Recent realbridge.online
Today's diagram depicts the last board of a recent realbridge.online match between the Australian three-pair squad - Avi Kanetkar and David Beauchamp, Stephen Burgess and Gabi Lorentz, Paul Lavings and Robert Krochmalik - that will represent Australia in this odd-numbered year's version of the world seniors teams championship and their New Zealand equivalents. One reason for the attention the deal attracted was the fact that the 10 IMPs it generated made the match result an exact 113-all tie, an occurrence about as rare in bridge as in AFL competition.
The match in no way affected its participants' prospects of going to Marrakech, this year's world championships venue, in August. Australia and NZ are the only nations in the World Bridge Federation's South Pacific Zone which owns two of the 24 spots in that field. Identical rules apply to the concurrently staged open, women's and mixed fields; but their equally pointless and - in the interests of regulatory uniformity - similarly WBF-mandated play-offs will take place face-to-face two or three weeks hence in Hong Kong during the Asia-Pacific championships to which all the relevant teams except the NZ seniors have accepted their customary invitations.
The diagrammed auction in which Kanetkar and Beauchamp were respectively EW match can hardly, if at all, be adversely criticised; but 4♠, into which NS thus climbed, was much more likely to fail than succeed against unknown EW distribution consistent therewith. Vulnerable at IMP scoring, however, constructively pressing on to 4♠ amounted to a five-to-three-on bet. On the full deal, best defence would, despite the favourable lie of both ♥Q and ♣Q, take 4♠ one down. but, as it turned out, South did amass the 10 needed tricks.
The play began ♦3, partner's bid-suit, to 2-A-8. Any non-diamond lead would have kept EW on track for a result of one down. Next came ♠3-A-2-7, ♦K-6-4-5, ♦Q-J-♥2-♦7, ♦9-♣3-♠J-♦10, ♣5-2-4-9, ♣8-J-A-♠4, ♠K-10-♥3-♠8-6, ♠Q-♣10-7-♠9, ♥10-5-4-A-♥8, at which point declarer's claim of his game contract was accepted.
The contrastingly unambitious bidding at the other table went Pass-Pass-1♣-1♠, 2♣-Pass-Pass-2♠, Pass-Pass-Pass, during which East's club length was announced as at least two cards. Krochmalik's ensuing declarer play, which accordingly didn't greatly matter, also generated 10 tricks. West's opening lead of ♣9, likewise partner's bid suit, elicited 5-2-4. Accurately somehow diagnosing the need for a shift, West did less well in choosing her continuation. Any one of ♠102 ♥Q95 ♦J would have given South no immediate line for a second overtrick. Instead the play continued ♦3-2-A-8, ♠6-4-10-J, ♦4-7-K-6, ♦9-J-♠7-♦5, ♣K-A-♠5-♣3, ♠A-2-♥2-♠3, ♠K-♣8-♥3-♠9, ♠Q-♣10-7-♦10, ♦Q-♥5-4-8, ♥J-Q-K-A, ♣6, after which it was agreed that EW could no longer make more than three of their four originally available tricks.
Victor Champion Cup Festival
Readers who, by tomorrow, had not yet submitted and paid for their entries to this year's five-day Victor Champion Cup Festival of Bridge at the Moonee Valley Racecourse which ends on June 12, the King's Birthday public holiday, would originally have forfeited the early-bird discounts of $30 a pair and/or $60 a team. See, however, a "latest news" post at the event website that, inter alia, extends the deadline until May 27.
The above-named trophy is held for the ensuing year by the top-placed team (of four, five or six players) in a 10-round IMP-scored Swiss tournament of 14-board matches. An unusual aspect of today's deal, from last year's eighth round, is that it was nowhere tied. At least one IMP and as many as 13 changed hands in each of the 25 matches.
At 32 of 50 tables spades became trumps. Of 20 Norths in 4♠, which goes one down against double-dummy defence that must begin with any heart or the unfindable(?) ♦K, two were instead allowed to make 11 tricks, 14 were content with being gifted the one trick they needed to bring their game contract home, and four duly conceded one down. Of other declarers who also amassed 10 tricks one, via presumably a misjudged "when in doubt bid one more" decision, was in 5♠. The rest, less frustratingly, were in unbeatable part-score contracts.
At the other 18 tables West was always declarer and hearts were always trumps. Of six not unreasonable 5♥ phantom sacrifices, all unsurprisingly doubled, four were taken two down, one fared a trick better, the other a trick worse. Eight entirely accurate undoubled 4♥ saves all went one down as, somehow, did one of three 3♥ contacts.
From the bridgebase.com archives one can download exactly what transpired in that round's single recorded match. After the diagrammed auction, Canberrans Peter Reynolds and David Hoffman defended as follows. The former led ♣Q to 9-2-3 after which came ♣8-10-J-A, ♦3-2-J-A, ♠A-3-2-4, ♠7-9-Q-6, ♠J-8-♣4-♥5, ♣5-♠5-♥2-♣7. At that point it was agreed that West's doubled 5♥ contract was two down for a NS table plus-score of 300.
A four-bid auction (1♣-2♥2S-4♥) in which 2♥ looks like a natural weak six-card jump overcall opposite which the tactical jump raise by Stephen Fischer (ACT) to 4♥, one level higher than the Law of Total Tricks would here suggest, was justifiable; prospectively by the favourable vulnerability and in practice by the ensuing play. That began ♠K-4-A-3, ♠7-9-10-6 ♣Q-9-2-A. On lead after trick three, declarer Pele Rankin (Qld) surrendered it with ♣3-8-10-J and regained it, in dummy, with ♣K-5-♠2-♥2. ♠8-♦6-♥5-♠5, ♣6-♦7-♥A-♣4, ♥J-3-K then allowed her to concede one diamond trick and claim all the rest for a table-score of 50 to NS and a six-IMP pick up.