As is the norm with bridge in my life, certain bridge events get fired at great speeds around the LHC (Large Hadron Calendar) to form collisions that involve several important, or interesting events all happening at around the same time. The main focus in my mind this week was the Phoenix Rising match at home to Ellon. This was despite another round of the Phoenix Cup the day before, and two other sessions of bridge during the week. That is not to mention the keen interest I have in the SBU European Open Trials, as Jim and Jun are competing and, naturally, I am rooting for them. Writing late on Saturday night, they have won their Semi-Final match, with the final to come tomorrow. I am so glad of that and I hope that they, Douglas Piper and Alex Wilkinson manage to qualify after the Final tomorrow. (Thanks be to Paul Gipson and his blog for his coverage of the event).
Round 5 of the Phoenix Cup did not go too well. Lessurl and I did not play badly, but we did not get the rub of the green required to come out on top. This was despite getting 1700 on one board. This was not even the highest aggregate score of the round, as a stone cold 7NT was going around, which our opponents bid against us on the very last board. Unfortunately, less than half of their counterparts did.
Phoenix Rising v Ellon
This was not necessarily a "must-win" match for us, but it was certainly a "must not lose heavily." After 3-17 and 0-20 in the first two matches, to fail to take something from this match would spell relegation well and truly.
By "us" I mean Phoenix Rising. Naturally, I have a vested interest in the welfare of both teams. But my first loyalty has to be to the Phoenix Rising project and my team-mates would expect no less than 100% commitment. So, I was to give it my all against my other club, Ellon. If we won, would I feel maybe just a little bit guilty at dragging another of my clubs into the relegation dogfight? Well, no. Ellon's destiny is well and truly within their own hands and I don't need to worry about them.
Furthermore, being Captain, if anyone is going to come up with a master plan to save us from relegation, it is me. I have therefore invoked "Operation Lazarus". To be fair, it would have happened regardless of our league position (perhaps without the cheesy name), but it will be a vital part of the battle to stay up.
One would think part of this operation would involve drafting in better players. Yes and no. We really need to get our best (junior) team playing. But unfortunately, that was not possible for last Friday's match against Ellon. In fact, we were to field what was on paper our weakest side of the season. Given that last time out, we were swept aside by Torphins, who in turn had been beaten by Ellon, we could have had little hope. This match was Ellon's to throw away before it even started, but we were not going to lie down.
The team was up for it. We had trained hard, and only one was a complete newcomer to the Division 2 league scene. I also made a tactical change. Our least experienced pair, who had shown they were capable of producing a nice surprise with the boards against them, sat the opposite way from Me and my partner this time. The plan was we would maximise the plusses our way, (lessurl doing the same with our new player), and the other two pairs would hold firm and not lose too much. This was a gamble, because it would back-fire hugely if the boards were against us. But I felt it was the most sensible choice and that, if we were going to win this match, we would need a great deal of luck.
We weren't without it. Things did not start well for partner and I. She passed what was intended as a forcing bid (although this might have saved her from playing an unclear 3NT), and a Game got through that might not have done. But then, partner found a 4 Spades Opening bid, which went two down but stopped our opponents finding their 5 Clubs Game. Still, we'd have hoped for better and we were down 750 after Round One.
Round 2 was a lot better, but it could have been better still had I taken the right view here:
Partner West Me East
1D 1S 2H P
3H 3S 4H All Pass
x x
K x x
A K Q 10 x x
x x
K x x
A J x x x x
x x
x x
4 Hearts by the bottom hand, AS led.
After LHO cleared the spades, I played a small heart and noted the ten on my left. The King won, and I played a small heart. East followed, and I play...?
My gut feeling was that it is right to play for the drop. Two guess theories are in my favour: Available Spaces and Restricted Choice. But what swings it for me, in addition to these facts, is that even if the drop is wrong, I will still make the contract when diamonds behave. Any 3-3 break or Jack doubleton will do. Unfortunately, when I played to the Ace, RHO ruffed and cashed AK of clubs.
880 in our plus column helped the team swing 150 in Round 2, leaving us 600 behind at Half Time.
Round 3 saw partner and I facing McLeod Senior; clash of the Captains. It was difficult to say who came out better from this, but this (for me) was the pick of the play contracts:
x x
K J 10 x
x
A Q x x x x
A Q J
Q x x
A Q J 10 x
J x
Contract: 3NT by the bottom hand; small spade led.
I have two spade stops and they are going to disappear soon. The first thing that springs to mind is to play on hearts. This sets up three tricks, and safe-guards the contract when LHO holds the ace. Even when RHO has it, things look hopeful since the club finesse will be into the safe hand (RHO will have no spades by the time I take it). The problem is this only guarantees 8 tricks. Nine are most likely, as only a bad club break will defeat it. With hindsight I believe this was the best play, but I played the Jack of Clubs at trick 2. This lost to the King with RHO, who fired through a spade, and I held up my ace until the third round, RHO showing out. Clubs broke for me, so I cashed them out. This required careful discards; after the clubs were gone I left myself this position:
-
K J 10
x
-
-
Q x
A Q
This was the right position to play for in the circumstance, as LHO had discarded two spades on the clubs, confirming that I was about to make this. I played the ten of hearts off table, and the ace appeared on my right. I promptly dropped the queen and won the diamond return with the ace, laying down a heart to claim ten. Had the ace been with LHO, she would have been endplayed in diamonds. Then again, had the ace of hearts been with LHO, I should have put her into an unforced triple suit end play at trick 2.
Things did not go well for us overall however, and we lost 310 to go into the last round 910 behind. This was not disastrous news. A 13-7 loss would still leave us in a position where we had a chance of recovering in the last two matches. But there was no margin for error. We couldn't allow the aggregate minus to go into quadruple figures. The team were tired; they had come from nowhere to keep us in the match after 18 boards. (By this point a supposedly stronger team had been wiped out by Torphins).
Partner and I scored quite well on the last set; +540 which I thought was round about par. One pair sitting the opposite way reported -30 - we had made up more than half the difference. However, our least experienced pair had some bad news: they had doubled a making part score into Game, subsequently losing 980 overall. That really did look like a killer. However, there was one more score to come in, and lessurl and our newcomer had something in store: +1100.
That made for a 12-8 win for Ellon. It was a great match. The progress of the juniors is clear to see. In a matter of WEEKS they have gone from Cannon Fodder to having a tangible chance of staying in Division 2. It is still unlikely, but improvement on that scale might just be enough. 8 VPs was by no means a win, but it was enough to keep our destiny in our own hands. However, winning will not be enough. We need to win big - winning our remaining matches 11-9 would relegate us. It is no lie to say that we could have won last night. If one pair had been clearer on the meaning of doubles and when to use them, we might well have won. But am I disappointed? No. A 12-8 win would not have left us in a much greater stead than the 12-8 loss. That means that I can look at the team's performance objectively and appreciate just how well they did. Our newcomer played out of his skin; it is one thing to say he was carried by Lessurl; in truth that doesn't ever happen unless the second player carries some of the weight.
The Ellon team I am sure will have mixed feelings. A win is a win, first of all. They have risen to third in the league table and play against Banchory for 2nd Place on the 16th March. This can only be a good thing. Furthermore, I note that their impressive Away record continues. But, they are also prudent and smart enough to know that they are not mathematically safe from relegation - something they had a chance to see to last night and didn't. Phoenix Rising are going to give it their best shot and we don't care who goes down instead of us.
Personally, I am satisfied that two of my teams managed to play each other where both sides were the winners. Ellon got the victory and a good league position. You can't say fairer than that. Phoenix Rising's gain is one of progress and potential. They were never going to keep themselves up with this match - the best they could do was stop themselves going down. In other words, both sides got what they wanted out of the match, and of that I am glad.
Saturday 25 February 2012
Sunday 19 February 2012
Junior Camrose and Peggy Bayer 2012 Results
So, my belief that the Junior Camrose could be won by anyone was proved right in my absence. I saw a little bit of NIBU v England, but had to leave to watch Aberdeen v St. Johnstone at Pittodrie, which was a disappointing 0-0 draw. You don't get 0-0 draws in junior bridge, and I returned to see that CBAI were 3-0 up on England in Round 8, with the table after Round 7 thus:
Scotland: 122
England: 102
CBAI: 101
NIBU: 95
Although I did not know the match scores, England had clearly had a terrible time of it, and CBAI were the biggest improvers: not only did they get the most VPs in Rounds 6 and 7, they did so without playing England. Scotland had opened up a 20 VP lead, but this was nothing, as they were losing to the currently bottom NIBU. So, I pick up mid-way through...
CBAI v England
K J 7 5
Q J 4
A 9 7 6 2
6
8 3
7 6 5
4
A K Q x x x x
Ireland were well ahead when this board came up.
The Irish South opened this a gambling 3NT. His team mates had already gone down, doubled in 1NT in the other room, so he needed some luck here. West doubled, and when it came back round to South, he trusted his partner's pass to such an extent that he Redoubled. This would have worked had the defence established a major trick for him, but unfortunately they took one heart, got the position, and knocked out the diamond. This swing set England on their way to a win; a win I didn't watch owing to playing in a tournament. A 19-11 win for England kept them in second place on 121. Scotland had almost made a fightback, losing 16-14 to NIBU, which put them 15 ahead going into the last round.
