1 |
♠KQJ4
♥J64
♦Q8
♣AJ73
|
Dlr: North Vul: None
|
|
|
|
|
Double Dummy Makes |
NS: 1♥ 2♠ ♣4 ♦3 NT5 |
EW: 3♣ 4♦ 2NT ♥5 ♠5 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
50 2.50 0.50 2♥ S -1 1-Burchfield-Burchfield vs 1-Hollander-Davis
50 2.50 0.50 2♥ S -1 2-Shreves-Shreves vs 3-Greenberg-Nadell
110 1.00 2.00 2♦ W 3 4-Nagel-Tuton vs 4-Cowan-Ash
130 0.00 3.00 3♦ W 4 3-Riggers-Riggers vs 2-Lusby-Back
|
2 |
♠J5
♥84
♦K962
♣QJ632
|
Dlr: East Vul: N-S
|
|
|
|
|
Double Dummy Makes |
NS: 3♣ 4/5♦ 5♥ 4♠ 4NT |
EW: ♣4 ♦3/2 ♥2/1 ♠3 NT3 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
650 3.00 0.00 4♥ S 5 1-Burchfield-Burchfield vs 1-Hollander-Davis
170 1.50 1.50 3♥ S 4 3-Riggers-Riggers vs 2-Lusby-Back
170 1.50 1.50 2♥ S 4 4-Nagel-Tuton vs 4-Cowan-Ash
140 0.00 3.00 1♥ S 3 2-Shreves-Shreves vs 3-Greenberg-Nadell
|
3 |
♠-
♥AKQT7
♦J543
♣8653
|
Dlr: South Vul: E-W
|
|
|
|
|
Double Dummy Makes |
NS: 2♣ 3♦ 2♥ 1♠ NT6 |
EW: ♣3 ♦4 ♥5 ♠6/5 NT6/5 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
110 3.00 0.00 2♥ N 2 1-Burchfield-Burchfield vs 1-Hollander-Davis
50 2.00 1.00 2N N -1 3-Riggers-Riggers vs 2-Lusby-Back
100 1.00 2.00 3N N -2 4-Nagel-Tuton vs 4-Cowan-Ash
150 0.00 3.00 3N N -3 2-Shreves-Shreves vs 3-Greenberg-Nadell
|
4 |
♠653
♥KQ843
♦J
♣AQ82
|
Dlr: West Vul: Both
|
|
|
|
|
Double Dummy Makes |
NS: 4/3♥ 1NT ♣4 ♦3 ♠5/4 |
EW: 3♣ 4♦ 2♠ ♥3 NT5 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
790 3.00 0.00 4♥* N 4 2-Shreves-Shreves vs 3-Greenberg-Nadell
620 2.00 1.00 4♥ N 4 3-Riggers-Riggers vs 2-Lusby-Back
170 1.00 2.00 2♥ N 4 1-Burchfield-Burchfield vs 1-Hollander-Davis
100 0.00 3.00 4♥ N -1 4-Nagel-Tuton vs 4-Cowan-Ash
|
5 |
♠KJT83
♥K9653
♦-
♣KQ9
|
Dlr: North Vul: N-S
|
|
|
|
|
Double Dummy Makes |
NS: 1♦ 5♥ 3♠ 4NT ♣5 |
EW: 1♣ ♦6 ♥2 ♠2/3 NT3 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
650 1.50 1.50 4♥ S 5 1-Burchfield-Burchfield vs 1-Hollander-Davis
650 1.50 1.50 4♥ S 5 2-Shreves-Shreves vs 3-Greenberg-Nadell
650 1.50 1.50 4♥ S 5 4-Nagel-Tuton vs 4-Cowan-Ash
650 1.50 1.50 4♥ N 5 3-Riggers-Riggers vs 2-Lusby-Back
|
6 |
♠KJ87653
♥QJ4
♦A
♣T5
|
Dlr: East Vul: E-W
|
|
|
|
|
Double Dummy Makes |
NS: 1♦ 3♥ 4♠ ♣5 NT6 |
EW: 2♣ ♦6 ♥3 ♠3 NT5 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
170 3.00 0.00 3♠ N 4 3-Riggers-Riggers vs 2-Lusby-Back
140 2.00 1.00 3♠ N 3 4-Nagel-Tuton vs 4-Cowan-Ash
50 0.50 2.50 4♠ N -1 1-Burchfield-Burchfield vs 1-Hollander-Davis
50 0.50 2.50 4♠ N -1 2-Shreves-Shreves vs 3-Greenberg-Nadell
|
7 |
♠8532
