The next County Committee Meeting will be held,Wednesday 1 May 2019 at 7:00 pm in Nottingham Bridge Club.
Team Captains are invited to email match results to the appropriate League Secretary Jane Hall for Team of 8 results and
for Team of 4 results
Report by John Auld
Another three losses were reflected in the Butler imps. Just two pairs, both in the Porter, were plus: Lloyd & Stan with +33 and Pravin & Bill with +9.
The big issue in set 1 was board 6:
Our opponenets knocked us about with a 4♠ barrage leaving us with just 500 when declarer got spades right. I do not see how we get to 6♥ after that start. Our Dawes Souths bid just 3♠ allowing West to bid 4♥ and East to proceed to slam and 1430 for a big swing. No Notts South ventured 4♠ and at least one judged it as a pass. By contrast I am told that both Markham Souths for Gloucestershire bid 4♠ . Obviously they eat more red meat in the west country. Perhaps even more remarkable was the decision by some Easts to pass 4♥ with their huge hand.
I like 4♠ but do not think it is clear. If you find partner with a good hand short in spades you have done the wrong thing. If you find the actual layout then you are very correct. ( I have canvassed various missing players for a view. First in was Ankush with "4♠ is clear....etc")
We hit back on board 12:
Irene started proceedings with another 4♠ which evokes mixed feelings. South decided that chancing 5♥ was not for him and doubled. North reluctantly passed to collect 300 and another vulnerable 6♥ went missing. Hard to be objective now but I am inclined to bid 5♥ as South. There is a lot to gain.
Irene assures me that opening at the 4 level usually works for her. Toni & Maciej and Stan & Lloyd also managed to play in 4Sx.
Overall Gloucestershire were simply better than us. They are better than most teams, and organising our best players to drive to and from Cheltenham compounds our problem. Nonetheless the Dawes team was not hugely adrift with one set to go. Thereafter fatigue set in or class told depending on your view. Large numbers of lost imps turned what might have been 6-14 into 1-19.
This was 32 ,the last board:
I led SQ to partner's Ace, and declarer thought before winning trick 2 with SK. He did not rely on hearts but instead played diamonds to my Ace. Now I was stuck; declarer had 8 tricks including a club finesse. If I cashed my spades that gave him his ninth trick. If I played passively, as I did, he could develop hearts and there was no way to my hand to cash spades. Well played but I can beat it. I have to lead a low spade not the Q and perhaps I should. If partner has a high spade then it is fine, and if declarer has spade length it is the right lead. If he has AK9 that is unfortunate but maybe it cant be beaten in that case. (You can see that I play the hindsight system).
Congratulations to Gloucestershire on their play and their hospitality. The Cheltenham club is better than ever with recent improvements.