Segment 8 of the final – was it fun? Not for me.

May 18th, 2011  ~  linda  ~  5 Comments 

The question is was the last segment of the Open Trials fun to watch?  Was it good bridge?  Did the Diamond team just run out of boards?  Maybe if they had continued with destructive tactics the whole event they would have won.  Do you really think so?

I am not criticising Diamond who were behind 81 with 15 boards to go to come out swinging.  I doubt they would have won if they had tried to play their best standard bridge game.  But let’s keep in mind a few things.  The Bathurst team was up 81 imps.  They didn’t need to fight back.  They were willing to get psyched and stolen from.  Their goal was to not lose 81 imps.  They were willing to trade +300 for +420.  It didn’t matter.  They were playing defense.  Some of the Diamond’s team tactics would work and some would fail but they just had to sit there take the abuse and not lose 81 imps.  I doubt it was much fun.

A few of the attempts were interesting.  I liked Fred Gitelman’s comic 1NT for example with a fist full of clubs.  And got to play 2C redoubled making on a misdefense.  Other attempts failed.  Like a hand later where Fred shot a spade slam that had no realistic chance.

Even though the hands were swingy and even though the Diamond team bid two grands back to back that made when the cards where not too unfriendly (one was quite a bit better than the other) it is bloody hard to get back 81 imps in 15 boards from a strong team who is playing in form.

I wished that I could have seen the same bridge I saw in all of the other segments.  I enjoyed it a lot more.  But I understand the choice was ending it after seven segments or coming out swinging.

I am just surprised that some of the commentators were describing it as entertaining.

It’s Over The Young Un’s Have Won

May 17th, 2011  ~  linda  ~  1 Comment 

Bathurst is as many said very deserving winner.  They did not have an easy path to victory defeating among others the Nickell team and then playing the final against Diamond.  Most of the time they just seemed to play topnotch bridge.

They bid well, played well, defended well and kept their cool.  This should be very exciting for American bridge which is so strong and now has a young team who can compete at the top level for many years.

The final set was a bit sad for me.  Down 81 Diamond tried to mix it up but as Ray said; “it wasn’t bridge as we know it.”  Bathurst just kept their cool and played defense.  They could afford to lose imps.  And they were willing to give up a few swings.  It is hard for the other team to get them all right.  They didn’t and so some imps came back.  Diamond was mathematically eliminated with about three or four boards to go.

The Diamond team is a good team too and it is too bad that both teams can’t play in the Bermuda Bowl.

I thoroughly enjoyed watching the event and I hope all of you had a chance to see a lot of it.

A Quiet Stanze … Segment 6

May 17th, 2011  ~  linda  ~  3 Comments 

There were few swings in Segment 6.  Board 82 was the biggest.  Grue and Lall had the machinery to get to the safest spot.  Here was the deal:

Dealer: Vul: N-S	North ♠ J3 ♥ 1054 ♦ K5 ♣ Q107653
Grue/Diamond ♠ 107 ♥ KJ872 ♦ A63 ♣ A84		Lall/Platnick ♠ AKQ65 ♥ Q63 ♦ Q10 ♣ J92
	South ♠ 9842 ♥ A9 ♦ J98742 ♣ K

Lall opened 1NT in first and Grue transferred with 2♦ .  Lall bid 2♥ and Grue bid 2♠ which was a relay to 2NT.  When Lall bid 2NT Grue bid 3NT which said even with 3 hearts it is okay to play notrump.  Lall decide to pass 3NT.  3NT is safe on this particular deal.  At the other table Diamond and Platnick arrived in the more usual but tougher 4♥ .  The opening lead was the ♦ 8 and Platnick ducked it.  He won the diamond return with his ♦ Q.  He played a heart South played the H9 and West won the ♥ J in dummy.  If you knew the hearts where breaking for sure that would be one thing but you don’t you might still make it if hearts don’t break and you have two heart losers if spades are 3-3.  Given that does it hurt to cross to dummy on a spade and lead another heart up?  Does it help?  Well on this hand it does help.  South has to win the heart ace and if he returns a diamond the ♥ Q is still in dummy to overruff North.  Maybe this is the right play.  I am not sure.  I do know it would work on this deal.

