TABLE TALK
A publication of
the Vermont Bridge Association June 2005
Introducing
Jesse Stalker
Table
Talk’s Featured Personality
for the
June issue
I was
raised on a dairy farm just south of
I also
joined and served 18 years in the Vermont National Guard. During the two weeks
of annual summer camp at
During the
winter of 1992, my favorite partner (Jim Daigle) and I started weekly trips to
the Wednesday night duplicate game in
I live in
When the
Goodyear plant closed in 1987 I began working for the U.S. Postal Service as a
rural route carrier in
When the
Woodstock Bridge Club went dormant, I switched to the weekly Norwich Club. In
June 2000, Sylvia Fraser said she was going to retire as Director/Club Manager.
When no one volunteered to take over, I raised my hand, passed the director's
exam and assumed her duties. The
This year
I taught my first bridge class (Diamond Series - Play of the Hand) at
Duplicate
bridge is a fascinating game. Somewhere I read that a player makes about 40,000
decisions during a game. I try to keep my mistakes to 50 or less. That's why I
now smile and move onto the next hand when my partner or I make a mistake.
Editor’s Note: Jesse resides in
Moving
Up
Congratulations to the following VBA members who have reached new
achievement levels
New Junior Master: Mark
Adair, Vivienne Adair, Donald Bly, Linda Bly
Robert
Nickerson. Maria Walsh, Thomas Walsh.
Nicholas
Weir
New Club Master: Frank
Reed
New Sectional Master: Bertrand
Nadeau
New NABC Master:
New Silver Life Master: Jean
Tout
Tiernan Trophy Race
Each year the Vermont Bridge
Association awards the Tiernan trophy to the
1. Phil Sharpsteen 27.93 6. Jerry DiVincenzo 14.78
2. Frank Hacker 27.93 7. Wayne Hersey 12.33
3. Michael Arnowitt 19.44 8.
4. Louise Acker 16.55 9. Jackie Kimel 10.19
4. Chris Acker 16.55 10. Hank Youngerman 9.94
As usual, my most humble and abject apologies for any errors or omissions.
Scott Aborn Trophy Race
At their May 14th meeting, the Board of Directors
of the Vermont Bridge Association instituted a new trophy race in memory of
Scott Aborn who passed away a few years ago. Scott was an educator, a former
Table Talk editor and a promoter of bridge. Scott was an avid student of the
game and an enthusiastic participant in
Each year, starting with the 2005 trophy race, the Vermont
Bridge Association will award the Scott Aborn trophy to the
1.
2. Alan Wertheimer 8.60 6. Elayne Bernstein 5.08
3. Rhoda Chickering 8.21 7. Gary Feingold 4.80
4. Bonnie Clouser 6.56 8. Herb Franzen 4.18
Once again, my apologies for any inadvertent errors.
Check It Out
Have you ever visited the American Contract Bridge League web site at www.ACBL.org? If not, you are missing a great good thing. The web site is easy to navigate and has a lot of information. You can find general bridge news and information about bridge clubs (very handy if you’re planning a vacation). You can order ACBL products and check out future tournament schedules and past tournament winners. The information in this Table Talk about the performance of Vermonters in tournaments around the country is readily available to anyone. No special access is required.
If you have a password (easy to get), you can check your master points and dues status. There are links to all the district web sites and through them to the unit web sites (including VT unit 175). Did you even know that the Vermont Bridge Association had a web site? All I can say is check it out.
Play The Card You’re Known To Have
by Ellie Hanlon
Note from the Editor:
Ellie Hanlon is a new contributor to Table Talk. Ellie resides in
A strange phenomenon occurs in duplicate bridge; holding a declarer to one fewer trick than all other declarers is as important as bidding a 28 point grand slam. It seems as if today’s student is focused on elaborate bidding systems and methods and sometimes neglects to learn the simple principles of defense.
