SpadeHeart  DiamondClub
Release 2.19n
Recent Updates
Home Page
22nd Aug 2019 08:31 BST
Contact Us
14th Aug 2019 17:28 BST
Rules - Team of Eight
7th Aug 2019 17:05 BST
0 0 0 0 0 0
Pages viewed in 2019
NCBA Committee Meeting

The next County Committee Meeting will be held,
Wednesday 12 June 2019 at 5:30 pm in Nottingham Bridge Club.

Match Results

Team Captains are invited to email match results to the appropriate League Secretary Jane Hall  for Team of 8 results and Shirley Ashtari
for Team of 4 results

Gloucestershire (Home) 18/02/2018

Report by John Auld  

Captain Keith Rodgers selected a strong Dawes team for this match including the much missed Rob Sharpe & Graham Kirby. No doubt on Sunday he was enjoying a small glass of vino in Marbella happily awaiting good news.

The teams with Butler imps:

Dawes

Willie Crook & Ankush Khandelwal      -16

Irene & John Auld                                   -50

Mark Goddard & David Hodge               -24

Rob Sharpe & Graham Kirby                   21

Porter

Bill Whalley & Pravin Tailor                   -2

Gerry Franklin & John Rolph                   11

Toni Smith  & Maciej Leman                  -30

Stn Zydagio & Lloyd Eagling                  22

Markham

Nick Clarke & Shirley Ashtari                -37

Hanna Tuus & Ivan Brajkovic                  12

Phil Dale & Ray Furlongr                        60

Janet Jacques & Jane Hall                        -3

 

Sorry Keith, the first team did not perform- although Rob & Graham did their stuff. The Markham however had a good day aided by a terrific score  from Ray Furlonger & Phil Dale. The Porter hung on for a tie, helped by a decent score from Lloyd Eagling & Stan Zygadio.

Things started well at our table:

 

 

 

This was board 7. Around the room 3NT was bid ten times and made six times. For some reason three of the defeats were in the Dawes team.

I led S4 and declarer pondered before winning with the Q and running the D8 to partners Ten. He can finesse spades for 3 tricks, cash 2 hearts and eventually develop 2 diamonds which leaves him needing 2 more tricks from clubs or elsewhere. And he has communication problems and must avoid losing 5 tricks on the way.

At trick 3 partner played a small heart (not revealing her holding) and declarer tried HJ losing to my Q. Now I knew declarer had nothing in diamonds and little in the black suits which meant his hearts were AKJ high. I exited passively with a D and partner won and continued hearts won by declarer who finessed spades, cashed a diamond and led CQ hoping to create an entry back to hand. Naturally I ducked and took 2 clubs on the continuation which with 2 diamonds and the HQ meant one off. It looks like he should cash his other top heart while in hand but that does not quite work because he has to discard two clubs on hearts.

That would reduce dummy to S AJ D 9 CQ9.

Then his best chance would be a club to the Q hoping I would duck, after which he could cash the last D and endplay me with CA to lead spades to AJ on table. I can thwart that by rising with the CA and putting him on table with CQ.

Willie points out that declarer should win trick one and play diamonds from the top preserving D8 as an entry to hand; later in the play he plays a club to the Q cashes winners and endplays North to lead spades. The different diamond play changes the outcome. Pretty routine at this level was Willies verdict. Not every declarer agreed I suspect.

Willie and Ankush were the only Notts pair to do the right thing on board 21 (and one of only two out of all 12 tables).

 

 

 

This is an extreme example of something I have often noted. Players are allergic to bypassing 3NT in favour of a minor suit, even at teams. Nine declarers tried 3NT which was completely hopeless. 5C fails on a spade lead but that is far from certain.

The sequence was pretty simple; 3C was routine exploration and 4C allowed a correction to 4H were that appropriate. I am not sure 2NT is the best rebid (although I bid it) and if 3C is chosen instead then 5C surely becomes inevitable. It is near unbelievable that so many good pairs avoided 5C.

 

 So how did one of our strongest line-ups manage to record a clear loss? Firstly Gloucestershire were a very good team. Secondly we displayed a distressing tendency to take wild risks. Scoring with one of our pairs I offered plus 100 and in reply got minus one thousand. I thought that was meant to be metaphorical or something but no. This was a redoubled cue bid opposite what was intended as a real suit. Then there was my partner's unfortunate decision to convert a double of 4S worth +800 into a contract of 5H doubled scoring -500. And finally my main contribution to the disasters was board 23:

As North I had to pass 1N doubled (redouble being rescue) but unfortunately was not systematically obliged to pass 3C. My double is a classic example of letting emotion overtake reason. I expected something good to happen after 1N was doubled and it did not transpire-so I made matters worse. As everyone knows points do not take tricks in defence and this declarer had no trouble diagnosing the diamond situation for +670. He could easily have had CAKQxxxx and a bit more besides so double is ridiculous.

I was surprised to note that in the Porter one of our pairs had also doubled 3C and achieved +200. Lucky them!