So, any double-figure VP score would do for Scotland, apart from maybe 10 as I don't know what the tie-splitting procedure was. It was the NIBU v England match on Vugraph, however, and I was invited to play elsewhere.
So, it was a race to the finish. England did all they could on boards 28 to 31, gaining all 37 of their match IMPs here. Two big swings came through bidding slams that the Irish didn't bid; one came through making a Game the Irish played but didn't make. It was all to no avail, however, as a 20-10 win was not enough. Scotland matched it with a 20-10 win of their own, so even a maximum for the English would not have done.
The full results were:
JUNIOR CAMROSE
Scotland 156
England 141
CBAI 122
NIBU 121
PEGGY BAYER
England 182
Scotland 167
NIBU 102
CBAI 77
Congratulations to the winning teams. The Scotland Under 25 team did well to emerge ahead when the music stopped in a very tight Junior Camrose field where every team beat every other team at least once (at least by my reckoning). It was especially tough given they were doing it four-handed.
The England Under 20 squad were red-hot favourites for the Peggy Bayer, but they still had to do the job. It looks like perhaps Scotland gave them a run for their money, since England finished only as far ahead of them as Scotland were against England in the Junior Camrose.
All in all, I'm glad I spent the vast majority of my weekend sitting in front of my computer on BBO. The juniors don't disappoint with exciting and quality bridge, and I look forward to a couple of weeks' time, when the Full Internationals play the second weekend.
Scotland: 122
England: 102
CBAI: 101
NIBU: 95
Although I did not know the match scores, England had clearly had a terrible time of it, and CBAI were the biggest improvers: not only did they get the most VPs in Rounds 6 and 7, they did so without playing England. Scotland had opened up a 20 VP lead, but this was nothing, as they were losing to the currently bottom NIBU. So, I pick up mid-way through...
CBAI v England
K J 7 5
Q J 4
A 9 7 6 2
6
8 3
7 6 5
4
A K Q x x x x
Ireland were well ahead when this board came up.
The Irish South opened this a gambling 3NT. His team mates had already gone down, doubled in 1NT in the other room, so he needed some luck here. West doubled, and when it came back round to South, he trusted his partner's pass to such an extent that he Redoubled. This would have worked had the defence established a major trick for him, but unfortunately they took one heart, got the position, and knocked out the diamond. This swing set England on their way to a win; a win I didn't watch owing to playing in a tournament. A 19-11 win for England kept them in second place on 121. Scotland had almost made a fightback, losing 16-14 to NIBU, which put them 15 ahead going into the last round.
So, any double-figure VP score would do for Scotland, apart from maybe 10 as I don't know what the tie-splitting procedure was. It was the NIBU v England match on Vugraph, however, and I was invited to play elsewhere.
So, it was a race to the finish. England did all they could on boards 28 to 31, gaining all 37 of their match IMPs here. Two big swings came through bidding slams that the Irish didn't bid; one came through making a Game the Irish played but didn't make. It was all to no avail, however, as a 20-10 win was not enough. Scotland matched it with a 20-10 win of their own, so even a maximum for the English would not have done.
The full results were:
JUNIOR CAMROSE
Scotland 156
England 141
CBAI 122
NIBU 121
PEGGY BAYER
England 182
Scotland 167
NIBU 102
CBAI 77
Congratulations to the winning teams. The Scotland Under 25 team did well to emerge ahead when the music stopped in a very tight Junior Camrose field where every team beat every other team at least once (at least by my reckoning). It was especially tough given they were doing it four-handed.
The England Under 20 squad were red-hot favourites for the Peggy Bayer, but they still had to do the job. It looks like perhaps Scotland gave them a run for their money, since England finished only as far ahead of them as Scotland were against England in the Junior Camrose.
All in all, I'm glad I spent the vast majority of my weekend sitting in front of my computer on BBO. The juniors don't disappoint with exciting and quality bridge, and I look forward to a couple of weeks' time, when the Full Internationals play the second weekend.
Saturday 18 February 2012
Junior Camrose and Peggy Bayer 2012 (Part 3)
NIBU v CBAI
Of course this was going to be the Vugraph match for Round 4, having not got the nod ahead of England v Scotland first time round. For a reason that I am sure is perfectly valid but unknown to me, the North and Republic teams generally go by their respective Union's names in these events - Northern Irish Bridge Union and Contract Bridge Association of Ireland respectively. NIBU were certainly due a Vugraph match, so I was looking forward to this one.
Things did not start quietly. On Board 1, the Northern Irish NS got a bit mixed up (by the look of it; it is possible they knew exactly what they were doing), and the Contract was 2 Hearts Doubled by North. Their team mates at least made 4 Spades +1 in the other room, so -500 when the dust cleared only lost 2 IMPs. I feel my theory of "confusion" is strengthened by Board 2, where a scrambling 2NT was not used to good effect and South played 3 Spades in a 5-2 fit, two off. 6 more IMPs to CBAI for Board 2. NIBU got off the mark on Board 3 by making an overtrick in 3NT by North.
The next two boards brought part score battles and 1 IMP to CBAI. Then NS held this:
A
J 9 5
J 7 6 5 3 2
6 4 2
K
K 10 3
A K 9 4
A K 10 8 7
Getting rid of one of two losers here is just too much to do, so when the CBAI pair bid to 6 Diamonds, a 10 IMP swing to NIBU was on its way; the first double-figure swing of the match making it 11-9. The underdogs were in the lead for the first time.
Here is one where both Declarers played the same contract:
A K J 2
A 4 2
K J 8 6 3
K
Q 9 7 5
J 8
10 5
A J 5 4 3
The contract was 4 Spades by South. I'm not sure how the Declarer for CBAI went down (the movie being inconclusive), but Somerville made it look easy. He got the same lead: the 3 of Hearts. He rose with the Ace of Hearts and unblocked the club suit by playing the King to the 9-3-2. He then exited in hearts, West winning with the King. West kept hearts going, ruffed in hand. Now Declarer laid down the 5 of diamonds, and West, holding AQ74, rose with the Ace. West returned a diamond, but Somerville guessed right and let the diamond run. He then cashed the Ace of clubs, played a small spade to the Jack, ruffed a diamond with the 9 of spades and cashed the queen, claiming 11. That was 13 IMPs to NIBU, but CBAI answered back, finding a killing defence against 4 Spades that their team mates managed to make. It was getting very hard to keep up with this swingy set. The next board was a flat 3NT, although there was play. The score with three quarters of the match played was 24-20 to the NIBU.
Board 10 was something I don't see every day. It looked to me like NS had 4 Hearts on and EW had 5 Diamonds on. The CBAI pair got the contract in both rooms; 3 Hearts making 11 and 4 Diamonds making on the nose, though for my money 11 was there. However, I could see all the cards and it is very difficult to factor that in sometimes, so I cannot be 100% sure what the "par" score was.
It was at this point that it was brought to my attention that one of the scores might have been wrong. The standing score was 28-24 to CBAI, but apparently they were about to lose 8 IMPs; it seemed that the contract that had been "allowed to make" was not 4 Spades at all. So, apparently, it was virtually 24-20 to the NIBU, the score that it was before the part score swing.
And there were still two boards of bridge to be played! On Board 11, the NI West made a safe 4 Hearts Contract. His team-mates "sacrificed" in 5 Clubs after Somerville opened 4NT showing both minors. He somehow managed to get out for -2, so the sacrifice was a brilliant one. 27 plays 28 or 20. Board 12 wrapped up an exciting match when both NS pairs couldn't get to a 20 point Spade Game. That went flat, so NIBU scored 27 IMPs and there was a wait to see if CBAI scored 20 or 28.
Scotland v England
There was no Vugraph of this match, but naturally I was keeping an eye on the running scores. Scotland took an early lead, and increased it to a point where they were in 1st place. The dreaded fight-back did come, and England closed the gap to 4 IMPs. Scotland pulled away again and after what was clearly a very twisty match, as exciting as the Irish match, Scotland won 18-12. That was not quite enough to overtake England, but it was still a big step in the right direction.
Northern Irish Bridge Union v Scotland
If memory serves me correctly, a 9:50pm start for this match is one of the latest I have seen. This is unintelligible to me when there are 9 rounds of twelve boards to be played, and it is clearly a knock-on from the start of the first round being 12:35pm. Being a reasonable person, I am forced to assume there were serious issues that prevented play being scheduled for Saturday morning, but I have to say I don't know what they were.
Because of the lateness of the hour, I didn't manage to see the start of the match. On boards 23 and 24, NS and EW traded Games with a certain amount of overtricks, the effectiveness of which would surely be examined around about 11pm when the other table came to them.
Board 13 brought the first comparison and it was not good from a Scots point of view: Both Scottish pairs were in Games that did not make, one doubled, and it was 9-0 to the NIBU. Scotland looked on their way to their second defeat by this team and third in the tournament. Damage was double with England taking an early lead against CBAI.
Time to highlight some more Declarer play from Frazer Morgan
K J 6
A J 6 3 2
7 4
K 10 6
A 10 8 7 4
Q
A K 10 8 2
8 7
He was in 4 Spades by the bottom hand. Dummy's counterpart had already made 11 on a favourable lead.