Going to the break the BBO score says Bathurst 194 and Diamond 142.  But checking on the USBF website the score is actually Bathurst 209 and DIamond 145.  I have found that there have been quite a few discrepancy with the BBO score this time.

Diamond usually has a good finish.  Let’s see how they do tonight.  I think either team will make a terrific representative in the Bermuda Bowl.

And at the half … watch for lovely Wooldridge Defense on B50

May 17th, 2011  ~  linda  ~  No Comments 

It is never easy … Diamond the number 1 seeds trails up and coming Bathurst by almost 50 imps 137-89 as the teams get ready to start day 2.  I am sad that the whole thing will end today.  It has been so much fun to watch.

In many ways as an outside observer the teams seem quite well matched.  Each team has a thoughtful careful player or two and flamboyant action players.

I find interesting the number of bidding misunderstandings during the entire trials.  Bidding has become very complex and the number of competitive auctions have grown.

But it was card play that created two large swings in the fourth segment.

On Board 49 both teams got to 5♣ .  Here is the auction in the Closed Room.  There are differences in the bidding but in both rooms East bid (or overcalled) spades and West raised 1♠ to 2♠ .

Dealer: Vul:	North ♠ 10 ♥ 108632 ♦ K5 ♣ AQ732
	South ♠ Q943 ♥ A ♦ AJ73 ♣ K1054

Hurd led the ♠ K and then switched to the ♦ 4.  With only 8 tricks off the top you have to make 3 extra tricks ruffing in the South hand.  Other options?  Setup hearts.  Ruff twice and take the diamond finesse.  But on the play at trick two that is pretty well marked with West.  The simplest line seems a cross-ruff.  You are going to ruff hearts in dummy and spades in hand.  If everything went perfectly you could actually get twelve tricks that way.  To prepare for the cross-ruff your plan is to cash your red suit winners and then begin the joyous process.

This is what happened in the Open Room.  Moss won the ♦ A in dummy, cashed the ♥ A and then crossed back to his hand on the ♦ K, presumably because he preferred to start with a heart ruff not a spade ruff, knowing he had five spades over the North hand.

The problem with this was that East had only one diamond and having won the ♦ A in dummy when he went to play the ♦ K it was ruffed and a trump came back.  On the positive side it was the ♣J and there was only one club outstanding the ♣8.  He would still have been fine if hearts had broken but they didn’t.  In the end he was one down.

Dealer: Vul:	North ♠ 10 ♥ 108632 ♦ K5 ♣ AQ732
West ♠762 ♥ KJ ♦ Q109862 ♣ 98		East ♠ AKJ85 ♥ Q9754 ♦ 4 ♣ J6
	South ♠ Q943 ♥ A ♦ AJ73 ♣ K1054

At the other table Lall (who played from the South side won the ♦ K  and played another diamond ruffed by East who returned the ♣ J.  But now East had “ruffed air” and the ♦K was still a winner.  With East out of trump Lall could cash the ♦ A at some point in the hand and still crossruff for eleven tricks.  This was a 10 imp swing for Bathurst.

Diamond lost a game swing on the next board Board 50.  Part of this was the fine defense by West, Wooldridge.

Here is what happened in the Open Room.  North-South is vulnerable.

Dealer: Vul:	Moss ♠ 87 ♥ AK10932 ♦ 86 ♣ J74
Wooldridge		Hurd
	Gitelman ♠ KQ93 ♥ QJ ♦ AK7543 ♣ Q

Moss got the lead of the ♦ 2 and led the ♣ Q off dummy.  Wooldridge won the ♣ K and returned a trump which you win in hand with the ♥ A.

Dealer: Vul:	Moss ♠ 87 ♥ K10932 ♦ 6 ♣ J7
Wooldridge		Hurd
	Gitelman ♠ KQ93 ♥ Q ♦ K7543 ♣

Here is the position.  Now what?

