- Saturday Morn - November 25, 2017

? Explanation of report features  
Download hands in PDF or PBN format (Right click and choose “Save Link As...” in Firefox or “Save Target As...” in IE)
Jump directly to board 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Field strength:  Mean: 958 MP  Geomean: 429 MP
(based on 12 players)
★ ★ ★  Masterpoint Winners  ★ ★ ★
Partnership Pct Rank MP
Judith Ritchie - Sharyn Siebert 60.00 1st A 1.00
Carol Maggipinto - Mark Maggipinto 59.00 2nd A 0.70
Doris Jones - Elizabeth Sebring 48.00 2nd B 0.45
EVENT>Sat Morning Open Game    |SESSION>Saturday Morn|SECTION> O
------------------------,------ ------------,-------- --------------------------
DATE>November 25, 2017  |CLUB NO.>150680    | 11/25/2017 14:39
---------------------,-- ------------------- -------------,---------------------
DIR> Alan Hedegard   |RATING>Club Masterpoint (100%, 80%, 70% Open)|MOVEMENT>ONE WINNER
------------,-------- ,-------------------------,--------- ---------------------
AVE>   25.0 |TOP>   2 |MP LIMITS>None/500/200   |CLUB>H & H  Saturday
------------ --------- ------------------------- -------------------------------
PAIRS IN STRAT A=6/B=4/C=3                       ,---,-------------------------,------,---------,
-------------------------------------------------|   |           Section       |      |Section  |
No Name                   Name                   |Flt|Rnk-A|Rnk-B|Rnk-C| Score | Pct  |Awards   |
------------------------------------------------- --- ----- ----- ----- ------- ------ ---------
 1 Peter De Gregorio      Richard Papst            B    .     .     .     22.50  45.00
 2 Judith Ritchie         Sharyn Siebert           C    1     1     1     30.00  60.00  1.00(A)
 3 Elizabeth Sebring      Doris Jones              C    .     2     .     24.00  48.00  0.45(B)
 4 Carol Maggipinto       Mark Maggipinto          A    2     .     .     29.50  59.00  0.70(A)
 5 Keith Hedlund          Joan Roberts             C    .     .     .     23.50  47.00
 6 Elizabeth Nasr         Michel Nasr              A    .     .     .     20.50  41.00
                                          Totals                         150.00

Hands and Results
1 ♠Q954
KQ
J973
♣Q82
Dlr: North
Vul: None
♠32
J84
T6
♣JT9754
♠KJ87
A9752
AK
♣AK
♠AT6
T63
Q8542
♣63
10
222
6
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1/-
       ♣3 ♦7/6 ♥4/3 ♠6/5 NT4
EW: 4♣ 3 1♠ 2NT  ♦6
LoTT: 17 - 17 = 0
Par: -140 3-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
   50          1.50   0.50  2N E -1   4  O4-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs O2-Ritchie-Siebert
   50          1.50   0.50  2N E -1   4  O5-Hedlund-Roberts vs O3-Sebring-Jones
        420    0.00   2.00  4 E      ♣3  O6-Nasr-Nasr vs O1-De Gregorio-Papst

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis

All EW pairs are destined for unhappy minus scores on this board. Those who achieve plus scores will have been overly pessimistic or West will have violated the forcing nature of the 2 opener.

I'd admire any East player who downgrades the AK and the AK each by one "point," but that still leaves a 2 opener with 5 1/2 quick tricks, nine controls, and length in both major suits. No, 1 is too much of a downgrade, even though it is certainly true that an AK doubleton is a waste of strength. Think of it this way: A trick is worth 2 1/2 - 3 points, (divide 26 for game by 10 tricks in either major), and if you trade back the two tricks in an AK doubleton suit, you get between 5.2 and 6 points for an AK. That's the same as downgrading.

Typically three card support to a minor honor is enough to give game a whirl opposite a 2 opener with a 2 or 2 rebid, so even those who use 2 as a double negative response to 2 will feel an obligation (after using up valuable bidding space) to bid game after 2 - 2(?); 3.

The problem with the hand is still the wasted minor honor strength and the lack of major suit intermediates.

It could be worse -- a bad trump break would be a really bad break.

Not a good way to start the day.



****************************************
Comments? Questions?

CLICK HERE to submit a question or join the BridgeWinners.com board discussion.