A few days ago, I saw my partner performing a miracle, a play I’d forgotten, which is playing the card one is known to have. It was an innocent, inelegant 1NT contract, but she netted us a complete top. Here is the hand
H KQx
D xx
S xx C Q102 S KJx
H 98x H J10xx
D Qxxx D AKx
C K9xx S 10xx C AJx
H Axx
D J1098
C 8xx
I was south. East opened 1NT and all passed. Of course, I led the J of diamonds. Declarer played dummy’s queen and led a small club to the J which held. This was followed by the A of clubs, on which partner played the Q, the CARD SHE WAS KNOWN TO HAVE.
Declarer then played a club to the 9 and lost to the 10 which surely appeared to be in my hand! Now declarer’s eight tricks, 3 diamonds and 4 clubs, plus a spade or a heart, evaporated and declarer’s score of +120 or +150 was gone. Declarer eventually won 3D, 2C and 2S for fewer tricks than any other declarer, not by misplay, but by deceptive defense.
A similar hand occurred on board 18 in the recent Saturday Worldwide pairs
S 5
H 108764
D 102
H K93 H J
D 9853 D AKQJ10
C Q6
H AQ52
D 64
C K5
I was east and opened 1D. South bid 1S and partner and north passed. To show the strength of my hand, I bid 1NT (showing 18-19). Everyone passed. The lead was the 2 of hearts, which I let ride to my J. Next I led a club toward the Q. South rose with the K and returned the 5 of H. I won the K (relief!) and now had my +150 (9 tricks in NT) as opposed to +130 in diamonds. I played 4 rounds of diamonds on which south jettisoned the A and Q of hearts. Now I became greedy, fallaciously thinking south was guarding the Q of spades and the A of clubs. I played a club. North delightedly won and cashed 3 hearts!!! (10 8 7). His partner had unblocked and with egg on my face, I claimed +120 for a very bad result.
A watchful defensive team can often garner many tops by using this deceptive play of playing cards they are known to have.
Interrogative
Doubles
by Bryant Jones
Note
from the Editor: Table Talk is pleased to have a new
contributor, Bryant Jones, who plays most of his bridge at the
The ACBL
refers to interrogative doubles as “card showing” (see back of card, top left)
and they are not alertable. Their primary function is to assist partner in
competitive auctions. Interrogative doubles are both telling and asking bids.
They tell partner you are at or near the top of your range and ask partner
whether s/he might prefer to defend.
The most
common occurrence is when you settle in 2 of a major and the opponents balance.
Most duplicate players realize they will not win many match points by
permitting their opponents to play in 2 of a major, so they usually compete,
often with suspect values, expecting partner’s hand to compensate.
To
illustrate – Suppose you raise partner’s 1H opener to 2H, which is passed back
around to your right hand opponents, who elects to compete by bidding 3C.
You may
hold one of the following hands
A. S- QJx H-
Kxx D- xxx C- xxxx
B. S- xxx H-
KQx D- QJ10xx C- xx
C. S- Axx H-
xxx D- Axxx C- xxx
With hand
A, you pass, having nothing further to say. With hand B, some (many?) would
also pass, but I suggest 3H. If the opponents make 3C, you will not like your match
point score. If partner has enough cards to defeat 3C, you may well make 3H.
With hand C, you definitely want to take action, but what? This is an ideal
hand for an interrogative double—not a penalty double. You wish to find out
whether (or not) partner’s hand is suitable for defense.
The
pendulum now swings back to opener. A typical opening hand contains 2 ½ quick
tricks. If opener has a modest/aggressive hand such as S- xx,
H- KQJxx, D- KQxx, C- Qx, s/he should bid 3H – preferring
offense to defense. However, if opener holds a more typical hand such as S-.KQx,
H- Axxxx, D- xx, C- Axx, s/he should pass your interrogative
double for penalties.
Interrogative
doubles are not restricted to responder. Suppose you open 1H; overcall of 1S;
2H by partner; 2S by right hand opponent. With extra values you may be unsure
whether to double or bid 3H. Here double by opener should be interrogative. If
partner’s raise was based on 6-8 points of non-defensive “stuff,” then s/he
should bid 3H (or perhaps 4H with exciting distribution). With some defense,
particularly a “wasted” trump trick, (say QJx), s/he should pass (convert the
interrogative double to a penalty double).
