September marks the start of the new bridge season and my planning is well underway.
Local
I'll be defending my pairs title (label: rbs) with Reg at the Berwick Club. There are ten sessions with the best six counting, but I normally miss a few due to other commitments so the pressure is on every time we play. I also intend playing the club teams (label: scott) with Malcolm but will be unavailable for that until January.
Previously Hels and I have played in the Berwick Congress, but unfortunately this clashes with the Spring Foursomes this year.
District
Once again the district league will dominate as I play for the 49ers (label: 49ers). Once again I will be the floating player so appearances will depend on the availability of others. I may also play in the MacLaren Cup, the handicap competition for league teams.
A new event for this season will be the Atholl Cup. This is the district pivot teams and I am playing with Alan, Dee and Sam.
National
I am playing with David, Roy and Alex in the National Swiss Teams and Scottish Cup. I was Alex's substitute last year in the final of the Scottish Cup Plate but a 'proper' place is now available as line ups shuffle around.
There are two Congresses at Peebles (label: peebles). In the Autumn I am playing with Ian, Harry and Finlay - apparently I am the virtual Bill for this event. In the Gold Cup congress in December I am playing with Jenny, Tim and Sam.
In January there is the Stirling Pairs ... assuming I can find a partner.
In February, Alex and I are playing with Harry and Finlay in the Winter Foursomes and later in the month there is the Mixed Swiss Pairs and Mixed Swiss Teams weekend (a mixed person and team mates needed).
Then there appears to be a gap in the diary until the ranked pairs in June.
International
Alex and I have formed a new team with Harry and Finlay to play in the Gold Cup. It will be different as we'll be playing in Scotland.
Alex and I are still undecided whether to play in the EBU National Bracket Teams in January. Traditionally this event has been a Swiss Teams but has suffered from declining numbers at inaccessible locations. This new event may well suffer the same issues.
We are playing with Harry and Finlay again in the EBU Spring Foursomes (label: s4). This is the toughest event in the UK calendar and we always enjoy playing there.
The ACBL Summer Nationals are in Las Vegas next summer. We intend to be there.
Wednesday, 29 August 2007
Russell finale
The Russell Cup has one more week to go, but yesterday was my final attempt at improving my score as I will be introducing the new alerting rules (PDF) at Berwick next week.
I am playing with David in the Scottish Cup and the National Swiss Teams, so we used the evening as the start of our system discussion. My contribution was a preference for a strong 1NT. David provided the rest, including detailed notes for 1NT/2NT sequences, checkback and various defensive methods.
We played very steadily and were rewarded with a 62% score (my third 60+% score in succession). As always a stream of positives scores always does well and we took advantage of any slips from the opponents. However even doing the 'normal' thing seemed to bring bucketloads of matchpoints, so clearly a night for being steady. The final scores only had 8 of the 23 pairs above average, perhaps illustrating the random night that some were having.
Everyone did well on this hand to reach the par contract:
This contract went down two but we scored 15/20 mps - perhaps some played in spades and went down a lot more, but it does show how unfair the game can be - our opponents have obtained the best result possible, but only scored 25% on the board.
David found a good lead against Les on this hand:
We were conspicuously silent in the auction (unlike Sam who opened David's hand 3♣) but David simply led the ♣Q to set up an easy four tricks for us. This was worth 16/20 mps.
The previous board had set me a small bidding problem:
Your call?
With one week to go I actually lead the Russell with an average score of 61.99%. However there are a host of people who can overtake me with a good score, the favourites being Les (needs 60%) and Roy (58%) although Veronica (64%), Sam (65%) and a few who need more than 66% are still in the game.
I am playing with David in the Scottish Cup and the National Swiss Teams, so we used the evening as the start of our system discussion. My contribution was a preference for a strong 1NT. David provided the rest, including detailed notes for 1NT/2NT sequences, checkback and various defensive methods.
We played very steadily and were rewarded with a 62% score (my third 60+% score in succession). As always a stream of positives scores always does well and we took advantage of any slips from the opponents. However even doing the 'normal' thing seemed to bring bucketloads of matchpoints, so clearly a night for being steady. The final scores only had 8 of the 23 pairs above average, perhaps illustrating the random night that some were having.
Everyone did well on this hand to reach the par contract:
| ||||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
| West | North | East | South |
| David | Paul | ||
| 1♣ | 1♦ | ||
| 1♥ | 3♦ | 4♥ | 4♠ |
| 5♥ | p | p | 6♦ |
| X | p | p | p |
This contract went down two but we scored 15/20 mps - perhaps some played in spades and went down a lot more, but it does show how unfair the game can be - our opponents have obtained the best result possible, but only scored 25% on the board.