The 9 of hearts was led, and that showed 0 or 2 higher cards. Frazer correctly played for 2, and ran to the queen, winning. He then cashed AK of diamonds, and LHO showed the 4 of hearts on the third round which he ruffed. He played the Ace of Hearts, and would not have been too disappointed to see RHO ruff with the 2 of spades. He over-ruffed with the 4 and ruffed a diamond with the Jack. He ruffed a heart, then a winning diamond, then another heart - the safest line for ten, not knowing he needed overtricks. He cashed the Ace of spades, and then claimed 12, presumably laying down another spade to endplay whoever won in clubs, as the Ace was with LHO.
Scotland were off the mark, but unfortunately Frazer's next line was unsuccessful, and Scotland found themselves 20-1 down.
K J 5
6 4
A K Q J 10 8 4 3
---
With the above hand, Alex Wilkinson called an 8 card suit trump and bid 5 Diamonds with his first turn to speak. This was doubled, and should come down, but he was allowed to make. The Irish pair went to 6, doubled course and two down. Scotland had 14 more IMPs all of a sudden. 4 IMPs quickly followed when an Irish pair went for a Game that didn't make. 20-18.
Then a phantom sacrifice for Northern Ireland, which was interesting but beyond my tiredness drained skills to write up, gave Scotland 11 IMPs and a 29-20 lead.
A flat 3NT+2 followed, where the key point was for East to be the first person to bid NT after South's weak 2 Spades Opener to right-side the 3NT contract. Phil Morrison demonstrated this by jumping straight to 3NT after 2S-P-P.
Good news followed for Scotland as the other table caught up to board 23. A game swing put the Scots 42-20 ahead. Meanwhile, the table I was watching played out another flat 3NT board, this time by NS.
With 3 comparisons to come, there was still plenty time for it to go horribly wrong. On Board 21, the Scots NS found themselves in a no-play 3NT, while the Scots West kept NS away from that fate by making a weak jump overcall that was left by his partner, who had 0 card support. That cost 6 IMPs, so I was happy to see the other table finish with another IMP for Scotland.
I took a breath, and looked at Board 22. Okay, the Scots South made 11 for 450 in spades. Looks okay. There is no slam (double dummy), Scotland should close this out. Phil and Frazer started the campaign by bidding their heart fit, which didn't stop Corry and Connolly finding 4 Spades. Unfortunately, it did stop Morgan spotting the best lead, a hard find, and NIBU gained 2 IMPs. A 43-28 win for Scotland. Enough to win 19-11.
The Junior Camrose standings after Day 1:
England 92
Scotland 84
NIBU 64
CBAI 60
The Peggy Bayer Standings after Day 1:
England 99
Scotland 78
NIBU 69
CBAI 48
Of course this was going to be the Vugraph match for Round 4, having not got the nod ahead of England v Scotland first time round. For a reason that I am sure is perfectly valid but unknown to me, the North and Republic teams generally go by their respective Union's names in these events - Northern Irish Bridge Union and Contract Bridge Association of Ireland respectively. NIBU were certainly due a Vugraph match, so I was looking forward to this one.
Things did not start quietly. On Board 1, the Northern Irish NS got a bit mixed up (by the look of it; it is possible they knew exactly what they were doing), and the Contract was 2 Hearts Doubled by North. Their team mates at least made 4 Spades +1 in the other room, so -500 when the dust cleared only lost 2 IMPs. I feel my theory of "confusion" is strengthened by Board 2, where a scrambling 2NT was not used to good effect and South played 3 Spades in a 5-2 fit, two off. 6 more IMPs to CBAI for Board 2. NIBU got off the mark on Board 3 by making an overtrick in 3NT by North.
The next two boards brought part score battles and 1 IMP to CBAI. Then NS held this:
A
J 9 5
J 7 6 5 3 2
6 4 2
K
K 10 3
A K 9 4
A K 10 8 7
Getting rid of one of two losers here is just too much to do, so when the CBAI pair bid to 6 Diamonds, a 10 IMP swing to NIBU was on its way; the first double-figure swing of the match making it 11-9. The underdogs were in the lead for the first time.
Here is one where both Declarers played the same contract:
A K J 2
A 4 2
K J 8 6 3
K
Q 9 7 5
J 8
10 5
A J 5 4 3
The contract was 4 Spades by South. I'm not sure how the Declarer for CBAI went down (the movie being inconclusive), but Somerville made it look easy. He got the same lead: the 3 of Hearts. He rose with the Ace of Hearts and unblocked the club suit by playing the King to the 9-3-2. He then exited in hearts, West winning with the King. West kept hearts going, ruffed in hand. Now Declarer laid down the 5 of diamonds, and West, holding AQ74, rose with the Ace. West returned a diamond, but Somerville guessed right and let the diamond run. He then cashed the Ace of clubs, played a small spade to the Jack, ruffed a diamond with the 9 of spades and cashed the queen, claiming 11. That was 13 IMPs to NIBU, but CBAI answered back, finding a killing defence against 4 Spades that their team mates managed to make. It was getting very hard to keep up with this swingy set. The next board was a flat 3NT, although there was play. The score with three quarters of the match played was 24-20 to the NIBU.
Board 10 was something I don't see every day. It looked to me like NS had 4 Hearts on and EW had 5 Diamonds on. The CBAI pair got the contract in both rooms; 3 Hearts making 11 and 4 Diamonds making on the nose, though for my money 11 was there. However, I could see all the cards and it is very difficult to factor that in sometimes, so I cannot be 100% sure what the "par" score was.
It was at this point that it was brought to my attention that one of the scores might have been wrong. The standing score was 28-24 to CBAI, but apparently they were about to lose 8 IMPs; it seemed that the contract that had been "allowed to make" was not 4 Spades at all. So, apparently, it was virtually 24-20 to the NIBU, the score that it was before the part score swing.
And there were still two boards of bridge to be played! On Board 11, the NI West made a safe 4 Hearts Contract. His team-mates "sacrificed" in 5 Clubs after Somerville opened 4NT showing both minors. He somehow managed to get out for -2, so the sacrifice was a brilliant one. 27 plays 28 or 20. Board 12 wrapped up an exciting match when both NS pairs couldn't get to a 20 point Spade Game. That went flat, so NIBU scored 27 IMPs and there was a wait to see if CBAI scored 20 or 28.
Scotland v England
There was no Vugraph of this match, but naturally I was keeping an eye on the running scores. Scotland took an early lead, and increased it to a point where they were in 1st place. The dreaded fight-back did come, and England closed the gap to 4 IMPs. Scotland pulled away again and after what was clearly a very twisty match, as exciting as the Irish match, Scotland won 18-12. That was not quite enough to overtake England, but it was still a big step in the right direction.
Northern Irish Bridge Union v Scotland
If memory serves me correctly, a 9:50pm start for this match is one of the latest I have seen. This is unintelligible to me when there are 9 rounds of twelve boards to be played, and it is clearly a knock-on from the start of the first round being 12:35pm. Being a reasonable person, I am forced to assume there were serious issues that prevented play being scheduled for Saturday morning, but I have to say I don't know what they were.
Because of the lateness of the hour, I didn't manage to see the start of the match. On boards 23 and 24, NS and EW traded Games with a certain amount of overtricks, the effectiveness of which would surely be examined around about 11pm when the other table came to them.
Board 13 brought the first comparison and it was not good from a Scots point of view: Both Scottish pairs were in Games that did not make, one doubled, and it was 9-0 to the NIBU. Scotland looked on their way to their second defeat by this team and third in the tournament. Damage was double with England taking an early lead against CBAI.
Time to highlight some more Declarer play from Frazer Morgan
K J 6
A J 6 3 2
7 4
K 10 6
A 10 8 7 4
Q
A K 10 8 2
8 7
He was in 4 Spades by the bottom hand. Dummy's counterpart had already made 11 on a favourable lead.
The 9 of hearts was led, and that showed 0 or 2 higher cards. Frazer correctly played for 2, and ran to the queen, winning. He then cashed AK of diamonds, and LHO showed the 4 of hearts on the third round which he ruffed. He played the Ace of Hearts, and would not have been too disappointed to see RHO ruff with the 2 of spades. He over-ruffed with the 4 and ruffed a diamond with the Jack. He ruffed a heart, then a winning diamond, then another heart - the safest line for ten, not knowing he needed overtricks. He cashed the Ace of spades, and then claimed 12, presumably laying down another spade to endplay whoever won in clubs, as the Ace was with LHO.
Scotland were off the mark, but unfortunately Frazer's next line was unsuccessful, and Scotland found themselves 20-1 down.
K J 5
6 4
A K Q J 10 8 4 3
---
With the above hand, Alex Wilkinson called an 8 card suit trump and bid 5 Diamonds with his first turn to speak. This was doubled, and should come down, but he was allowed to make. The Irish pair went to 6, doubled course and two down. Scotland had 14 more IMPs all of a sudden. 4 IMPs quickly followed when an Irish pair went for a Game that didn't make. 20-18.
