| 1 |
♠QT4
♥8742
♦543
♣763
|
Dlr: North
Vul: None
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
| NS: 2♥ 4♠ ♣2 ♦5 NT3 |
| EW: 4♣ 1♦ 4NT ♥4 ♠3 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
300 5.50 0.50 6♣* W -2 2-Humphreys-Tracey vs 3-Wilson-Aiken
300 5.50 0.50 6♣* W -2 3-McGimpsey-Poon vs 5-Lancaster-Krueger
50 3.50 2.50 4♠ S -1 1-Smith-Martenson vs 1-Baranski-Sweetwood
50 3.50 2.50 4♠ S -1 7-Lavine-Batko vs 6-Harmon-Hawk
130 1.50 4.50 4♣ W 4 5-Lindholm-McLeod vs 2-Segal-D'Amico
130 1.50 4.50 3♣ W 4 4-Munday-Munday vs 7-Pringle-Pringle
150 0.00 6.00 3♣ W 5 6-Hines-Gerlach vs 4-Windler-Gaer
|
| 2 |
♠JT95
♥KJ983
♦84
♣A6
|
Dlr: East
Vul: N-S
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
| NS: 1♣ 4♥ 4♠ 1NT ♦5 |
| EW: 2♦ ♣6 ♥3 ♠3 NT6 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
620 3.50 2.50 4♠ S 4 2-Humphreys-Tracey vs 3-Wilson-Aiken
620 3.50 2.50 4♠ S 4 3-McGimpsey-Poon vs 5-Lancaster-Krueger
620 3.50 2.50 4♠ S 4 4-Munday-Munday vs 7-Pringle-Pringle
620 3.50 2.50 4♠ S 4 5-Lindholm-McLeod vs 2-Segal-D'Amico
620 3.50 2.50 4♠ S 4 6-Hines-Gerlach vs 4-Windler-Gaer
620 3.50 2.50 4♠ S 4 7-Lavine-Batko vs 6-Harmon-Hawk
150 0.00 6.00 5♦ W -3 1-Smith-Martenson vs 1-Baranski-Sweetwood
|
| 3 |
♠8642
♥854
♦J8
♣AQ92
|
Dlr: South
Vul: E-W
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
| NS: -/1♣ 1♦ ♣6/7 ♥5 ♠6 NT6 |
| EW: 2♥ -/1♠ 1NT ♣6 ♦6 ♠6/7 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
300 6.00 0.00 4♥ E -3 3-McGimpsey-Poon vs 5-Lancaster-Krueger
100 4.50 1.50 4♥ E -1 2-Humphreys-Tracey vs 3-Wilson-Aiken
100 4.50 1.50 4♥ E -1 4-Munday-Munday vs 7-Pringle-Pringle
110 3.00 3.00 2♥ W 2 5-Lindholm-McLeod vs 2-Segal-D'Amico
140 1.50 4.50 3♥ E 3 1-Smith-Martenson vs 1-Baranski-Sweetwood
140 1.50 4.50 3♥ E 3 6-Hines-Gerlach vs 4-Windler-Gaer
620 0.00 6.00 4♥ E 4 7-Lavine-Batko vs 6-Harmon-Hawk
|
| 4 |
♠96
♥J93
♦86
♣Q97653
|
Dlr: West
Vul: Both
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
| NS: 1♣ 1♦ ♥5/4 ♠4 NT4 |
| EW: 2♥ 2♠ 2/1NT ♣6 ♦6 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
200 6.00 0.00 3♠ E -2 4-Munday-Munday vs 6-Harmon-Hawk
100 5.00 1.00 3♠ E -1 6-Hines-Gerlach vs 3-Wilson-Aiken
100 3.50 2.50 3♦ S -1 5-Lindholm-McLeod vs 1-Baranski-Sweetwood
100 3.50 2.50 2♦ S -1 7-Lavine-Batko vs 5-Lancaster-Krueger
200 2.00 4.00 1N S -2 1-Smith-Martenson vs 7-Pringle-Pringle
300 1.00 5.00 4♦ S -3 2-Humphreys-Tracey vs 2-Segal-D'Amico
730 0.00 6.00 3♥* W 3 3-McGimpsey-Poon vs 4-Windler-Gaer
