Handicapping the CNTC

June 5th, 2009  ~  linda  ~  No Comments 

I am not crazy enough to venture any guesses about the outcome of the CWTC round robin but I thought I might take a wild guess at how teams would finish in the Canadian Open Teams.  The teams that by chance are number team 1 and team 2 seem to be two of the top contenders.  They include

1. John Carruthers, Joseph Silver, David Turner, Roy Hughes, Nader Hanna, Jim Green
2. Nicolas L’Ecuyer, Kamel Fergani, Darren Wolpert, Jurek Czyzowicz, David Grainger, Daniel Korbel

Most of the players on both teams have won before at least once.  Moving down the list team 3,  6 and 13 also looks to me to be a qualifier.

3. Paul Thurston, Jeff Smith, Keith Balcombe, Ross Taylor, John Duquette, Hérve Chatagnier

6. Vince Nowlan, Vince Lambert, Doug Deschner, Gerry McCully, Judy Gartaganis, Nick Gartaganis

13. Zygmunt Marcinski, Bryan Maksymetz, Dan Jacob, Larry Hicks, Waldemar Frukacz, David Willis

Again composed of past winners.

As I go further down the randonly order team list here are two more.

15. Michael Gamble, Ranald Davidson, Vince Oddy, John Gowdy, Anton Blagov, Ivan Popinov

22. Ray Jotcham, Steve Mackay, Lewis Richardson, Eiji Kujirai, Alan Lee

Those are my picks to make the top 8.  But one thing I know for certain, even if I knew all the teams really well (and I admit I don’t) so that I was a better handicapper there will still be lots of surprises.  These teams are closely matched and many of the teams I didn’t pick could easily qualify.  If I didn’t pick your team don’t get upset – I know I won’t be more than about 60% right.  Go ahead show me your stuff.

The Open Teams are starting on Saturday.  I am sure many of them are already in Penticton.  Good luck to you all.  Have a blast too.  And I will be seeing you soon.

Full Disclosure

June 3rd, 2009  ~  linda  ~  4 Comments 

Colin and I play a weird system by North American standards.  We play a strong forcing club which eliminates most players.  We play canape with four card majors.  An opening bid of one diamond suggests that we do not have even a four card major.  That is really very strange to most players.  We also play Multi, 11-3 notrump not vulnerable and 14-16 vulnerable and our major suit two bids show a major and a minor weak.    Even our responses to one of a major are odd with transfer responses and two clubs as a game force requesting opener to describe their shape.  We usually tell some of this to players who have not seen us play before we start and we do self alert on BBO but perhaps not as much as we should.

Yesterday I was startled by a complain by an opponent.  It didn’t really affect the actual auction but he felt we should have alerted.  It started 1NT 14-16 which was alerted and the two clubs Stayman which was not alerted.  We do play forcing and nonforcing Stayman so when we bid two clubs it does suggest that we have an invitational hand (less frequently a weaker hand).  But that was not the complaint exactly.  I responded two diamonds, no major and Colin bid two spades which has to be a five card suit or longer in any system and normally invitational.  That is what they complained about.  They felt Colin should alert two spades and say it was five or longer and invitational.  Oddly enough they had a very similiar auction later which they did not alert and which had the same meaning.  (Being me, I did point it out to them).

They asked that since it was a system with “screens” that we alert everything.  So I did. 1H, four plus hearts, could have a longer minor, could have four spades, 11-16 HCP, generally unbalanced unless it is in our notrump range.

Every bid and every response carries a lot of meaning and it did take forever to type it all (not to mention that it is error prone).

I think there is a lot of validity in their comments and having the behind screen self alert on BBO is nice.  Colin used to have the convention card set up so it did some of this automatically.  I will ask him to do it again.

Still alerting normal Stayman auctions (other than saying nonforcing Stayman perhaps) seems a bit much.

We Finally Did IT

June 2nd, 2009  ~  linda  ~  No Comments 

After working for months (slowly I admit) on a new system with Colin we finally decided to try it out last night.  Strangely I find this version of the system much easier to remember than the original version (based on Meckwell) where bidding used a lot of transfers and relays.  We are playing four card majors with canape and forcing club with a 14-16 notrump (occasionally 10-12).  Since we are playing four card majors 1 diamond actually shows diamonds since it denies a four card major although you could have fewer than four diamonds with some distributions.