CAUTION --- Interrogative doubles are not
for the faint of heart. Giving up 3C doubled is a minus of 470 or 670,
depending on the vulnerability. I suggest that you may find that -110 (the
undoubled score) would have scored nearly as poorly. On the other hand, you may
find that most of the scores are +140 your way (for making 3H). In that case,
perhaps your choice to convert the double needs rethinking. BUT, when your
double gets you + 200, you will get a good result by beating all the part
scores. Duplicate bridge is a game of frequency. If you decide to try
interrogative doubles, keep track of the number of times you profit – and
ignore the occasional disaster.
GATLINBURG: A BRIDGE FANTASYLAND
by Dave Shaw
Bridge! Mostly Knock Out (
The playing site is one huge room covering about two acres (80,000 square feet) with more than 800 card tables. There is a three fourths partition that breaks the room into 2/3rds - 1/3rd but the overall impression is two acres of playing space. And the first night of the tournament, every seat was taken – 3200 people playing bridge in one room. We were team #14 of the Monday/Tuesday bracketed KO event and played against team #456 in the first round. We were in the 8th bracket of 27 brackets, each containing 16 teams – enormous! Each team in our bracket had a total of between 5800 and 6300 master points making the competition as “skill equal” as I’ve ever enjoyed.
What I’m writing about is the
Gatlinburg Regional Bridge Tournament – the biggest regional in the
The town of
The town is given over to rooms and meals and shops and displays. It’s very clean and somewhat “campy” with palm readers, the movie car museum, haunted house, a wedding chapel etc. The shops sell everything form Harley Davidson sweatshirts to good samples of minerals (quartz, amethyst, zinc, calcite, pyrite and many more.)
An entrance to the
Want to go next year? I’m making a list of anyone interested in a
bus charter for next year. We’d leave on
RECYCLING
by Frank Hacker
It is not often that I reprint a hand
from a previous bridge article, but I like this hand so much that I just have
to tell you about it one more time. I first published this hand in Table Talk
of January 1998. The hand was played in
Dealer: East North
Both Vulnerable S 9753
H A8
D KJ5
West C 10752 East
H KQ952 H J643
D A76 D 9843
C 96 South C K83
H 107
D Q102
C AQJ4
The bidding went: West North East South
P P
1H P 2H P
P 2S 3H 3S
All Pass
I was West. Partner’s opening lead was a low heart and my queen fell to declarer’s ace. Declarer led a low spade which partner won, continuing with a heart. I won and led a low diamond to declarer’s king. Declarer led another low spade. Partner won the queen and continued a diamond to my ace. I led another diamond to dummy’s queen. Declarer led the spade jack from dummy to my ace.
To this point, declarer has lost 5 tricks and must avoid a club loser to avert down 2 and the dreaded minus 200. We have reached the following end position with the lead in the West hand.
Dealer: East North
Both Vulnerable S 9
H
D
West C 10752 East
S S
H 952 H J6
D D
C 96 South C K83
S 6
H
D
C AQJ4
I led the 9 of hearts and, all of a sudden, declarer had a serious problem. Obviously, declarer had to ruff in hand to avoid being trapped in the dummy. What was declarer to discard from dummy? A low club would lead to being trapped after the club finesse. Declarer discarded the jack of clubs, but that didn’t work either. Declarer then led the 10 of clubs, but partner covered with the king and declarer wound up losing a trick to the 8 of clubs. The only way declarer can avoid a club loser is to save all of dummy’s clubs. Therefore, the winning play is a ruff and ruff. Declarer must trump the 9 of hearts in both hands.
by Mike Farrell
Editor: This is part 1 of 2. Part 2 will appear in the next issue.
THE LEBENSOHL PRINCIPLE:
How do you differentiate between forcing and non-forcing hands if there is only one bid available? Look at the following example, partner has opened the bidding 1NT (15-17) and your right hand opponent has overcalled 2 Hearts (natural) You hold:
Hand #1: 65 843 QJT8654 7 [1]
Hand #2: KQ 97 AQJT96 Q98 [2]
¨
¨ Double of the overcall suit is for penalties. Jacoby Transfers and other similar calls such as Puppet Stayman are off.