David found a good lead against Les on this hand:
| ||||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
| West | North | East | South |
| Paul | Les | David | Archie |
| p | 1♦ | ||
| p | 1♠ | p | 1NT |
| p | 4♠ | p | p |
| p |
We were conspicuously silent in the auction (unlike Sam who opened David's hand 3♣) but David simply led the ♣Q to set up an easy four tricks for us. This was worth 16/20 mps.
The previous board had set me a small bidding problem:
|
| West | North | East | South |
| Paul | Les | David | Archie |
| 3♥ | 3♠ | p | |
| ? |
Your call?
With one week to go I actually lead the Russell with an average score of 61.99%. However there are a host of people who can overtake me with a good score, the favourites being Les (needs 60%) and Roy (58%) although Veronica (64%), Sam (65%) and a few who need more than 66% are still in the game.
Thursday, 23 August 2007
I Love Lucy
Back to the club for another night in the Russell Cup and a game with Lucy. She is probably the first partner who has the ability to retaliate to my blog, as her husband writes the bridge column in the Scotland on Sunday paper, so I needed to ensure that all copy would put us in a good light.
We agreed, actually Lucy told me, a simple system. I don't think we actually agreed what discards meant, but that seemed to affect the opposition more than us. As I said afterwards, the best thing about a first-time partnership is that you try to avoid ambiguous bids: the second time you play there is some semblance of understanding and the rot sets in. The only contribution I made to the system was the FIDO (Forcing in Doubt) convention.
The abiding memory of the evening was the number of double bidding cards used. We played 30 boards and the final contract was doubled on 6 of them. As I mentioned to Lucy afterwards, this is often caused by someone not having their bid ...
Perhaps not everyone opened 1NT but the final contract was not stressful to play. I don't normally identify the opponents, but Brian and Sheila racked up 67% despite this board so they clearly had a great game.
Our round against Archie went normally: each side made a doubled partscore and then Dee played successfully in a suit that I had shown!
Finally, another example of how competitive matchpoints can be:
I was slightly concerned at the turn of events during the auction as I might have fewer values than Lucy expected, but when I got the diamonds right the contract was only one down for a good score.
Although we knew we'd had a reasonable session, we were both surprised and delighted to score 60.00% and this gives us both a good chance of finishing in the Cup prizes. I think this was Lucy's highest ever score in the Russell, despite playing with better players than me, but I'll look forward to beating it in next year's competition.
We agreed, actually Lucy told me, a simple system. I don't think we actually agreed what discards meant, but that seemed to affect the opposition more than us. As I said afterwards, the best thing about a first-time partnership is that you try to avoid ambiguous bids: the second time you play there is some semblance of understanding and the rot sets in. The only contribution I made to the system was the FIDO (Forcing in Doubt) convention.
The abiding memory of the evening was the number of double bidding cards used. We played 30 boards and the final contract was doubled on 6 of them. As I mentioned to Lucy afterwards, this is often caused by someone not having their bid ...
| ||||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
| West | North | East | South |
| Paul | Brian | Lucy | Sheila |
| 1NT | p | p | X |
| p | p | XX | p |
| 2♣ | p | p | X |
| p | p | p |
Perhaps not everyone opened 1NT but the final contract was not stressful to play. I don't normally identify the opponents, but Brian and Sheila racked up 67% despite this board so they clearly had a great game.
Our round against Archie went normally: each side made a doubled partscore and then Dee played successfully in a suit that I had shown!
Finally, another example of how competitive matchpoints can be:
| ||||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
| West | North | East | South |
| Paul | Lucy | ||
| 1♥ | |||
| X | 2♥ | X | 3♥ |
| p | p | X | p |
| 4♣ | X | p | p |
| p |
I was slightly concerned at the turn of events during the auction as I might have fewer values than Lucy expected, but when I got the diamonds right the contract was only one down for a good score.
Although we knew we'd had a reasonable session, we were both surprised and delighted to score 60.00% and this gives us both a good chance of finishing in the Cup prizes. I think this was Lucy's highest ever score in the Russell, despite playing with better players than me, but I'll look forward to beating it in next year's competition.
Wednesday, 22 August 2007
Brighton finals day
The B final seemed to have quite a good field when we saw the other teams, so we knew it was going to be tough.
We started against the German team and I thought we'd won this match. They had a bidding misunderstanding and missed a game on the second board, and missed another game on the seventh board. We did gain on the first of these, but somehow lost more on the second. Looking at the hand records I can only surmise that our team mates were doubled in a slam off two cashing tricks, but whatever it was still a 9-11 VPs (2 IMPs) loss.