How many hearts do you open this hand with both red.

S 10 J KQJ9432 D KJ4 C 53

I decided on 4H which my preempt meister Ray confirmed this morning was his choice too.  It worked really well propelling them much to high.

One of the questions I have asked Colin is what one of major means over one diamond.  Since partner is denying a four card major should it show five or four?  With 1-4-4-4 and a singleton diamond should you bid clubs?  We don’t seem to have any notes over one diamond which I am sure Colin will remedy soon.

We had a great time and I was reminded about how good a player Colin is.  On to bigger and better things.

Sylvia and I are practicing a fair bit in these last few days before Penticton.  It will be strange to play in person after all this time playing on the Internet.  I don’t know how our team will do although of course we will all give it our all but this year (and that hasn’t always been the case), I am looking forward to playing in the women’s team trials.  I think I feel less pressure this year than last and there is the special treat at the end, my visit to my daughter in Vancouver.

The 41st Tallinn – Swiss Teams in Estonia

May 30th, 2009  ~  linda  ~  4 Comments 

I had a lot of fun watching some very exciting this morning.  I was kibitzing the Swiss Team event at the Tallinn Festival in Estonia. http://www.bridge.ee/festival/fest08.htm  Here is one deal

North-South quickly arrived in 6♦ . At one table East led a trump. North has three potential losers, a club and two hearts. But he can throw some of them away on the spade winners. On a trump lead North can actually try hearts and clubs. He can lead a heart towards dummy and if the ♥K holds he can then discard the rest of the hearts in his hand on spades and just give up a club. If the heart loses to the ♥A he can try the♥Q and if the ♥J doesn’t fall he can fall back on the club finesse. Lots of chances. But what if you get a club as in the Open Room? In this case the ♣6 playing third and fifth.  Should you rise on the ♣A? If you do how should you play the hand now?

Let’s say you think that East has the ♣K and you rise. You unblock the ♠K and draw trump ending in dummy.   East showing up with three diamonds.  You play of two rounds of spades discarding your remaining clubs and then play the last spade discarding a heart. East shows out on the fourth spade.  Here is the ending.

Dealer: Vul:		North
		♠	—
		♥	Q108
		♦	J10
		♣	—
West				East
♠				♠
♥				♥
♦				♦
♣				♣
		South
		♠	—
		♥	K63
		♦	—
		♣	Q10

At this point you know that West was had five spades three diamonds and probably three clubs but you can’t be certain of the clubs.  So likely two hearts. If you think that West has the  ♥J you could finesse the  ♥10, 50%.  You could also lead a heart to your ♥Q.   If East has the ♥A then he can win and will have to play a heart back since a club sets up your twelfth trick.  At this point the odds suggest that East has the ♥J because he has more hearts.  Therefore you duck.  If the ♥Q holds you could play a heart towards dummy and duck completely playing West for the doubleton ace.  Given the likelihood that East has four hearts a heart to the queen doesn’t seem too bad, possibly more than 50%.  A third line might be the ruffing finesse in clubs and then leading the ♥Q out of your hand.  If that holds then play a heart to dummy’s ♥K.  This seems worse because it needs more cards well placed.

I think the right line once you rise on the ♣A is to play a heart to the queen and we see that works.  We all thought at the time that the club finesse at trick one was best but then who wants to go down at trick one.  North played the first few tricks as described but faltered in this ending.  Full credit to East who made the nice attacking lead at trick one.

This deal from the same event caused so much discussion at the table and so many comments and questions from spectators that I finally promised to write it up in my blog.

It seems innocent enough. West lead his stiff club and declarer rose with the ace and led a club out. East won with the ♣ J as West discarded a heart. East returned a diamond won in dummy with the diamond ace. Declarer played another club. East won and West discarded a second heart. East continued a diamond ruffed by declarer. Declarer led out the ♠10 which East won.  East returned the H10 covered with the ♥Q, ♥A and ruffed. This is the ending.