¨ Any suit bid at the 2 level is to play. Not forcing just competitive.
¨ Any suit bid at the 3 level is forcing. Opener must bid.
¨ A Cue-bid of the overcalled suit is Stayman and denies a stopper in the opponent’s suit.
¨ 2NT artificial and demands opener to bid 3 Clubs. After which:
¨ Any suit bid below the overcalled suit is meant to play.
¨ Any suit bid above the overcalled suit is invitational. (could have bid suit at 2 level)
¨ A Cue-bid of the overcalled suit is Stayman and shows a stopper in the opponent’s suit. (SASS = Slow Approach Shows Stop) The exception is that when the opponent overcalls Clubs naturally, you Cue-bid 3 Clubs for Stayman regardless of whether or not you hold a Club Stopper. If opener responds with a major suit and you have a fit, no problem. If the 1NT opener doesn’t have a fit, he responds 3 Diamonds without a Club stopper or 3NT showing a Club stopper.
Here are some examples: 1NT 2 Hearts You?
1. 3 Hearts = Stayman, without a Heart stopper. (If partner has four Spades, he bids them. If not he may bid 3NT ONLY with a Heart stopper, otherwise he bids his better minor.
2. 2 Spades = To play showing five or more Spades.
3. 2NT = Lebensohl requesting partner bid 3 Clubs. When he Does:
a. Pass = a bad hand with a lot of Clubs 6 or more.
b. 3 Diamonds = bad hand with 6 or more Diamonds.
c. 3 Hearts = Stayman, promising a Heart Stopper. (SASS)
d. 3 Spades = 5 or more Spades, invitational. (You would bid 2 Spades with a weak hand and 3 Spades directly with a game forcing hand).
e. 3 NT = To play, promising a Heart Stopper
4. 3 Clubs, Diamonds or Spades, natural 5 or more cards and game forcing.
5. 3 NT = Game values, denies a Heart Stopper and also denies a four-card major.
6. 4
Hearts = Transfer to Spades (as would 4 Diamonds transfer to Hearts if the
opponent had overcalled in Diamonds. If
you play Texas Transfers,
7. Pass. Sometimes you have nothing to say.
This principle of starting a “slow-down” auction with a 2NT bid allows you to show weaker hands, as well as good hands when you don’t use 2NT. If your suit outranks the opponent’s suit, you can also show invitational hands. The only thing you lose is the ability to bid 2NT as a standard invitational raise.
If the opponent uses an artificial call, such as Brozel, DONT, or any of the myriad devices in vogue today, things change a little. The Lebensohl 2NT principle remains in force, as do all suit bids at the two level. Suit bids at the two level are to play and bids at the three level are forcing. If the opponent’s bid is either Double or 2 Clubs (SHOWING AN UNSPECIFIED SINGLE SUIT), Lebensohl is off, and you should bid as follows:
1. Ignore the double – all bids are as if the opponent had been silent. A Redouble should show Game Values but no good suit. (1NT redoubled taking 7 or more tricks scores more than 3NT) If the opponent runs out to his suit, the partnership is better placed to double for penalties or bid 3NT, whichever is most appropriate. Since Lebensohl does not apply, 2NT is an invitational raise.
2. Double of a 2 Club bid means Stayman, and all other bids retain their regular meaning. (This is the exception to the principle that “doubles of artificial bids are for penalties”.) As above, Lebensohl does not apply and 2NT is an invitational raise.
If the opponent’s bid shows one suit and another unspecified suit, Lebensohl is on. Ignore the unknown suit and bid as you would around the one shown suit. For example:
1NT 2Clubs(showing Clubs and another suit) YOU: Double shows Clubs and a desire to defend 2 Clubs, and 3 Clubs is Stayman, Lebensohl is on.
If the opponent’s bid shows that suit and another specific suit, double by you shows a willingness to defend the bid suit. All other Lebensohl bids remain the same. These methods remain consistent with only one set of exceptions.
by Kathy Farrell
Note From The Editor: Kathy writes in an entertaining self-deprecating style. She is obviously being much too modest.
