Sittard BC
Internal Championships Imps Pairs 2002
Session 05, Baandert, Sittard,
April 02, 2002
Group A, Boards 09-12
Copyright © 2002-2025 by Michel
Franssen
Board 9
N/EW
WEST |
NORTH
ª A Q
© A J T 6 4 3
¨ 8 2
§ A J 5 |
EAST |
ª K T 8 7 2
© Q 5
¨ 5
§ T 7 6 4 3 |
SOUTH |
ª 9 4 3
© K 9 7
¨ A Q T 9 6 3
§ 2 |
|
ª J 6 5
© 8 2
¨ K J 7 4
§ K Q 9 8 |
|
|
NS score |
Freq |
imps NS |
imps EW |
460 |
1 |
8 |
-8 |
200 |
2 |
2 |
-2 |
140 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
-50 |
2 |
-5 |
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
NS |
avg
= |
130 |
|
|
Recommended bidding sequence:
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| --- |
1© |
2¨ |
pass |
| pass |
dbl |
pass |
pass |
| pass. |
|
|
|
|
Pass = Unable to give a negative
double, which requires 4-card ª-suit or 12+ hcp. South could try a borderline
response of 2NT, but prefers an attempt to trap East in 2¨.
Dbl = Hoping that South is trapping.
Pass = South was trapping indeed.
East must guess very well to set up his ªK in time, and get away with -500.
Board 10
E/All
WEST |
NORTH
ª K 9
© 6 5 3 2
¨ K J 3
§ K T 5 2 |
EAST |
ª A 8 3 2
© Q 9 4
¨ 5 4
§ A Q 4 3 |
SOUTH |
ª Q J 6 5 4
© A T 8
¨ Q 9 2
§ 9 7 |
|
ª T 7
© K J 7
¨ A T 8 7 6
§ J 8 6 |
|
|
NS score |
Freq |
imps NS |
imps EW |
100 |
2 |
5 |
-5 |
-110 |
5 |
-1 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
NS |
avg
= |
-70 |
|
|
Recommended bidding sequence:
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| --- |
--- |
pass |
pass |
| 1§ |
pass |
1ª |
pass |
| 2ª |
pass |
3ª |
pass |
| pass |
pass. |
|
|
|
1ª = May be bypassing 4+ ¨-suit in Walsh Approach (needs alert).
Board 11
S/-
WEST |
NORTH
ª A 5 3
© Q 7 5 4 2
¨ - - -
§ Q 8 7 5 4 |
EAST |
ª K Q J 9 8 6
© J
¨ T 4 3 2
§ K 9 |
SOUTH |
ª 7 4 2
© A K T 8 6
¨ J 8
§ J T 3 |
|
ª T
© 9 3
¨ A K Q 9 7 6 5
§ A 6 2 |
|
|
NS score |
Freq |
imps NS |
imps EW |
130 |
2 |
6 |
-6 |
-100 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
-140 |
1 |
-1 |
1 |
-200 |
3 |
-3 |
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
NS |
avg
= |
-100 |
|
|
Recommended bidding sequence:
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| --- |
--- |
--- |
1¨ |
| 2ª |
dbl |
pass |
3¨ |
| pass |
pass |
pass. |
|
|
Dbl = Negative, showing
4-card ©-suit or 12+ hcp. North has no altrenative, for 3© would promise 5+ suit and
12+ hcp.
2ª = Weak jump overcall, i.e., 6+ suit and 5-10 hcp.
3¨ = 6+ suit, 11 to a bad 15 hcp. Looks like an underbid with the near-solid suit. 3ª
may work out well indeed, when North has ¨-tolerance and ª-stopper, but from the other
end, game is unlikely to make, when North can't bid again. With misfit or bad breaks, and
getting doubled in game may cost even more than the game can possibly earn for NS.
Board 12
W/NS
WEST |
NORTH
ª 8 4
© K J T 4 2
¨ J T 5
§ K 5 2 |
EAST |
ª Q 6
© A 7 5 3
¨ Q 9 8 6
§ Q T 8 |
SOUTH |
ª K J T 9 3
© 8 6
¨ A 4
§ J 9 6 3 |
|
ª A 7 5 2
© Q 9
¨ K 7 3 2
§ A 7 4 |
|
|
NS score |
Freq |
imps NS |
imps EW |
110 |
1 |
2 |
-2 |
100 |
1 |
2 |
-2 |
90 |
2 |
2 |
-2 |
50 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
-110 |
1 |
-4 |
4 |
-140 |
1 |
-5 |
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
NS |
avg
= |
40 |
|
|
Recommended bidding sequence:
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| pass |
pass |
2ª |
pass |
| pass |
pass. |
|
|
|
2ª = Muiderberg weak-2: 5-card ª-suit, 4+ minor, 5-10 hcp (should
be 5/5+ if vulnerable).
Pass = We do not adhere to the dogma that
doubler should have 4-card suit in the unbid majors(s), when he has less that 16 hcp, but
we must keep in mind that partner has not been able to open. That makes game most
unlikely, and greatly increases the danger of running into a booby trap.
Go
to Boards 13-16