Dealer: Vul:		North
		♠	QJ
		♥	—
		♦	87
		♣	Q9
West				East
♠	87			♠	4
♥	J8			♥	953
♦	KQ			♦	—
♣	—			♣	J9
		South
		♠	K6
		♥	K74
		♦	—
		♣	8

It seemed apparent to the spectators that North had the rest of the tricks.  He could ruff another diamond high/  Cash his top heart throwing a diamond and play a trump to dummy, drawing trump and claiming.  The problem was that South (Luks) was worried that the trumps might be 4-1.   At this point he has four tricks in and he needs five of the remaining six to make his contract.  If he ruffs a diamond then cashes his heart throwing a club (not a diamond), he can make the remaining three tricks he needs on a high crossruff.

So yes, that line will work for those who suggested it.  But at the table South did not throw a club, he threw a diamond.  He can still make it by cashing the ♠K and playing a club.  West will ruff in with his last trump but dummy will now be high.  Of course if you play it this way you are playing for trump to split so you may as well have claimed a few tricks back.  However our declarer ruffed a heart after cashing the ♥K.  This leaves him a trick short.  If he tries to play a club the defense ruffs and returns a trump and declarer can take no more tricks.

So for those who thought Luks played it right:  yes, it was right to guard against the 4-1 trump break but only if he continued along the lines that let him make the hand.

Then at the table Luks claimed and the defense agreed.  The Vugraph operator confirmed all happened as stated.  So unless there was some error somewhere this was indeed  a false claim.  Thanks to everyone who sent me comments (I think everyone who was watching did just that).  I hope this clears it allup.

Winning and Losing

May 29th, 2009  ~  linda  ~  No Comments 

It must have been heart breaking for the Mancuso team to lose the competition for USA1 by such a narrow margin but they knew they had another chance and they took it becoming USA 2. This time it wasn’t that close but still there is a fine line between winning and losing and a few small things could have made a lot of difference.  Let’s look at one deal that lead to their victory and is quite often the case this is all about bidding.

I have shown the auction in the Open Room where Glasson and Berkowitz held the East-West cards. They are playing Precision which actually didn’t affect the auction much except that the opening diamond bid didn’ show diamond length. Once Glasson had shown a balanced minimum hand (presumably 11-13 since their opening notrump range is 14-16). Berkowitz must have been thinking slam but as you can see the auction timed out badly for her. But look at Glasson’s hand. She doesn’t have a minimum for this auction. She has 12 HCP, three decent trump, a ruffing value. Her points are good and well placed. I think she should cuebid over 3♠. This will get them to the slam that was reached in the other room.

Congratulations to all the winners but especially my commiserations to the losers.  I have been in both places.  It is hard to lose.

Exciting to the second last deal

May 28th, 2009  ~  linda  ~  3 Comments 

The US Women’s Team Trial has been wonderful to watch so far. Going into Board 95 of 96 Mancuso was in the lead. It was a slim lead but the last two deals looked straightforward enough and Mancuso figured to be the winner. This was Board 95

At the other table they North-South from the Mancuso team had played this hand in 3NT down 1.  This figured to be normal since 3NT will go down on the lead of either major suit.  In the open room Levitina and Sanborn for the Dinkin team reached 5 clubs.  As you can see from the diagram this contract has three losers and it seems that there is no way to avoid them.   Quinn sitting West lead a trump.  Sanborn played three rounds of trump ending in dummy.   Needing to set up diamonds she led a diamond from dummy to the DK and DA. 

To be fair it is not clear what Quinn should do now and she doesn’t know about declarer’s diamond fit. But the SA does seem safe.  Even if Sanborn has the Kx of spades she will certainly be able to play the suit for herself for the same number of tricks.  But it is hard to imagine why Quinn made her next play.  She returned a small diamond and the deal was over and so was the final.  Now down by 7 instead of up by 5 the last deal was a low level partscore, not enough to have any chance to regain the lead.

If the Mancuso team fails to win the match today for USA 2, this is a deal that Quinn will not soon forget.  She has my sympathy.  We all make these mistakes.  I don’t usually write up this type of deal in my blog but this one was the final turning point in this hard fought match.  I mean no disrespect to Quinn at all.  She is a fine player and a ferocious competitor.