CLICK HERE or email me directly at rcraigh@aol.com

2 ♠JT72
A
Q9
♣KJ9865
Dlr: East
Vul: N-S
♠K8643
Q9874
32
♣2
♠AQ5
T63
KJT654
♣4
♠9
KJ52
A87
♣AQT73
11
510
14
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 6♣ 3NT  ♦6/5 ♥5 ♠5
EW: 1 1♠  ♣1 ♦6 NT4
LoTT: 19 - 19 = 0
Par: +1100 6♠*-EW/6*-EW-5
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  620          2.00   0.00  5♣ S +1   3  O5-Hedlund-Roberts vs O3-Sebring-Jones
         90    1.00   1.00  2 E      ♠9  O4-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs O2-Ritchie-Siebert
        110    0.00   2.00  3 E      ♠9  O6-Nasr-Nasr vs O1-De Gregorio-Papst

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
  12
Dbl2!Dbl3!
Pass3Pass3
Pass5PassPass?
Pass   

NS may sniff at slam, but can they really "see" the diamond and heart shortness in the North hand, combining forces for an essential diamond discard on the K? I don't quite think it can be reasoned out, despite the mutual cue bidding exercises. Perhaps some will simply bid the slam on their high evaluation of the hand plus optimism rather than final analytical conclusion.

Or perhaps North can emphasize the value of the heart shortness by bidding 4 over 3. THAT would do it.



****************************************
Comments? Questions?

CLICK HERE to submit a question or join the BridgeWinners.com board discussion.

CLICK HERE or email me directly at rcraigh@aol.com

3 ♠J
K76
J9753
♣AQ86
Dlr: South
Vul: E-W
♠983
QJT8
KQ82
♣J5
♠AKQ6
A5
AT
♣K9432
♠T7542
9432
64
♣T7
11
920
0
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣3 ♦4 ♥3 ♠3 NT3
EW: 4♣ 3 4 4♠ 4NT
LoTT: 14 - 14 = 0
Par: -630 4NT-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  300          2.00   0.00  3N E -3   ♠7  O6-Nasr-Nasr vs O1-De Gregorio-Papst
        140    1.00   1.00  2♠ W +1   ♣T  O4-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs O2-Ritchie-Siebert
        600    0.00   2.00  3N E      ♠4  O5-Hedlund-Roberts vs O3-Sebring-Jones

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
   Pass
Pass1DblPass
1Pass2Pass
2NTPass3NTAll pass

There is not much to be said for a 1 opening bid in the North hand. It does not provide any lead-directional value, it does not protect against missing a major suit contract, and it does open the door for an easy entry to the spade suit. So passing is not a bad idea at all. However, there is one small point in favor of the 1 opening bid. It creates a bit of a concern to the opponents who might have game values and no major suit fit. There might be a bit of a snag for many less experienced players to find a satisfactory degree of stopper confidence.

Without the 1 opening bid, the auction is a smooth 2NT opening bid followed by Stayman, a denial, and 3NT. Easy-peasy. The inconvenience to the opponents is shown in the bidding diagram, where a double and cue bid are required for respectable bidding.

As a result, expect about 60% for being in 3NT making, and higher for taking the maximum ten tricks.



****************************************
Comments? Questions?

CLICK HERE to submit a question or join the BridgeWinners.com board discussion.

CLICK HERE or email me directly at rcraigh@aol.com

4 ♠Q7
97
QT753
♣J432
Dlr: West
Vul: Both
♠42
J65
J82
♣AQT76
♠K985
K82
AK4
♣985
♠AJT63
AQT43
96
♣K
5
813
14
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1♣ 1 2 1♠  NT6
EW:  ♣6 ♦5/4 ♥5 ♠5/4 NT6
LoTT: 14 - 15 = -1
Par: +110 2-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  300          2.00   0.00  3♣ E -3   9  O4-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs O2-Ritchie-Siebert
        100    1.00   1.00  2 S -1   ♣A  O6-Nasr-Nasr vs O1-De Gregorio-Papst
        200    0.00   2.00  3♠ S -2   ♣A  O5-Hedlund-Roberts vs O3-Sebring-Jones

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
PassPass121
3PassPass3
All pass   
  1. Michaels

Woe betide the play who rebids his values! South should have kept quiet over 3! After all, he did show his general hand, and the K is of no worth at all on this auction, so 3 is bid with three anticipated minor losers and a dummy which will produce no fit and few values.