I am not sure it is possible to work this out but let’s see what Moss knows.  Hurd is likely 5-5 for his 1NT bid (or maybe 6-5).  The lead of the ♦ 2 suggests he had one diamond.  He has shown in to a trump.  Wooldridge’s bid suggests he has four clubs.  So Hurd is either 6-1-1-5 or 5-2-1-5.  There are several things that suggest to me (besides seeing all four hands) that he is 5-2-1-5.  The first is that he led his singleton diamond which is less likely to work with a stiff heart.  The second is that if Wooldridge had a stiff spade he might have returned it at trick two to get his spade ruff and then give Hurd a diamond ruff for the setting trick.  Also with six spades ace and five clubs to the ace or something like that Hurd might have done more in the bidding.  So let’s assume Hurd is 5-2-1-5.  What do you need to do now?

Dealer: Vul:	North ♠ 87 ♥ AK10932 ♦ 86 ♣ J74
West ♠ A10 ♥ 754 ♦ QJ109 ♣ K532		East ♠ J 6542 ♥ 86 ♦ 2 ♣ A10986
	South ♠ KQ93 ♥ QJ ♦ AK7543 ♣ Q

You need to play a diamond.  Did you work that out?  Even double dummy it is very hard to see it.  The point is that if you lead a diamond and Hurd ruffs it he will have no trump to return.  In fact the situation will not have changed.  You can ruff a club in dummy, cash the remaining high diamond pitching a club loser and so on.  Perhaps this is impossible.  The credit goes to Wooldridge who returned a trump.  At the table Moss played a spade, reasonably expecting the ♠ A to be onside.  Wooldridge won and once again returned a trump and now the hand was down for 12 imps.  A simple quiet and lovely defense.

Second Segment … are these the same teams?

May 16th, 2011  ~  linda  ~  No Comments 

We have started the second segment off with 6 pushes.  These guys even played a hand in 2NT at both tables.  I was starting to think that wasn’t possible.

On the next two boards Diamond is on the wrong side of two slam swings.  Here is the first.

Board 23 Woolridge-Hurd bid to 6♥ from the East hand.  This was missed at the other table.  Perhaps made harder for Hampson-Greco after the Precision 2♦ opening.

How good a slam is it?  You probably need a 3-2 heart break mostly.    You need to ruff two diamonds in East hand.  That gives you 5 club tricks, 6 heart tricks and the ♠ A.  Here is there auction.

I do not know what the bids mean exactly.  I apologize but it appears that East showed the three suited hand and West supported hearts.  After some cuebids Hurd basically bid the slam.  I can try to find out more later.

Try out your auction.

Board 23 Wooldridge -Hurd stopped in 4NT when Hampson Greco bid 6♦ .  6♦ is off an ace so you need to play A109742 of diamonds opposite Q53 for no losers.  Not so good.

Hampson laid down the ♦ A which wins if their is a stiff king in the North hand so he can finish for the ♦ J.  I guess th other possibility is to run the Queen which requires a stiff J in the South hand.  I am not sure one is better than the other.  Anyway the diamonds were 2-2 so there was no chance.

Both pairs are now playing Board 27 and the score is now 61 for Bathurst and 47 for Diamond.  I can see it will be a long hard couple of days for watchers.  Board 29 Hampson took a push over a strong notrump on this hand by inviting with 3S after transferring.  It could work sometimes and you really hate to miss vulnerable games.  What do you think?

By the way we have been told that there are some photos from the first 15 boards courtesy of Catalina Bathurst.  Go to www.confsudbridge.org to see them.

Here is one of Eric Greco:

It’s time to see if Woolridge takes the push to 3♠ .  I don’t think he will being a bit more of the cautious type.  Yes he passed 2♠ .  So 5 more to Bathurst.  They lead 66-49 with one more to come in the stanze.

And just when we were thinking about a break Board 30 has more action.  4♥ doubled made in the Closed Room but in the Open Room Wooldridge-Hurd are in 5♥ doubled.  It looks like it makes to me and so it turns out.  I am not sure why Greco Hampson only claimed ten tricks but it appears they did if that is correct then it is a couple of imps to Bathurst and if BBO is wrong a couple of imps the other way.

Dealer: Vul:	North ♠ A103 ♥ 5 ♦ Q96 ♣ KQ9864
West ♠ KJ8742 ♥ K1073 ♦ A53 ♣ –		East ♠ Q6 ♥ Q98642 ♦ K7 ♣ 1053
	South ♠ 95 ♥ AJ ♦ J10842 ♣ AJ72

Now everyone is finally off to dinner.  The final very unofficial score after 2 segments 66 to Bathurst and 50 to Diamonds with a lot more bridge to come.