So the majority of readers who picked Dinkin in my Blog were right but just by a hair.

Active Kibitzing The US Women’s Team Trials

May 27th, 2009  ~  linda  ~  No Comments 

As of end of day yesterday the score in the Final match with teams one and two was Baker: 102 and Mancuso 107 with the lead changing hands a few times. I see from the results of the poll this morning that readers see it as close as well. Still time to vote.

I have been a BBO commentator at several sessions of the US Women’s Team Trials and watch some bits and pieces of other sessions. It is exciting and with two rounds to go the Final with Dinkin and Mancuso has a 5 imp difference with the match see sawing back and forth between the two teams. Like two tired prize fighters each throws some great punches and then is hit by a sucker punch or simply falls to the mat when they lose their footing. Or as Charles Dickens might have said had he written a Tale of Two Women’s Teams: “It was the best of bridge, it was the worst of bridge.” Well to be fair a lot of it was just good women’s bridge.

Why do teams rise to the occasion or fall flat from time to time in these matches? From my personal experience most of it is the pressure.

Being a commentator has also been an interesting experience. Some times I think it is a competitive sport with the commentators arguing about the merits of potential bids or plays, sometimes knowledgably and sometimes not. My first match was wonderful with Kit Woolsey and David Bird who are two of the very best. Some of the later matches seemed more like territorial contests where players of lesser caliber seemed determined to mark their turf with silly arguments. What do you think of this bid from the second final set not vulnerable versus vulnerable?  You are in first chair in a close match holding this hand:

Karen McCallum opened 3♣. This worked very well on the deal as we shall see.  This bid never works for me.  My partner turns up with something like:

But winning bridge is doing the wrong thing at the right time.  In events like this it is about creating pressure.  Oddly enough McCallum and Baker did have a spade fit but it was still right to preempt in clubs.  Here is the deal:

What went wrong? Well perhaps West (Mancuso) should just have bid 4 ♥ after East (Sutherlin) bid 4♣ which I think had to show a slam try in hearts.   Mancuso doesn’t have much extra for her 3 ♥ bid and Sutherlin did pass.  Yes they might have a perfect fit but it isn’t worth exploring.  Things tend not to break after a preempt and it isn’t usually right to try for ambitious slams.  When McCallum found the spade lead 5 ♥ had no play.

I am going to include a deal that was misplayed at both tables in a similar way because it is instructive.

There was no option bidding and both tables ended in 4♠ after North showed a strong balanced hand and South used Stayman to find the spade fit.  At both tables a club honor was led.  How do you play the hand?

I teach my students to count losers so let’s start with that.  You have a potential heart loser, a diamond loser and three club losers.  (I am assuming that spades break 3-2).    Two too many but 1 club can go on a diamond and one can be ruffed.  Simple ten tricks.  Let’s say you win the first club and play a high diamond.  East will win and return a heart.  Now what do you do?  If spades break you must rise taking no risk of a heart ruff draw trump and claim your ten tricks.  But if spades don’t break then you need the finesse and there will be some more play to the hand.  Perhaps the best line is to draw trumps right away.  If you play two rounds of trump and everyone follows you can actually play the third round and then the top diamond ultimately conceding a heart to the king.  What if someone shows out on the second trump which you have won in dummy.  You are now forced to take the heart finesse.  Things are going to be tense but you may make it even with the bad trump break.  By the way, if East is going to hold the opening club lead I like ducking it.  This will help with the timing on the hands with the 4-1 trump breaks.

Did I miss something?

At both of the tables in the Final both women did not draw two rounds of trump and both ended up finessing the heart.  When the heart return was trumped they were out of luck.

US Women’s Team Trials – The First Final

May 26th, 2009  ~  linda  ~  No Comments 

With two teams to pick for Brazil, the final that starts today is not the end of the road.  All of the four teams in the semifinals keep playing.  I like this system; it is similar to one used in curling.  The winner of today’s final goes to Brazil while the loser plays the winner of today’s second match, a playoff between what are now the three and four team.  It really a kind of double elimination among the final four teams.  The teams I thought would win did go through to today’s final.  Mancuso has been in good form all week and Baker (Dinkin) was the number one seed.  North of yesterday’s matches were fairly close all day which made it fun for the spectators if not the players.

