Wednesday 12 February 2025
Wessex League Division 1 match
Blewbury lost to Oxford A

IMPs: 75 to 263
VPs: 0.40 to 19.60

CROSS-IMPS

Graham Orsmond & Jackie Fairclough = +1.99 IMPs
Diana Nettleton & Emily Middleton = +1.50 IMPs
Kathy Talbot & Denis Talbot = +1.11 IMPs
Martin Illingworth & Amr El-Kashef = +0.63 IMPs
Finn Clark & Stuart Forsyth = -0.31 IMPs
Hilary Strang & Shirley Moore = -1.29 IMPs
Matt Wright & Ian van Maanen = -1.32 IMPs
Dermot Paddon & Nigel Carter = -2.31 IMPs

Click here to play through all the hands on RealBridge.

HAND 1 = flat

The result is flat as a pancake, but I could have opened a Trash Major as dealer.  I bid too quickly, I was chatting to Graham Orsmond and doing RealBridge director stuff.  Afterwards, I looked at my hand and went "yaaargh, we have a system bid for this".

What's more, it looks as if a heart lead beats 3NT...  but in practice it's almost impossible to avoid blocking the suit.  It's a fascinating heart position.  Stuart and Graham were analysing it afterwards.  (Stuart, Graham and I know each other from the St John's Wood Bridge Club many years ago.)

But at least a heart lead makes declarer's life more difficult.

HAND 2 = flat

Everyone's making 3NT+2 or 4NT+1.

HAND 3 = +20 IMPs

North's 5-5 in the majors and South's 5-5 in the minors.  An Oxford pair played in 4♥-1 rather than 3NT (for which I have limited sympathy given the meatiness of South's minors), so Blewbury gained 20 IMPs.

That said, though, the computer says that theoretically 4♥ should make, so well done to Ian and Matt in defending that hand.  Declarer's first-bid suit had been spades and Ian had a long, strong holding in that suit sitting over him, so he led trumps to kill potential ruffs.  Declarer didn't do anything silly as far as I can see.  He just had a horrible entry tangle.

HAND 4 = +4 IMPs

Stuart was the only declarer to make 3NT+2 rather than 3NT, which was worth a couple of IMPs.  You have eight top tricks after the spade lead and continuation and you can easily set up a ninth in diamonds...  but before playing on that suit, Stuart played dummy's ♣AK to see what would happen.  When the queen fell doubleton, he could set up dummy's six-card suit without touching diamonds.

HAND 5 = -13 IMPs

I misclicked and played the ace when I could have won with the queen.  It was expensive.  I'd been in no danger of making my 3♠ contract, but my goof cost us an extra vulnerable undertrick.

Congratulations to Shirley and Hilary for stealing the hand in 2♥+1 as East-West.  All other tables were playing in spades by North-South.

HAND 6 = -4 IMPs

North-South can make 4♣.  Two tables attempted 5♣ and went off, in one case doubled.

HAND 7 = -28 IMPs

A colourful traveller.  East-West can actually make 5♣, but North-South declared at all tables in quite an assortment of contracts: 3♦-1, 3NT-1, 3♠-2 and 4♠-6.

HAND 8 = -16 IMPs

1NT by West at all tables, but each declarer made a different number of tricks.  4, 5, 6 and 7 all appeared.  (The computer thinks 1NT-2 is the double-dummy result.)

HAND 9 = -13 IMPs

Stuart and I got frisky over Denis and Kathy Talbot's strong 1♣ opening.  The subsequent auction was understood by no one (and we had a system discussion afterwards to clarify some things that we'd forgotten) and our opponents subsided in 2♥+1 when all other North-South pairs were reaching game...

...but unfortunately this was a triumph for Oxford as game is unmakeable.  The other results were 4♥-1, 3NT-1 and 3NT-2.

HAND 10 = -2 IMPs

East-West can make ten tricks in either major, but only because three finesses are right.  No one bid it.  One Blewbury North-South (Ian and Matt) stole the hand in 2♣-2, which cost an insignificant IMP at the vulnerability.

