | p | 1♥ | |
| p | 1♠ | p | 2♦ |
| p | p | p |
My rebid is classic 'expert', hoping to be able to bid 2♠ on the next round to show my strength and distribution. That assumes that there will be a next round! 3NT has play but I believe both of us took the percentage action.
Overall we didn't play as well as last time. I let a few overtricks through, Les psyched a 1NT overcall that we didn't pick, and we didn't lead as well as before. But still an enjoyable evening.
Friday, 15 June 2007
Practice? We need some more!
The opposition failed to arrive for last night's Funky Gibbons match, the six of us co-opted Ben and a stranger (to me at least) for a quick 12-board practice. The resulting performance showed no-one in a good light.
I was playing with Alex against Martin and John (our team mates for Brighton later this year). In the other room Mike and Nigel were our team against Ben and AS.
Neither N/S did well on the first board.
Both sides failed to bid the obvious 3NT contract. Martin and John bid these hands to 4♥ that made when the hearts behaved. Nigel and Mike had a misunderstanding and played in 3♣.
Then a distributional nightmare:
1 Natural or balanced 11-13/17-19
2 4+ hearts, 4+ HCP
We were in trouble when Alex reversed. Martin and John need little encouragement to bid even when vulnerable so I took a pragmatic view and bid the contract I thought would make. I was wrong!
At the other table, Ben and AS bid well to 5♦ after East passed initially. The score was now 0:18 IMPs.
After an overtrick IMP to us on 3, Martin and John did well on board 4 to avoid a hopeless game after my pre-empt. At the other table my hand opened at the 1-level and Mike and Nigel bid the game, but AS found a phantom sacrifice to gift us 9 IMPs.
Both sides missed a good grand slam on the next board. We put Martin and John under greater pressure by pre-empting more aggressively but Nigel and Mike had the space to explore more than they did.
The nadir was probably board 6. All four pairs failed this test!
Open Room
Closed Room
1 Natural (inv+) or balanced (FG)
2 Single-suiter, 15+HCP
3 Relay
4 6331 shape
5 Good diamonds
Both Souths led a diamond so the contracts made, another 13 IMPs away. In Alex's defence (of moving over 4♥) my hand was pretty sub-minimum for my sequence.
On the next hand Mike failed to bid the obvious sacrifice and we lost another 11 IMPs - now 10-42 IMPs.
On board 8 Alex and I bid to a good 5♦ after some competitive bidding in clubs. Mike and Nigel never bid and this meant that Ben and AS reached 3NT. Nigel led a club from ♣KQT987 but failed to continue the suit and cash the six available club tricks. Even worse, he switched to the only suit that gave declarer nine tricks, so it was a flat board.
On 9 we got 10 IMPs back when Martin and John decided to avoid a normal 3NT and played in a failing 5♣ instead.
Board 10 and both E/W pairs bid a poor spade game, followed by a simple 3NT. Finally a simple 3NT game was made more interesting in the Open Room when Mike redoubled the contract and it was solid for two overtricks.
The final score was 36:45 IMPs. Not our finest hour.
I was playing with Alex against Martin and John (our team mates for Brighton later this year). In the other room Mike and Nigel were our team against Ben and AS.
Neither N/S did well on the first board.
Board 1; IMPs
| ||||||||
|
Both sides failed to bid the obvious 3NT contract. Martin and John bid these hands to 4♥ that made when the hearts behaved. Nigel and Mike had a misunderstanding and played in 3♣.
Then a distributional nightmare:
Board 2; IMPs
|
|
| West | North | East | South |
| Paul | John | Alex | Martin |
| 1♣1 | p | ||
| 1♦2 | 1♠ | 2♦ | 3♠ |
| X | p | 4♣ | p |
| 6NT | p | p | p |
1 Natural or balanced 11-13/17-19
2 4+ hearts, 4+ HCP
We were in trouble when Alex reversed. Martin and John need little encouragement to bid even when vulnerable so I took a pragmatic view and bid the contract I thought would make. I was wrong!
At the other table, Ben and AS bid well to 5♦ after East passed initially. The score was now 0:18 IMPs.
After an overtrick IMP to us on 3, Martin and John did well on board 4 to avoid a hopeless game after my pre-empt. At the other table my hand opened at the 1-level and Mike and Nigel bid the game, but AS found a phantom sacrifice to gift us 9 IMPs.
Both sides missed a good grand slam on the next board. We put Martin and John under greater pressure by pre-empting more aggressively but Nigel and Mike had the space to explore more than they did.
