For those interested in such statistics, the cross imps were:
a) Within each team:
'A'
Amit Badiani & Suzanne Cohen
+31
Richard Lonsdale & Stuart McPhee +30.5
Steve Noble +Keith Bennett
+19.5
Paul & Alex Fearnhead
+19
Mike Webley & Nigel Wilkes
+48
Rob Proctor & Brian Claridge
+22
Lynne Hayes & Sandra Landy
+20
Jeremy & David Bygott
-6
b) Across both teams:
Richard Lonsdale & Stuart McPhee +41.75
Rob Proctor & Brian Claridge
+37
Mike Webley & Nigel Wilkes
+35
Lynne Hayes & Sandra Claridge +34.75
Steve Noble & Keith Bennett
+34
Amit Badiani & Suzanne Cohen
+18.75
Paul & Alex Fearnhead
+1.75
Jeremy & David Bygott
- 19
These scores seem to indicate that there was quite a bit of difference
between `par' in A and B teams.
The Butler scores are similar. I am indebted to Paul Fearnhead
for calculating all these for me. A big thank you too for Suzanne Cohen
who agreed to play even though it entailed a punishing travel schedule.
A county match against Derbyshire can scarcely have seemed enticing just
after her team's brilliant performances in Maastrich.!
A particularly promising feature of the 'A' team win is that the average
age of the team on Sunday (present company excepted!) was very low and
the team can only improve.
The match threw up its usual share of interesting boards, starting with
board 1:
NORTH
|
WEST |
ª
10 9 6 5 4 2
© 9 6 2 ¨ 9 4 § 7 3 |
EAST |
| ª
K Q
© A 10 8 5 ¨ 8 3 § Q 10 9 6 2 |
SOUTH |
ª
A J 8 7 3
© Q J 4 ¨ 10 7 5 § A K |
| ª
none
© K 7 3 ¨ A K Q J 6 2 § J 8 5 4 |
Nearly every East/West pair bid to 4S after south had bid diamonds. Despite only holding a 5-2 fit, four spades is not a bad spot. However, few contracts can survive a 6-0 break - paricularly if the defence start with three top diamonds for force you to ruff with one of dummy's top trumps and most pairs drifted one or two down, sometimes doubled. After the hand, my partner opined (as usual!) that he could have made it by cashing clubs and hearts before drawing trumps but I was a little sceptical. However the fact that Keith Bennett chalked up +420 on this line is good enough for me.
We had to wait until hand 2 for the first slam to come along:
NORTH
|
WEST |
ª
K 5
© K Q 6 2 ¨ A K 6 4 § A 8 4 |
EAST |
| ª
8 7 6 3
© 8 5 4 3 ¨ Q 8 § J 9 5 |
SOUTH |
ª
Q 9 2
© A J 10 7 ¨ 10 9 7 3 2 § 3 |
| ª
A J 10 4
© 9 ¨ J 5 § K Q 10 7 6 2 |
6 clubs looks a pretty healthy spot for North/South and six no-trumps
will also make more often than not.
If your methods allow a sequence that begins something like this:
| NORTH | EAST | SOUTH | WEST |
| 1 Heart | Pass | 2 Clubs | Pass |
| 2 No trumps (forcing) | pass | 3 Spades | Pass |
| 4 Clubs |
then you should be on your way. Badiani/Cohen and Fearnheads successfully
bid the slam for Oxford.
My oppos bid the hand: 1D - 1S (!)
3NT
which was nice gift for us ( or should I say that we talked them out
of it?) Why South should prefer to bid 1S rather than 2C with such
a nice hand is beyond me.
Hayes and Landy were a bit unlucky. They reached 6C and west led a
heart. Declarer drew two rounds of trumps and ruffed a spade. Declarer
now hand to decide whether to return to hand with a heart or a diamond.
Having read the opening lead as a doubleton, South tried to return to hand
with a diamond and was over-ruffed! I dare say that we could all
find reasons for the right choice now with all four hands available.
A routine game on board three followed by another slam hand.
NORTH
|
WEST |
ª
K Q J 10
© 8 4 ¨ J 7 6 § A K 7 5 |
EAST |
| ª A 4
3
© 3 2 ¨ AQ 10 4 2 § Q 3 2 |
SOUTH |
ª
9 6 5
© A K Q J 10 7 6 ¨ K 8 § 8 |
| ª
8 7 2
© 9 5 ¨ 9 5 3 § J 10 9 6 4 |
With diamonds breaking 3-3, 6 hearts is the top scoring spot for east/west.
East West pairs seemed to need silent opponents to reach this contract.