Want to rethink 3? Those values will take tricks on defense, and the K gets in the way of the opponents, creating a defensive winner for North's Jxxx.

Yes, bid your hand once and subside unless invited to the party.



****************************************
Comments? Questions?

CLICK HERE to submit a question or join the BridgeWinners.com board discussion.

CLICK HERE or email me directly at rcraigh@aol.com

5 ♠QT9
Q863
AQ
♣QJ64
Dlr: North
Vul: N-S
♠J73
AKT4
9542
♣K3
♠K52
952
K87
♣9872
♠A864
J7
JT63
♣AT5
13
116
10
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2♣ 1/2 1 2♠ 2NT
EW:  ♣5 ♦5 ♥5/6 ♠5 NT5
LoTT: 14 - 14 = 0
Par: +120 2NT-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  100          2.00   0.00  1N E -2   3  O6-Nasr-Nasr vs O1-De Gregorio-Papst
   90          1.00   1.00  1N N      ♣9  O5-Hedlund-Roberts vs O3-Sebring-Jones
        100    0.00   2.00  3♠ S -1   A  O4-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs O2-Ritchie-Siebert

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
 1Pass1
Pass1NTAll pass 

The tide toward ignoring the diamond suit without general purpose is rising. Not many will bid 1 with the South hand, for then the entire first level will have been filled with meaningless bids ending in 1NT from the North chair: 1 1 1 1 1NT should have more meaning that a hand such as this. Consider the more efficient quick exploration shown in the bidding diagram: North opens, South admits to holding spades, and North rebids 1NT -- finis. Now the defense has to figure out the hand without a road map. Meanwhile, the other auction gains meaning, but that story is for another day.

EW might have to defend quite well to hold this contract to eight tricks. Specifically, the heart suit will provide three tricks for the defense if East leads a low heart and West plays three rounds, East retaining the 9 until the bitter end. But the defense can, alternatively, sit and wait for its tricks, taking two minor kings, one spade, and the AK. 120 should be fairly common for NS, but some will fare better, a very few worse.



****************************************
Comments? Questions?

CLICK HERE to submit a question or join the BridgeWinners.com board discussion.

CLICK HERE or email me directly at rcraigh@aol.com

6 ♠A32
A97
AK9
♣Q874
Dlr: East
Vul: E-W
♠J8
T65432
Q65
♣T5
♠QT65
QJ8
432
♣AKJ
♠K974
K
JT87
♣9632
17
313
7
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3♣ 3 1/- 3/2♠ 2NT
       ♥7/6
EW:  ♣3 ♦4 ♥6 ♠4 NT4
LoTT: 15 - 17 = -2
Par: +140 3♠-S
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  180          2.00   0.00  1N N +3   ♣K  O4-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs O3-Sebring-Jones
  150          1.00   1.00  1N N +2   Q  O6-Nasr-Nasr vs O2-Ritchie-Siebert
        100    0.00   2.00  3N* N -1  Q  O1-De Gregorio-Papst vs O5-Hedlund-Roberts

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
  1Pass
Pass1DblPass1
Pass1NTPassPass
Pass   
  1. No weak jump shifts!

Do you like weak jump shifts? Then you will, as West, bid 2 over partner's opening bid, with full confidence in your virtuous bidding. Alas, if you keep a tally on the bid's effectiveness, you should mark this one down in the negative column: North really has no good bid over 2, and plus 200 for the disciplined pass would be a proper reward: two spades, two hearts, and three diamonds! North would lead the A and switch either to a small heart or the K, either way picking up the allotted tricks.



****************************************
Comments? Questions?

CLICK HERE to submit a question or join the BridgeWinners.com board discussion.