The nadir was probably board 6. All four pairs failed this test!
Board 6; IMPs
| ||||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
Open Room
| West | North | East | South |
| Ben | Mike | AS | Nigel |
| 1♥ | p | ||
| 1♠ | p | 3♣ | p |
| 3♥ | p | 4♦ | p |
| 4NT | p | 6♥ | p |
| p | p |
Closed Room
| West | North | East | South |
| Paul | John | Alex | Martin |
| 1♥ | p | ||
| 2♣1 | p | 2NT2 | p |
| 3♣3 | p | 3♦4 | X |
| XX5 | 4♦ | p | p |
| 4♥ | p | 5♣ | p |
| 5♦ | p | 5♥ | p |
| p | p |
1 Natural (inv+) or balanced (FG)
2 Single-suiter, 15+HCP
3 Relay
4 6331 shape
5 Good diamonds
Both Souths led a diamond so the contracts made, another 13 IMPs away. In Alex's defence (of moving over 4♥) my hand was pretty sub-minimum for my sequence.
On the next hand Mike failed to bid the obvious sacrifice and we lost another 11 IMPs - now 10-42 IMPs.
On board 8 Alex and I bid to a good 5♦ after some competitive bidding in clubs. Mike and Nigel never bid and this meant that Ben and AS reached 3NT. Nigel led a club from ♣KQT987 but failed to continue the suit and cash the six available club tricks. Even worse, he switched to the only suit that gave declarer nine tricks, so it was a flat board.
On 9 we got 10 IMPs back when Martin and John decided to avoid a normal 3NT and played in a failing 5♣ instead.
Board 10 and both E/W pairs bid a poor spade game, followed by a simple 3NT. Finally a simple 3NT game was made more interesting in the Open Room when Mike redoubled the contract and it was solid for two overtricks.
The final score was 36:45 IMPs. Not our finest hour.
Wednesday, 13 June 2007
Taking the low road
Laura and I had an unsuccessful evening in the Russell Cup but enjoyed our first game together.
We should have realised it was not going to be our night on board 1, when Miro found an excellent lead to beat our 3NT. This did prove to be an omen, as our opponents seem to do the right thing continuously, whereas we would take the wrong option given the chance.
Another example of being fixed:
Board 18; Pairs; Dealer East; NS Game
1NT=12-14
West's bidding is slightly bizarre. Most transferred to spades and found their partners with 4-card support, allowing the Norths to double for takeout and generally take a good penalty. Meanwhile I was totally fixed when the bidding came back to me and we only beat the contract by one trick for a bottom.
We did have the odd success, especially good as it was against team mates!
Board 14; Pairs; Dealer East; Love All
Harry and Finlay failed to uncover my distribution in the play and I made seven tricks for a clear top (eleven tricks being available in spades or notrump).
Laura made a good call on the next board:
Board 15; Pairs; Dealer South; NS Game
Taking our nine tricks on a spade lead was a good score as many missed this game. The hearts were 4-3 so the contract was never in danger.
Laura dashed off after the game to catch the sleeper down to London. Her son had spent the evening playing tennis with Judy Murray and would be attending a coaching clinic the following day. Laura decided that bridge was more important!
We should have realised it was not going to be our night on board 1, when Miro found an excellent lead to beat our 3NT. This did prove to be an omen, as our opponents seem to do the right thing continuously, whereas we would take the wrong option given the chance.
Another example of being fixed:
Board 18; Pairs; Dealer East; NS Game
| West | North | East | South |
| 1NT | p | ||
| 2♣ | p | 2♦ | p |
| p | p |
1NT=12-14
West's bidding is slightly bizarre. Most transferred to spades and found their partners with 4-card support, allowing the Norths to double for takeout and generally take a good penalty. Meanwhile I was totally fixed when the bidding came back to me and we only beat the contract by one trick for a bottom.
We did have the odd success, especially good as it was against team mates!
Board 14; Pairs; Dealer East; Love All
| ||||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
| West | North | East | South |
| p | p | ||
| 1♠ | 1NT | X | p |
| p | 2♥ | X | 2NT |
| X | 3♣ | X | p |
| p | p |
Harry and Finlay failed to uncover my distribution in the play and I made seven tricks for a clear top (eleven tricks being available in spades or notrump).
Laura made a good call on the next board:
Board 15; Pairs; Dealer South; NS Game
| ||||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
| West | North | East | South |
| p | |||
| p | 1♦ | 1♠ | p |
| 2♣ | 3♦ | p | 3NT |
| p | p | p |
Taking our nine tricks on a spade lead was a good score as many missed this game. The hearts were 4-3 so the contract was never in danger.