|
| 5 |
♠T852
♥A7432
♦T3
♣K6
|
Dlr: North
Vul: N-S
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
| NS: 1♥ 1♠ ♣6 ♦6 NT6 |
| EW: 1♣ 1♦ 1NT ♥6 ♠6 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
100 6.00 0.00 2♣ E -2 4-Munday-Munday vs 6-Harmon-Hawk
50 4.00 2.00 2N E -1 3-McGimpsey-Poon vs 4-Windler-Gaer
50 4.00 2.00 1N E -1 5-Lindholm-McLeod vs 1-Baranski-Sweetwood
50 4.00 2.00 1N E -1 7-Lavine-Batko vs 5-Lancaster-Krueger
90 2.00 4.00 1N E 1 1-Smith-Martenson vs 7-Pringle-Pringle
100 0.50 5.50 1N S -1 2-Humphreys-Tracey vs 2-Segal-D'Amico
100 0.50 5.50 2♥ N -1 6-Hines-Gerlach vs 3-Wilson-Aiken
|
| 6 |
♠T63
♥A9832
♦AQ6
♣A4
|
Dlr: East
Vul: E-W
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
| NS: 1♣ 1♦ 5♥ 5♠ 4NT |
| EW: ♣6 ♦6 ♥2 ♠2 NT2 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
450 4.50 1.50 4♠ S 5 2-Humphreys-Tracey vs 2-Segal-D'Amico
450 4.50 1.50 4♠ S 5 3-McGimpsey-Poon vs 4-Windler-Gaer
450 4.50 1.50 4♠ S 5 5-Lindholm-McLeod vs 1-Baranski-Sweetwood
450 4.50 1.50 4♠ S 5 7-Lavine-Batko vs 5-Lancaster-Krueger
420 2.00 4.00 4♥ N 4 6-Hines-Gerlach vs 3-Wilson-Aiken
300 1.00 5.00 3♦ W -3 4-Munday-Munday vs 6-Harmon-Hawk
170 0.00 6.00 2♥ N 4 1-Smith-Martenson vs 7-Pringle-Pringle
|
| 7 |
♠T974
♥KJT9
♦AT9
♣86
|
Dlr: South
Vul: Both
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
| NS: 4♦ 5♠ 1NT ♣4 ♥6 |
| EW: 3♣ ♦3 ♥6 ♠2 NT3 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
650 5.50 0.50 4♠ S 5 3-McGimpsey-Poon vs 3-Wilson-Aiken
650 5.50 0.50 4♠ S 5 4-Munday-Munday vs 5-Lancaster-Krueger
620 4.00 2.00 4♠ S 4 1-Smith-Martenson vs 6-Harmon-Hawk
230 3.00 3.00 3♠ S 6 6-Hines-Gerlach vs 2-Segal-D'Amico
200 2.00 4.00 3♠ S 5 5-Lindholm-McLeod vs 7-Pringle-Pringle
170 1.00 5.00 3♠ S 4 2-Humphreys-Tracey vs 1-Baranski-Sweetwood
100 0.00 6.00 4♣ W -1 7-Lavine-Batko vs 4-Windler-Gaer
|
| 8 |
♠842
♥AT874
♦KQ8
♣64
|
Dlr: West
Vul: None
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
| NS: ♣3 ♦4 ♥5 ♠6 NT3 |
| EW: 3♣ 2♦ 1/2♥ 1♠ 3/4NT |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
400 5.50 0.50 3N E 3 2-Humphreys-Tracey vs 1-Baranski-Sweetwood
400 5.50 0.50 3N E 3 4-Munday-Munday vs 5-Lancaster-Krueger
430 3.00 3.00 3N W 4 3-McGimpsey-Poon vs 3-Wilson-Aiken
430 3.00 3.00 3N W 4 5-Lindholm-McLeod vs 7-Pringle-Pringle
430 3.00 3.00 3N E 4 6-Hines-Gerlach vs 2-Segal-D'Amico
460 0.50 5.50 3N E 5 1-Smith-Martenson vs 6-Harmon-Hawk
460 0.50 5.50 3N E 5 7-Lavine-Batko vs 4-Windler-Gaer