The second match was against the eventual winners, LIGGINS. I had a bidding aberration on board 10, playing in part score with a cold slam available, and then we played a game contract from the wrong side (a little unluckily) and this, together with a couple of part score losses, meant a 2-18 VP scoreline. Not the start we wanted, but we had one small success:
Alex's aggressive effort kept them out of the auction and the contract made when the diamonds were well positioned. This friendly lie of the diamonds for us meant that John and Martin's 4♥ contract was doomed, but we still gained 11 IMPs.
Our third match featured more poor bridge. Alex and I misdefended a game contract (-12 IMPs) and then both pairs did poorly on 24 - we bid a phantom sacrifice and Martin/John bid to the five level over the same phantom, so we lost -14 IMPs in a real team effort. Alex and I did do a number of good things so we reduced the deficit to 7 IMPs but still a 6-14 VP loss.
Time for a break, coffee and cookies.
Next up was ALLFREY, who features Robson, Forrester and Bakhshi. The key was board 5 where we gained 14 IMPs:
1 Transfer to clubs, may be weak
After the spade lead I played carefully to make the contract. And slowly (as Andy is not the quickest player). A trump lead would have beaten the contract but impossible to find that here.
I did not hear the auction at the other table, but North-South finished in 3NT!
Robson made a thin slam on the last board but we'd won all the part score battles and got a 14-6 VP win.
We then played BYRNE. This is a team that has started to do very well with junior and recent ex-junior players, but we got everything right for a 20-0 VP win. Martin and John did well to bid the following cards to the club grand slam for 11 IMPs:
A couple of boards later and a real distributional monster. As Byrne said, it is unusual to hold an ace and a king, hear your partner open a STRONG 1NT, and then find the opponents are making slam tries! The hand was:
1 Majors
2 Splinter
3 First round club control
I thought I had the tougher decision over 5♦. Clearly this is a slam try, but I decided that I had already shown some values by redoubling with the club ace. If I had no major fit then I probably would not have done that. Within that context I did not have a great hand, so we finished in the best spot.
Well, almost the best. Martin and John understandably doubled the same contract so we lost 6 IMPs.
The penultimate match was against ROSEN. This was all decided on a normal game hand that Rosen overbid to slam and so we won by 12 IMPs (15-5 VPs).
Our final match was against the weakest team, but Alex and I bid to a poor slam and Martin and John let a silly game through, so we slumped to a disappointing 7-13 VP loss.
We finished in 5th place, scoring 73/140 VPs. A disappointing result as we could have done a lot better.
We started against the German team and I thought we'd won this match. They had a bidding misunderstanding and missed a game on the second board, and missed another game on the seventh board. We did gain on the first of these, but somehow lost more on the second. Looking at the hand records I can only surmise that our team mates were doubled in a slam off two cashing tricks, but whatever it was still a 9-11 VPs (2 IMPs) loss.
The second match was against the eventual winners, LIGGINS. I had a bidding aberration on board 10, playing in part score with a cold slam available, and then we played a game contract from the wrong side (a little unluckily) and this, together with a couple of part score losses, meant a 2-18 VP scoreline. Not the start we wanted, but we had one small success:
| ||||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
| West | North | East | South |
| Armstrong | Alex | Burn | Paul |
| 2♠ | p | 4♠ | |
| p | p | p |
Alex's aggressive effort kept them out of the auction and the contract made when the diamonds were well positioned. This friendly lie of the diamonds for us meant that John and Martin's 4♥ contract was doomed, but we still gained 11 IMPs.
Our third match featured more poor bridge. Alex and I misdefended a game contract (-12 IMPs) and then both pairs did poorly on 24 - we bid a phantom sacrifice and Martin/John bid to the five level over the same phantom, so we lost -14 IMPs in a real team effort. Alex and I did do a number of good things so we reduced the deficit to 7 IMPs but still a 6-14 VP loss.
Time for a break, coffee and cookies.
Next up was ALLFREY, who features Robson, Forrester and Bakhshi. The key was board 5 where we gained 14 IMPs:
| ||||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
| West | North | East | South |
| Robson | Alex | Allfrey | Paul |
| 1♦ | 1♠ | 1NT1 | |
| 4♥ | p | p | 5♣ |
| p | p | p |
After the spade lead I played carefully to make the contract. And slowly (as Andy is not the quickest player). A trump lead would have beaten the contract but impossible to find that here.
I did not hear the auction at the other table, but North-South finished in 3NT!