Laura dashed off after the game to catch the sleeper down to London. Her son had spent the evening playing tennis with Judy Murray and would be attending a coaching clinic the following day. Laura decided that bridge was more important!
Monday, 11 June 2007
Unranked defensive goodness
Andrea asked if I would blog this good defence against us from the ranked pairs. Unfortunately my analysis shows that he should have made the contract, but that does not detract from the defensive play that took advantage of a minor slip.
Board 24; Pairs; Dealer West; Love All
.........North
.........♠ Q J 9 8 6 5
.........♥ A 10
.........♦ J 8 7 3
.........♣ 2
West................East
♠ -.................♠ K 10 4 3
♥ K Q J 9 5 2.......♥ 6 4
♦ K Q 10 6 5 2......♦ 9 4
♣ A.................♣ K Q J 10 6
.........South
.........♠ A 7 2
.........♥ 8 7 3
.........♦ A
.........♣ 9 8 7 5 4 3
West...North..East...South
.......Andrea........Paul
.1♣1....2♠.....Dbl....3♦2
.4♥.....4♠.....Dbl...All Pass
1 Any strong hand with 16+ HCP
2 Undiscussed, but designed to get a diamond lead against 5-level contracts
Lead: ♣K
West won the opening lead and, perforce, switched to the ♥K. Andrea did well to rise with the ace and commenced a minor-suit cross ruff after cashing the ♦A. On the third diamond East threw a club and then, on the fourth diamond, ruffed with the ♠3 when dummy was always playing the ♠A. This under-ruff was necessary to give Andrea the chance to go wrong and avoid an endplay as this left the following 4-card ending with South to lead:
.........North
.........♠ Q J 9
.........♥ 10
.........♦
.........♣
West................East
♠ -.................♠ K 10 4
♥ K Q 2.............♥ 4
♦ K.................♦
♣ ..................♣
.........South
.........♠
.........♥ 8 7
.........♦
.........♣ 9 8
Andrea needs two more tricks, so he should lead the club and discard the heart for the contract. Unfortunately he decided to exit with a heart and East was able to follow, leaving his partner on lead, guaranteeing two further spade tricks. West led another heart and East ducked when Andrea rose with the ♠Q.
Board 24; Pairs; Dealer West; Love All
.........North
.........♠ Q J 9 8 6 5
.........♥ A 10
.........♦ J 8 7 3
.........♣ 2
West................East
♠ -.................♠ K 10 4 3
♥ K Q J 9 5 2.......♥ 6 4
♦ K Q 10 6 5 2......♦ 9 4
♣ A.................♣ K Q J 10 6
.........South
.........♠ A 7 2
.........♥ 8 7 3
.........♦ A
.........♣ 9 8 7 5 4 3
West...North..East...South
.......Andrea........Paul
.1♣1....2♠.....Dbl....3♦2
.4♥.....4♠.....Dbl...All Pass
1 Any strong hand with 16+ HCP
2 Undiscussed, but designed to get a diamond lead against 5-level contracts
Lead: ♣K
West won the opening lead and, perforce, switched to the ♥K. Andrea did well to rise with the ace and commenced a minor-suit cross ruff after cashing the ♦A. On the third diamond East threw a club and then, on the fourth diamond, ruffed with the ♠3 when dummy was always playing the ♠A. This under-ruff was necessary to give Andrea the chance to go wrong and avoid an endplay as this left the following 4-card ending with South to lead:
.........North
.........♠ Q J 9
.........♥ 10
.........♦
.........♣
West................East
♠ -.................♠ K 10 4
♥ K Q 2.............♥ 4
♦ K.................♦
♣ ..................♣
.........South
.........♠
.........♥ 8 7
.........♦
.........♣ 9 8
Andrea needs two more tricks, so he should lead the club and discard the heart for the contract. Unfortunately he decided to exit with a heart and East was able to follow, leaving his partner on lead, guaranteeing two further spade tricks. West led another heart and East ducked when Andrea rose with the ♠Q.
Sunday, 10 June 2007
Immigration update
Following its exit from the main event, Peru played in the Open Teams. Carl and his team finished third in the 9-team round robin comfortably qualifying for the semi-finals (Carl was 7/31 on the Butler).
In the semi-final, despite conceding a small carry over, Peru beat the D-D team by 9 IMPs. In the final they were walloped by Ecuatina when they conceded 48 IMPs in the first half.