Then a phantom sacrifice for Northern Ireland, which was interesting but beyond my tiredness drained skills to write up, gave Scotland 11 IMPs and a 29-20 lead.
A flat 3NT+2 followed, where the key point was for East to be the first person to bid NT after South's weak 2 Spades Opener to right-side the 3NT contract. Phil Morrison demonstrated this by jumping straight to 3NT after 2S-P-P.
Good news followed for Scotland as the other table caught up to board 23. A game swing put the Scots 42-20 ahead. Meanwhile, the table I was watching played out another flat 3NT board, this time by NS.
With 3 comparisons to come, there was still plenty time for it to go horribly wrong. On Board 21, the Scots NS found themselves in a no-play 3NT, while the Scots West kept NS away from that fate by making a weak jump overcall that was left by his partner, who had 0 card support. That cost 6 IMPs, so I was happy to see the other table finish with another IMP for Scotland.
I took a breath, and looked at Board 22. Okay, the Scots South made 11 for 450 in spades. Looks okay. There is no slam (double dummy), Scotland should close this out. Phil and Frazer started the campaign by bidding their heart fit, which didn't stop Corry and Connolly finding 4 Spades. Unfortunately, it did stop Morgan spotting the best lead, a hard find, and NIBU gained 2 IMPs. A 43-28 win for Scotland. Enough to win 19-11.
The Junior Camrose standings after Day 1:
England 92
Scotland 84
NIBU 64
CBAI 60
The Peggy Bayer Standings after Day 1:
England 99
Scotland 78
NIBU 69
CBAI 48
Junior Camrose and Peggy Bayer 2012 (Part 2)
CBAI v England
It was no surprise that this match got top billing for Round 2, as with 16 and 19 VPs respectively, they were the top two. I was late to start viewing this match, as I was finishing up my previous post, and when I came in, North and South held these cards on Board 14:
5 4
A 7 3
Q 5
K Q 6 5 3 2
K Q J 10 7
Q
A J 8 4
A J 7
The diamond finesse is onside, so 6 Clubs is the optimum spot. 6NT by North is reasonably good on the lie, as East would have to find the lead of King from K J 9 4 in hearts to beat it. But do you want to be in a 50% slam? Personally, I want to be in a 50% slam only on the 50% of occasions that it works. England went to Five Clubs with an Overtrick, where Gormally and Synnott went to 3NT and made 3 overtricks for 2 IMPs. They were the only 2 IMPs scored at that point, and with six boards played and four comparisons made (one table having played boards 23 and 24 first), the score was still 2-0 to the Contract Bridge Association of Ireland.
The boards were looking a bit flat, with no IMPs scored at all in the other match, and it required someone to take action in the bidding to cause more IMPs to flow. The Irish East-West found themselves in 2 Spades one off on Board 17, but after the same 1 Club opening from East, Gormally (South) held this:
A K
10 3
K 9 7 5 4 3
9 7 4
He found a bid of 3 Diamonds. This was well judged, as it might make, and it caused the English pair to try their luck in 3NT. Their luck was out; they came four off, and CBAI took a 6-0 lead. That remained the score after six comparisons out of 12, and we were looking at a low scoring match. Boards 23 and 24 looked flat too (though you can never tell, and when I say "you", I do of course mean: "me"). On Board 18, an English Declarer in a superior contract to his counterpart went two down, losing three more IMPs. I won't post that one here. Not long after, the Irish gained an IMP on Board 23 (the other table clearly slightly ahead of time), and it was 10-0. Both England and Ireland played well enough to flatten Board 20 at 630 to North-South. Ireland did well on Board 24 to get a 15-0 lead with one table having two boards to play, but then came the "swing" board.
Q 8 6 5
A K J 10 4
A 8 5
4
K 10 4
Q 5
K 7 4 3 2
Q 10 8
These were the North and South hands. The English North played in 4 Hearts, making exactly. Gormally was in 3NT, and he had no chance of making it when West led from K J x x x in clubs. Suddenly, with one board to go, it was 15-13. That was hard lines on Ireland, on a set where one bad board can finish you off. And if your luck is out, it's out.
On the final board, Ireland gained an IMP in generally confusing circumstances, which I won't go into here. However, the 16-13 result was not necessarily final, as the English East-West called the Director to ask for an adjusted score. The result at 4:11pm British time was 16-14 to CBAI.
Scotland v CBAI
This started off as Bottom versus Second Top. Scotland had thrown away a narrow lead in a very short space of time against Northern Ireland, to find themselves headed for a 19-11 defeat at one stage, having to battle back to a 16-14 loss. CBAI were second by one VP, but had won two out of two matches.
As is my want, I watched the table that started with Board 35, so that I would see the comparisons. So for Board 35 I found myself casting a virtual IMP to Scotland, as Ireland made a 4 Heart contract without the possible overtrick. On Board 36, Scotland bid to 3NT without a diamond stop, and took 8 tricks. Therefore, I made a mental note to deduct x amount of IMPs from Scotland's score. The next question that arose was how do you get to the optimum contract here:
A K Q 4
10 9 8 6 4 2
6
A 4
J 6 3
K
A 5
K Q J 9 8 7 2
The Irish North-South did not manage, and I was left to assume the Scottish pair did, assuming because the running scores said Scotland were 11-0 up, but BBO had completely frozen. I tried closing it down and logging back in, but that maybe wasn't a good idea. For some reason BBO was suddenly running at dead slow and stop.
So, I took a break for supper, and returned to find that the Scots had indeed bid the slam and built up a 29-0 lead in my absence. That was with 7 boards played and 5 comparisons made. On board 30, Wilkinson took a wrong guess in 2 Clubs, but did enough to make the contract and flatten 1NT making 7 to retain the 29 IMP lead.
Board 31 was a sore missed opportunity for Scotland.
Q J 2
6 4 3
Q 9 7
A K Q 2
K 10 6 5 3
2
A K 5 4 3
10 5
The other table had already played the board; the Irish pair coming down in 4 Spades. I was keen for the Scottish pair to get to the same contract. After 2 Hearts from West, raised to 3 Hearts from East, South doubled at unfavourable vulnerability. North pondered and bid 4 Clubs, and South bid 4 Diamonds. North went into the tank again, and eventually bid 5 Diamonds. Gormally led his singleton ace of spades and played partner in with a heart to generate a ruff; flat board.
On Board 32, the same contract was played at both tables; 2 Spades by North. The Scottish East was unlucky that his choice of lead was a disaster that allowed the contract to sail to ten, whilst Alex Wilkinson had to play carefully just to make 8. There was a double dummy route to 9, but not a line that an International player is going to find, or even look for, when he doesn't have the benefit of seeing all the cards. Ireland were off the mark with 2 IMPs. Almost immediately, the IMP in reserve appeared for Scotland from Board 35. Whilst writing that up, Wilkinson found an inspired trump lead on the next board to flatten it.
I was happy to see Board 36 going flat, meaning that the other table had finished and we just had to see what happened on Board 34. The Scottish EW bid and made 3 Spades. Gormally found himself in the same contract, and NS always have four tricks (cashed off the top), so the match ended with a 22-8 VP win to Scotland.
Meanwhile, England won by the same VP scoreline to retain their lead at the top. The table after the first round robin:
England: 55
Scotland: 47
CBAI: 40
NIBU: 38
This brought it to supper time for the players.
I shall conclude with a bit of unfinished business - the hand I left at the end of my Retaining the Reid post. The "answer" is that the player who held that hand made a well-judged bid of 6 Clubs. Jun held:
K Q 5
K 10 7 4 3 2
A Q 3
Q
He raised to 7 Clubs, making.
It was no surprise that this match got top billing for Round 2, as with 16 and 19 VPs respectively, they were the top two. I was late to start viewing this match, as I was finishing up my previous post, and when I came in, North and South held these cards on Board 14:
5 4
A 7 3
Q 5
K Q 6 5 3 2
K Q J 10 7
Q
A J 8 4
A J 7
The diamond finesse is onside, so 6 Clubs is the optimum spot. 6NT by North is reasonably good on the lie, as East would have to find the lead of King from K J 9 4 in hearts to beat it. But do you want to be in a 50% slam? Personally, I want to be in a 50% slam only on the 50% of occasions that it works. England went to Five Clubs with an Overtrick, where Gormally and Synnott went to 3NT and made 3 overtricks for 2 IMPs. They were the only 2 IMPs scored at that point, and with six boards played and four comparisons made (one table having played boards 23 and 24 first), the score was still 2-0 to the Contract Bridge Association of Ireland.
The boards were looking a bit flat, with no IMPs scored at all in the other match, and it required someone to take action in the bidding to cause more IMPs to flow. The Irish East-West found themselves in 2 Spades one off on Board 17, but after the same 1 Club opening from East, Gormally (South) held this:
A K
10 3
K 9 7 5 4 3
9 7 4
He found a bid of 3 Diamonds. This was well judged, as it might make, and it caused the English pair to try their luck in 3NT. Their luck was out; they came four off, and CBAI took a 6-0 lead. That remained the score after six comparisons out of 12, and we were looking at a low scoring match. Boards 23 and 24 looked flat too (though you can never tell, and when I say "you", I do of course mean: "me"). On Board 18, an English Declarer in a superior contract to his counterpart went two down, losing three more IMPs. I won't post that one here. Not long after, the Irish gained an IMP on Board 23 (the other table clearly slightly ahead of time), and it was 10-0. Both England and Ireland played well enough to flatten Board 20 at 630 to North-South. Ireland did well on Board 24 to get a 15-0 lead with one table having two boards to play, but then came the "swing" board.
