NBB - Dutch Bridge Federation
Final Dutch NC Imps Teams
Onstein Castle BC Vorden - Modalfa BC Amsterdam
Amsterdam. RAI Exhibition Center
Session 4, Boards 17-20
December 10, 2000
| Players |
| Jan Jansma |
- |
Louk Verhees jr |
't Onstein Vorden |
| Anton Maas |
- |
Vincent Ramondt |
't Onstein Vorden |
Wubbo de Boer |
- |
Bauke Muller |
Modalfa Amsterdam |
Piet Jansen |
- |
Jan Westerhof |
Modalfa Amsterdam |
Enri Leufkens |
- |
Berry Westra |
Modalfa Amsterdam |
Board 17
N/None
WEST |
NORTH
ª 9 8 5
© A
¨ A T 8 7
§ A Q 7 3 2 |
EAST |
ª 6 3
© Q J T 7 2
¨ J 9 6 5
§ 9 5 |
SOUTH |
ª K Q 7 4 2
© 9 6 3
¨ Q 4 2
§ T 8 |
|
ª A J T
© K 8 5 4
¨ K 3
§ K J 6 4 |
|
|
Westra |
Verhees |
Leufkens |
Jansma |
--- |
1§ |
1ª |
dbl |
pass |
2¨ |
pass |
2ª |
pass |
3§ |
pass |
4§ |
pass |
4¨ |
pass |
4© |
pass |
5§ |
pass |
pass |
pass |
|
|
|
|
|
|
NS 420 |
|
|
|
|
Ramondt |
De Boer |
Maas |
Muller |
--- |
1§ |
1ª |
dbl |
pass |
2§ |
pass |
3NT |
pass |
pass |
pass |
|
|
|
|
NS 460 |
|
|
Recommended bidding sequence:
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| --- |
1§ |
1ª |
dbl1 |
| pass |
2¨2 |
pass |
3§3 |
| pass |
3¨4 |
pass |
3©5 |
| pass |
4§6 |
pass |
4NT7 |
| pass |
5¨8 |
pass |
5©9 |
| pass |
5NT10 |
pass |
6§ |
| pass |
pass |
pass. |
|
|
1 = Negative double: 4-card ©-suit, or, 12+ hcp, or,
both.
2 = North treats South's negative double as a 1-over-1 response. This is not
a reverse.
3 = South made a negative double first, so this forces game, and designates § as trump suit.
4 = ¨-control (must be ¨A).
5 = ©-control.
6 = §-control (must be §A), denying ª-control.
7 = RKCB.
8 = 0 or 3 out of 6 aces (1403-variation).
9 = Asking for queen of trumps.
10 = Promises §Q, denies outside aces.
South upgrades his ª-holdings, but he does not
need the marked ª-finesse to make his 12
tricks: he can ruff 2 diamonds in hand.
Board 18
E/NS
WEST |
NORTH
ª 9 8 6
© J
¨ T 9 6
§ K T 9 8 7 4 |
EAST |
ª 3 2
© K Q 7 6 5 2
¨ Q J 4 2
§ 3 |
SOUTH |
ª A K J 7 5 4
© A T
¨ K 5
§ Q J 5 |
|
ª Q T
© 9 8 4 3
¨ A 8 7 3
§ A 6 2 |
|
|
Westra |
Verhees |
Leufkens |
Jansma |
--- |
--- |
1ª |
pass |
1NT |
pass |
4ª |
pass |
pass |
pass |
|
|
|
|
NS -420 |
|
|
|
|
|
Ramondt |
De Boer |
Maas |
Muller |
--- |
--- |
1ª |
pass |
3© |
pass |
4© |
pass |
pass |
pass |
|
|
|
|
NS -450 |
|
|
|
Recommended bidding sequence:
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| --- |
--- |
1ª |
pass |
| 1NT1 |
pass |
3NT2 |
pass |
| 4©3 |
pass |
pass4 |
pass. |
|
1 = One round force, 5-11 hcp, unlikely to have 3-card ©-support, denying 4-card ©-support and 4-card ª-suit.