Robson made a thin slam on the last board but we'd won all the part score battles and got a 14-6 VP win.
We then played BYRNE. This is a team that has started to do very well with junior and recent ex-junior players, but we got everything right for a 20-0 VP win. Martin and John did well to bid the following cards to the club grand slam for 11 IMPs:
|
|
A couple of boards later and a real distributional monster. As Byrne said, it is unusual to hold an ace and a king, hear your partner open a STRONG 1NT, and then find the opponents are making slam tries! The hand was:
| ||||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
| West | North | East | South |
| Woodcock | Alex | Byrne | Paul |
| p | p | ||
| 1NT(15-17) | 2♣2 | p | 2♠ |
| p | 4♣3 | X | XX | 1
| 5♣ | 5♦ | p | 5♠ |
| p | p | p |
2 Splinter
3 First round club control
I thought I had the tougher decision over 5♦. Clearly this is a slam try, but I decided that I had already shown some values by redoubling with the club ace. If I had no major fit then I probably would not have done that. Within that context I did not have a great hand, so we finished in the best spot.
Well, almost the best. Martin and John understandably doubled the same contract so we lost 6 IMPs.
The penultimate match was against ROSEN. This was all decided on a normal game hand that Rosen overbid to slam and so we won by 12 IMPs (15-5 VPs).
Our final match was against the weakest team, but Alex and I bid to a poor slam and Martin and John let a silly game through, so we slumped to a disappointing 7-13 VP loss.
We finished in 5th place, scoring 73/140 VPs. A disappointing result as we could have done a lot better.
Brighton teams - moving back day
Having got ourselves onto table 1 at the start of Saturday evening, we beat the leaders in a tight match to lead the event with two qualifying matches to go.
Then we blew it. We lost 0-20 VPs to the Ireland Open Team when we:
So on Sunday we would compete in the B final, but it was very disappointing not to have done better.
Then we blew it. We lost 0-20 VPs to the Ireland Open Team when we:
- bid and made a poor slam, replicated by Hanlon/McGann
- sacrificed against a non-making game
- misplayed a game contract (Hanlon making no such mistake)
- misdefended a game contract (as did some others, but it was still poor)
So on Sunday we would compete in the B final, but it was very disappointing not to have done better.
Tuesday, 21 August 2007
Brighton teams - moving day
Saturday is moving day in the Swiss Teams. It is essential to have a good afternoon and give yourself a chance of finishing in the top 8 at the end of the day, or at least in the top 16. These teams are taken to the Four Stars finals (A and B) on Sunday and escape the humdrum Swiss of Sunday afternoon.
In a change to recent years, we played well in the afternoon, won all our matches and scored 69/80 VPs. Board 7 provoked some discussion:
After a little thought I found the diamond lead necessary to beat 4♥ and felt pretty pleased with myself. Martin and John, team mates, later pointed out that Alex and I could make 5♠, but I still do not think that overcalling with my hand, opposite a passed partner, is a winning proposition. However at their table South opened 1♠ and they bid up to 5♥. Luckily North led a spade, allowing the club loser to be discarded, for a 13 IMP gain.
In the last match of the afternoon we played OSBORNE, who would go on to win the Four Stars A Final on the following day. We got a big swing when Alex's lead against 3NT gave declarer some losing options that he took (10 IMPs) and then the danger of hesitating, and subsequently passing, were highlighted:
1 3-8 points, 4+ hearts, 4+ spades
2 long hesitation
West's long hesitation created a problem for East who, being one of the most ethical players around, took the ethical decision to pass. Missing 3NT cost them 11 IMPs.
We finished the afternoon in second place on 113/140 VPs.
In a change to recent years, we played well in the afternoon, won all our matches and scored 69/80 VPs. Board 7 provoked some discussion:
| ||||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
| West | North | East | South |
| Paul | Alex | ||
| p | |||
| 1NT (12-14) | p | 2♦ | p |
| 2♥ | p | 4♥ | p |
| p | p |
After a little thought I found the diamond lead necessary to beat 4♥ and felt pretty pleased with myself. Martin and John, team mates, later pointed out that Alex and I could make 5♠, but I still do not think that overcalling with my hand, opposite a passed partner, is a winning proposition. However at their table South opened 1♠ and they bid up to 5♥. Luckily North led a spade, allowing the club loser to be discarded, for a 13 IMP gain.