♥A742
♦A
♣6542
|
Dlr: South Vul: Both
|
|
|
|
|
Double Dummy Makes |
NS: 5♥ 2NT ♣5 ♦6 ♠3 |
EW: 1♣ -/1♦ 3♠ ♦6/7 ♥2 NT5 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
790 3.00 0.00 4♥* S 4 2-Shreves-Shreves vs 2-Lusby-Back
170 2.00 1.00 2♥ S 4 3-Riggers-Riggers vs 1-Hollander-Davis
140 1.00 2.00 3♠ W 3 1-Burchfield-Burchfield vs 4-Cowan-Ash
620 0.00 3.00 4♠ W 4 4-Nagel-Tuton vs 3-Greenberg-Nadell
|
8 |
♠6
♥AK954
♦KT96
♣AT3
|
Dlr: West Vul: None
|
|
|
|
|
Double Dummy Makes |
NS: 2♦ 2♥ ♣6 ♠4 NT6 |
EW: 1♣ 2/3♠ -/1NT ♦2/5 ♥3/5 NT3/7 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
150 3.00 0.00 4♠ W -3 3-Riggers-Riggers vs 1-Hollander-Davis
100 2.00 1.00 3N W -2 4-Nagel-Tuton vs 3-Greenberg-Nadell
50 1.00 2.00 4♥ N -1 2-Shreves-Shreves vs 2-Lusby-Back
140 0.00 3.00 2♠ W 3 1-Burchfield-Burchfield vs 4-Cowan-Ash
|
9 |
♠K42
♥52
♦KT9
♣K7543
|
Dlr: North Vul: E-W
|
|
|
|
|
Double Dummy Makes |
NS: -/1♣ 2♦ 1/2♥ -/1♠ ♣6/7 ♠5/7 NT6 |
EW: ♣6 ♦4 ♥5 ♠5 NT6 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
100 2.50 0.50 2♣ E -1 4-Nagel-Tuton vs 3-Greenberg-Nadell
100 2.50 0.50 1♣ E -1 2-Shreves-Shreves vs 2-Lusby-Back
90 1.00 2.00 1N N 1 1-Burchfield-Burchfield vs 4-Cowan-Ash
100 0.00 3.00 1N N -2 3-Riggers-Riggers vs 1-Hollander-Davis
|
10 |
♠KQT862
♥AQT73
♦AJ
♣-
|
Dlr: East Vul: Both
|
|
|
|
|
Double Dummy Makes |
NS: 3♣ 2♦ 6♥ 5♠ 5NT |
EW: ♣4 ♦4/5 ♥1 ♠2 NT2 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
680 2.00 1.00 5♥ N 6 2-Shreves-Shreves vs 2-Lusby-Back
680 2.00 1.00 4♥ N 6 3-Riggers-Riggers vs 1-Hollander-Davis
680 2.00 1.00 4♥ N 6 4-Nagel-Tuton vs 3-Greenberg-Nadell
630 0.00 3.00 3N N 4 1-Burchfield-Burchfield vs 4-Cowan-Ash
|
11 |
♠T6
♥A98
♦A9853
♣J42
|
Dlr: South Vul: None
|
|
|
|
|
Double Dummy Makes |
NS: 1/2♦ 1♠ ♣4 ♥3 NT4 |
EW: 1♣ 4♥ 1NT ♦5 ♠6 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
50 2.50 0.50 2♠ S -1 1-Burchfield-Burchfield vs 4-Cowan-Ash
50 2.50 0.50 2♠ S -1 4-Nagel-Tuton vs 3-Greenberg-Nadell
420 0.50 2.50 4♥ E 4 2-Shreves-Shreves vs 2-Lusby-Back
420 0.50 2.50 4♥ E 4 3-Riggers-Riggers vs 1-Hollander-Davis
|
12 |
♠J
♥QT984
♦AQ954
♣T2
|
Dlr: West Vul: N-S
|
|
|
|
|
Double Dummy Makes |
NS: 1♦ 1♥ ♣4 ♠3 NT5 |
EW: 3♣ 4♠ 2NT ♦6 ♥6/5 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
100 3.00 0.00 4♠ E -2 4-Nagel-Tuton vs 3-Greenberg-Nadell
50 2.00 1.00 4♠ E -1 1-Burchfield-Burchfield vs 4-Cowan-Ash
110 1.00 2.00 2♠ E 2 3-Riggers-Riggers vs 1-Hollander-Davis
140 0.00 3.00 3♠ E 3 2-Shreves-Shreves vs 2-Lusby-Back
