1. 4ª was there for EW if they could get there after North opened 1© - they have a 4-4 fit and 23 points. With a secondary club fit, it was about a 50/50 shot. Once Goldsmith found a sketchy 1ª overcall we were always likely to get there but we were the only Oxon pair to do so. Day/Price did not compete above 2©, Bennett/Noble stopped in 3§ and Thomson/Dawe in 3ª. Badiani/Cohen were unlucky to be the one Oxon pair to concede game.
2. A pretty dire effort from me:

I opened 1NT (14-16) with the West hand and North found a disgusting overcall of 2© at red. Goldsmith made a Lebensohl double, showing a raise to 2NT with Hxx in their suit. I wish I’d left it in but North has surely got six hearts for his bid and the diamond suit also looks a bit worrying. So I removed to 3NT.

3. South opens 1§ at green and West overcalls 4ª. What do you bid with ªJ8 ©A3 ¨QJ107532 §85? The winning action is to save in 5¨ although DD defence would get it three off. 4ª was untouchable. Always a bit of a lottery; North has very little chance of evaluating West’s chances in 4ª. The 7-card suit would be enough to persuade me to take the push.

I was West and allowed to collect my 620, as were Bennett/Noble and Thomson/Dawe and a couple of Warks pairs. But Cohen and Wilkes both found the 5¨ save and got out for -300. However, Day/Price went on to 5ª for a disappointing -200.

4. Hotfoot from Stratford and our first board of the day:

ª A J © A 6 5 2 ¨ 2 § A K 9 8 7 2

ª K Q 7 6 3 © Q 10 9 4 ¨ Q 9 3 § 6

I opened 1§ (Prec), Goldsmith responded 1ª and I tried 2§ (Alpha). After the 2¨ response, I should probably have bid a natural 2© but with a nice spade holding and a diamond shortage, I plumped for 2ª (Gamma) instead. Five to one top honour. In our feeble system, three of a red suit is now epsilon, so I have lost the chance to investigate a 4-4 heart fit. 3¨ seemed the best ask, North doubled and MG’s 3NT call now showed ¨AK or AQ. Naturally, I passed. There was no ambiguity that 3¨ was Epsilon (we’ve never played it any other way) but his brain was scrambled (no change there, then!)

South led ¨5 from K105. North won the Ace and sent a small one back. It would have been interesting if MG had played the 9 blocking the suit but he didn’t so it was two off. If he does get the diamonds right and South exits with a spade (say) at trick 4, declarer can play two top spades and start on clubs. South ought to unblock on the 2^nd round of clubs, otherwise he can be trivially thrown in. If he unblocks on the first round, declarer can switch to hearts and make the contract. So the defence should prevail.

With clubs and hearts both splitting well, there was no problem in making 4©. There were 650s and 680s at six tables but Badiani/Cohen made up a bit for our error by competing fiercely in diamonds and persuading oppos to play in 4§.

5. 4ª was unbreakable but the ‘A’ team declarers were more determined to nail the overtrick.
6. Oxon’s best board of the day:

ª A 5 2 © J 2 ¨ Q 10 3 § A 10 6 4 3

ª K Q 9 6 © A 8 7 6 ¨ K 9 5 2 § 2

We played these cards peacefully enough in 2ª and it was a bit of a surprise to find that 3NT had been bid and made twice. Bennett did so after an unhelpful ©9 lead from the South hand. A good guess and you can nab three diamond tricks but North has ªJ1083 and it’s hard to see where the ninth trick is coming from (Bennett made ten). Hearts? Thomson/Dawe on the other hand had the benefit of a spade lead which helped pin-point the suit.

Procter/Claridge and Wilkes/Webley both defeated 3NT. 27 IMPs in.

7. Some cards for NS! An easy 600 or 630, in fact.
8. What, more? 3NT was less solid here but with hearts 3-3 and the spade finesse working, it crept home at six tables, often with the likely free trick on a diamond lead. At the time, I thought I’d missed a chance to defeat it but the clubs are not quite good enough for our side and we can’t.

	ª A J © 10 8 5 4 ¨ A K 5 § A 8 5 2	Love All Dealer W
ª K 4 2 © Q 6 2 ¨ Q 10 8 6 4 § 9 6		ª 9 8 7 6 3 © J 9 7 ¨ 2 § K Q J 7
	ª Q 10 5 © A K 3 ¨ J 9 7 3 § 10 4 3

Procter/Claridge stopped short on their 26 points, perhaps correctly, and were unlucky to miss out. The Fearnheads were also unlucky to play it the wrong way up - the club lead was less helpful. Alex took her Ace on the 2^nd round and played back a third round to establish §8. East switched to diamonds and Alex tried to establish a diamond trick rather than play for hearts to lie kindly. On another day, she would probably have sniffed the air better.