In the last match of the afternoon we played OSBORNE, who would go on to win the Four Stars A Final on the following day. We got a big swing when Alex's lead against 3NT gave declarer some losing options that he took (10 IMPs) and then the danger of hesitating, and subsequently passing, were highlighted:
| ||||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
| West | North | East | South |
| Paul | Alex | ||
| 2♥1 | p | 3♠ | |
| p2 | p | p |
1 3-8 points, 4+ hearts, 4+ spades
2 long hesitation
West's long hesitation created a problem for East who, being one of the most ethical players around, took the ethical decision to pass. Missing 3NT cost them 11 IMPs.
We finished the afternoon in second place on 113/140 VPs.
Brighton teams - session one
We'd driven down to Brighton on Friday morning as I was attending the EBU's Appeals Committee (AC) seminar. We don't have many appeals in Scotland (the estimate was one per weekend) so there are not a lot of experienced AC members, and as I am interested in this topic I said that I'd attend with Liz.
In the evening the main event started. We won our first two matches without conceding an IMP but lost the final match by 15 IMPs to be on 44/60 VPs overnight.
In the second match we played NAQVI. They would go on to win the Brighton Bowl so I'm sure our 20-0 VP victory helped position them well. This defence caught the eye:
I made a good start when I led the ♥2 rather than the ♥10. Alex won the ♥K and switched to the ♠9. Declarer won this in hand and led the ♣J, but I rose with the ♣A to lead the ♥10. Alex unblocked the ♥7 on the return and we beat the contract by two tricks. At the other table a less revealing auction left East playing 3NT and the defence was unable to take all their tricks for an 11 IMP gain.
We were more fortunate to gain when we bid the following hand to slam:
1 Either hearts or game-forcing with both minors
2 5+ hearts, 4+ clubs, invitational values or better
3 Keycard Blackwood for hearts
4 2 of 5 keycards and the queen of trumps (sic)
Problems in the trump suit were resolved with the small heart lead, and so we gained another 11 IMPs.
In the evening the main event started. We won our first two matches without conceding an IMP but lost the final match by 15 IMPs to be on 44/60 VPs overnight.
In the second match we played NAQVI. They would go on to win the Brighton Bowl so I'm sure our 20-0 VP victory helped position them well. This defence caught the eye:
| ||||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
| West | North | East | South |
| Paul | Alex | ||
| p | |||
| 1♣ | p | 1♦ | p |
| 1♠ | p | 2♥! | p |
| 3♣ | p | 3♥ | p |
| 3NT | p | p | p |
I made a good start when I led the ♥2 rather than the ♥10. Alex won the ♥K and switched to the ♠9. Declarer won this in hand and led the ♣J, but I rose with the ♣A to lead the ♥10. Alex unblocked the ♥7 on the return and we beat the contract by two tricks. At the other table a less revealing auction left East playing 3NT and the defence was unable to take all their tricks for an 11 IMP gain.
We were more fortunate to gain when we bid the following hand to slam:
| ||||||||
|
| West | North | East | South |
| Paul | Alex | ||
| 1NT | |||
| p | 2♦1 | p | 2♥ |
| p | 2NT2 | p | 4♥ |
| p | 4♠3 | p | 5♥4 |
| p | 6♥ | p | p |
| p |
2 5+ hearts, 4+ clubs, invitational values or better
3 Keycard Blackwood for hearts
4 2 of 5 keycards and the queen of trumps (sic)
Problems in the trump suit were resolved with the small heart lead, and so we gained another 11 IMPs.
Monday, 20 August 2007
Brighton teams summary
I'll write up some hands over the next few days so I'll just note how friends and I performed over the weekend. The top 16 teams on Saturday evening play in the Four Stars finals on Sunday and the rest continue in the Swiss.
70 VPs is average
70 VPs is average
140 VPs is average
| Posn | Four Stars A Final (8 teams) | VPs |
| 1 | Frances, Jeffrey, Graham and Peter | 98 |
| 2 | Tim, Filip, Heather and Rob | 81 |
| 5 | Ireland Open Team (Shanghai-bound) | 66 |
70 VPs is average
| Posn | Four Stars B Final (8 teams) | VPs |
| 5 | Paul, Alex, John and Martin | 73 |
70 VPs is average
| Posn | Brighton Bowl (remaining 168 teams) | VPs |
| 8 | Alex, Tony, Liz and David | 175 |
| 26 | Nigel, David, Bob and Pat | 160 |
| 32= | Steve, David, Nathan and Chris | 156 |
| 45= | Graham, Anne, Monica and Maggie | 149 |
| 58 | Ben, Mike, Ed and Tom | 146.5 |
| 77 | Sam, Diana, Dee and Alan | 139 |
140 VPs is average
Wednesday, 15 August 2007
Interlude
I am playing with Ian in the Autumn Congress in Peebles so we had a practice game in the Russell Cup. We'd agreed to play 2/1 with a few gadgets, but more important was to get some defensive harmony and an idea of bidding style.