I often struggle along as declarer, trying to execute an endplay or a squeeze. Usually I get the timing wrong, or I mismanage the entries, or the opponents just plain don’t cooperate! Well, here’s a double squeeze that executed itself. I can’t take any credit for it… as declarer, I pretty much just followed suit!
I was having a delightful Monday afternoon playing Duplicate with Frank Hacker. This was the last hand of the day, and I was declarer in One NoTrump. Ho-Hum, sounds boring.
Dealer West EW vulnerable
North opens 1D, South ends the auction with 1NT 6 of diamond opening lead
North
S-QT9
H-J842
D-AJ94
C-AJ
West East
S-853 S-KJ62
H-K73 H-T96
D-KT8653 D-Q
C-K C-Q8532
South
S-A74
H-AQ5
D-72
C-T9764
West made the normal fourth-best lead of the 6 of diamonds. I ducked, and East won the Queen. At this point, using the “RULE of 11,” I now know that West has the King, ten and eight of Diamonds. (If you don’t know and use this Rule, you should check it out. It comes in very handy against opponents who lead 4th best.)
Since neither a spade switch nor a club switch appeared desirable, East returned a heart. I ducked the heart to West’s King. West continued a heart to my Ace. Hoping for a 3-3 club split, I led a club to North’s Ace, and continued with North’s Jack of clubs. East won the Queen of clubs (West discarded a diamond), and the remaining cards were as follows:
North
S-QT9
H-J8
D-AJ9
C-void
West East
S-853 S-KJ62
H-3 H-T
D-KT85 D-void
C-void C-853
South
S-A74
H-Q
D-7
C-T97
So far in this hand, I am just following suit and “pushing cards.” I have no idea that a double squeeze is about to materialize. East is on lead, and knows that a club lead is wrong. Since a spade lead seems wrong also, East leads the ten of hearts, which I win in my hand with the Queen. Suddenly, I wake up and come to attention. Suspecting that all three of dummy’s diamonds will be useful in a potential squeeze situation, I cash the ten and nine of clubs, throwing two SPADES from dummy, bringing the hand down to this position:
North
S-Q
H-J
D-AJ9
C-void
West East
S-85 S-KJ62
H-void H-void
D-KT8 D-void
C-void C-8
South
S-A74
H-void
D-7
C-7
Knowing from the “Rule of 11” that West has all of the missing diamond honors, I lead the seven of diamonds to dummy’s nine, East throwing a spade. I cash the Ace of diamonds, pitching a spade from my hand. East pitches another spade, and the hands are now:
North
S-Q
H-J
D-J
C-void
West East
S-85 S-KJ
H-void H-void
D-K D-void
C-void C-8
South
S-A7
H-void
D-void
C-7
At this point I realize that the opponents are caught in the vise of a double squeeze* (see below for Terminology). When I lead dummy’s good Jack of hearts, East MUST keep the club 8, and so must bear down to a singleton spade. Likewise when I lead dummy’s Jack of hearts, West MUST keep the diamond King, and therefore must also bear down to a singleton spade. So, when East throws a spade on the heart Jack, I throw my losing club seven. I overtake dummy’s spade Queen with my Ace, and the lowly seven of spades wins the last trick! A rare and effortless double squeeze materializes on an unambitious One NoTrump hand! What a fun way for me to end the afternoon!
*According to Freddie North in BRIDGE: TECHNIQUES AND TIPS FROM THE MASTERS, “The basis of the double squeeze is that if one opponent guards one suit and the other opponent guards another suit, then neither will be able to guard the third suit.”
Vermonters On The Tournament Trail
Not many Vermonters hit the tournament trail and when we do, like Rodney Dangerfield, we don’t get any respect. It is a great pleasure to report the following outstanding performances by Vermonters at recent regional tournaments.