|
| 9 |
♠AJ3
♥AT7
♦-
♣KQJ9862
|
Dlr: North
Vul: E-W
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
| NS: 7♣ 3♦ 1♥ 6♠ 6NT |
| EW: ♣0 ♦4 ♥6 ♠0/1 NT1 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
490 5.50 0.50 3N S 6 5-Lindholm-McLeod vs 7-Pringle-Pringle
490 5.50 0.50 3N S 6 6-Hines-Gerlach vs 2-Segal-D'Amico
440 3.50 2.50 5♣ N 7 1-Smith-Martenson vs 6-Harmon-Hawk
440 3.50 2.50 5♣ N 7 7-Lavine-Batko vs 4-Windler-Gaer
420 1.50 4.50 5♣ N 6 2-Humphreys-Tracey vs 1-Baranski-Sweetwood
420 1.50 4.50 5♣ N 6 3-McGimpsey-Poon vs 3-Wilson-Aiken
170 0.00 6.00 2♣ N 6 4-Munday-Munday vs 5-Lancaster-Krueger
|
| 10 |
♠3
♥KQJ86532
♦2
♣T62
|
Dlr: East
Vul: Both
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
| NS: 1♣ 3♥ ♦2 ♠4 NT2 |
| EW: 5♦ 3♠ 4NT ♣6 ♥4 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
200 6.00 0.00 4♥* N -1 2-Humphreys-Tracey vs 3-Wilson-Aiken
500 4.50 1.50 5♥* N -2 1-Smith-Martenson vs 1-Baranski-Sweetwood
500 4.50 1.50 5♥* N -2 3-McGimpsey-Poon vs 5-Lancaster-Krueger
600 2.00 4.00 3N W 3 6-Hines-Gerlach vs 4-Windler-Gaer
600 2.00 4.00 5♦ E 5 5-Lindholm-McLeod vs 2-Segal-D'Amico
600 2.00 4.00 5♦ E 5 7-Lavine-Batko vs 6-Harmon-Hawk
630 0.00 6.00 3N W 4 4-Munday-Munday vs 7-Pringle-Pringle
|
| 11 |
♠QJT953
♥84
♦J73
♣K4
|
Dlr: South
Vul: None
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
| NS: 2♠ ♣5 ♦5 ♥5 NT5 |
| EW: 1♣ 1♦ 2♥ 1NT ♠5 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
140 6.00 0.00 2♠ N 3 7-Lavine-Batko vs 5-Lancaster-Krueger
110 4.00 2.00 2♠ N 2 3-McGimpsey-Poon vs 4-Windler-Gaer
110 4.00 2.00 2♠ N 2 5-Lindholm-McLeod vs 1-Baranski-Sweetwood
110 4.00 2.00 2♠ N 2 6-Hines-Gerlach vs 3-Wilson-Aiken
50 1.50 4.50 3♠ N -1 2-Humphreys-Tracey vs 2-Segal-D'Amico
50 1.50 4.50 2♠ N -1 4-Munday-Munday vs 6-Harmon-Hawk
150 0.00 6.00 4♠ N -3 1-Smith-Martenson vs 7-Pringle-Pringle
|
| 12 |
♠JT632
♥53
♦A82
♣742
|
Dlr: West
Vul: N-S
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
| NS: 2♥ 2♠ ♣4 ♦5 NT4 |
| EW: 2♣ 2♦ ♥5 ♠4 NT6 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
50 5.50 0.50 3N E -1 3-McGimpsey-Poon vs 3-Wilson-Aiken
50 5.50 0.50 3♦ E -1 5-Lindholm-McLeod vs 7-Pringle-Pringle
90 4.00 2.00 1N W 1 2-Humphreys-Tracey vs 1-Baranski-Sweetwood
110 2.50 3.50 3♦ W 3 6-Hines-Gerlach vs 2-Segal-D'Amico
110 2.50 3.50 3♣ E 3 7-Lavine-Batko vs 4-Windler-Gaer
130 1.00 5.00 2♦ W 4 1-Smith-Martenson vs 6-Harmon-Hawk
400 0.00 6.00 3N E 3 4-Munday-Munday vs 5-Lancaster-Krueger