CLICK HERE or email me directly at rcraigh@aol.com

7 ♠AQ542
542
5
♣T432
Dlr: South
Vul: Both
♠96
KJ983
Q92
♣876
♠JT73
76
J8743
♣KJ
♠K8
AQT
AKT6
♣AQ95
6
66
22
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 6♣ 3 3 5♠ 4/5NT
EW:  ♣1 ♦4 ♥4 ♠2 NT2
LoTT: 16 - 16 = 0
Par: +1370 6♣-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  660          2.00   0.00  3N S +2   9  O4-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs O3-Sebring-Jones
  630          1.00   1.00  3N S +1   8  O1-De Gregorio-Papst vs O5-Hedlund-Roberts
  200          0.00   2.00  2♠ S +3   ♣8  O6-Nasr-Nasr vs O2-Ritchie-Siebert

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
   2
Pass2Pass2NT
Pass3Pass3
Pass3NTAll pass 

North hasn't enough for a positive response of 2, which generally is stated as containing 8 HCP and a suit of five card length or more including two of the top three honors. Just the latter is not enough. Add the Q or the Q and the natural positive response of 2 would be a traditional positive. There is much to be said for having solid requirements for bids. Not that rigidity is required, but guidelines or parameters are certainly beneficial if partner can rely on your bidding to describe both your pattern and your strength.

North has enough to force game, but not enough to envision slam without a fit, so 3NT rates to be the final contract.

On a very optimistic heart lead, declarer will quickly wind up with eleven tricks by taking two spades then playing on clubs, reverting to spades later. If declarer has imaginatively cashed the AK early on, there will be an endplay remaining for the twelfth trick. Kudos for any declarer with the foresight and courage for this play, and even more so for any West player who thinks to unblock the Q.

On a "safe" club lead, that suit's problems are resolved for declarer, but to make the maximum number of tricks South will need more help or engineer an endplay against West.

On a spade lead, the spade situation is more clear, so the club play is marked, and declarer will be happy with that result, but still only ten tricks, Declarer seems destined not to make the maximum, but may try the endplay described above.

Ten tricks won't do much for the NS score, but the defenders will extoll the virtues of passive defense.



****************************************
Comments? Questions?

CLICK HERE to submit a question or join the BridgeWinners.com board discussion.

CLICK HERE or email me directly at rcraigh@aol.com

8 ♠J542
AJ4
AK72
♣54
Dlr: West
Vul: None
♠AQ
865
Q863
♣J763
♠K98
T932
JT
♣A982
♠T763
KQ7
954
♣KQT
13
98
10
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1 1 2♠ 1NT  ♣6
EW:  ♣6 ♦6 ♥6/5 ♠5 NT5
LoTT: 14 - 16 = -2
Par: +110 2♠-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
   90          2.00   0.00  1N S      3  O6-Nasr-Nasr vs O2-Ritchie-Siebert
         50    0.50   1.50  4♠ S -1   4  O4-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs O3-Sebring-Jones
         50    0.50   1.50  3♠ S -1   8  O1-De Gregorio-Papst vs O5-Hedlund-Roberts

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
Pass1Pass1
Pass2PassPass
Pass   

West would love to balance, but has spade honors and no reasonable source of tricks, so 2 is it. It is not necessary to have the top honors in a suit to make it a viable part score contract: having eight or more trumps is key.



****************************************
Comments? Questions?

CLICK HERE to submit a question or join the BridgeWinners.com board discussion.

CLICK HERE or email me directly at rcraigh@aol.com

9 ♠Q4
J652
AQT94
♣73
Dlr: North
Vul: E-W
♠9532
T8
53
♣AKT42
♠AKJ
KQ93
KJ82
♣Q8
♠T876
A74
76
♣J965
9
719
5
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣2 ♦4 ♥3 ♠3 NT3/2
EW: 5♣ 3 3 4♠ 4NT
LoTT: 15 - 14 = +1
Par: -630 4NT-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
        150    2.00   0.00  2N W +1   9  O4-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs O3-Sebring-Jones
        200    1.00   1.00  2 E +3   7  O1-De Gregorio-Papst vs O5-Hedlund-Roberts
        600    0.00   2.00  3N E      ♣5  O6-Nasr-Nasr vs O2-Ritchie-Siebert

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
 Pass1Pass
1Pass2NTPass
3NTPassPassPass

What is poor South to lead against this auction? Every lead seems flawed. Every suit is weak and partner has not bid. Although it is generally better to lead a major suit against 3NT, spades have been bid by West and South has too many of that suit for it to be helpful to the defense. A heart might skewer partner's holding, and a diamond surely will. A truly unattractive hand from which to select a lead!