HAND 11 = -8 IMPs

Double-dummy, East-West can make 4♥...  but the points are 20-20 to each side.  This one cost us IMPs (although fortunately not very many) because Oxford declared at all four tables.  Their East-West pairs played in diamonds and made ten tricks, while their North-South pairs played in 4♣-1.  Looking at the hand in hindsight, West actually has quite a strong hand in support of partner's diamonds.  Only six points, but a singleton in partner's suit, a nice side suit in hearts and even the ♠109865 could easily turn out to be useful.

HAND 12 = +24 IMPs

Stuart and I bid a thin 6♦ and made an overtrick when I got lucky and guessed to play North for the trump queen.  Our auction was 1♠ 2♦ (game-forcing in our 2-over-1 system) 2♥ 3♦ (more informative than a nebulous fourth suit forcing and safe because this was already a game-forcing situation) 4♦ (holding ♦A7 and nothing in the missing suit of clubs) 6♦.  We actually had system bids available to ask for key cards...  RKC Blackwood 4NT, obviously, or else a next-suit-up 4♥ would technically have been Minorwood in our system since we hadn't been able to agree our minor below the four level.  I decided that 4♥ felt a bit dangerous since it's not a sequence we've followed very often and I didn't want to make a bid that invites a misunderstanding (since that was partner's second suit).

Also, obviously, we needed to bid and make a few slams like this if we wanted to win the match.

Looking back at it, I think the key bid is 3♦...  but you couldn't make that bid in Acol.  Partner's allowed to pass!

HAND 13 = +1 IMP

4♠ was bid and made at two tables (congratulations, Shirley and Hilary), compared with 2♠+2 and 3♠+1 elsewhere.

In hindsight, though, it's not easy to bid.  North has a relatively unappealing 4333 hand (all aces and jacks), while South has five spades to the king but only six points and no singleton.  Denis and Kathy Talbot bid 1NT (14-16) 2♥ (transfer to spades) 2NT (transfer break with ♠AJ64) and away they went.

Shirley and Hilary, on the other hand, just bid 1♠ 3♠ 4♠.

HAND 14 = -10 IMPs

North-South are cold for 3NT.  Shirley and Hilary actually bid it while all other North-Souths were stopping in 3♦+2...  but then alas the auction continued to 5♦-1.  It's not a ridiculous decision at all, but unfortunately the defence have three aces.

HAND 15 = +24 IMPs

Shirley and Hilary made 4♠, while all other declarers failed in 4♠-1.

HAND 16 = -23 IMPs

Three tables played in 3NT+1 or 3NT+2 by East, but unfortunately Nigel and Dermot stopped in 3♣+1.  They had a mini no trump to contend with.  North opened 1NT on ten points, Dermot doubled with his rock-crushing 21-count (which looks normal), South ran like a rabbit into spades and Dermot continued with 3♣.  Nigel knew Dermot was big, but not that he was that big.  Dermot's correct rebid is probably either 2NT or 3NT, depending on how much strength you think partner would assume if you bid the former.  The bid must surely show 18-ish as an absolute minimum and can't be far off a 2NT opening.  Stuart would have rebid 2NT.

HAND 17 = -11 IMPs

Stuart and I disagreed on this one.  When the auction starts 3♣ pass pass, I think Stuart needs to begin with a double because he's in the pass-out seat and so his 16-count has to be treated as a 19-count.  Stuart disagreed and just bid a quiet 3♠, duly playing there when a splendid-looking 4♥ is available.

As it happens, though, 4♥ is unmakeable and so our misbid should theoretically have yielded a good board for Blewbury...  but Ian and Matt bid 5♣x-3.  (The South hand can actually count four tricks in defence if partner has the club ace, which seems likely given the 3♣ pre-empt.  Club ace, club ruff and two aces in the South hand still to come.  Also, raising to the five level on a singleton trump probably isn't ideal.)

HAND 18 = -32 IMPs

4♥-1 or 4♠-2 was the contract at most tables, but Martin Illingworth brought home 4♥ against Shirley and Hilary.  Starting with the ♦AK looks innocuous and any of us might have done the same, but as it happens it's setting up declarer's side suit.