More Live Blogging … Continuation of Segment 1

May 16th, 2011  ~  linda  ~  No Comments 

We are back.  Bathurst has now pushed their lead to 22 with 12 imps on a game swing when Diamond sold to 4S.

Things have quieted down with Board 6-7 being routine major suit games.   Play is much slower in the Open Room where Moss has gone into a huddle in the early stages of Board 7.  Of course many boards require some play and Board 7 is one of them but it is pretty safe on any reasonable line despite a poor trump break.

Board 8 brings another big swing.  This one to Diamond.  Here is the deal and the auction.  Nobody vulnerable.

Dealer: Vul:	Moss ♠ AJ97 ♥ Q3 ♦ Q532 ♣ KQ9
Zagorin ♠ K64 ♥ K876 ♦ K10964 ♣ 2		Bathurst ♠ 2 ♥ AJ10952 ♦ 8 ♣ AJ864
	Gitelman ♠ Q10853 ♥ 4 ♦ AJ7 ♣ 10753

Moss opened 1D and maybe Bahurst would have been best to bid 2NT to show his two-suiter but he chose to overcall 1H.  Gitelman bid 1S and Zagorin bid 4H. Over 5C Bathurst showed his clubs to help his partner out if the opponents bid 5S.  Gitelman decided he better show his diamond fit for much the same reason and bid 5D.  Now Zagorin really should double 5D to calm Bathurst down.  When Moss bid 5S Bathurst continued to 6H which was doubled.  This was 11 imps to diamond who played 5H making in the other room.   The room is wild with male hormones.

There is a small exchange of imps when each East-West goes down one less tricks on two failing partscores and now we come to Board 11 and more male hormones.  Lall and Gue got too high in a basically no play 7S.  6S is not bad from the South hand and may make on a club lead but Gitelman contents himself with 4.   He got the club lead and he might expect to lose imps on this board not win them.  +580 is worth 11 and we will have a tie.  Here is board 11.

Dealer: Vul:	North ♠ A4 ♥ J63 ♦ A9864 ♣ J109
West ♠ 632 ♥ KQ54 ♦ – ♣ KQ8753		East ♠ 5 ♥109872 ♦QJ753 ♣ 64
	South ♠ KQJ10987 ♥ A ♦ K102 ♣ A2

As you can see 6♠ is not a bad contract.  On a club lead you have 12 tricks and on another lead you can set up diamonds if they break (and sometimes when they don’t) for a pitch.  Grue showed a positive response  to a strong club after Hampson overcalled 2♣ and after that Lall used Blackwood and then bid the grand.  I see a lot of minuses on the horizon on the remaining boards coming from the Bathurst team in the Closed Room.   They just kept bidding.  My guess is that Diamond will end with a decent lead.  Let’s see.  In the end the minuses didn’t prove to be too bad with Diamond picking up 5 imps.  The score ended 41-36 for Diamond and I feel as if this final is going to be exciting to say the least.

These are two flamboyant teams with a lot of skill, a lot of flair and well real competitors.

So here we are the finals… live blog

May 16th, 2011  ~  linda  ~  1 Comment 

The action starts right away.  On Board 1 Moss and Gitelman arrive at a hopeless 3NT.  Moss bid the non vulnerable game because he has a source of tricks.  Unfortunately their 22 HCP did not prove to contain enough stoppers (or other tricks), four down and 6 imps.  You can see this will be an imaginative match.

Dealer: Vul:	Moss ♠ J7 ♥ K6 ♦ AKQ765 ♣ K96
West ♠ K9853 ♥ A84 ♦ 43 ♣ A103		East ♠ A1042 ♥ J9532 ♦ 102 ♣ Q5
	Gitelman ♠ Q6 ♥ Q107 ♦ J98 ♣ J9842

If this was intended to test the waters then so far they have found the waters a bit choppy.  On Board 3 we seem to have a pretty routine spade game.  But Zagorin-Bathurst had a big misunderstanding around a transfer advance (was it or wasn’t it after a negative double) which is about to cost them 11 imps.  It just reminds me how we all walk the edge sometimes with are complex bidding systems.  Colin used to call transfer advances “F–K Up”  (I have censored this for any younger readers.)  Ray and I are interested in doing a book on transfer advances.  I don’t think it has to be that complicated and it can be very useful.  All long matches will have big mistakes.  You just have to take them in your stride.   Of course those are the boards that haunt you if you lose.  (They can even become amusing if you win.)  So Diamond has regained the early lead 11 to 6.