Points
Won
Frank Hacker 126.70
Mary Savko 123.43
Ellie Hanlon 123.43
Jonna Robinson 83.36
Dave Shaw 82.98
Jay Friedenson 48.29
Jean Tout 27.72
Doug Clark 27.72
Vermont Spring Sectional
FRIDAY AFT OPEN PAIRS
46 Pairs
A B
C
5.50 1
1 Reid Fleming - Albert Muggia 151.69
4.13 2 2
Stephen Bean - Alan Wertheimer 142.50
3.09 3 Ellie
Hanlon - Mary Savko 136.81
2.32 4 Michael Arnowitt - Stephen Rzewski 135.00
2.03 5 3
Andy Avery - Paul Cohen 128.00
1.31 6 Bill
Irvine - Walter Fontaine 127.50
1.52 4 Beverly Balch - Mary Anne Pickett 127.31
2.17 5 1 Dale
Collinson - Susan Collinson 119.31
1.63 6 2 Margie
Wilbur - Wendy Baurmeister 116.56
1.22 3 Mae Beck - H Joseph Schineller 116.50
0.92 4 Joan Knight - Guy Knight 112.50
0.69 5 Patricia Pember - Betty Faulkner 108.50
0.61 6 David Jenkins - Elinor Horne 106.50
FRIDAY EVE OPEN PAIRS
40 Pairs
A B C
5.83 1 Bill Irvine
- Walter Fontaine 152.56
4.37 2 David Shaw -
Jackie Kimel 130.85
3.28 3 Jacqueline Kovacs - Thomas
Belle 129.50
2.81 4 1 Rosemarie Viscardi - Flora Farrell 129.00
1.84 5 Wayne Hersey - June Dorion 128.06
1.38 6 Fred Donald Jr - Judith Donald 127.56
2.11 2 Reid Fleming - Albert Muggia 124.69
1.58 3 Patricia Nestork - Bonnie Clouser 124.00
1.62 4 1
William Wade -
1.22 5 2
E VonRiesenfelder - L Rawls 111.31
0.91 6/7 Mark Conner - Bruce Downing 111.00
0.91 6/7 Rich Stevens - Don Peters 111.00
0.91 3 Ronald Silverman - June Silverman 104.50
0.70 4 Nadine Chamandy - Bernard Rabot 98.00
FRIDAY EVE 299ER PAIRS
10 Pairs
A B C
1.51 1 Thomas Cronin -
1.33 2 1
1 Bonnie Taylor - Leonard
Lapinski 55.00
1.00 3 2 Guy Knight - Joan Knight 54.13
0.76 4 Catherine Earle - Mary Ellen
McMahon 52.13
0.83 3 2
Arthur Aiken - Karen Kristiansen 51.56
SATURDAY AFT OPEN PAIRS
56 Pairs
A B C
7.67 1 1 George Kay Jr - Harry Preble 206.00
5.75 2 Fred Donald Jr - Judith Donald 190.50
4.31 3 Gerald Di Vincenzo -
Michael Farrell 187.50
3.24 4 2 Patricia Nestork - Bonnie Clouser 186.00
2.43 5 Jacqueline Kovacs - Thomas
Belle 185.00
1.82 6 Walter Fontaine - Bill
Irvine 182.50
1.96 3 Mary Tierney -
1.47 4 Gerow Carlson - Mary Azarian 172.00
1.21 5 Don Peters - Rich Stevens 171.50
1.84 6 1
Roger Crean - Nancy Anderson 164.00
1.38 2 Inge Cassidy - Katherine Hoopes 159.00
1.04 3 Jacqueline Walker - Carl Payne Jr 154.00
0.70 4/5 Catherine Earle - Mary Ellen McMahon 146.50
0.70 4/5 David Jenkins - Elinor Horne 146.50
SATURDAY AFT 299ER PAIRS
16 Pairs
A B C
1.82 1 Thomas Cronin -
1.71 2 1 Sandy Desilets - Rhoda Chickering 72.50
1.28 3 2
1 Deborah Crisfield - Jane
Grewcock 71.00
0.96 4 3 Tom Ludwig - Judith Ludwig 65.50
0.96 5 4
2 Karen Haines - Jennifer
Feltes 64.00
0.72 5 3
Patricia Pember - Betty Faulkner 63.50
0.54 4 Raymond Lopes - Susan Ransom 61.00
SATURDAY EVE FLT A PAIRS
20 Pairs
6.50 1 Philip Sharpsteen - Frank Hacker 139.00
4.88 2 Bernice Kramer - Walter Fenton Jr 124.00
3.66 3 Edsel Hughes - Wayne Hersey 119.50
2.74 4 Jacqueline Kovacs - Thomas Belle 115.00
2.06 5 William Braucher - A Braucher 113.50
1.54 6 June Dorion - Stephen Rzewski 112.50
SAT EVE FLT B/C/D PAIRS
38 Pairs
B C D
3.88 1 Louise Acker - Chris Acker 130.19