Q 8 6 5
A K J 10 4
A 8 5
4
K 10 4
Q 5
K 7 4 3 2
Q 10 8
These were the North and South hands. The English North played in 4 Hearts, making exactly. Gormally was in 3NT, and he had no chance of making it when West led from K J x x x in clubs. Suddenly, with one board to go, it was 15-13. That was hard lines on Ireland, on a set where one bad board can finish you off. And if your luck is out, it's out.
On the final board, Ireland gained an IMP in generally confusing circumstances, which I won't go into here. However, the 16-13 result was not necessarily final, as the English East-West called the Director to ask for an adjusted score. The result at 4:11pm British time was 16-14 to CBAI.
Scotland v CBAI
This started off as Bottom versus Second Top. Scotland had thrown away a narrow lead in a very short space of time against Northern Ireland, to find themselves headed for a 19-11 defeat at one stage, having to battle back to a 16-14 loss. CBAI were second by one VP, but had won two out of two matches.
As is my want, I watched the table that started with Board 35, so that I would see the comparisons. So for Board 35 I found myself casting a virtual IMP to Scotland, as Ireland made a 4 Heart contract without the possible overtrick. On Board 36, Scotland bid to 3NT without a diamond stop, and took 8 tricks. Therefore, I made a mental note to deduct x amount of IMPs from Scotland's score. The next question that arose was how do you get to the optimum contract here:
A K Q 4
10 9 8 6 4 2
6
A 4
J 6 3
K
A 5
K Q J 9 8 7 2
The Irish North-South did not manage, and I was left to assume the Scottish pair did, assuming because the running scores said Scotland were 11-0 up, but BBO had completely frozen. I tried closing it down and logging back in, but that maybe wasn't a good idea. For some reason BBO was suddenly running at dead slow and stop.
So, I took a break for supper, and returned to find that the Scots had indeed bid the slam and built up a 29-0 lead in my absence. That was with 7 boards played and 5 comparisons made. On board 30, Wilkinson took a wrong guess in 2 Clubs, but did enough to make the contract and flatten 1NT making 7 to retain the 29 IMP lead.
Board 31 was a sore missed opportunity for Scotland.
Q J 2
6 4 3
Q 9 7
A K Q 2
K 10 6 5 3
2
A K 5 4 3
10 5
The other table had already played the board; the Irish pair coming down in 4 Spades. I was keen for the Scottish pair to get to the same contract. After 2 Hearts from West, raised to 3 Hearts from East, South doubled at unfavourable vulnerability. North pondered and bid 4 Clubs, and South bid 4 Diamonds. North went into the tank again, and eventually bid 5 Diamonds. Gormally led his singleton ace of spades and played partner in with a heart to generate a ruff; flat board.
On Board 32, the same contract was played at both tables; 2 Spades by North. The Scottish East was unlucky that his choice of lead was a disaster that allowed the contract to sail to ten, whilst Alex Wilkinson had to play carefully just to make 8. There was a double dummy route to 9, but not a line that an International player is going to find, or even look for, when he doesn't have the benefit of seeing all the cards. Ireland were off the mark with 2 IMPs. Almost immediately, the IMP in reserve appeared for Scotland from Board 35. Whilst writing that up, Wilkinson found an inspired trump lead on the next board to flatten it.
I was happy to see Board 36 going flat, meaning that the other table had finished and we just had to see what happened on Board 34. The Scottish EW bid and made 3 Spades. Gormally found himself in the same contract, and NS always have four tricks (cashed off the top), so the match ended with a 22-8 VP win to Scotland.
Meanwhile, England won by the same VP scoreline to retain their lead at the top. The table after the first round robin:
England: 55
Scotland: 47
CBAI: 40
NIBU: 38
This brought it to supper time for the players.
I shall conclude with a bit of unfinished business - the hand I left at the end of my Retaining the Reid post. The "answer" is that the player who held that hand made a well-judged bid of 6 Clubs. Jun held:
K Q 5
K 10 7 4 3 2
A Q 3
Q
He raised to 7 Clubs, making.
Junior Camrose and Peggy Bayer 2012 (Part 1)
For me, this is a “must-watch” event – two events, in fact. The only
reason that I would not have watched them as much as possible on BBO would be
if I was actually there. For the uninitiated, the Junior Camrose is the Camrose
Trophy for – well, juniors. It is played for by the Under 25 players of
England, Scotland, Northern Ireland, Republic of Ireland, and Wales. The Peggy
Bayer is likewise for Under 20s.
This year’s event is being held
in the Bewleys Hotel, Dublin Airport. Unlike the Full International
counterpart, the entire competition is played over one weekend. I don’t expect
(m)any of the Peggy Bayer games to be screened, so the event I’ll be watching
is the JC. For both events, Wales have declined/ are unable to send a team, so
both events are being contested by four teams in a triple round-robin format.
This presumably means each team gets seating rights against a particular
opponent once, with the draw for the third round of matches made “blind”.
This event did not even get its own coverage last year, so I shall try to atone for that this year with better coverage. So I shall start as I mean to go on with the first match:
England v Scotland
This event is open for all four teams to win,
and it is difficult to call. In previous years, Scotland have won five
out of eight and finished bottom, won the event, and then gained more VPs than
they did to win it the previous year and come second. The dynamic constantly
shifts and although the event over the years has been dominated by England, the
other teams are always intent on upsetting the apple cart. Straight off the
bat, we have a clash between the auld enemies – a good way to start. It is
always a match that generates a lot of interest. It is the only fixture that
gets a chance of being screened in the Peggy Bayer.
Straight away, we had Board 11 and this hand:
9 8 5 4
A 10 9
J 7 6 5 2
2
Partner opens a strong NT and you...?
Pass? It might be the most obvious action to some of us, but the
English North, Myers, made a good decision to bid 2 Clubs here, passing his
partner’s 2 Hearts response. This is safe as if Opener responds 2 Diamonds,
Pass will find partner with a minimum of two, with odds-on for more. The point
is that a suit contract plays better than 1NT.
The Scottish North did not get the chance. His RHO made a weak 3 Clubs
bid, which he then Doubled. This was left in. What do you lead to beat 3 Clubs
Doubled?
So, -580 after one board was not a good start for Scotland and I was
fearing the worst at this point. How pessimistic am I? Well, perhaps I had a
right to be when my hopes were dashed on Board 1. This was the contract Frazer
Morgan faced:
10 5 4
8 5 3 2
A 6 5 3
A 2
A K 8
A K 6
Q 7 2
Q 9 7 6
3NT by you; the bottom hand.
LHO opened a weak 2 Spades; you bid 2NT and after 3C-3N play in 3NT.
There are only six top tricks and it is not doesn’t take a lot of
looking to surmise that only a series of correct guesses (and in all
likelihood, sheer luck) will allow you to make this contract.
Frazer got the 6 of spades led, and chose the 10 of spades as a shot to
nothing. RHO won with the Jack, which he ducked, having placed him with a singleton.
The four of hearts was returned, and Frazer ducked this too, LHO winning with
the ten and exiting with the Jack to the 3-7-A. Now came an important, but
correct guess. He played the 2 of diamonds to the nine, Ace and four. He then
played the three, and when RHO played the 8, the queen held, collecting the
ten. So far so good, but what now? Do either of the red suits break? Will clubs
behave? Of course, I could see the answers double-dummy and was pleased to see
Frazer exit a diamond, finding the 3-3 break, RHO winning with the King. RHO
then cleared the heart suit, North playing the 9 of spades. It looks like
Frazer should play on clubs now, but he calmly cashed the Ace of Spades first,
noting the 4 of clubs discard from RHO. Now he played the six of clubs to the
three-Ace-five. That brings him to this position:
5
8
6
2
A
-
-
Q 9 7
Six Tricks Won; Three Lost.
There is only one layout on which this will make. Given that he has to
lose the King of Clubs, Frazer knows he goes down if RHO holds it. Therefore,
he needs LHO to have started with K3 doubleton. That is what he plays for, and
it succeeds. LHO is obliged to allow him back in with the spade, and he makes
the contract. What a shame the board was flat. But of course it was. Such an
interesting board to me is a warm-up for the likes of these junior
Internationals.
Morgan and Morrison then competed well to 3 Hearts making on Board 2,
and their team mates picked up 500 in the other room for 3 Spades Doubled. 11
IMPs went to England when one Scots pair failed to find a killer club lead or
switch against 3NT. Morgan and Morrison then bid to a shapely 5 Diamonds, which
(after another good view, this time by Morrison) made 12 tricks and gained 10
IMPs when not bid in the other room. England gained a part score swing when
they defended on both tables on Board 7, and Scottish hopes were finally killed
off when North and South held these respective cards:
A Q 6 2
Q 10 4
J
Q J 9 6 2
8 5
A K 6 5
K Q 5 4
A K 5
Myers and Thrower bid to 6NT on this. Unfortunately, East decided to
lead from K J 9 7 3 in spades, giving England a slam swing as South played it
without a hope in the other room. Before analysing this hand I looked at the
hands in isolation and concluded that my regular partner and I should finish on
4NT on this board. But don’t take my word for it; I’ll ask him as I generally do
with bidding queries.