Board 4 is a slam.  And it is amazing.  6♣ makes on 25 HCP but a 5-5 club fit North-South.  This was reached by lall-Grue in 4 bids.   .  Gitelman-Moss just ended in 1♠ on this board.   (Oh and there was a revoke by the defense which made no difference to the score …nervous anyone?)   I am glad I didn’t come to this match late.  In the first four boards we have seen 23 imps change hands.  Here is the deal

Dealer: Vul:	North ♠ 9 ♥ 1076 ♦ AQ53 ♣ 109862
West ♠ J102 ♥ 32 ♦ KJ1086 ♣ 543		East ♠ KQ74 ♥ KQ984 ♦ 9742 ♣ –
	South ♠ A8653 ♥ AJ5 ♦ – ♣ AKQJ6

In both rooms East opened 1H in third but Lall bid 2♥ with the South hand and Gitelman bid 1♠ .  Over 2♥ Grue bid 2NT and Lall just bid 6♣ .

Back to the Closed Room on Board 5, Grue and Lall did well to push on to 5♥ against a 4♠ “save” that might even make.  Now in the Open Room Gitelman-Moss sold out to 4♠ .  It should go down but we will see.  Oh no the Vugraph is down..come back, come back.  Good place to stop the blog.  I will start a new one if Vugraph returns.

The Two “Young” Teams to the Final … opening light

May 16th, 2011  ~  linda  ~  No Comments 

As Diamond and Bathurst move on to the final I think we shall see some interesting and innovative bidding from these two teams.  Diamond who has been storming along these last few years has a new threat from an even younger team.

Geoff Hampson made a case for opening light on this deal.  You are not vulnerable against vulnerable and in first chair.  Do you or don’t you open this hand?

Generally when I look at a balanced hand I have a philosophy, if I wouldn’t even open it a weak notrump than I don’t open it.  This hand falls in that category.  True the high cards you do have are nice and at least your not 4-3-3-3.  But still I wouldn’t generally open this hand with any of my partners.  Would you?  Schermer agreed with me and passed.  But Hampson opened 1♦ which shows two plus diamonds.

Let’s look at Bramley’s hand now.

He was in fourth.  North doubled and East redoubled.  The redoubled showed hearts.  (I like this treatment and then using other suits as transfers.  I can’t remember the last time I redoubled for penalty or any other useful purpose in this type of auction).  What do you bid?  You do have 15 high card points.  Bramley bid 2♦ .  It must have been meant as a cuebid since he would not have bid a passable 2♦ natural with this hand.  He was on his way to a spade game most likely.

Hampson doubled which showed three hearts and Welland passed.  East bid 2♥ and it was Bramley’s turn again.  What would you do?  If you are certain that 2♠ is forcing it seems reasonable to bid that now.  But maybe it isn’t.  By this point you are pretty certain that Welland has a light weight takeout double.Are you clear about this with your partner?  I think it should be.  In a normal auction a cuebid over a double should be forcing to at least the three level.  Bramley did get passed out.  Can you get to the only game contract that has a chance?  3NT.   This is the whole deal.

Dealer: Vul:	Welland ♠ K53 ♥ A1097 ♦ 4 ♣ K7532
Hampson ♠10984 ♥ KJ2 ♦ K976 ♣ A10		Greco ♠ 72 ♥ Q8543 ♦ Q10 ♣ 9864
	Bramley ♠ AQJ6 ♥ 6 ♦ AJ8532 ♣ QJ

Let’s assume that you have agreed that 2♦ is a cuebid.  I think you need to start out that way even with the possibility of a short diamond in opener’s hand because you need a cuebid over a takeout double and I would like to keep hearts as natural after partner doubles diamonds.  After that I think that 2♠ should be forcing to game.  Now Welland would probably bid 3♣ and you could bid 3♥ getting 3NT from Welland.  But even then, the defense should be easier with Bramley’s hand coming down.  Suppose you get the likely heart lead.  The trick is that Hampson must win the first club.  Now there are just not enough entries to set up clubs and then cash them.