Nevertheless I'm sure Carl will be pleased by the team's performance and they will look to build on this in the future.
In the main event Brazil beat Argentina comfortably for the Bermuda Bowl spot.
Full results from 57th CAMPEONATO SUDAMERICANO DE BRIDGE, Quito, Ecuador.
In the semi-final, despite conceding a small carry over, Peru beat the D-D team by 9 IMPs. In the final they were walloped by Ecuatina when they conceded 48 IMPs in the first half.
Nevertheless I'm sure Carl will be pleased by the team's performance and they will look to build on this in the future.
In the main event Brazil beat Argentina comfortably for the Bermuda Bowl spot.
Full results from 57th CAMPEONATO SUDAMERICANO DE BRIDGE, Quito, Ecuador.
Chilean Exploits
We played the Latino (Chile) team last night in the BBO league recording two narrow victories. Alex and I only played the first set and had one bad board and, in a sense, it was lucky that team mates also messed up the same one.
Board 6; IMPs; Dealer East; EW Game
.........North
.........♠ A 10 9 7 4
.........♥ J 8 3
.........♦ J 5 3
.........♣ 10 7
West................East
♠ Q 8 5.............♠ 6
♥ K 9 5 2...........♥ A Q 10 7 6 4
♦ A Q 7 2...........♦ 10 9 4
♣ 9 2...............♣ K 6 3
.........South
.........♠ K J 3 2
.........♥ -
.........♦ K 8 6
.........♣ A Q J 8 6 4
Open Room
West...North..East...South
David.........Mike
...............1♥.....Dbl
.2NT1...3♠.....4♥.....4♠
Pass...Pass....5♥.....5♠
.Dbl...All Pass
1 Good heart raise
Closed Room
West...North..East...South
.......Alex..........Paul
..............Pass....1♣1
Pass....1♥2....2♥.....4♥3
.Dbl...Pass...Pass...Rdbl4
Pass....4♠....Pass...Pass
.5♥.....Dbl...All Pass
1 Either clubs or balanced 11-13/17-19
2 transfer showing 4+ spades
3 splinter
4 first round control
David and Mike conceded an overtrick in their room (-750), Mike thinking later that he should really have passed 4♠.
In our room I started the defence with a spade to Alex's ace and he switched to the ♣7. Alex was trying to hide his distribution from declarer (as the ♣10 is the normal card) . I should work this out as declarer really must have the ♣K, but I misread it and thought Alex had three clubs. If he has three clubs then I can safely try to cash my ♠K but, in reality, this was an error that allowed declarer to get out for one down. We lost 11 IMPs instead of losing 6 IMPs.
We did bid a slam missed in the other room and had the better of the partscores to win 24:15 IMPs.
The team won the second match by 27:14 IMPs.
Board 6; IMPs; Dealer East; EW Game
.........North
.........♠ A 10 9 7 4
.........♥ J 8 3
.........♦ J 5 3
.........♣ 10 7
West................East
♠ Q 8 5.............♠ 6
♥ K 9 5 2...........♥ A Q 10 7 6 4
♦ A Q 7 2...........♦ 10 9 4
♣ 9 2...............♣ K 6 3
.........South
.........♠ K J 3 2
.........♥ -
.........♦ K 8 6
.........♣ A Q J 8 6 4
Open Room
West...North..East...South
David.........Mike
...............1♥.....Dbl
.2NT1...3♠.....4♥.....4♠
Pass...Pass....5♥.....5♠
.Dbl...All Pass
1 Good heart raise
Closed Room
West...North..East...South
.......Alex..........Paul
..............Pass....1♣1
Pass....1♥2....2♥.....4♥3
.Dbl...Pass...Pass...Rdbl4
Pass....4♠....Pass...Pass
.5♥.....Dbl...All Pass
1 Either clubs or balanced 11-13/17-19
2 transfer showing 4+ spades
3 splinter
4 first round control
David and Mike conceded an overtrick in their room (-750), Mike thinking later that he should really have passed 4♠.
In our room I started the defence with a spade to Alex's ace and he switched to the ♣7. Alex was trying to hide his distribution from declarer (as the ♣10 is the normal card) . I should work this out as declarer really must have the ♣K, but I misread it and thought Alex had three clubs. If he has three clubs then I can safely try to cash my ♠K but, in reality, this was an error that allowed declarer to get out for one down. We lost 11 IMPs instead of losing 6 IMPs.
We did bid a slam missed in the other room and had the better of the partscores to win 24:15 IMPs.
The team won the second match by 27:14 IMPs.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)