9. Four pluses for each side, usually between 100 and 140, two for NS for each side, so any plus was a good score. I was forced up to 3ª with these cards:

10. Mmm, yes. Well, I don’t psyche that often, do I? I held ª87 ©109752 ¨1075 §984 and partner opened 1© at amber. 1ª, 1NT or some random number of hearts? No, 2§ - that’ll do nicely, sir. North with his 4-0-5-4 18-count was not deflected from doubling. Goldsmith now bid a rather obscure 2NT and I removed to 3© which North again doubled.

Maybe NS will play in 3ª? Wishful thinking, really. Goldsmith raised to 4© on his maximum 15-count and South was at last persuaded to bid 4ª. When Goldsmith doubled, I knew the game was up. -990 seemed preferable to -1100, so I passed. Fortunately, it was only 790 - perhaps I deserved worse.

620 was the obvious result at most tables but Badiani/Cohen judged and defended well to take 4©* for 800, the best score.

Day/Price managed to beat 4ª. With all suits splitting well, there is no obvious way of managing this and I suspect they may have had a little bit of help. But Webley made a free bid of 2ª on his 6-count and Wilkes raised that to 5ª. This was passed out but it proved to be too high for our boys.

11. A tricky little number:

ª A J 3 © 10 8 6 3 ¨ 8 § 9 8 7 5 3

ª K Q 10 6 4 © Q ¨ A 10 § Q 10 6 4 2

South opened 1©, possibly Canapé, and North raised distributionally to 3©. Goldsmith tried 3ª, South bid 4¨ and I raised to 4ª. North, with 2-4-5-2, decided the secondary fit justified him in going on to 5© which was passed round to me. Expecting the layout to be more distributional and liking the look of my red suits, I eventually took the push to 5ª, trusting that somebody could make a 5-level contract.

I should have been wrong but it was partner who had the joy of playing 5ª* on this magnificent 5-3 fit. Sooner or later he led a club from dummy and North, holding KJ, conveniently hopped up with the King, crashing pard’s Ace. +650. It’s hard to think of a distribution where playing the King gains but who are we to argue? (North should also surely have bid 5¨ not 5© by the way).

Badiani/Cohen lost just 50 in 5¨ while our ‘B’ team EWs were also unable to collect more than 100 from 5-level contracts. The Fearnheads competed as far as 4© but after a rather baffling sequence they did not take the push over 4ª and were unable to beat that.

Meanwhile, Claridge opened 1¨, Procter responded 1© and East came in with 2© which was incorrectly explained, I believe. Claridge bid 3©, Procter raised to game, doubled by East (W had not bid at all). East has surely done too much. West bid 5§ and a heart was led against 5§*. Apparently, "North went up with §K, expecting to solve South’s problems by leading a diamond." Unlucky.

12. Most NSs had a crack at 4ª, only to find that spades were 4-1 and it wasn’t quite there. The Fearnheads had their best result of the day, scoring +620 instead of -200 or -100 but they must have made off with the curtain cards for this one, so I can’t tell you much about it except that Alex guessed spades and diamonds correctly for ten tricks.
13. As on 9, four pluses for either side, two for each ‘A’ team and two for each team’s NSs, i.e. anybody’s guess. Each side has 20 points and a 4-4 minor fit.
14. Very hard lines for Bennett/Noble:

ª 8 4 © A 3 2 ¨ 10 9 7 2 § 8 7 6 2

ª A K 9 6 2 © Q ¨ A K § A Q J 9 4

6§ was too hard for most pairs to reach but it is demonstrably the best spot. Bennett opened 2§ and it went 2§ - 2¨ - 2ª - 2NT - 3§ - 4§ - 4NT - 6§. A well judged sequence. The heart lead was won in dummy and a club led. Bennett finessed the Queen but lost to a singleton King and when North turned out to have a small doubleton spade, there was no way of making the contract.

It seems to be about an 80-90% chance - even when the club finesse loses, you still have the chance of clubs being 2-2, of spades being 3-3 or the same hand being long in both black suits. It was briefly suggested that going up with §A might be better but that one has been soundly dismissed.

Wilkes/Webley’s oppos had an uninterrupted "Precision" sequence to 6ª four off - some people give Precision a bad name! Our paltry effort went 1§ -1¨ - 2ª - 2NT - 3§ - 3© -3NT - 4ª - Pass. I tried to show some enthusiasm for clubs and a heart control with my 3© bid but the last two bids were pretty uninspired. Goldsmith did well to keep control and make 4ª. Mind you, 3NT would also have been a lucky make. Our ‘B’ team EWs deserve quite a bit of credit for playing in the superior 5§.