|
| 13 |
♠Q62
♥AK
♦KT85
♣KJ95
|
Dlr: North
Vul: Both
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
| NS: 5/4♣ 6♦ 2♥ 3/2♠ 5/6NT |
| EW: ♣1 ♦1 ♥5 ♠4 NT1 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
1440 5.50 0.50 6N N 6 3-McGimpsey-Poon vs 2-Segal-D'Amico
1440 5.50 0.50 6N N 6 7-Lavine-Batko vs 3-Wilson-Aiken
690 2.00 4.00 4N N 6 5-Lindholm-McLeod vs 6-Harmon-Hawk
690 2.00 4.00 4N N 6 6-Hines-Gerlach vs 1-Baranski-Sweetwood
690 2.00 4.00 3N N 6 1-Smith-Martenson vs 5-Lancaster-Krueger
690 2.00 4.00 3N N 6 2-Humphreys-Tracey vs 7-Pringle-Pringle
690 2.00 4.00 3N N 6 4-Munday-Munday vs 4-Windler-Gaer
|
| 14 |
♠A2
♥KJ
♦JT65
♣QJT84
|
Dlr: East
Vul: None
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
| NS: 2♣ 1♦ 1NT ♥3 ♠5 |
| EW: 4♥ 1♠ ♣4 ♦6 NT6 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
50 5.00 1.00 3♠ E -1 6-Hines-Gerlach vs 1-Baranski-Sweetwood
50 5.00 1.00 4♥ W -1 5-Lindholm-McLeod vs 6-Harmon-Hawk
50 5.00 1.00 4♥ W -1 7-Lavine-Batko vs 3-Wilson-Aiken
420 1.50 4.50 4♥ W 4 1-Smith-Martenson vs 5-Lancaster-Krueger
420 1.50 4.50 4♥ W 4 2-Humphreys-Tracey vs 7-Pringle-Pringle
420 1.50 4.50 4♥ W 4 3-McGimpsey-Poon vs 2-Segal-D'Amico
420 1.50 4.50 4♥ W 4 4-Munday-Munday vs 4-Windler-Gaer
|
| 15 |
♠Q865
♥A53
♦T83
♣K84
|
Dlr: South
Vul: N-S
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
| NS: ♣1 ♦0 ♥5 ♠4 NT4 |
| EW: 4♣ 4♦ 1♥ 3♠ 2/3NT |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
50 6.00 0.00 5♣ E -1 2-Humphreys-Tracey vs 7-Pringle-Pringle
130 4.50 1.50 3♣ E 4 5-Lindholm-McLeod vs 6-Harmon-Hawk
130 4.50 1.50 3♣ E 4 7-Lavine-Batko vs 3-Wilson-Aiken
150 3.00 3.00 3♣ E 5 3-McGimpsey-Poon vs 2-Segal-D'Amico
430 1.00 5.00 3N W 4 1-Smith-Martenson vs 5-Lancaster-Krueger
430 1.00 5.00 3N W 4 4-Munday-Munday vs 4-Windler-Gaer
430 1.00 5.00 3N W 4 6-Hines-Gerlach vs 1-Baranski-Sweetwood
|
| 16 |
♠J94
♥972
♦K96432
♣3
|
Dlr: West
Vul: E-W
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
| NS: 2♦ 1♠ ♣4 ♥6 NT5 |
| EW: 3♣ 2NT ♦5 ♥6 ♠6 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
100 5.50 0.50 3N E -1 5-Lindholm-McLeod vs 5-Lancaster-Krueger
100 5.50 0.50 3N E -1 6-Hines-Gerlach vs 7-Pringle-Pringle
100 4.00 2.00 3♠ S -2 1-Smith-Martenson vs 4-Windler-Gaer
110 3.00 3.00 2♣ E 3 4-Munday-Munday vs 3-Wilson-Aiken
120 1.00 5.00 2N E 2 2-Humphreys-Tracey vs 6-Harmon-Hawk
120 1.00 5.00 2N E 2 7-Lavine-Batko vs 2-Segal-D'Amico