It seemed to go quite well as we finished top with 65%. We took most of our tricks on defence, most of the tricks when playing the hands and we both bid aggressively in competition. This is a winning strategy but it can always go wrong on the night.
Like all partnerships, especially new ones, hands will come up that lead to the question of "what is standard in this situation?". For example,
A simple reverse auction, but what is standard now? Is 2♠ forcing? Should I bid 2NT with this hand to show a good diamond stop and give partner the chance to support spades, or is it Lebensohl (as some play), or is it non-forcing too? If I bid fourth suit forcing, will we reach 3NT when it's right? I'm a passed hand, does that change the meaning of any of the bids?
Eventually I decided to go for the pragmatic 3NT. Ian did have three spades but a slight defensive error meant that I made twelve tricks for a good score, and 3NT was always likely to make more tricks than spades.
We've now agreed that the only non-forcing bids are a return to opener's first suit, and a rebid of responder's suit. So 2NT is probably the best call on the hand.
I'm off to Brighton for the weekend to play in the teams event. Limited internet access probably means no posts until Monday.
It seemed to go quite well as we finished top with 65%. We took most of our tricks on defence, most of the tricks when playing the hands and we both bid aggressively in competition. This is a winning strategy but it can always go wrong on the night.
Like all partnerships, especially new ones, hands will come up that lead to the question of "what is standard in this situation?". For example,
|
| West | North | East | South |
| Ian | Paul | ||
| p | p | ||
| p | 1♣ | p | 1♠ |
| p | 2♥ | p | ? |
A simple reverse auction, but what is standard now? Is 2♠ forcing? Should I bid 2NT with this hand to show a good diamond stop and give partner the chance to support spades, or is it Lebensohl (as some play), or is it non-forcing too? If I bid fourth suit forcing, will we reach 3NT when it's right? I'm a passed hand, does that change the meaning of any of the bids?
Eventually I decided to go for the pragmatic 3NT. Ian did have three spades but a slight defensive error meant that I made twelve tricks for a good score, and 3NT was always likely to make more tricks than spades.
We've now agreed that the only non-forcing bids are a return to opener's first suit, and a rebid of responder's suit. So 2NT is probably the best call on the hand.
I'm off to Brighton for the weekend to play in the teams event. Limited internet access probably means no posts until Monday.
Tuesday, 14 August 2007
World Bridge Championships
The World Bridge Championships are being held in Shanghai, September 29-October 13. Thanks to the Chinese federation there will be extensive vugraph coverage on BBO although the time difference is a problem for those of us in Europe. Even so, I'm sure all vugraph records will be broken.
Gerben is running a non-contributory, non-prized sweepstake to name the top teams in the Bermuda Bowl, Venice Cup and Seniors Bowl. If you are interested, then follow these instructions - closing date is September 29.
Information on the teams, and everything else about the event, can be found on the ECatsBridge site.
Good luck!
Gerben is running a non-contributory, non-prized sweepstake to name the top teams in the Bermuda Bowl, Venice Cup and Seniors Bowl. If you are interested, then follow these instructions - closing date is September 29.
Information on the teams, and everything else about the event, can be found on the ECatsBridge site.
Good luck!
Sunday, 12 August 2007
Irish win Brighton Pairs
Tom Hanlon and Hugh McGann, who we met in Nashville, won the Brighton Swiss Pairs in what must have been a tense finish. The top three tables appear to have fairly flat matches and so a 8-12 VP loss was enough for the Irish to win by 6 VPs.