15. A small plus for NS at seven tables, including all four where we were EW. The Fearnheads competed no higher than 2¨ and missed the chance to take that one off.
16. Goldsmith opened 1© and with ªA532 ©76 ¨K75 §QJ42, I responded 1ª. He rebid 2§. Am I now worth 3§, 2¨ or even 2NT? With partner limited to about 14 and my intermediates so poor, I decided to pass it out. But partner turned out to have AK to five in both his suits, clubs and hearts were splitting 2-2 and 3-3 respectively, and 4© and 5§ were unputdownable. Even 3NT would sail home on the likely diamond lead.

Noble found a 2NT call on the 2^nd round after the same first three bids (presumably, the 2§ rebid is rather wider-ranging in Acol). North duly found the disastrous diamond lead against 3NT. Other Wests preferred to push on with 3§ and 5§ was reached.

Badiani/Cohen’s oppos were playing Precision and after a similar start, East jumped to 3§. With only a singleton spade, I wouldn’t fault Goldsmith for being more cautious. The only other pair to miss out on 600 were Wilkes/Webley’s oppos who had the same sequence as us.

17. Embarrassingly bad:

	ª K 10 6 5 4 3 © K 4 ¨ J 10 3 § 3 2	Love All Dealer N
ª J 9 7 © 10 6 5 3 ¨ K § A J 10 9 5		ª A 2 © Q 7 ¨ Q 9 7 6 § K Q 8 7 6
	ª Q 8 © A J 9 8 2 ¨ A 8 5 4 2 § 4

North opened a Multi and Goldsmith doubled (I think he should pass - it’s a grotty 13). South bid 2ª and I too took a rosy view, making a Lebensohl double (see Hand 2). It’s not a great 9-count but, if we do defend, I may be able to ruff diamonds.

Defend we did and declarer was even able to ruff a club in hand, making a pretty comfortable nine tricks and 570 on a hand where the next best score by either side was 170. Who was most at fault? Impartial as ever, I’d have to say that the real no-no was partner’s final pass of 2ª doubled. With just ªAx and (sub) -minimum for his bid (and so little defensive prospects), I’d say he has to run. We’ve doubled making two-of-a-majors too often recently (again cf. 2). Sorry, team.

18. A rerun of 16? This time I held a different 10 points - ªQ75 ©K764 ¨Q986 §K9 - and partner opened 1ª. I responded 2¨ and MG rebid 2ª. One for the road? Yes, I bid 3ª and we duly went one off. Why bid on here and not on 16? Well, here we are looking towards a possible major suit game, there it was a minor. Mind you, the fact that partner’s opening bid is a bit sketchy may have affected the result.

Other Oxon pairs were a bit more reticent about bidding too far on this hand. Warks made five low-level contracts (2ª or 3§ by NS) and the only Oxon pair to get a plus were Wilkes/Webley who made 2§.

19. EW can make 4© very comfortably as the cards lie for a potential 620 and at our table NS sacrificed in 5¨ going for 500. Day/Price also took 500 from 5¨* and this proved to be a surprisingly good score.

At least three of our pairs - Badiani/Cohen Wilkes/Webley and Procter/Claridge - found a surprisingly effective advance save in 3NT. No pair was doubled so they lost just 50, 100 and 150 respectively. The heart guard (xx opposite Jx) was a little flimsy and there were only seven tricks to run. The Fearnheads were also -150, but in 5¨. Since they’d been prepared to play in 2¨, it must have been tempting for Warks to double on principle (just as I had to do, in fact).

Bennett/ Noble’s oppos bought the contract in 2NT (+50) while Thomson/Dawe did well to beat 3¨ by two tricks. The problem for EW at most tables was that they found time to mention clubs but not hearts as well.

20. A real clockwork orange of a hand:

23. With a 21-19 split and no more than a 7-card suit for either side, it wasn’t easy for anyone to make a contract. The only ones to do so were the Fearnheads (+110) and Day/Price’s oppos. Smith/Goldsmith took 200 from 2§ while Bennett/Noble and Thomson/Dawe lost a similar sum.
24. As with Board 20, the spade game, based on a pretty sensible 4-4 fit, is really struggling when trumps break 5-0. Those pairs who landed, by luck or judgment, in 3NT had a much easier time of it. Three NSs including the Fearnheads lost 50 or 100, all (I think) in 4ª or 4ª*.