So, after the first match, Scotland sit bottom with 11 VPs, as CBAI emerged slightly ahead in a twisty match with Northern Ireland to win 16-14. Still, the trophy is not decided after Round 1 and there will be time for Scotland to come back. I shall try to keep dedicated coverage over the weekend, and hope to post an update around late Supper Time.
Tuesday 14 February 2012
Retaining the Reid
Sunday the 12th February saw an important event. No, not the National Mixed Swiss Teams. Oh, all right then, that as well. But for me, it was all about the Reid Trophy. The picture of the winning team is still available in a post from last February, and I am getting fed up of it as a wallpaper on my computer. (Perhaps because I am in it?) Anyway, having won last year, it was only fair I offered the same players a chance to retain the trophy, but I knew that would not be possible as 009domino was off to Glasgow for the aforementioned national competition. The remaining three all returned, Jun playing with his Mum, and we were firm favourites for the event. (Not that I like being favourite, or place myself as such for any event, but I don't get to decide).
The Reid Trophy is supposed to be a Swiss event, but for the last two years it has been a multiple teams event owing to the fact that both times, only six teams entered. This was particularly disappointing given that two of the teams that entered were junior teams (not counting my 50% junior team); so there were only fourteen over-25s in the entire District that came forward to play. This is a trend that needs to be reversed, and I shall openly consider some (possible) reasons here and respond to each in turn.
1: The qualification of entry is too low
It is true that restricting entry to those of Star Master and below rules out a number of players - or does it? The rules of the competition allowed for higher ranked players to participate provided they played with a beginner. Who wants to do that, you ask? Plenty people! Several players came forward and offered themselves as partners for beginners, and were left un-matched when not enough beginners came forward. Besides which, at least 75% of the District could have entered if they'd wanted to, and the other 25% would also have had a chance if they really wanted to play. So this really doesn't do as an answer. True, higher ranked players are more inclined to enter a District competition. But I don't think the restriction on entries is enough to explain poor turnout.
2: The competition is in the wrong place
Why should every District event be played in the City? My opinion is that it shouldn't. It might be an idea to "tour" certain trophies around the shire. Nobody likes having to travel to events all the time. There are a lot of players in the shire and maybe we might reward their numbers by bringing a competition to them, rather than asking them to come into Aberdeen.
It is not just an issue of travel. There is still a stigma that bridge in the city is "too serious" and some players probably genuinely fear to play there as they expect the Director will be called for every move they make. This is by and large a misconception, as players in the city are just as friendly. The trouble is that there is also a minority of nit-pickers that will call the Director for every little thing. What those from the shire may not realise is that this type of player is as unwelcome in the City as anywhere else. Furthermore, Directors are there to help the social aspect of the game; not remove it. Being very lax on Laws and Ethics, as most clubs in the Shire are, is perfectly all right in of itself, but they should realise that it is fair to say that they are thereby "over-tolerant", as opposed to the general practice being "too serious".
On the issue of tolerance then, it has been said before: "Zero tolerance for rudeness, maxi tolerance for everything else". The chances of a player falling foul of the Laws are greater in the City; there is no getting round that. But most players will allow for it, and take it within their stride. The chances of an irregularity occurring is actually greater in the Shire, but someone is less likely to call the Director in the Shire, which puts us back to square one. The stigma will exist as long as players are allowed to think that calling the Director is aggressive/ anti-social, which is the exact opposite of what it should be seen as.
By the way, I do not hereby accuse anyone of something I don't admit to myself. I will hold my hand up and say that Yes, there have been incidents in the Shire that I would have called the Director for if I'd been playing in Aberdeen. I should know better, but then, the stigma is there and I cannot personally remove it. Why will I call the Director for something trivial when that will be seen as "causing trouble"? It's just not worth it.
3. The Competition is at the wrong time
If this is the case, I am unsure how that can be rectified. The calendar is choc-full of events to be played. There is little wriggle-room. I am unsure how February would compare to March/ April anyway.
4. 'So-and-so is going to win; we don't have a chance of winning'
I can't imagine the Reid Trophy being so cut-and-dry. My team were favourites yesterday and I never at any point considered the event to be in the bag, until we had finished scoring up. Does taking part count for nothing any more? I've entered the Scottish Cup in the last two seasons with no hope what so ever of actually winning. Perhaps related however is...
5. Juniors getting "help with their bidding"
Sigh. It would upset as much as it would annoy me if anyone was not entering for this reason, because it is totally out-of-date. For avoidance of doubt: this has not happened for at least three years, nor will it ever happen again.
Yes, it was not a level playing field when certain junior teams had experts kibitzing on the pretext of "helping the juniors with their bidding". The main problem was that the experts could not restrain themselves from telling their charges how to play the cards as well, and this should never have been allowed. I tried to put a stop to it at the time, but was unsuccessful. However, I would point out that it was JUNIORS that STOPPED this. I am somewhat older and more confident than I was back in those days, and there will not be a return to "those days" on my watch.
People should be careful of tarring everyone with the same brush. I have played in the Reid since its inception (bar one year when it clashed with the Men's Teams in Dundee). There has always been a junior in my team, but my team has always stood on its own two feet, win or lose. How angry I would be with someone recalling the bad old days would be nothing compared to how angry I'd be with someone who suggested my team has ever had help in a tournament. The juniors nowadays are keen to enter events, stand by themselves, get beaten (heavily in some cases), and then analyse why. Always a formula for success (later rather than sooner). Phoenix Rising operates the same policy. We could have fielded stronger teams this year, but we chose the youngest teams available.
I did touch on this last year, but I felt I needed to re-visit the issue in full, because we did not improve our entries. Granted, this blog has a low circulation, but if just one person has had their mind put at rest by what I have to say, it was worth it. Now, onto the competition itself.
With six teams, we took Team 6, to make the movement easier for all the other teams. We started with a match against the Grammar School. Our opponents at both tables were over-enthusiastic on Board 1, 800 plus 500 equals 16 IMPs in. We then lost four IMPs after a horrendous mis-play by yours truly. Then came a suit combination problem:
8 5 4 opposite Q J 9 7 6
You need to play the suit for two losers, starting in hand (8 5 4). You play the 4 to the 2-J-K. Later, you play the 8 and LHO plays the 3. What do you do?
I was in 3NT, in danger of coming down if I got this wrong. My counterpart was in 4NT Doubled. I made ten tricks. I would like to think that guessing wrong is the only reason my counterpart lost 800 on this board, and maybe it is.
In the end, we were strong enough to keep it within our own hands. With scores (in Board Number order) of 20, 18, 14, 15, and 20, we scored more VPs against every team than we dropped altogether. Anyone would take that. Well done to my team-mates on a deserved victory, even with me on the team.
Of course, Bridge addicts that we are, it was not Jun or my first session of the day. No, that came at 8am in the morning, with the regular BBO practice session. Jun then had a BBO match in the evening as well, and I agreed to post this hand:
---
A Q
K J 9 2
A K J 9 7 6 5
All Vul, RHO is Dealer and opens 4 Spades.
Jun's partner held this hand, I'll let you know what he called in the next blog. In the mean time, decide for yourself. Enjoy! :)
The Reid Trophy is supposed to be a Swiss event, but for the last two years it has been a multiple teams event owing to the fact that both times, only six teams entered. This was particularly disappointing given that two of the teams that entered were junior teams (not counting my 50% junior team); so there were only fourteen over-25s in the entire District that came forward to play. This is a trend that needs to be reversed, and I shall openly consider some (possible) reasons here and respond to each in turn.
1: The qualification of entry is too low
It is true that restricting entry to those of Star Master and below rules out a number of players - or does it? The rules of the competition allowed for higher ranked players to participate provided they played with a beginner. Who wants to do that, you ask? Plenty people! Several players came forward and offered themselves as partners for beginners, and were left un-matched when not enough beginners came forward. Besides which, at least 75% of the District could have entered if they'd wanted to, and the other 25% would also have had a chance if they really wanted to play. So this really doesn't do as an answer. True, higher ranked players are more inclined to enter a District competition. But I don't think the restriction on entries is enough to explain poor turnout.
2: The competition is in the wrong place
Why should every District event be played in the City? My opinion is that it shouldn't. It might be an idea to "tour" certain trophies around the shire. Nobody likes having to travel to events all the time. There are a lot of players in the shire and maybe we might reward their numbers by bringing a competition to them, rather than asking them to come into Aberdeen.
It is not just an issue of travel. There is still a stigma that bridge in the city is "too serious" and some players probably genuinely fear to play there as they expect the Director will be called for every move they make. This is by and large a misconception, as players in the city are just as friendly. The trouble is that there is also a minority of nit-pickers that will call the Director for every little thing. What those from the shire may not realise is that this type of player is as unwelcome in the City as anywhere else. Furthermore, Directors are there to help the social aspect of the game; not remove it. Being very lax on Laws and Ethics, as most clubs in the Shire are, is perfectly all right in of itself, but they should realise that it is fair to say that they are thereby "over-tolerant", as opposed to the general practice being "too serious".