HAND 19 = -22 IMPs

The first of two consecutive hands on which Stuart and I went berserk.

Stuart opened a 15-17 1NT and I doubled Amr El-Kashef's 2♥ (vulnerable against not) when I held a fourteen-count with ♥AK96.  Theoretically, we're almost in the slam zone.  Dummy then tabled a heart void.  I was hoping for a four-figure penalty...  but unfortunately we tried something clever in defence and gave declarer his contract for -670.

That said, though, even one off doubled would have scored badly against 430 from an easy 3NT+1.  Declarer holds a 4711 hand and has a magic spade fit with dummy.  But give me that hand again and I'll double again.

HAND 20 = -35 IMPs

The second of those two consecutive berserk hands.  I went insane and forgot that I'd opened 1♣.  I think I must have been distracted by thinking about the previous hand, but that's no excuse.  It cost us 1100.

This brain explosion made the results of the other tables irrelevant...  but Diana Nettleton & Emily Middleton managed to steal the hand in 3♠-2 against Shirley and Hilary.  (Even if you're not going to compete more strongly in hearts on the West hand, a double of 3♠ must have looked tempting.)

Elsewhere, the normal result was for East-West to be making 4♥.  Graham Orsmond wrangled an overtrick.

HAND 21 = -4 IMPs

Flat in either 3NT+1 or 4♠+1...  but our North-South pairs must have been tempted to look for 6♣.  It's a vulnerable slam at IMPs.  It's a dodgy slam, mind you, with a missing ace and a two-way guess for the trump queen.  If you wanted to try your luck, though, one route there might perhaps be 1♠ 2♥ 2♠ 3♣ 4♣ 6♣ (shutting your eyes and guessing).  If you're playing a game-forcing two-over-one, some pairs might think the North hand is good enough for 1♠ 2♥ 3♣, but most people would call that a reverse.  It's true that the North hand is extremely strong in distribution and tricks, despite having only eleven points, but even so partnership discussion might be needed before you try a bid like that.

On bidding the vulnerable slam...  we'd have definitely wanted to be in it if we were 30 IMPs behind rather than 250... it's a pure 50-50 guess. Get it right and you've got twelve tricks off the top. Get it wrong and you're doomed. (The clever approach of cashing two top clubs and then running spades doesn't work because the long club hand also has short spades.)  It's the same odds as our 6♦ on hand 12, for the same reasons. (A missing ace and a queen of trumps to find.)

HAND 22 = -23 IMPs

Part-scores at all tables except 5♦x-2 by Nigel and Dermot.  A 1♦ opening promises five in their system, so Dermot could raise immediately to 2♦ on three-card support.  Both opponents were bidding.  Now, though, I think Nigel's correct rebid at this point is 2♠.  (It doesn't do any good, as it happens, since Dermot only has a doubleton there, but it still seems like the normal next step against opponents who are bidding clubs and hearts.)

HAND 23 = -19 IMPs

Dermot opened a Weak 2♠ in third seat with a 13-count, only for Nigel to put down an 11-count with four spades.  Whoops.  The result was 2♠+2, when the other tables were in 4♠.

I actually have some sympathy.  It's an imaginative choice and it was clearly unlucky.  Holding the boss suit, though, gives you more control over the hand and makes you less interested in off-centre decisions.

HAND 24 = +2 IMPs

A small gain to Blewbury.  3NT made at two tables, but Nigel and Dermot went 3NT-1.  (Don't cash the third round of diamonds, but instead placidly play on clubs while you still have control of the hand.)  Ian and Matt, though, collected +100 from 5C-2 against Denis and Kathy Talbot.  Congratulations there.

So there we have it.

Blewbury has now played all of our Wessex League matches for the 2024-25 season with a couple of months still to go.  I hope people have enjoyed it!  It's certainly been something new for us.  We've faced some strong opponents, unsurprisingly, but we've gained experience and we scored one good win.  Here's the Wessex League division one table.

We scored 33.59 VPs in total from our six matches, giving us an average of 5.60 per match.  We'll probably go down to Division Two next year, but there's nothing wrong with that and it'll mean we win more matches!

Thanks to everyone and looking forward to next year!