A club lead might be selected by some, and it will create a small point of interest: Declarer must note that there is no side entry to dummy and that the opening lead must be won by the Q, not cheaply with the 8. Then the finesse of the T ensures that five club tricks will be taken, else only three: the 8, the A, and the K! Some may play carelessly, thereby declining the gift offered by the chosen lead.

It turns out that the best lead, giving away nothing, is a spade, and that might be selected purely for that reason: while rejected above because the lead would not provide a source of tricks, the safety value was ignored: East is always entitled to three spade tricks and the lead does nothing to change that fact. The benefit of the lead is that it gives nothing away and requires declarer to do his own work.



****************************************
Comments? Questions?

CLICK HERE to submit a question or join the BridgeWinners.com board discussion.

CLICK HERE or email me directly at rcraigh@aol.com

10 ♠86
AJ94
T986
♣KT6
Dlr: East
Vul: Both
♠KT94
K5
KJ75
♣942
♠A32
Q762
43
♣8753
♠QJ75
T83
AQ2
♣AQJ
8
106
16
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1♣ 1 1/2 2NT  ♠6
EW:  ♣6 ♦6 ♥5 ♠6 NT5
LoTT: 14 - 14 = 0
Par: +120 2NT-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  600          2.00   0.00  3N S      5  O1-De Gregorio-Papst vs O5-Hedlund-Roberts
  150          1.00   1.00  2N S +1   J  O4-Maggipinto-Maggipinto vs O3-Sebring-Jones
  120          0.00   2.00  1N S +1   ♠4  O6-Nasr-Nasr vs O2-Ritchie-Siebert

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
  Pass1NT
Pass2Pass2
Pass2NTPass3NT
All pass   

This particular 8 HCP hand for North seems to offer some potential in the form of working tens and nines, so North elects to search for a heart fit and risk an invitational sequence. South has a fair hand and might either accept or decline -- it is an optional strength hand. Personally, I'd accept. Although there is much truth to the concept that at matchpoints it is not necessary to bid marginal games, there is also the idea of going with the field, and this hand will likely be bid to game much more often than not.

While there is an aversion to leading a broken honor suit that has been bid in the dummy against notrump (usually you lead around to Jx or Qx or the like, which costs a trick), there is not so much negativity about leading exactly that suit when bid on your right! This hand shows why, and also why the lead of an interior sequence is the right choice, rather than fourth-best!

On the lead of the T (or 9, if playing "zero or two"), East should simply encourage the lead, allowing the spot card to do its work. South wins the J and tries the 8. West may cover or not, as seems most appropriate -- it won't matter, for the defense is entitled to one and only one heart trick. But when East gets in with the Q, he can cash the A and return the suit, thereby scoring three spade tricks along with the heart and a diamond will surely come home to roost, even if South engineers an endplay to minimize the damage in that suit.

Let's look again at that idea of not overbidding to close games! That would have worked out well on this hand, no?



****************************************
Comments? Questions?

CLICK HERE to submit a question or join the BridgeWinners.com board discussion.