120 1.00 5.00 1N E 2 3-McGimpsey-Poon vs 1-Baranski-Sweetwood
|
| 17 |
♠-
♥QT876
♦Q962
♣AKQ5
|
Dlr: North
Vul: None
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
| NS: 3♣ 1♦ 4♥ ♠1 NT4 |
| EW: 6♠ 3NT ♣3 ♦5/6 ♥3 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
100 6.00 0.00 5♥* N -1 7-Lavine-Batko vs 2-Segal-D'Amico
480 4.00 2.00 5♠ W 6 4-Munday-Munday vs 3-Wilson-Aiken
480 4.00 2.00 5♠ W 6 6-Hines-Gerlach vs 7-Pringle-Pringle
480 4.00 2.00 4♠ W 6 1-Smith-Martenson vs 4-Windler-Gaer
790 2.00 4.00 4♠* W 6 2-Humphreys-Tracey vs 6-Harmon-Hawk
980 1.00 5.00 6♠ W 6 5-Lindholm-McLeod vs 5-Lancaster-Krueger
1210 0.00 6.00 6♠* E 6 3-McGimpsey-Poon vs 1-Baranski-Sweetwood
|
| 18 |
♠986
♥2
♦T654
♣JT432
|
Dlr: East
Vul: N-S
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
| NS: 2♣ 1♦ 2♠ ♥2 NT2 |
| EW: 4♥ 4NT ♣4 ♦5 ♠5 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
200 6.00 0.00 3♥ W 5 7-Lavine-Batko vs 2-Segal-D'Amico
450 3.50 2.50 5♥ W 5 3-McGimpsey-Poon vs 1-Baranski-Sweetwood
450 3.50 2.50 4♥ W 5 2-Humphreys-Tracey vs 6-Harmon-Hawk
450 3.50 2.50 4♥ W 5 4-Munday-Munday vs 3-Wilson-Aiken
450 3.50 2.50 4♥ W 5 6-Hines-Gerlach vs 7-Pringle-Pringle
510 1.00 5.00 4♥ W 7 1-Smith-Martenson vs 4-Windler-Gaer
980 0.00 6.00 6♥ W 6 5-Lindholm-McLeod vs 5-Lancaster-Krueger
|
| 19 |
♠T87
♥98
♦9542
♣K942
|
Dlr: South
Vul: E-W
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
| NS: ♣6 ♦5 ♥2 ♠1 NT3 |
| EW: 2♦ 4♥ 4♠ 2NT ♣6 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
100 6.00 0.00 3N E -1 5-Lindholm-McLeod vs 4-Windler-Gaer
620 5.00 1.00 4♠ W 4 3-McGimpsey-Poon vs 7-Pringle-Pringle
650 4.00 2.00 4♠ E 5 1-Smith-Martenson vs 3-Wilson-Aiken
680 2.00 4.00 4♠ W 6 7-Lavine-Batko vs 1-Baranski-Sweetwood
680 2.00 4.00 4♠ E 6 4-Munday-Munday vs 2-Segal-D'Amico
680 2.00 4.00 4♠ E 6 6-Hines-Gerlach vs 6-Harmon-Hawk
690 0.00 6.00 3N W 6 2-Humphreys-Tracey vs 5-Lancaster-Krueger
|
| 20 |
♠AQ73
♥T82
♦JT
♣7432
|
Dlr: West
Vul: Both
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
| NS: 2♣ 1♥ 1NT ♦4 ♠6 |
| EW: 2♦ 1♠ ♣5 ♥6 NT6 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
200 6.00 0.00 3N E -2 4-Munday-Munday vs 2-Segal-D'Amico
110 5.00 1.00 2♥ S 2 3-McGimpsey-Poon vs 7-Pringle-Pringle
100 3.50 2.50 1N E -1 5-Lindholm-McLeod vs 4-Windler-Gaer
100 3.50 2.50 2♦ E -1 7-Lavine-Batko vs 1-Baranski-Sweetwood
90 2.00 4.00 1N E 1 6-Hines-Gerlach vs 6-Harmon-Hawk
110 1.00 5.00 2♦ E 3 1-Smith-Martenson vs 3-Wilson-Aiken