On the issue of tolerance then, it has been said before: "Zero tolerance for rudeness, maxi tolerance for everything else". The chances of a player falling foul of the Laws are greater in the City; there is no getting round that. But most players will allow for it, and take it within their stride. The chances of an irregularity occurring is actually greater in the Shire, but someone is less likely to call the Director in the Shire, which puts us back to square one. The stigma will exist as long as players are allowed to think that calling the Director is aggressive/ anti-social, which is the exact opposite of what it should be seen as.
By the way, I do not hereby accuse anyone of something I don't admit to myself. I will hold my hand up and say that Yes, there have been incidents in the Shire that I would have called the Director for if I'd been playing in Aberdeen. I should know better, but then, the stigma is there and I cannot personally remove it. Why will I call the Director for something trivial when that will be seen as "causing trouble"? It's just not worth it.
3. The Competition is at the wrong time
If this is the case, I am unsure how that can be rectified. The calendar is choc-full of events to be played. There is little wriggle-room. I am unsure how February would compare to March/ April anyway.
4. 'So-and-so is going to win; we don't have a chance of winning'
I can't imagine the Reid Trophy being so cut-and-dry. My team were favourites yesterday and I never at any point considered the event to be in the bag, until we had finished scoring up. Does taking part count for nothing any more? I've entered the Scottish Cup in the last two seasons with no hope what so ever of actually winning. Perhaps related however is...
5. Juniors getting "help with their bidding"
Sigh. It would upset as much as it would annoy me if anyone was not entering for this reason, because it is totally out-of-date. For avoidance of doubt: this has not happened for at least three years, nor will it ever happen again.
Yes, it was not a level playing field when certain junior teams had experts kibitzing on the pretext of "helping the juniors with their bidding". The main problem was that the experts could not restrain themselves from telling their charges how to play the cards as well, and this should never have been allowed. I tried to put a stop to it at the time, but was unsuccessful. However, I would point out that it was JUNIORS that STOPPED this. I am somewhat older and more confident than I was back in those days, and there will not be a return to "those days" on my watch.
People should be careful of tarring everyone with the same brush. I have played in the Reid since its inception (bar one year when it clashed with the Men's Teams in Dundee). There has always been a junior in my team, but my team has always stood on its own two feet, win or lose. How angry I would be with someone recalling the bad old days would be nothing compared to how angry I'd be with someone who suggested my team has ever had help in a tournament. The juniors nowadays are keen to enter events, stand by themselves, get beaten (heavily in some cases), and then analyse why. Always a formula for success (later rather than sooner). Phoenix Rising operates the same policy. We could have fielded stronger teams this year, but we chose the youngest teams available.
I did touch on this last year, but I felt I needed to re-visit the issue in full, because we did not improve our entries. Granted, this blog has a low circulation, but if just one person has had their mind put at rest by what I have to say, it was worth it. Now, onto the competition itself.
With six teams, we took Team 6, to make the movement easier for all the other teams. We started with a match against the Grammar School. Our opponents at both tables were over-enthusiastic on Board 1, 800 plus 500 equals 16 IMPs in. We then lost four IMPs after a horrendous mis-play by yours truly. Then came a suit combination problem:
8 5 4 opposite Q J 9 7 6
You need to play the suit for two losers, starting in hand (8 5 4). You play the 4 to the 2-J-K. Later, you play the 8 and LHO plays the 3. What do you do?
I was in 3NT, in danger of coming down if I got this wrong. My counterpart was in 4NT Doubled. I made ten tricks. I would like to think that guessing wrong is the only reason my counterpart lost 800 on this board, and maybe it is.
In the end, we were strong enough to keep it within our own hands. With scores (in Board Number order) of 20, 18, 14, 15, and 20, we scored more VPs against every team than we dropped altogether. Anyone would take that. Well done to my team-mates on a deserved victory, even with me on the team.
Of course, Bridge addicts that we are, it was not Jun or my first session of the day. No, that came at 8am in the morning, with the regular BBO practice session. Jun then had a BBO match in the evening as well, and I agreed to post this hand:
---
A Q
K J 9 2
A K J 9 7 6 5
All Vul, RHO is Dealer and opens 4 Spades.
Jun's partner held this hand, I'll let you know what he called in the next blog. In the mean time, decide for yourself. Enjoy! :)
Saturday 11 February 2012
Running the marathon
Not literally, obviously. I struggle to run for twenty six metres, let alone miles.
But Saturday saw my sixth bridge event in six days - the Scottish Plate match versus HODGSON.
I went into this match still looking for my first Scottish Cup or Scottish Plate victory, and after today's match, I am still looking. My hopes were the same as anyone in my situation: that my team found their best form and the opposition did not.
Unfortunately, the second aspect of that particular hope did not happen. Our opponents were on inspired form and went back to Glasgow with a comfortable victory. The difference? We didn't take our chances. I feel the door was open for us for a fair few swings, but we never took them. Conversely, our opponents played a steady game throughout, gifting us absolutely nothing. We scored a total of 31 IMPs which tells its own story. You (or at least we) don't win a Scottish Cup Match scoring less IMPs than boards. With a lesser experienced team last year, we scored more than twice as many IMPs than boards against SHORT and still were thrashed.
Oh well, there's always next year.
Monday, Wednesday and Thursday was business as usual. Three club nights, 77 boards. Nothing to write home about. Obviously Phoenix had plenty to discuss, as it was a tutorial night, but I didn't stick around.
DONSIDE LEAGUE
This event I have played in for quite a few years, and to my knowledge I have never blogged about it. I seemingly do this event a dis-service. I can't have anyone thinking it isn't important enough to be worthy of recognition. It's a good wee tourney.
The Donside League is a non-SBU event. What is the difference between an SBU event and a non-SBU event? No Masterpoints, and less cost is the answer. And to some extent, a change in who is participating. The Donside league is not played in the City, and I described it to someone who was asking as "the Shire's version of the Sybil Hay" i.e. the Aberdeenshire Teams of Four.
The qualification is that players from certain clubs within Aberdeenshire may form Teams of Four and play in this league. There used to be a flaccid rule about the clubs being specifically within some geographical relation to the River Don, but this (to my knowledge) has never exactly been hard-and-fast, and I think it would be to the detriment of the tournament if it was. For example, my team (under it's old name) was named after a completely different river (Ury), albeit a river that converges with the Don. Our new name is Buchan, which is a fairer reflection of our four players' links to the shire. If anyone asks, I point out that partner and I live about five minutes' walk from the River Don.
The format is eight board matches with IMPs converted to VP scores. Three a night, except for the final night, where there is one more match followed by a Pairs aggregate.
We were in the running going into Tuesday's round, which was quite lucky considering we'd only won three out of six matches so far. We were also not playing with our regular team-mates for this round as they were otherwise engaged.
For Round Three, we faced MURRAY, URYSIDE and TARVES. These are actual team names, as opposed to Captain names which you get in a lot of SBU events. I actually think this does nothing to hinder organisation and can add to the fun of an event, but really, it doesn't matter.
Our stand-in team-mates were on fire against Murray, and a close-to-par offering from us was enough to yield an 18-2 VP win. That was a great start against a mid-table team capable of beating anyone.
Uryside are a team that are always somewhere near the top, and sure enough, 8 solid boards of bridge were played. There weren't many swings and my favourite suit combination was:
9 x opposite A K Q 10 7 in dummy.
I was playing in 1NT; an overcall over my RHO's suit bid. I had to play this suit for one loser (or four winners), with only one outside entry to dummy. I ran the nine (not a hard decision), dropping the 8 on my right, before playing another hook to pick up five diamond tricks and set me on my way to 9 tricks in total. No missed Game by the way; one of those ones I wouldn't make if I was in.
What swung the match was a 4 Hearts Contract by me. If I remember right, I opened 1 Spade with 5 of them but no honours (there's no point in calling a ten an honour unless you're playing rubber bridge). Before I knew it, I found myself in 4 Spades missing the Ace and King, but luckily, with J x x of hearts in dummy opposite a doubleton A K, I managed to convince RHO to rise with the queen on the second round and found a pitch for ten tricks. 12-8 was the final score.
The third match was against the lower ranked TARVES team, and was full of Game contracts (mostly their way) that didn't make. Luckily, I found myself in one such absurd Game, but made. Our team mates did the trick at the other table, and when the dust cleared on a set full of bad splits and harsh fortune for whoever was Declarer we walked away with 17 VPs.
This put us second, two VPs behind STRATHBOGIE, who we have already played. We have four difficult matches to attend to in the two coming rounds, so we are in no way favourites, but we'll carry on regardless.
DISTRICT TEAMS OF FOUR (Round 5)
Last time I reported, we were doing rather well in this, to the point of being a very dark horse for the Sybil Hay trophy. This round threatened to end that challenge. Playing East-West, Lessurl and I were to play twelve boards against PETERS, before a match against ROSS.