CLICK HERE or email me directly at rcraigh@aol.com

11 ♠K63
KQ4
8642
♣KJT
Dlr: South
Vul: None
♠J82
AT3
AKQJ3
♣74
♠A9754
986
T975
♣2
♠QT
J752
-
♣AQ98653
12
154
9
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 5♣ 2  ♦3 ♠4 NT6
EW: 3 2♠  ♣2 ♥3 NT6
LoTT: 20 - 19 = +1
Par: +300 5*-EW-2
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  550          2.00   0.00  5♣* S     A  O2-Ritchie-Siebert vs O1-De Gregorio-Papst
  150          1.00   1.00  5 W -3   ♣J  O6-Nasr-Nasr vs O3-Sebring-Jones
   50          0.00   2.00  3♠ W -1   ♣K  O5-Hedlund-Roberts vs O4-Maggipinto-Maggipinto
12 ♠KT6
K753
AQJT7
♣5
Dlr: West
Vul: N-S
♠AQ872
Q84
84
♣QT3
♠54
AT62
K32
♣A874
♠J93
J9
965
♣KJ962
13
1011
6
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2/1  ♣6 ♥6 ♠5 NT6
EW: 1♣ 1 2♠  ♦5 NT6
LoTT: 16 - 15 = +1
Par: -110 2♠-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  100          2.00   0.00  2N E -2   ♣9  O2-Ritchie-Siebert vs O1-De Gregorio-Papst
   90          1.00   1.00  1 N +1   A  O6-Nasr-Nasr vs O3-Sebring-Jones
        100    0.00   2.00  3 N -1   ♠5  O5-Hedlund-Roberts vs O4-Maggipinto-Maggipinto
13 ♠KT9
A73
QJ532
♣AJ
Dlr: North
Vul: Both
♠643
T964
K8
♣Q975
♠J872
KQJ82
A74
♣6
♠AQ5
5
T96
♣KT8432
15
511
9
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 4♣ 4 1♠ 1NT  ♥5
EW: 2  ♣3 ♦3 ♠6 NT4
LoTT: 18 - 17 = +1
Par: +130 4-NS/4♣-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  130          2.00   0.00  4♣ N      K  O2-Ritchie-Siebert vs O1-De Gregorio-Papst
  100          1.00   1.00  3 E -1   T  O5-Hedlund-Roberts vs O4-Maggipinto-Maggipinto
        140    0.00   2.00  2 E +1   ♣4  O6-Nasr-Nasr vs O3-Sebring-Jones
14 ♠AK43
AT64
KJ82
♣2
Dlr: East
Vul: None
♠62
KJ9872
Q4
♣A85
♠J5
Q53
963
♣QT964
♠QT987
-
AT75
♣KJ73
15
105
10
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2♣ 6 1 6♠ 4NT
EW:  ♣5 ♦1 ♥6 ♠1 NT2
LoTT: 18 - 18 = 0
Par: +980 6♠-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  980          2.00   0.00  6♠ S      ♣A  O2-Ritchie-Siebert vs O1-De Gregorio-Papst
  480          1.00   1.00  4♠ S +2   9  O6-Nasr-Nasr vs O3-Sebring-Jones
  450          0.00   2.00  4♠ S +1   8  O5-Hedlund-Roberts vs O4-Maggipinto-Maggipinto
15 ♠KJ
J987
Q73
♣K532
Dlr: South
Vul: N-S
♠98632
52
T85
♣A94
♠75
KQ63
A642
♣J76
♠AQT4
AT4
KJ9
♣QT8
10
410
16
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 3♣ 3 4 3♠ 4NT
EW:  ♣3 ♦4 ♥3 ♠4 NT3
LoTT: 14 - 14 = 0
Par: +630 4NT-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  630          2.00   0.00  3N S +1   ♠5  O5-Hedlund-Roberts vs O4-Maggipinto-Maggipinto
  600          1.00   1.00  3N S      ♠6  O6-Nasr-Nasr vs O3-Sebring-Jones
        100    0.00   2.00  3N S -1   ♠6  O2-Ritchie-Siebert vs O1-De Gregorio-Papst
16 ♠J
863
KQ87
♣AKJT5
Dlr: West
Vul: E-W
♠AQT4
AQ974
9
♣Q83
♠63
2
JT65432
♣962
♠K98752
KJT5
A
♣74
14
141
11
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2♣ -/1 1/2 1/2♠ 2/3NT
       ♦6/7
EW:  ♣3 ♦6 ♥5 ♠5 NT4
LoTT: 14 - 15 = -1
Par: +400 3NT-N
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  140          2.00   0.00  2♠ S +1   9  O6-Nasr-Nasr vs O4-Maggipinto-Maggipinto
        100    1.00   1.00  3♣ N -2   2  O3-Sebring-Jones vs O1-De Gregorio-Papst
        150    0.00   2.00  3♠ S -3   9  O2-Ritchie-Siebert vs O5-Hedlund-Roberts
17 ♠KT6
A8632
65
♣732
Dlr: North
Vul: None
♠J82
KQJ7
KJ9
♣QJ6
♠AQ973
9
A843
♣KT8
♠54
T54
QT72
♣A954
7
1413
6
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣3 ♦2 ♥4 ♠2 NT2
EW: 4♣ 5 3 5♠ 5NT
LoTT: 15 - 16 = -1
Par: -460 5NT-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
        420    2.00   0.00  4♠ E      T  O2-Ritchie-Siebert vs O5-Hedlund-Roberts
        450    1.00   1.00  4♠ E +1   2  O3-Sebring-Jones vs O1-De Gregorio-Papst
        460    0.00   2.00  3N E +2   ♣5  O6-Nasr-Nasr vs O4-Maggipinto-Maggipinto
18 ♠AQ984
T82
AT6
♣J9
Dlr: East
Vul: N-S
♠K65
Q9753
K
♣KT76
♠T72
A4
Q742
♣AQ54
♠J3
KJ6
J9853
♣832
11
1112
6
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1  ♣4 ♥5 ♠6 NT4
EW: 2/3♣ 1/2  ♦5/6 ♠6 NT6
LoTT: 16 - 16 = 0
Par: -110 2-W
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  150          2.00   0.00  3N E -3   3  O3-Sebring-Jones vs O1-De Gregorio-Papst
   50          1.00   1.00  2 W -1   ♣J  O2-Ritchie-Siebert vs O5-Hedlund-Roberts
        130    0.00   2.00  3♣ E +1   ♣2  O6-Nasr-Nasr vs O4-Maggipinto-Maggipinto
19 ♠5
9876
J85
♣KQT97
Dlr: South
Vul: E-W
♠AT8743
Q5
AQ432
♣-
♠KQJ62
AJT4
7
♣J82
♠9
K32
KT96
♣A6543
6
1212
10
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 1♣  ♦3 ♥5 ♠1 NT4
EW: 2 2 6♠ 2NT  ♣5
LoTT: 19 - 21 = -2
Par: -1400 7♣*-NS-6
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
        680    2.00   0.00  4♠ W +2   ♣K  O2-Ritchie-Siebert vs O5-Hedlund-Roberts
       1430    0.50   1.50  6♠ W      ♣K  O6-Nasr-Nasr vs O4-Maggipinto-Maggipinto
       1430    0.50   1.50  6♠ E      ♣A  O3-Sebring-Jones vs O1-De Gregorio-Papst