2 = East is too strong for a jump rebid of 3ª,
that would only promise 16-17 hcp. So far, we included 6331-hands in this 3NT-rebid as
well, This board proves however, that East must be kind of balanced. If he holds a
6331-hand, he should rebid 3 of his best minor. That way, West will know when to sign off
in 4©, and when to end in 4ª.
3 = West can have several sorts of distribution for his forcing 1NT-response. For his
rebid 4©, he must have at least a 6-card ©-suit. Since East has promised 2 or 3 hearts for his
rebid of 3NT, West's hand will probably more valuable in 4© than in 4ª.
4 = In a sound partnership, East has no reason to question West's judgment.
More discussion to follow.
Board 19
S/EW
WEST |
NORTH
ª K 9 5 2
© Q 3
¨ K 6 5
§ J 6 5 4 |
EAST |
ª Q T 8 6 4
© J 9 6
¨ A T 3
§ A Q |
SOUTH |
ª A J 7 3
© A 4 2
¨ Q 9 7
§ 9 8 3 |
|
ª - - -
© K T 8 7 5
¨ J 8 4 2
§ K T 7 2 |
|
|
Westra |
Verhees |
Leufkens |
Jansma |
--- |
--- |
--- |
2© |
2ª |
pass |
4ª |
pass |
pass |
pass |
|
|
|
|
NS -620 |
|
|
|
|
|
Ramondt |
De Boer |
Maas |
Muller |
--- |
--- |
--- |
2© |
2ª |
pass |
4ª |
pass |
pass |
pass |
|
|
|
|
NS -620 |
|
|
|
Recommended bidding sequence:
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| --- |
--- |
--- |
2©1 |
| 2ª2 |
pass |
4ª3 |
pass |
| pass |
pass. |
|
|
|
1 = Muiderberg weak-2: 5-card ©-suit, 4+ of a minor, 5-10 hcp. South should 2 top
honors in hearts, and a 5-card §-suit for a vulnerable
Muiderberger.
2 = 5+ ª-suit, 12-15 hcp.
3 = At imps, East must bid game, even when it could be a close
one.
More discussion to follow.
Board 20
W/All
WEST |
NORTH
ª J 2
© T 9
¨ 6 3
§ K J T 9 6 4 3 |
EAST |
ª K 6
© J 8 3 2
¨ Q J 8 7 4 2
§ A |
SOUTH |
ª A 5 3
© K 6 5 4
¨ A K 5
§ Q 7 2 |
|
ª Q T 9 8 7 4
© A Q 7
¨ T 9
§ 8 5 |
|
|
Westra |
Verhees |
Leufkens |
Jansma |
1¨ |
pass |
1© |
2ª |
3© |
pass |
3ª |
pass |
4§ |
pass |
4¨ |
pass |
4© |
pass |
pass |
pass |
|
|
|
|
|
|
NS -650 |
|
|
|
|
|
Ramondt |
De Boer |
Maas |
Muller |
1¨ |
pass |
1© |
1ª |
2© |
3§ |
4© |
pass |
pass |
pass |
|
|
|
|
NS -620 |
|
|
|
Recommended bidding sequence:
| West |
North |
East |
South |
| 1¨ |
pass1 |
1© |
1ª2 |
| 2© |
pass3 |
4©4 |
pass |
| pass |
pass. |
|
|
|
1 = North's hand is too weak for a vulnerable simple overcall, and his clubs are too
bad for a vulnerable preemptive overcall.
2 = White versus red, this hand would qualify for a weak jump overcall of 2ª, even when both opponents have bid. Vulnerable,
South should have better spades: ªKQxxxx, ªAJTxxx, or better.
3 = We would still stay out of the bidding at this vulnerability.
4 = West has shown a minimum opening hand, so East must forget about slam with his 'ugly'
balanced hand.
More discussion to follow.
Go to session 05, boards
01-08
Copyright © 1999-2024 by Michel Franssen