The Peters team has four club players, who are all capable of holding their own in a field such as this. They are the team with more 20-0 defeats this season than any other, which is annoying because if it is their day, they will win. Sometimes you get teams like that, but if you lose against a team that all of your rivals are taking 20 from, you know your challenge is over. In other words, they've probably had a share of bad luck to have five zeros thus far, evidenced by the fact they are not bottom.
Things did not look good from our point of view. Our opponents gifted nothing, and made one or two good part score contracts. I doubled a making Game (I felt justified but won't do it again in a hurry - oh wait; I've done it since). They did eventually over-stretch themselves on one board, and we collected 800, but the rest of the "good" boards came in the form of bidding two ultra thin Games, plus one that was not actually there but did not come with an instruction manual for the defence.
Of course, we could not score up immediately; we had to play our second match whilst our team-mates played the twelve boards we'd just played.
ROSS has been flying of late. After a bad start with 6/40 in October, they then scored 37, 38 and 35. Our match therefore was between title challengers and title dark horses. It was almost a total part score battle. We did not think this would suit our team, and we were right, but what could we do? There were no Games to go for in the match - at all. Naturally, both sides competed in the auctions, trying to stop the other side finding the optimum contract. There was only one card play error and that was ours, so things looked bad until the very last board. Lessurl and I have patience - we can sit it out when we are not getting the board we want. Lack of games does not mean lack of interest. But for South, it was unthinkable to have twelve boards without a Game, and therefore South bid to 5 Diamonds on board 12, calmly doubled by Lessurl for 500. A swing of 14 IMPs from the last two boards was enough to edge the match 13-7, keeping both teams' title hopes alive. We beat Peters 19-1, and have moved up to fourth.
There has been a change at the top. The HAY team got their second 40 night of the season, proving that they are apt to score when it matters. Suddenly they lead MOWAT by 10 VPs. In fact, three VPs separate 2nd and 4th, with ROSS just one ahead of us. Hay is certainly in pole position but there really is all to play for. His team play both Mowat and Ross on the final night, so either one of them could pip him to the post. Meanwhile, we do not play any Contenders, so our Game plan is simple: Play as well as we can; hope that we score enough VPs with the other Contenders all duffing each other up. I still doubt that we will win (the other teams are not going to lie down; we could lose both matches), but we're going to give it a go.
There endeth the marathon. I'm not happy it has taken so long to post, but there it is. Hopefully it won't take so long to post on the Reid Trophy.
But Saturday saw my sixth bridge event in six days - the Scottish Plate match versus HODGSON.
I went into this match still looking for my first Scottish Cup or Scottish Plate victory, and after today's match, I am still looking. My hopes were the same as anyone in my situation: that my team found their best form and the opposition did not.
Unfortunately, the second aspect of that particular hope did not happen. Our opponents were on inspired form and went back to Glasgow with a comfortable victory. The difference? We didn't take our chances. I feel the door was open for us for a fair few swings, but we never took them. Conversely, our opponents played a steady game throughout, gifting us absolutely nothing. We scored a total of 31 IMPs which tells its own story. You (or at least we) don't win a Scottish Cup Match scoring less IMPs than boards. With a lesser experienced team last year, we scored more than twice as many IMPs than boards against SHORT and still were thrashed.
Oh well, there's always next year.
Monday, Wednesday and Thursday was business as usual. Three club nights, 77 boards. Nothing to write home about. Obviously Phoenix had plenty to discuss, as it was a tutorial night, but I didn't stick around.
DONSIDE LEAGUE
This event I have played in for quite a few years, and to my knowledge I have never blogged about it. I seemingly do this event a dis-service. I can't have anyone thinking it isn't important enough to be worthy of recognition. It's a good wee tourney.
The Donside League is a non-SBU event. What is the difference between an SBU event and a non-SBU event? No Masterpoints, and less cost is the answer. And to some extent, a change in who is participating. The Donside league is not played in the City, and I described it to someone who was asking as "the Shire's version of the Sybil Hay" i.e. the Aberdeenshire Teams of Four.
The qualification is that players from certain clubs within Aberdeenshire may form Teams of Four and play in this league. There used to be a flaccid rule about the clubs being specifically within some geographical relation to the River Don, but this (to my knowledge) has never exactly been hard-and-fast, and I think it would be to the detriment of the tournament if it was. For example, my team (under it's old name) was named after a completely different river (Ury), albeit a river that converges with the Don. Our new name is Buchan, which is a fairer reflection of our four players' links to the shire. If anyone asks, I point out that partner and I live about five minutes' walk from the River Don.
The format is eight board matches with IMPs converted to VP scores. Three a night, except for the final night, where there is one more match followed by a Pairs aggregate.
We were in the running going into Tuesday's round, which was quite lucky considering we'd only won three out of six matches so far. We were also not playing with our regular team-mates for this round as they were otherwise engaged.
For Round Three, we faced MURRAY, URYSIDE and TARVES. These are actual team names, as opposed to Captain names which you get in a lot of SBU events. I actually think this does nothing to hinder organisation and can add to the fun of an event, but really, it doesn't matter.
Our stand-in team-mates were on fire against Murray, and a close-to-par offering from us was enough to yield an 18-2 VP win. That was a great start against a mid-table team capable of beating anyone.
Uryside are a team that are always somewhere near the top, and sure enough, 8 solid boards of bridge were played. There weren't many swings and my favourite suit combination was:
9 x opposite A K Q 10 7 in dummy.
I was playing in 1NT; an overcall over my RHO's suit bid. I had to play this suit for one loser (or four winners), with only one outside entry to dummy. I ran the nine (not a hard decision), dropping the 8 on my right, before playing another hook to pick up five diamond tricks and set me on my way to 9 tricks in total. No missed Game by the way; one of those ones I wouldn't make if I was in.
What swung the match was a 4 Hearts Contract by me. If I remember right, I opened 1 Spade with 5 of them but no honours (there's no point in calling a ten an honour unless you're playing rubber bridge). Before I knew it, I found myself in 4 Spades missing the Ace and King, but luckily, with J x x of hearts in dummy opposite a doubleton A K, I managed to convince RHO to rise with the queen on the second round and found a pitch for ten tricks. 12-8 was the final score.
The third match was against the lower ranked TARVES team, and was full of Game contracts (mostly their way) that didn't make. Luckily, I found myself in one such absurd Game, but made. Our team mates did the trick at the other table, and when the dust cleared on a set full of bad splits and harsh fortune for whoever was Declarer we walked away with 17 VPs.
This put us second, two VPs behind STRATHBOGIE, who we have already played. We have four difficult matches to attend to in the two coming rounds, so we are in no way favourites, but we'll carry on regardless.
DISTRICT TEAMS OF FOUR (Round 5)
Last time I reported, we were doing rather well in this, to the point of being a very dark horse for the Sybil Hay trophy. This round threatened to end that challenge. Playing East-West, Lessurl and I were to play twelve boards against PETERS, before a match against ROSS.
The Peters team has four club players, who are all capable of holding their own in a field such as this. They are the team with more 20-0 defeats this season than any other, which is annoying because if it is their day, they will win. Sometimes you get teams like that, but if you lose against a team that all of your rivals are taking 20 from, you know your challenge is over. In other words, they've probably had a share of bad luck to have five zeros thus far, evidenced by the fact they are not bottom.
Things did not look good from our point of view. Our opponents gifted nothing, and made one or two good part score contracts. I doubled a making Game (I felt justified but won't do it again in a hurry - oh wait; I've done it since). They did eventually over-stretch themselves on one board, and we collected 800, but the rest of the "good" boards came in the form of bidding two ultra thin Games, plus one that was not actually there but did not come with an instruction manual for the defence.
Of course, we could not score up immediately; we had to play our second match whilst our team-mates played the twelve boards we'd just played.
ROSS has been flying of late. After a bad start with 6/40 in October, they then scored 37, 38 and 35. Our match therefore was between title challengers and title dark horses. It was almost a total part score battle. We did not think this would suit our team, and we were right, but what could we do? There were no Games to go for in the match - at all. Naturally, both sides competed in the auctions, trying to stop the other side finding the optimum contract. There was only one card play error and that was ours, so things looked bad until the very last board. Lessurl and I have patience - we can sit it out when we are not getting the board we want. Lack of games does not mean lack of interest. But for South, it was unthinkable to have twelve boards without a Game, and therefore South bid to 5 Diamonds on board 12, calmly doubled by Lessurl for 500. A swing of 14 IMPs from the last two boards was enough to edge the match 13-7, keeping both teams' title hopes alive. We beat Peters 19-1, and have moved up to fourth.
There has been a change at the top. The HAY team got their second 40 night of the season, proving that they are apt to score when it matters. Suddenly they lead MOWAT by 10 VPs. In fact, three VPs separate 2nd and 4th, with ROSS just one ahead of us. Hay is certainly in pole position but there really is all to play for. His team play both Mowat and Ross on the final night, so either one of them could pip him to the post. Meanwhile, we do not play any Contenders, so our Game plan is simple: Play as well as we can; hope that we score enough VPs with the other Contenders all duffing each other up. I still doubt that we will win (the other teams are not going to lie down; we could lose both matches), but we're going to give it a go.
There endeth the marathon. I'm not happy it has taken so long to post, but there it is. Hopefully it won't take so long to post on the Reid Trophy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)