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
   Pass
1Pass4Pass
5Pass5Pass
6All pass  

That's one way to get to slam. West trusts the trump suit or the heart suit to be pure. Control bids at the five level or above typically are first-rounders, as here.

West could bid 6 to look for a grand slam, but that's a bit pushy, don't you think, opposite a mere Splinter ? splinters are really nice, but should have HCP limited to the 10-14 range unless the partnership has a method to show two tiers of strength with, say, an artificial 3 bid or other device to announce a different value Splinter. Of course, East could bid 2NT Jacoby or 2NT the modern version of Jacoby, and all are actually viable paths to this slam.

Just have SOME method and this one should be easy enough to bid. The cards themselves cry out for slam.



****************************************
Comments? Questions?

CLICK HERE to submit a question or join the BridgeWinners.com board discussion.

CLICK HERE or email me directly at rcraigh@aol.com

20 ♠K732
QT
K642
♣A95
Dlr: West
Vul: Both
♠QJ984
K64
AQT
♣72
♠-
A952
987
♣KJT843
♠AT65
J873
J53
♣Q6
12
128
8
Double Dummy Makes
NS:  ♣4 ♦6 ♥5 ♠6 NT6
EW: 2♣ -/1 2 1♠  ♦6/7 NT6
LoTT: 14 - 16 = -2
Par: -110 2-EW
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
         90    2.00   0.00  2 W      Q  O6-Nasr-Nasr vs O4-Maggipinto-Maggipinto
        600    0.50   1.50  3N W      6  O3-Sebring-Jones vs O1-De Gregorio-Papst
        600    0.50   1.50  3N E      3  O2-Ritchie-Siebert vs O5-Hedlund-Roberts
21 ♠J985
-
KQT74
♣7543
Dlr: North
Vul: N-S
♠Q64
T732
J982
♣T6
♠AT732
J94
5
♣K982
♠K
AKQ865
A63
♣AQJ
6
38
23
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 4♣ 6 5 2♠ 5NT
EW:  ♣2 ♦0 ♥1 ♠5 NT2
LoTT: 17 - 16 = +1
Par: +1370 6-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  660          2.00   0.00  4N N +1   ♣2  O1-De Gregorio-Papst vs O4-Maggipinto-Maggipinto
  650          0.50   1.50  4 S +1   ♣T  O3-Sebring-Jones vs O2-Ritchie-Siebert
  650          0.50   1.50  4 S +1   ♣T  O6-Nasr-Nasr vs O5-Hedlund-Roberts

Craig Hemphill Hand Analysis
WestNorthEastSouth
 PassPass2
Pass2Pass2
Pass3Pass4NT
Pass5Pass5NT
Pass6All pass 

4NT is surely the fallback key card ask in the absence of discussion... Isn't it, pard? Well, answer anyway!