|
13 |
♠Q975
♥T32
♦964
♣J63
|
Dlr: North Vul: Both
|
|
|
|
|
Double Dummy Makes |
NS: ♣1 ♦1 ♥1 ♠4 NT1 |
EW: 5♣ 6♦ 6♥ 3♠ 5NT |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
100 3.00 0.00 3N W -1 2-Shreves-Shreves vs 1-Hollander-Davis
600 1.50 1.50 3N W 3 1-Burchfield-Burchfield vs 3-Greenberg-Nadell
600 1.50 1.50 3N W 3 3-Riggers-Riggers vs 4-Cowan-Ash
660 0.00 3.00 3N W 5 4-Nagel-Tuton vs 2-Lusby-Back
|
14 |
♠KJ2
♥AKQ95
♦94
♣732
|
Dlr: East Vul: None
|
|
|
|
|
Double Dummy Makes |
NS: 5♣ 4♦ 4♥ 2♠ 4NT |
EW: ♣2 ♦3 ♥3 ♠4 NT2 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
430 3.00 0.00 3N N 4 2-Shreves-Shreves vs 1-Hollander-Davis
400 1.50 1.50 3N N 3 1-Burchfield-Burchfield vs 3-Greenberg-Nadell
400 1.50 1.50 3N N 3 3-Riggers-Riggers vs 4-Cowan-Ash
150 0.00 3.00 3♣ S 5 4-Nagel-Tuton vs 2-Lusby-Back
|
15 |
♠Q9
♥K
♦A953
♣AKJT42
|
Dlr: South Vul: N-S
|
|
|
|
|
Double Dummy Makes |
NS: 3♣ 2♦ 4♥ 3NT ♠6 |
EW: ♣3 ♦5 ♥3 ♠6 NT4 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
120 3.00 0.00 2N N 2 1-Burchfield-Burchfield vs 3-Greenberg-Nadell
110 1.50 1.50 3♣ N 3 3-Riggers-Riggers vs 4-Cowan-Ash
110 1.50 1.50 3♣ N 3 4-Nagel-Tuton vs 2-Lusby-Back
400 0.00 3.00 3N N -4 2-Shreves-Shreves vs 1-Hollander-Davis
|
16 |
♠AQ3
♥53
♦A7
♣JT9762
|
Dlr: West Vul: E-W
|
|
|
|
|
Double Dummy Makes |
NS: 7♣ 5♦ 6♥ 5♠ 7NT |
EW: ♣0 ♦2 ♥1 ♠2 NT0 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
990 3.00 0.00 6N S 6 1-Burchfield-Burchfield vs 3-Greenberg-Nadell
940 1.50 1.50 6♣ N 7 2-Shreves-Shreves vs 1-Hollander-Davis
940 1.50 1.50 6♣ N 7 3-Riggers-Riggers vs 4-Cowan-Ash
490 0.00 3.00 3N S 6 4-Nagel-Tuton vs 2-Lusby-Back
|
17 |
♠A85
♥JT54
♦54
♣K875
|
Dlr: North Vul: None
|
|
|
|
|
Double Dummy Makes |
NS: ♣5 ♦2 ♥4 ♠3 NT4 |
EW: 2♣ 5♦ 3♥ 4♠ 3NT |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
50 3.00 0.00 3N E -1 4-Nagel-Tuton vs 2-Lusby-Back
90 2.00 1.00 2♦ E 2 2-Shreves-Shreves vs 1-Hollander-Davis
130 0.50 2.50 2♦ E 4 1-Burchfield-Burchfield vs 3-Greenberg-Nadell
130 0.50 2.50 2♦ E 4 3-Riggers-Riggers vs 4-Cowan-Ash
|
18 |
♠KT83
♥762
♦Q4
♣9864
|
Dlr: East Vul: N-S
|
|
|
|
|
Double Dummy Makes |
NS: 3♣ 2♦ 2♥ 4♠ 3NT |
EW: ♣4 ♦5 ♥5 ♠3 NT4 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
600 3.00 0.00 3N S 3 3-Riggers-Riggers vs 4-Cowan-Ash
170 2.00 1.00 3♠ S 4 4-Nagel-Tuton vs 2-Lusby-Back
150 1.00 2.00 2N S 3 2-Shreves-Shreves vs 1-Hollander-Davis
100 0.00 3.00 4♠ S -1 1-Burchfield-Burchfield vs 3-Greenberg-Nadell
|
19 |