130 0.00 6.00 3♦ E 4 2-Humphreys-Tracey vs 5-Lancaster-Krueger
|
| 21 |
♠A9753
♥64
♦J6
♣9754
|
Dlr: North
Vul: N-S
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
| NS: ♣4 ♦2 ♥4 ♠3 NT2 |
| EW: 3♣ 4♦ 3♥ 4/3♠ 5NT |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
430 5.50 0.50 3N W 4 4-Munday-Munday vs 2-Segal-D'Amico
430 5.50 0.50 3N W 4 7-Lavine-Batko vs 1-Baranski-Sweetwood
460 2.50 3.50 3N E 5 1-Smith-Martenson vs 3-Wilson-Aiken
460 2.50 3.50 3N E 5 2-Humphreys-Tracey vs 5-Lancaster-Krueger
460 2.50 3.50 3N E 5 5-Lindholm-McLeod vs 4-Windler-Gaer
460 2.50 3.50 3N E 5 6-Hines-Gerlach vs 6-Harmon-Hawk
490 0.00 6.00 3N E 6 3-McGimpsey-Poon vs 7-Pringle-Pringle
|
| 22 |
♠J94
♥AQ765
♦63
♣K86
|
Dlr: East
Vul: E-W
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
| NS: 2♥ ♣5 ♦5 ♠4 NT6 |
| EW: 2♣ 2/1♦ 3♠ ♥5 NT6 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
140 6.00 0.00 3♥ N 3 5-Lindholm-McLeod vs 3-Wilson-Aiken
PASS 5.00 1.00 Pass Out 3-McGimpsey-Poon vs 6-Harmon-Hawk
140 2.00 4.00 3♠ W 3 1-Smith-Martenson vs 2-Segal-D'Amico
140 2.00 4.00 3♠ W 3 4-Munday-Munday vs 1-Baranski-Sweetwood
140 2.00 4.00 3♠ E 3 7-Lavine-Batko vs 7-Pringle-Pringle
140 2.00 4.00 2♠ W 3 2-Humphreys-Tracey vs 4-Windler-Gaer
140 2.00 4.00 2♠ W 3 6-Hines-Gerlach vs 5-Lancaster-Krueger
|
| 23 |
♠AJ9653
♥KJ
♦85
♣J75
|
Dlr: South
Vul: Both
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
| NS: 4♣ 3♦ 3♠ 2NT ♥5 |
| EW: 2♥ ♣2 ♦4 ♠4 NT4 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
170 6.00 0.00 3♠ N 4 6-Hines-Gerlach vs 5-Lancaster-Krueger
140 5.00 1.00 3♠ N 3 7-Lavine-Batko vs 7-Pringle-Pringle
100 2.50 3.50 3♥ W -1 2-Humphreys-Tracey vs 4-Windler-Gaer
100 2.50 3.50 3♥ W -1 3-McGimpsey-Poon vs 6-Harmon-Hawk
100 2.50 3.50 3♥ W -1 4-Munday-Munday vs 1-Baranski-Sweetwood
100 2.50 3.50 3♥ W -1 5-Lindholm-McLeod vs 3-Wilson-Aiken
100 0.00 6.00 5♣ S -1 1-Smith-Martenson vs 2-Segal-D'Amico
|
| 24 |
♠T872
♥AJ3
♦JT7
♣T93
|
Dlr: West
Vul: None
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
| NS: 6♣ 6♥ ♦3 ♠4 NT4 |
| EW: 4♦ 2♠ ♣1 ♥1 NT1 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
480 5.50 0.50 4♥ S 6 3-McGimpsey-Poon vs 6-Harmon-Hawk
480 5.50 0.50 4♥ S 6 7-Lavine-Batko vs 7-Pringle-Pringle
450 4.00 2.00 4♥ N 5 5-Lindholm-McLeod vs 3-Wilson-Aiken
420 3.00 3.00 5♣ S 6 4-Munday-Munday vs 1-Baranski-Sweetwood
400 2.00 4.00 5♣ S 5 2-Humphreys-Tracey vs 4-Windler-Gaer
100 1.00 5.00 5♦* E -1 6-Hines-Gerlach vs 5-Lancaster-Krueger