The opening bid helped the defense in two ways.  It would make it easy for Greco to lead a heart (although pretty well any lead will beat 3NT) and it puts the wrong hand down in dummy.

So at Hampson’s table the table result of 2♠ was probably as good as it gets.  While at the other table Moss and Gitelman had no problem getting to 3NT.  They got a spade lead and when Gitelman led the ♣ J from hand it was not obvious to rise to block the suit.

I admit that this doesn’t prove that opening light works better but it can make it a lot harder on the other side when it is their hand.

Diamond and Bathurst Lead Semi’s

May 15th, 2011  ~  linda  ~  1 Comment 

At the mid-way point Diamond (Diamond-Platnick, Gitelman-Moss, Greco-Hampson) the number 1 seed lead Welland (Welland-Bramley, Chambers-Schermer) by 59 imps while Bathurst the original 10th seed leads Bathurst (Bathurst-Zagorin, Grue-J. Lall, Hurd-Wooldridge) leads Wolfson (Wolfson-Cohen, Ekeblad-Rubin, Garner-Weinstein byt 51 imps).  If these results hold up we will see a battle between the young and the younger.  I was reading an interesting blog in Bridge Topics this morning about a deal from their quarter final match against Nickell – a Dutch Squeeze.  (a psuedo-squeeze.)

Peggy Kaplan descibes the new generation of players that shone in Louisville in this article from the ACBL news archive.  Here is what she said about Joel Wooldridge.

At the Louisville NABC, however, a new generation burst upon the scene. In both pair and team events, players in their twenties and thirties knocked out the elite. Competitors not long out of junior competition captured titles.

At the head of the pack was Joel Wooldridge. Joel began his incredible showing by capturing the toughest-ever-pair event, the Platinum Pairs (playing with John Hurd). He followed that up with another title, the Silodor Open Pairs. In addition to his two wins, Joel finished 2nd in the Flight A NAP, and fourth in the Jacoby Swiss. All in all, Joel ended with an amazing 454+ platinum points and a firm grasp of the Mott-Smith Trophy, the award bestowed upon the player with the highest total at the Spring NABC.

This New York Times Article has a deal played by Joe Grue (with Shane Blanchard) with Kevin Bathurst and Joel Wooldridge second) in the N.A. Open Pairs in Louisville.

There is more about the players on this wonderful up and coming team.

Of course the number 1 seed Diamond is a favorite with all of us.  We have watched this team mature and become a top North American team.    As Peggy Kaplan says in her article – who says bridge is dying.  Its wonderful to have new generations of bridge players to challenge for the top spots.

But don’t count Wolfson and Welland out.  These teams are composed of strong experienced players who could win any event.

These Things Happen

May 14th, 2011  ~  linda  ~  2 Comments 

I was going through the final session of the quarterfinals of the US Team Trials this morning.   In the closest match number 3 seed Aker lost to the 6th seed Wolfson by 12 imps.  Board 109 was a 12 imp swing to the winners.  It was a bidding mistake in what would normally be a pretty routine four spade game.  I am not familiar with their system which is a form of Precision, nor does the system summary on the website have the details I need.  It does seem to be pretty routine.

West ♠ A1074 ♥ 52 ♦ 2 ♣ AKQ1096

East ♠ K962 ♥ AK84 ♦ 9863 ♣ 4

This is the auction as it was described by the commentators.

2♣ showed 6 clubs and an opener.  2♦ apparently  asks about majors and 2♥ shows s four card major.  2♠ asks again and 3♥ shows four spades.    East bid 2♠ which apparently he thought confirmed spades as the trump suit.  Now East continued with 3♥ its not clear what that meant.  Somewhere around here the auction got lost in the ether.  East continued 4♥ which was passed out.

Now I don’t know what their actual understanding was.  I don’t know if somebody was outside the bounds of the system book.  But this does seem like a pretty basic auction in their system.

As I look at this very big oops I have two emotions.  One, please don’t let this happen to me when it matters this much and two I am so sorry that it happened to you.

I have had my share of oops lately so I know just how it can happen.