New Orleans NABC: The Wagar

 

 

 

Normally I would have written a lot more about the New Orleans NABC but between traveling and just being very tired I have been quite negligent.  The coverage on the ACBL website is quite decent and I do love reading the bulletin each day.  Isn’t it great to look at that magazine each morning over breakfast!  So getting caught up a little I was happy to see that Lynn Baker’s team had won the Wagar Knockout.

Lynn Baker, Austin TX; Karen McCallum, Exeter NH; Kerri Sanborn, Stony Point NY; Irina Levitina, Hackensack NJ; Beth Palmer, Silver Spring MD; Lynn Deas, Schenectady NY

I had talked to Karen at the NABC as she was setting up her booth selling quite lovely jewelry she crafted.  She told me that she and Lynn had been working very hard and that it took a lot of effort to analyze thoroughly even one session.  It is nice to see that hard work can pay off.  The seeding had held up very well since the original top two seeds met in the final Baker (1) and Valerie Westheimer (2).  And to make it even more exciting the last quarter of the final was shown on BBO and it was very exciting.  Coming into Board 62 Westheimer led 118-114 (according to BBO’s unofficial score.)  Board 62 swung that around and decided the match.  Here are the East-West hands with nobody vulnerable and West the dealer:

  

West ♠ 94   ♥ AKQ8 ♦ QJ9843  ♣ 10

East ♠  AJ7 ♥  53 ♦  K6 ♣  AJ8764

Looking at both hands what is the best game 3NT or 5♦?  In 5♦ there is a risk of a very bad diamond break and you do still have to find an eleventh trick, possibly by setting up clubs or a spade trick.  3NT on a spade lead will make as long as declarer can take three diamond tricks having Given up the DA and the defense can only take three spade tricks.  Of course declarer might not get a spade lead and that would make chances even better.  Without having worked out all the probabilities I think 3NT is the better contract.  Well yesterday it was WAY better because bidding 3NT meant winning the match.

In the Closed Room Deas was East.  She was playing a strong club system so she opened 2♣ showing 11-15 and six or more clubs with no four-card major.  Palmer bid 2♦ an enquiry and Deas responded with 2NT showing a maximum with two outside suits stopped, which from Palmers hand showed spades and diamonds since she couldn`t have a heart stopper.  Palmer simply bid 3NT and they had reached the best contract in four bids.  In the Open Room there was a more complex auction.

 

West (Breed)	East (Letizia)
	1♣
1♦	2♣
2♥	2NT
3♦	4♦
5♦	all pass

Letizia showed some length clubs and denied a four-card major when she bid 2♣   Breed continued with a natural 2h bid describing her hand and the 2NT response did suggest stoppers in the other two suits.  So to some degree Breed had similar information to Palmer at that juncture although Letizia`s hand was not quite as limited and she didn`t know about the sixth club.  Maybe it was those to factors that gave her the incentive to suggest a diamond contract.  For one thing slam might even be possible if Letizia had the right hand say something like:

S AKx H xx D Kxx C Axxxx

So now she continued to show her 6-4 shape with 3♦.  Letizia had a great hand in a way with controls and a diamond honor so it was certainly reasonable to raise diamonds but Breed didn`t have enough extra to try for slam on her own and she simply bid the diamond game.  Either player could have decided to play 3NT instead of 5♦ and neither did anything eggregious.  on a good day 5♦ would have made.  Once Levitina(North) led the ♠K Breed knew she had a home for her fourth heart.  All she needed to do was bring diamonds home for one loser but that was not possible as the cards lay:

 

 

Dealer: Vul:	North ♠ KQ62 ♥  J974 ♦  – ♣  Q9532
West ♠ 94 ♥ AKQ8 ♦ QJ9843 ♣ 10		East ♠ AJ7 ♥ 53 ♦ K6 ♣ AJ8764
	South ♠ 10753 ♥ 1062 ♦ A10752 ♣ K

 

 

 Well done in the Closed Room and unlucky for Letizia-Breed and the Westheimer team who lost the event by 2 imps!