130 0.00 6.00 4♦ E 4 1-Smith-Martenson vs 2-Segal-D'Amico
|
| 25 |
♠Q7
♥AKT7
♦KT97
♣AT2
|
Dlr: North
Vul: E-W
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
| NS: 4♦ 5♥ 1NT ♣6 ♠6 |
| EW: 1♣ 1♠ ♦2 ♥2 NT3 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
450 4.00 2.00 4♥ N 5 1-Smith-Martenson vs 5-Lancaster-Krueger
450 4.00 2.00 4♥ N 5 2-Humphreys-Tracey vs 7-Pringle-Pringle
450 4.00 2.00 4♥ N 5 3-McGimpsey-Poon vs 2-Segal-D'Amico
450 4.00 2.00 4♥ N 5 6-Hines-Gerlach vs 1-Baranski-Sweetwood
450 4.00 2.00 4♥ N 5 7-Lavine-Batko vs 3-Wilson-Aiken
420 1.00 5.00 4♥ S 4 4-Munday-Munday vs 4-Windler-Gaer
200 0.00 6.00 2♥ N 5 5-Lindholm-McLeod vs 6-Harmon-Hawk
|
| 26 |
♠J73
♥QJ942
♦982
♣A3
|
Dlr: East
Vul: Both
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
| NS: 1♦ 2♥ 2NT ♣5 ♠6 |
EW: 2♣ 1/-♠
♦6/5 ♥4 ♠7/6 NT4 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
300 5.50 0.50 1N W -3 4-Munday-Munday vs 3-Wilson-Aiken
300 5.50 0.50 1N W -3 5-Lindholm-McLeod vs 5-Lancaster-Krueger
140 3.50 2.50 3♥ N 3 3-McGimpsey-Poon vs 1-Baranski-Sweetwood
140 3.50 2.50 2♥ N 3 2-Humphreys-Tracey vs 6-Harmon-Hawk
120 2.00 4.00 1N S 2 7-Lavine-Batko vs 2-Segal-D'Amico
100 1.00 5.00 1♦ E -1 6-Hines-Gerlach vs 7-Pringle-Pringle
300 0.00 6.00 3♥ N -3 1-Smith-Martenson vs 4-Windler-Gaer
|
| 27 |
♠KJ7
♥Q5
♦QT
♣A87642
|
Dlr: South
Vul: None
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
| NS: ♣5 ♦4 ♥4 ♠4 NT5 |
| EW: 2♣ 3♦ 3♥ 3♠ 2NT |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
110 5.33 0.67 3♦ E 3 6-Hines-Gerlach vs 6-Harmon-Hawk
110 5.33 0.67 2♦ E 3 3-McGimpsey-Poon vs 7-Pringle-Pringle
140 3.00 3.00 3♠ W 3 7-Lavine-Batko vs 1-Baranski-Sweetwood
140 3.00 3.00 2♠ W 3 2-Humphreys-Tracey vs 5-Lancaster-Krueger
150 1.25 4.75 1N E 3 4-Munday-Munday vs 2-Segal-D'Amico
170 0.08 5.92 2♠ W 4 5-Lindholm-McLeod vs 4-Windler-Gaer
|
| 28 |
♠AQ97
♥K86
♦KQ2
♣KQ5
|
Dlr: West
Vul: N-S
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Double Dummy Makes |
| NS: 1♣ 4♦ 3♥ 5♠ 4NT |
| EW: ♣5 ♦3 ♥4 ♠2 NT3 |
|
|
N-S E-W N-S E-W Contract
650 4.50 1.50 5♠ S 5 7-Lavine-Batko vs 7-Pringle-Pringle
650 4.50 1.50 4♠ S 5 5-Lindholm-McLeod vs 3-Wilson-Aiken
650 4.50 1.50 4♠ S 5 6-Hines-Gerlach vs 5-Lancaster-Krueger
650 4.50 1.50 4♠ N 5 2-Humphreys-Tracey vs 4-Windler-Gaer
630 2.00 4.00 3N S 4 1-Smith-Martenson vs 2-Segal-D'Amico
100 0.50 5.50 6♠ S -1 4-Munday-Munday vs 1-Baranski-Sweetwood
100 0.50 5.50 6♠ N -1 3-McGimpsey-Poon vs 6-Harmon-Hawk
|