♠763
♥85
♦95
♣AKT974
|
Dlr: South Vul: E-W
|
|
|
|
|
Double Dummy Makes |
NS: 5/4♣ 4♥ 4/3♠ 2/1NT ♦6/5 |
EW: 1♦ ♣2 ♥3 ♠3 NT3 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
420 2.50 0.50 4♥ S 4 2-Shreves-Shreves vs 4-Cowan-Ash
420 2.50 0.50 4♥ S 4 3-Riggers-Riggers vs 3-Greenberg-Nadell
170 1.00 2.00 2♥ S 4 1-Burchfield-Burchfield vs 2-Lusby-Back
140 0.00 3.00 2♥ S 3 4-Nagel-Tuton vs 1-Hollander-Davis
|
20 |
♠A73
♥AQ95
♦QJ96
♣63
|
Dlr: West Vul: Both
|
|
|
|
|
Double Dummy Makes |
NS: 1/2♣ -/1♦ 1/2NT ♦6/7 ♥4 ♠6 |
EW: 1/2♥ -/1♠ ♣5 ♦6 ♠6/7 NT5 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
300 3.00 0.00 4♥ W -3 1-Burchfield-Burchfield vs 2-Lusby-Back
200 2.00 1.00 4♥ W -2 3-Riggers-Riggers vs 3-Greenberg-Nadell
140 1.00 2.00 3♥ W 3 2-Shreves-Shreves vs 4-Cowan-Ash
300 0.00 3.00 4♣ S -3 4-Nagel-Tuton vs 1-Hollander-Davis
|
21 |
♠KJ2
♥AJT53
♦T3
♣853
|
Dlr: North Vul: N-S
|
|
|
|
|
Double Dummy Makes |
NS: 1♣ 3♥ ♦4 ♠6 NT6 |
EW: 2♦ 1♠ ♣6 ♥4 NT6 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
140 3.00 0.00 2♥ N 3 4-Nagel-Tuton vs 1-Hollander-Davis
110 2.00 1.00 2♥ N 2 2-Shreves-Shreves vs 4-Cowan-Ash
100 0.50 2.50 3♥ N -1 1-Burchfield-Burchfield vs 2-Lusby-Back
100 0.50 2.50 2♥ N -1 3-Riggers-Riggers vs 3-Greenberg-Nadell
|
22 |
♠95
♥932
♦AJT75
♣KT2
|
Dlr: East Vul: E-W
|
|
|
|
|
Double Dummy Makes |
NS: 2♦ 1NT ♣5 ♥5 ♠5 |
EW: 2♣ 2♥ 2♠ ♦5 NT5 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
90 2.00 1.00 2♦ S 2 2-Shreves-Shreves vs 4-Cowan-Ash
90 2.00 1.00 2♦ S 2 3-Riggers-Riggers vs 3-Greenberg-Nadell
90 2.00 1.00 2♦ S 2 4-Nagel-Tuton vs 1-Hollander-Davis
150 0.00 3.00 5♦ S -3 1-Burchfield-Burchfield vs 2-Lusby-Back
|
23 |
♠A3
♥J32
♦T7653
♣JT4
|
Dlr: South Vul: Both
|
|
|
|
|
Double Dummy Makes |
NS: ♣2 ♦6 ♥1 ♠1 NT1 |
EW: 4♣ 4♥ 6♠ 2NT ♦6 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
230 3.00 0.00 3♠ W 6 4-Nagel-Tuton vs 1-Hollander-Davis
680 1.00 2.00 4♠ W 6 1-Burchfield-Burchfield vs 2-Lusby-Back
680 1.00 2.00 4♠ W 6 2-Shreves-Shreves vs 4-Cowan-Ash
680 1.00 2.00 4♠ W 6 3-Riggers-Riggers vs 3-Greenberg-Nadell
|
24 |
♠T7
♥AK532
♦J2
♣Q643
|
Dlr: West Vul: None
|
|
|
|
|
Double Dummy Makes |
NS: 1/2♣ 3♦ 3♥ 2♠ 2NT |
EW: ♣5 ♦3 ♥4 ♠5 NT5 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
130 3.00 0.00 3♦ S 4 4-Nagel-Tuton vs 1-Hollander-Davis
110 1.00 2.00 2♥ N 2 1-Burchfield-Burchfield vs 2-Lusby-Back
110 1.00 2.00 2♥ N 2 3-Riggers-Riggers vs 3-Greenberg-Nadell
110 1.00 2.00 2♦ S 3 2-Shreves-Shreves vs 4-Cowan-Ash
|