Daily Bulletin

I did my first day as a Vugraph commentator on BBO.  It was a lot of fun especially the first session.  I got to chat with David Bird, a friend and author and Kit Woolsey, who I don’t know personally but who I respect a great deal.  There were a lot of jokes and some interesting bridge comments.  Here was one of the jokes.  We were talking about whether or not to discuss an inflammatory deal with a poor result.  I was arguing that it needed time to age and I wouldn’t discuss it for a while.  Anyway, I said that if it had happened to Ray and I, we wouldn’t be sleeping in the same beds that night.  David immediately responded; “Yes, and both beds would be labelled “I am right””.

There are many interesting hands to discuss but I will only pick a few.  This is a hand that Ray and I discussed after.  Here is your hand  sitting West, white on red

The auction starts 1♠-pass-1NT (forcing one round) and you overcall 2♣

This is passed around to South (Palmer) who bids 2♦.  Do you bid again?  I confess I would it looks like I have about eight tricks.  But Ray argues that I should be seeing the flashing “Warning Will Robinson, Danger!” lights.   He argues that North could have a trap pass.  Yeah, I suppose but is it really that likely.  Why can’t North have some wishy washy 13 count.  Anyway not this time.  North was 5-5 and 3♣ gets doubled.  The auction was identical at both tables for a push.  This is the whole deal.

Dealer: Vul:		North
		♠	KQJ65
		♥	A9
		♦	7
		♣	KJ1086
West				East
♠	A72			♠	1084
♥	64			♥	K8753
♦	A			♦	Q543
♣	AQ95432			♣	7
		South
		♠	93
		♥	QJ102
		♦	KJ109862
		♣	VOID

Board 28 was interesting.

Dealer: Vul:		North
		♠	5
		♥	K764
		♦	K32
		♣	A8762
West				East
♠	AKQ104			♠	J7
♥	10852			♥	AQJ93
♦	Q76			♦	AJ
♣	10			♣	KQJ3
		South
		♠	98632
		♥	VOID
		♦	109854
		♣	954

The auction started off this way

North-South Vulnerable

Is there any way that East-West can penalize this?  On a trump lead North-South will take four tricks which adds up to 1100 and a lot of imps.  If you play that redoubles tend to be penalty oriented (as I do)  and show no real fit. then there is an argument that you should be fairly trigger happy with opponents at this vulnerability and West who has a  minimum hand, some trump and some shape might take a piece of this.  If that were the case at this vulnerability McCallum might well pass.  This is of course a fantasy.

The real question is can East-West now get to slam.  A slam that is made better by the knowledge that the heart king is almost certainly onside.  North has to hold all the high cards in fact.  At our table after 2♦ was passed to her McCallum continued with 3♥ announcing her good suit and super hand.  Now it was up to Baker.  While she did have an official minimum in my mind this hand has grown.  You have a source of tricks, lots of trump for partner, and a singleton.  I would have cuebid 4♣.  After that East will not stop short of slam.  But you can hardly fault Baker for bidding a simple 4♥.

In the other room Pollack with the East handed ended the auction quickly when she bid 3NT over South’s 2♦ bid in a similar auction.  I like McCallum’s action a lot better.

Let the Games Begin – The USBF Women’s Team Trials

May 24th, 2009  ~  linda  ~  1 Comment 

The Women’s team trials have begun and they have completed the first round robin with 7 of the 8 teams competing.  Today they are playing the second round robin.  I read the very amusing newsletter.  Here is a snippet from it.