Both Derbyshire 'A' team pairs bid the slam but no oxfordshire pairs managed
it. I blame myself (unusually!) for our failure to get there.
| WEST | NORTH | EAST | SOUTH |
| 1 No Trump | 2 Clubs (1) | 3 Hearts (2) | Pass |
| 3 No trumps | Pass | 4 Clubs (3) | Pass |
| 4 Diamonds (4) | Pass | 4 Hearts | Pass |
| ? |
I think that west opening one no-trump gives the partnership the best
chance of getting there. North's two club bid showed clubs and another.
Three hearts was game forcing. 4 clubs and 4 diamonds were cue bids with
hearts as trumps. The question is whether I should bid again over 4 hearts.
Clearly the ace of spades is a big card but I let myself get influenced
unduly by north's bid (increasing the chances of a bad heart break) and
my heart holding, which was as poor as it can be. Against that, when Richard
makes a game forcing bid then a cue bid on the same hand then a grand slam
is usually in the picture. Also, I had seen north's bidding on several
boards by now so I should not set much store by it. Oh well, maybe
it's not such a great slam.
Both teams were losing at the end of the first quarter.
A run of flattish boards was halted by Hayes and Landy defeating a game on board 12 (+9 imps), assisted by some bizarre-looking delarer play. Similarly, poor declarer play by declarer in a part score on board 13 (allowing herself to be forced rather than discarding a loser) led to an 11 imp gain in the 'A' team.
Wilkes and Webley did well to reach 3NT on hand 15, over a weak two from opponents.
NORTH
|
WEST |
ª
A J 10 7 6 4
© J 10 6 ¨ J 10 § Q 10 |
EAST |
| ª 5 2
© K 8 3 ¨ K Q 8 7 5 § 7 5 2 |
SOUTH |
ª
Q 9 8 3
© A ¨ 9 4 3 § A K J 8 3 |
| ª
K
© Q 9 8 7 5 2 ¨ A 6 2 § 9 6 4 |
On this lay of the cards, you cannot beat 3NT. Most pairs languished in a part score.
Badiani and Cohen did very well (only pair in the room) to reach 6S on board 17 - especially since Amit professes to be a very cautious slam bidder!
By half-time a storming second quarter had taken the 'B' team into a 12 imp lead, while the 'A' team were down by 9 imps (still jet-lagged by long journeys).
NORTH
|
WEST |
ª
A 6 4
© K 10 ¨ 4 2 § K 9 8 7 5 4 |
EAST |
| ª
-
© J 9 8 6 3 ¨ Q 10 3 § J 10 6 3 2 |
SOUTH |
ª
K 9 5
© 5 4 2 ¨ K J 9 7 5 § A Q |
| ª Q
J 10 8 7 3 2
© A Q 7 ¨ A 8 6 § none |
At most tables, north passed, east opened one no-trump and south went
into the tank to think about about how many spades to bid. At our table,
while south was thinking, I started to hope that he would double - as I
have a range of entertaining bids available over one no-trump doubled with
this sort of distributional hand.
In the event, south usually bid 4S by themselves or bid three spades
and were raised to game by their partner.
Suzanne elected to open 1C with the north cards. this was their auction to 6S.
1C (1D) 1S
(2H)
X (3H) 4D
(P)
4S (P) 5D
(P)
5S* (P) 6S.
I am not certain whether Suzanne's send round double was takeout or showing three card support. Either way, the knowledge that partner had spade tolerance and an opening bid was enough for Badiani. The only real question was 6 or 7.
Hand 22 was expensive for the 'A' team when Lonsdale went off in a game that might have made - all other 'A' team pairs were making a vulnerable game. Strangely, none of the four east west pairs made game in the 'B'match.
At the three-quarter stage, the B team had pulled another 11 imps ahead and the A team were now 29 imps ahead, mainly die to good sets from Badiani/Cohen and Bennett/Noble.
Hand 29 was an opportunity to double 3NT for the lead of dummy's suit.
NORTH
|
WEST |
ª
K J 6 5 4 3
© A 8 6 ¨ 8 5 3 § K |
EAST |
| ª
9 7
© J 10 5 4 2 ¨ 7 § Q 8 7 5 3 |
SOUTH |
ª
A Q 10 8
© 9 3 ¨ J 10 6 4 § A 6 2 |
| ª
2
© K Q 7 ¨ A K Q 9 2 § J 10 9 4 |
At several, south ended in three no-trumps after north had bid
and rebid spades. (Bennett/Noble judged well to stop in a spade part-score!).
If west leads a heart or a club, then declarer will probably
have time (even with the bad diamond break) to emerge with nine tricks.
However, if east doubles 3NT for a spade lead then declarer is in trouble
and will go at least one down. Both Claridge and Badiani found the
double.
In the last quarter, the 'B' team gained a further 15 imps (good cards from Wilkes/Webley and Landy/Hayes in particular) while the 'A' team clinched a good win by gaining a further 22 imps (good cards from Fearnheads and Lonsdale/McPhee - at last!).