2.91 2 Andrew Archibald - Shirley
Grady 130.00
2.18 3 Robert Neuhart - Andrew
Dubay 126.25
2.17 4 1
1 Sandy Desilets - Rhoda
Chickering 123.94
1.27 5 Irene Vignoe - C Kirk
Osterland 123.38
1.63 6 2 Janice L Wild - Karen Xia 122.56
1.29 3 2
Catherine Earle - Mary Ellen McMahon 116.69
0.97 4 3
Roger Crean - Nancy Anderson 115.38
0.69 5 Bernard Rabot - Nadine Chamandy 114.38
0.57 6 Judith Ward - Mae Beck 111.63
0.73 4 Tom Ludwig - Judith Ludwig 107.13
0.66 5 Jennifer Feltes - Jane Grewcock 105.44
STRATIFIED SWISS TEAMS
24 Teams
A B C
9.00 1 Walter Fontaine - Bill
Irvine -
Michael
Arnowitt - Stephen Rzewski 116.00
6.75 2 Thomas Belle - Jacqueline
Kovacs -
Roy Green - Mary Green 106.00
5.06 3 William Dubay - Judy Dubay
-
Andrew Dubay - Robert Neuhart 105.00
3.80 4 Frank Hacker - Philip
Sharpsteen -
Rudolph Polli - Walter Smith 101.00
2.85 5 Andy Avery - Paul Cohen –
Ellie Hanlon -
Mary Savko 100.00
2.14 6 Gerald Di Vincenzo -
Patricia Di Vincenzo
Kathleen
Farrell - Michael Farrell 92.00
3.82 1 Don Peters - Rich Stevens
Albert
Muggia - Reid Fleming 91.00
2.87 2 1
Karen Kristiansen - Jeannie Clermont
William
Beadle - Sheila Long 80.00
2.15 3 John O'Brien - Susan Eastman – Bonnie
Taylor -
Leonard Lapinski - Anne Lapinski 79.00
1.83 4 2
Richard Gazley - Martha Gazley -
Sandy Desilets - Rhoda Chickering 68.00
SUNDAY 299ER SWISS TEAMS
4 Teams
1.41 1 Karen Haines - Deborah Crisfield
Jane
Grewcock - Jennifer Feltes 44.00
Subtracting From The Sum Of Human
Knowledge
by Frank Hacker
I once had a bridge friend who used to talk about bridge discussions that went around in rapidly decreasing concentric circles and subtracted from the sum of human knowledge. As usual, I’m chipping right in to do my dubious share.
Here you are on defense, the place where most really good foul-ups occur. The form of scoring is match points (that is, usual duplicate scoring). The auction is simple – 1NT (15-17), 3NT by the opponents. Partner leads the king of hearts. Here is the situation that confronts you
King of hearts led
H 1054
D KQ543
C Q5
H A93
D 876
C 8763
You decide that you like the king of hearts opening lead and you signal with the 9. Partner continues with the queen of hearts and you have reached a critical decision point. Do you unblock or not? Most players would play their ace on partner’s queen to get out of partner’s way and permit partner to run the heart suit. In my opinion, that would be a BIG MISTAKE. How can it be wrong to unblock, you ask? The answer is simple. Partner does not have the KQJxx that you are hoping for. Partner has KQx and was hoping with an otherwise hopeless hand to hit your suit. Partner would have been spot on, if you had had another heart or two. How can you be sure? Why can’t partner have KQJxx? --- because in that case partner would have continued with the jack, not the queen. Simple, isn’t it? Of course, partner and I had to screw this up twice (once each way), before we figured it out. Except for the fact that we are obviously very good at it, I sometimes wonder whether we are smart enough to take nourishment.
Onward and upward!