140 VPs is average
| Posn | VPs | |
| 3 | John and Andy | 198 |
| 13 | Tim and Filip | 185 |
| 19= | Tony and Alex | 181 |
| 39= | Martin and Cameron | 174 |
| 41= | Sam and Dee | 173 |
| 80= | Mike and Tom | 164 |
| 106= | Bill and Alex | 159 |
| 113= | Frances and Jeffrey | 158 |
| 131= | Nigel and David | 155 |
| 184= | Lorne and Gordon | 148 |
140 VPs is average
Brighton Pairs with four matches to go
After ten matches with four to go this afternoon (100 VPs is average):
| 3 | John and Andy | 152 |
| 23= | Tony and Alex | 135 |
| 33= | Martin and Cameron | 131 |
| 43= | Bill and Alex | 128 |
| 48= | Sam and Dee | 127 |
| 51= | Tim and Filip | 126 |
| 65= | Mike and Tom | 122 |
| 91= | Nigel and David | 118 |
| 102= | Frances and Jeffrey | 117 |
| 169= | Lorne and Gordon | 108 |
Saturday, 11 August 2007
Brighton after seven matches
Friends and acquaintances are still doing reasonably well after the seven matches (max score 140 VPs):
| 1 | John and Andy | 118 |
| 4= | Martin and Cameron | 111 |
| 21= | Sam and Dee | 99 |
| 29= | Lorne and Gordon | 97 |
| 36 | Bill and Alex | 96 |
| 61= | Mike and Tom | 90 |
| 75= | Frances and Jeffrey | 88 |
| 129= | Nigel and David | 80 |
| 250= | Tim and Filip | 69 |
Brighton Swiss Pairs after session 1
Friends and acquaintances are doing reasonably well after the first three matches (max score is 60 VPs), but the first two rounds are random so only one round of Swiss has been played:
There are 497 pairs.
There is a long way to go and seven matches today, so positions tomorrow morning will tell us how they are really playing.
| 3= | John and Andy | 56 |
| 8= | Martin and Cameron | 54 |
| 12= | Bill and Alex | 53 |
| 22= | Sam and Dee | 50 |
| 32= | Tim and Filip | 47 |
| 46= | Lorne and Gordon | 45 |
| 46= | Frances and Jeffrey | 45 |
| 57= | Mike and Tom | 42 |
| 415= | Nigel and David | 19 |
There are 497 pairs.
There is a long way to go and seven matches today, so positions tomorrow morning will tell us how they are really playing.
Friday, 10 August 2007
English summer congress
The English Bridge Union's Summer Congress starts today in Brighton. It has two principal events: the first weekend is a 14-round single section Swiss Pairs (8 boards of matchpoints converted to VPs); the second weekend is a 14-round single section Swiss Teams where the top sixteen teams after 10 rounds are taken out to all-play-all 8-team finals.
I'm only playing the second weekend but will be following the progress of partners and teammates Sam and Dee in the pairs (a new partnership I believe). Next weekend their regular CHOs fly in for the teams.
Although marketed as the largest congress in Europe, it does not compare with the scale of the ACBL National tournaments (or even with some of its regionals)
I'm only playing the second weekend but will be following the progress of partners and teammates Sam and Dee in the pairs (a new partnership I believe). Next weekend their regular CHOs fly in for the teams.
Although marketed as the largest congress in Europe, it does not compare with the scale of the ACBL National tournaments (or even with some of its regionals)
- in Nashville, over 4800 people won masterpoints; in Brighton I'm sure that the EBU will be happy with 1000.
- there is only ONE event per weekend; in Nashville there were multiple events every day.
- there is really only one event per day during the intervening week, with very small fields. People do not come in for these events.
- however, the ACBL will not have a single section as large as the Brighton fields.
- lack of top players. The NABCs feature the best players in the world, whereas Brighton will not even feature the top UK players in established partnerships.
- standard - the standard at Brighton drops dramatically after the top teams. In the US it degrades far slower.
- however Brighton has a beach, that in a million years will be sandy!
Wednesday, 8 August 2007
A state of confusion
I played with Alan in the Russell Cup last night. Alan is Dee's regular partner and we'd agreed to play a similar system (based on their normal methods).
In my game with Dee little of the system actually came up. This time we spent the entire evening trying to decipher auctions that were related to, but not precisely covered in, the system. Unfortunately we were largely unsuccessful, and we could have played better too.
We had good/bad accidents, cue bid woes, Lebensohl views and 'strength' issues. I also bid quite aggressively (surprise!) in the first few boards. This probably did not help a lot either. So we did not end up with a scoring (for the Cup) evening but we maintained good humour throughout.
One hand was the subject of discussion later. How do you handle this hand?
1 weak
If you double, then partner will bid 2NT - Lebensohl (puppet to 3♣), either (1) weak sign-off in a minor (2) invitational in spades or (3) values for 3NT without a stop.
What is your initial action, and if you double what do you bid over 2NT?
Comments welcome.
Edit: you can read the views of experts, BBO experts and other contributors on this problem in the BBO Forums.
In my game with Dee little of the system actually came up. This time we spent the entire evening trying to decipher auctions that were related to, but not precisely covered in, the system. Unfortunately we were largely unsuccessful, and we could have played better too.
We had good/bad accidents, cue bid woes, Lebensohl views and 'strength' issues. I also bid quite aggressively (surprise!) in the first few boards. This probably did not help a lot either. So we did not end up with a scoring (for the Cup) evening but we maintained good humour throughout.