5NT is pick a slam, isn't it pard? or is it trying to find a spot to play?

Bridge is a partnership game, and discussing these issues is key to successful and CONFIDENT bidding.

An alternative method for asking for key cards is for the 2 bidder simply to raise his partner's suit to the four level, a la Minorwood (in fact, it IS Minorwood if the initial response had been 3 to the 2 opening). But here the diamonds were bid later, and while opener would like 4 to ask for keycards, responder might not think so. After this hand, the partnership should discuss and be ready... This method would be my choice.



****************************************
Comments? Questions?

CLICK HERE to submit a question or join the BridgeWinners.com board discussion.

CLICK HERE or email me directly at rcraigh@aol.com

22 ♠AJ952
94
K752
♣A8
Dlr: East
Vul: E-W
♠8
AKJT5
JT983
♣93
♠43
Q87632
AQ
♣Q62
♠KQT76
-
64
♣KJT754
12
910
9
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 5♣ 6/5♠  ♦4 ♥2 NT5
EW: 4  ♣2 ♦6 ♠0 NT2
LoTT: 22 - 21 = +1
Par: +800 7*-EW-3
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  510          2.00   0.00  4♠ S +3   A  O1-De Gregorio-Papst vs O4-Maggipinto-Maggipinto
  480          1.00   1.00  5♠ S +1   ♣9  O3-Sebring-Jones vs O2-Ritchie-Siebert
         50    0.00   2.00  5♠ S -1   A  O6-Nasr-Nasr vs O5-Hedlund-Roberts
23 ♠KJ943
K876
962
♣T
Dlr: South
Vul: Both
♠T6
42
KQJT5
♣J732
♠Q8
JT93
A
♣K98654
♠A752
AQ5
8743
♣AQ
7
710
16
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2 4 5♠ 4NT  ♣6
EW: 1♣  ♦5 ♥3 ♠1 NT3
LoTT: 18 - 19 = -1
Par: +650 5♠-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  650          1.50   0.50  4♠ S +1   K  O3-Sebring-Jones vs O2-Ritchie-Siebert
  650          1.50   0.50  4♠ N +1   A  O6-Nasr-Nasr vs O5-Hedlund-Roberts
  620          0.00   2.00  4♠ S      K  O1-De Gregorio-Papst vs O4-Maggipinto-Maggipinto
24 ♠K8
AQ96
T6
♣AKJ53
Dlr: West
Vul: None
♠J542
874
984
♣T97
♠9763
KJT532
AQ
♣8
♠AQT
-
KJ7532
♣Q642
17
110
12
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 6♣ 6 2 3♠ 6/5NT
EW:  ♣1 ♦1 ♥5 ♠4 NT1
LoTT: 17 - 18 = -1
Par: +990 6NT-S
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  490          1.50   0.50  5N N +1   ♠3  O6-Nasr-Nasr vs O5-Hedlund-Roberts
  490          1.50   0.50  3N N +3   J  O1-De Gregorio-Papst vs O4-Maggipinto-Maggipinto
  400          0.00   2.00  5♣ N      ♠9  O3-Sebring-Jones vs O2-Ritchie-Siebert
25 ♠QJT543
K85
7
♣732
Dlr: North
Vul: E-W
♠K96
AQJ4
KQ865
♣Q
♠87
932
T42
♣K9864
♠A2
T76
AJ93
♣AJT5
6
173
14
Double Dummy Makes
NS: 2♣ 3♠  ♦5/6 ♥6 NT6
EW: 1 1  ♣5 ♠4 NT5
LoTT: 16 - 16 = 0
Par: +140 3♠-NS
  N-S   E-W    N-S    E-W   Contract  Ld
  400          2.00   0.00  4 W -4   2  O3-Sebring-Jones vs O2-Ritchie-Siebert
        100    0.50   1.50  4♠* N -1  T  O6-Nasr-Nasr vs O5-Hedlund-Roberts
        100    0.50   1.50  4♠* N -1  2  O1-De Gregorio-Papst vs O4-Maggipinto-Maggipinto