S 953
H 2
D AJ5
H 1085 H KJ9743
D Q86 D 104
C QJ95 C K7
H AQ6
D K9732
C 10
You are South. The opponent’s uncontested auction is East West
1H 1NT (forcing)
2H 3H
P
You lead the club 10. Partner wins the ace and returns the 2 for you to ruff. You lead back the 3 of diamonds. Partner thinks a bit and wins the ace. He then continues with another club. Declarer ditches his diamond loser, while you ruff with the queen of hearts. Clearly an accident has occurred. Your side was entitled to 2 diamond tricks, 2 heart tricks, the ace of clubs and a club ruff, but you have managed to compress your six tricks into five. Here is the question. Who is to blame – South or North? I believe south should get most of the demerits, but I’ll leave it for you to decide. Here are some points to ponder.
1. South knew he didn’t want another ruff. He also should have been pretty sure that North had the ace of diamonds. He could have averted this catastrophe by leading the king first, followed by a second diamond to partner. Then North could not have gone wrong.
2. North shouldn’t have gone wrong anyway. A low diamond like the 3 promises an honor. This should be the king, since partner should not consider the 10 to be an honor in this situation. North can play the jack of diamonds and be able to conclude that it is safe to cash the ace. After the 2 diamond tricks are home, it makes no difference what north returns.
COMING 2005 EVENTS
July 8 – 10 VT summer sectional, Cortina Inn, Killington (see flyer)
July 21 – 31 ACBL
summer nationals,
Aug. 6 Marilyn
Hacker Memorial Pairs,
Please pre-register, (unit rated game)
Aug. 8 – 14 Montreal Regional, Montreal Airport Hilton, 12505 Cote de Liesse
Aug.21
10 AM start, 2 sessions with buffet, reservations required,
Fee $20 or $25, depending on type of buffet, Call Jesse Stalker, 603-298-8913 or email him at stalker@cyberportal.net, (unit rated game)
Aug. 31 – Sep. 5
Sep. 10 Reiter
Memorial Swiss Teams,
Please pre-register, (unit rated game)
Oct. 2 President’s Cup and Vermont Bridge Association annual meeting,
Oct. 5 - 10 Regional,
Oct. 28 – 30 VT fall sectional, Cortina Inn, Killington
Dec. 3 Perrin Pairs, Burlington Bridge Academy, 10:30 AM start, 2 sessions with outstanding meal, $25, Please pre-register, (unit rated game)
Friday July 8th Sanction # S0507024
2:00PM Open Pairs, Stratified
Newcomer Pairs,
Stratified
8:00PM
Open Pairs, Stratified
Newcomer Pairs,
Stratified
Saturday
July 9th
1:00PM Open Pairs, Stratified
Newcomer
7:00PM Open Pairs, Stratiflighted
A (separate
event) = 0 to 72000
B = 500 to 1500
C = 200 to 500
D = 0 to 200
Sunday
July 10th
10:30AM 1st session Open Swiss Teams,
Stratified
0 to 300 Swiss
Teams (1 session only)
@
Open
Stratifications: A > 1500, B 500 to 1500, C 0 to 500
Newcomer
Stratifications: A 100 to 300, B 20 to 100, C 0 to 20
Price
per session: $8 ($10 Canadian), $1 additional for Non-ACBL members
Partnerships and information: Dave Shaw (800) 639-8000 davida.shaw@agedwards.com
Hospitality: The VBA is pleased to offer free refreshments
after the Friday and Saturday evening sessions and at
Accommodations
“package” for the tournament at Cortina Inn:
1 person 2 persons
Superior
room $159 $199
Queen
deluxe $169 $209
King
deluxe $179 $219
“Package” includes 2 nights
stay with 2 full breakfasts and a $10 per person food voucher towards dinner in
Zola’s Grille or Theo’s Tavern. 9%
Reservations:
1-800 451-6108 or 802-773-3331. email: cortina1@aol.com.
Fax: 802- 775-6948.
There
will be a drawing on June 20th from all room reservations that the
Cortina has received by that date. The winner will receive a free upgrade to
the best available accommodations at the time of the drawing.