——————————————————–

Ten Things Only Women Understand:

10. Why it’s good to have five pairs of black shoes.

9. The difference between cream, ivory, and off-white.

8. Crying can be fun.

7. FAT CLOTHES.

6. A salad, diet drink, and a hot fudge sundae make a balanced lunch.

5. Discovering a designer dress on the clearance rack can be considered a peak life experience.

4. The inaccuracy of every bathroom scale ever made.

3. A good man might be hard to find, but a good hairdresser is next to impossible.

2. Why a phone call between two women never lasts under ten minutes.

AND THE NUMBER ONE THING ONLY WOMEN UNDERSTAND:

1. OTHER WOMEN!

——————————————————-

You can read the newsletter and follow the trials at

USBF Women’s Team Trials

I have just joined the crew of commentators on BBO and I will be commenting on some of the matches tomorrow.

Here is the Vugraph schedule for Monday and Tuesday – all times are Eastern Standard Time.  Add 3 hours if you are on the West Coast.

Monday, May 25:

Match 1 2:00 pm EST

Match 2 4:35 pm

Match 3 9:00 pm

Match 4 11:35 pm New York

Tuesday, May 26

Match 5 2:00 pm

Match 6 1:35 pm

Match 7 9:00 pm

Match 8 11:35 pm

I will be writing a daily report on the trials and writeups of some of the matches on the Blog.  Come and see me on BBO, all comments and heckling are of course welcome.

The Dinkin team has a bye to the semifinals.  All the other teams are playing a double round robin.  After Round Robin 1 the standings are:

5. Mancuso 85.91

7. Walsh 85.12

4. Radin 78.75

3. Glasson  73.85

6. Moss  63.01

2. Fireman 46.22

8. Boyd 44.14

The results for Boyd after Day 1 is probably no surprise since they were seeded last.  Fireman was seeded second though and surely are expected to come on strong.  They include

Phyllis Fireman, Janice Seamon-Molson, Jill Meyers, Shannon Cappelletti, Tobi Sokolow

The top three make it to the semifinals but there is still another complete day of play.

“Peaches” comments in the newsletter that she expects Fireman and Glasson to rally.  They did have to contend with the time zones, coming from the East Coast.  (Which reminds me that most of my team will have the same problem in Penticton in a few weeks.)

The USBF newsletter makes me wish we could have the same in the CBF trials.  Well this year a blog will have to do but maybe some of us can convince the CBF that an online newsletter is not expensive and would add a lot to our trials.  (Hey, maybe they are planning to do it and will surprise me?)

Don’t miss Stacy Jacobs blog from the event. Here is her Day 1 blog.

http://stacyjacobs.com/2009/05/24/well-underway/

UPDATE:

The top three in the round robin who will move on into the semifinals:

Mancuso who played strong from the beginning and ran away from the field almost a match and a half ahead of second.

In the end the rest of the teams were closely packed and just about any of them could have claimed a playoff spot.  Glasson and Moss narrowly edged out Fireman (sorry about that Chris – see the comment).

Congratulations to the winners and my sincere commiserations to the losers.  It was so close; believe me I have been there.

A Nice Position

May 19th, 2009  ~  linda  ~  2 Comments 

Sylvia and I had a pretty good set in a team game this afternoon. I found this position during the game (for an extra undertrick) a little unusual.

The opponents arrived in 4♠ After South with nobody vulnerable opened 1♠ in third and I overcalled 2♠ Michaels.  Passed hand North took a shot at the spade game.

So your hand is

The opening lead is a high diamond and this is the dummy:

Nice partner switches to a club and declarer wins the club ace and plays a spade partner winning the spade queen.  Now partner plays a club to your club queen.  It is your moment.  It looks like partner is

1-5-5-2.

We have a spade trick, a club trick, two diamonds, and maybe we can make two heart tricks.  (Yeah, yeah I am just trying for extra undertricks).

If partner has the heart AQ we can return either heart and partner will take the two hearts and her diamond.  But what if partner has the KQ9?  Now we have to return a small heart form the J4.  This is the only defense.  Partner did well not to cash her diamond earlier.

Maybe I have seen this position before but it is pretty and I don’t recall it just now.  Here is the whole hand

Dealer: Vul:		North
		♠	A94
		♥	532
		♦	Q652
		♣	AJ2
West				East
♠	Q			♠	653
♥	A10876			♥	J4
♦	AK1043			♦	97
♣	83			♣	KQ10965
		South
		♠	KJ10872
		♥	KQ9
		♦	J8
		♣	74