One hand was the subject of discussion later. How do you handle this hand?
|
| West | North | East | South |
| Alan | Paul | ||
| 2♥1 | ? | ||
If you double, then partner will bid 2NT - Lebensohl (puppet to 3♣), either (1) weak sign-off in a minor (2) invitational in spades or (3) values for 3NT without a stop.
What is your initial action, and if you double what do you bid over 2NT?
Comments welcome.
Edit: you can read the views of experts, BBO experts and other contributors on this problem in the BBO Forums.
Wednesday, 1 August 2007
Final thoughts on Nashville
We had a good time.
Taking friends gave an extra dimension that I thoroughly enjoyed, so thanks to Sam and Diana for coming. Previously we have either arranged partners beforehand, through the partnership chair or over the Internet, and this has worked both well (e.g., Han, Jason) and poorly (some others).
This time, the four of us being together for a long week and playing continuously really helped make it a memorable trip.
On the bridge front it was disappointing not to get through the first round of the Spingold, especially as we would have played Fred Gitelman the following day. We did get the chance to win the Sunday Swiss, but lost to Jeff Meckstroth and Sally, Donna & Eric Rodwell in the final round.
The girls' most memorable match was against Dano De Falco, a member of the legendary Blue Team. It did not start well when his partner, Patricia Cayne, arrived at the table saying that she could not play against us (Alex & I) but facing a more natural system it was apparently a really friendly affair. At the other table we played Charlie Weed (weedo) and Gabry Olivieri and had a similarly good time. Plus we won handsomely. And I only told the girls who Dano was after the match.
We did win a consolation compact knockout bracket but otherwise we seemed to lose quite a few matches by a single digit number of IMPs. Once again the average standard of play seemed a lot higher in the USA and mistakes rarely go unpunished. We now need to take this standard we've got to into the next major tournament (which is Brighton later this month).
As always we got to watch a lot of good bridge but fewer Italians this year as they were despatched early on. Our friend, Ulf, got to the Spingold semi-final before meeting the Nickell machine but I'm sure he would have taken top 4 finishes in both the Spingold and European Open at the start of the year.
Nashville was not a memorable place, except for the country music that gets blared around the downtown area from bars and municipal speakers. I much preferred Chicago. In the end I suppose it made little difference as we only ever ventured out to eat and drink with little time or interest in sightseeing.
Roll on Las Vegas next summer!
Taking friends gave an extra dimension that I thoroughly enjoyed, so thanks to Sam and Diana for coming. Previously we have either arranged partners beforehand, through the partnership chair or over the Internet, and this has worked both well (e.g., Han, Jason) and poorly (some others).
This time, the four of us being together for a long week and playing continuously really helped make it a memorable trip.
On the bridge front it was disappointing not to get through the first round of the Spingold, especially as we would have played Fred Gitelman the following day. We did get the chance to win the Sunday Swiss, but lost to Jeff Meckstroth and Sally, Donna & Eric Rodwell in the final round.
The girls' most memorable match was against Dano De Falco, a member of the legendary Blue Team. It did not start well when his partner, Patricia Cayne, arrived at the table saying that she could not play against us (Alex & I) but facing a more natural system it was apparently a really friendly affair. At the other table we played Charlie Weed (weedo) and Gabry Olivieri and had a similarly good time. Plus we won handsomely. And I only told the girls who Dano was after the match.
We did win a consolation compact knockout bracket but otherwise we seemed to lose quite a few matches by a single digit number of IMPs. Once again the average standard of play seemed a lot higher in the USA and mistakes rarely go unpunished. We now need to take this standard we've got to into the next major tournament (which is Brighton later this month).
As always we got to watch a lot of good bridge but fewer Italians this year as they were despatched early on. Our friend, Ulf, got to the Spingold semi-final before meeting the Nickell machine but I'm sure he would have taken top 4 finishes in both the Spingold and European Open at the start of the year.
Nashville was not a memorable place, except for the country music that gets blared around the downtown area from bars and municipal speakers. I much preferred Chicago. In the end I suppose it made little difference as we only ever ventured out to eat and drink with little time or interest in sightseeing.
Roll on Las Vegas next summer!
Food and drink
Our favourite restaurant in Nashville was the Big River Grille and Brewing Works on Broadway. The Sweet Magnolia Ribs and Dry-rubbed Chicken was the most popular entree, Nashville Steamer the best locally-brewed ale, and there were a fair number of Raspberry Iced Teas and Lemon-drop Martinis consumed too.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)