Contest conducted by Marc Smith
Welcome to the first set of 2025. A reminder that only your best nine scores count in the annual competition. It is therefore worthwhile playing every month, as doing so will mean that you can drop your three weakest scores during the year.
We have two experienced international players as guest panelists this month. Born in 1952, Sameh Makram Ebeid is a former member of Egypt's Parliament. He was part of the Egyptian open team at the 1980 Olympiad in Valkenberg and, more recently, a member of his country’s senior team in Wroclaw and Lyon. He recalls a rare double intra-finesse, reported in the Daily Bulletin, that he executed against the USA team to land a 3NT contract that many failed to make. Nigel Kearney is a 54-year-old software developer from Wellington, New Zealand. He was a member of the silver medal winning Kiwi team at the 1995 Junior World Championships in Bali, and he has also represented his country at open level. He is currently a national selector and coach. His preferred system is 2/1 with a weak notrump.
A couple of this month’s hands were sent to me by regular panelists: Hand 4 came from David Bird and Hand 5 from Alan Mould. Thanks to them. If you have a hand that you think would produce an interesting panel discussion, please send me details.
The panel produce a majority on four of the hands in this set, two of them with very big majorities. However, on the other four hands, they are seriously divided. Is that good news for competitors? We shall see…
The most popular action chosen by the competition entrants scores ‘10’ on only two of the eight hands this month. However, voting with the largest group of competitors scores 59/80 (just down from 60/80 in December). The average score this month is 53.82 (only marginally down from the high watermark of 55.86 on Set 24-12). Without further ado, let’s see what the panel have to say about this month’s hands…
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
2♥ |
10 |
8 |
18 |
|
2NT |
8 |
5 |
5 |
|
2♦ |
8 |
2 |
2 |
|
1♥ |
6 |
3 |
45 |
|
Dbl |
5 |
2 |
7 |
|
3NT |
5 |
2 |
8 |
|
1NT |
4 |
1 |
11 |
|
3♥ |
3 |
0 |
1 |
|
Pass |
0 |
0 |
2 |
|
2♣ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
4♥ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 6.28
We begin the year with mayhem, as the panel come up with seven different choices. Even so, there was one clear favorite, so let’s start with them. First, Giorgio explains why a jump to 2♥ is better than the 1♥ bid that was very popular with competitions entrants.
GIORGIO DUBOIN: 2♥. I would bid 1♥ with a minimum hand for my original double, so I have to jump now to show my extra strength.
HANOI RONDON: 2♥. I'm showing my suit and I jump to try and show the strength of my hand.
Migry starts the year with an accurate prediction, as we shall see later.
MIGRY zur CAMPANILE: 2♥. I don’t think 1♥ or 1NT would show any extra strength. 2NT looks sort of right, but I can see the opponents taking four spades and the ♦A. If partner advances with 2♠, I’ll bid NT.
MARTY BERGEN: 2♥. Forcing.
Is it? The comments from both Sally and David suggest it may not be.
SALLY BROCK: 2♥. This surely must show a hand too strong to overcall 1♥ on the first round. My hand is good, but not that terrific. If partner has passed 1♣-doubled with J109xxxx and nothing, I don’t want to kill him.
DAVID BIRD: 2♥. Partner does not necessarily have enough for us to make game. I need to describe my hand and leave it to him.
Simon and Andrew both address the question of whether we should defend.
SIMON DE WIJS: 2♥. Doubles would be penalty after this start. I expect partner to double 1♦ with 3+♦ (as he is marked with long clubs already and I implied some diamond length by doubling 1♣). I am not willing to defend at the one-level with at most five trumps, so I will show my hand type and take it from there.
ANDREW ROBSON: 2♥. Tricky! The first decision is whether to double. I think the lack of a fourth diamond makes this anti-percentage. Next question, how to get to the right game - between 3NT and 4♥. My first thought was to simply jump in no-trumps, as Qx looks very no-trumpy. However, I feel like we can have our cake and eat it: jumping in hearts then bidding no-trumps.
A couple did like the look of defending.
LARRY COHEN: Dbl. With the expected trump lead, I hope we will get a huge number -- and I don't know how to reach our correct spot anyway.
SAMEH MAKRAM EBEID: Dbl. South has sent a distress signal and I am not letting them escape in any one-level contract. We will lead trumps and I expect +500 and maybe 800+. (South is probably 4-4-3-2 and North could have only four diamonds and no high card points.) Let’s go for the kill – it’s more fun and, if it backfires, well c’est la vie! +500 against +620 is not a disaster at IMPs.
There was some support for the choice of nearly half of competition entrants…
BARNET SHENKIN: 1♥. Double and 2NT are also possible.
JOEY SILVER: 1♥. I would not have made a takeout double with only two spades, so I will bid my hand, taking advantage of my previous foolishness, and hopefully showing a good hand in the context of a takeout double. To be honest, I don't know if East's pass is forcing.
P-O seems to have misread the auction, thinking he is the opening bidder…
P-O SUNDELIN: 1♥. I much prefer 1♥ to redouble. Apparently, we must guess if double showed clubs or was takeout, if East had any other negative options than pass, if South showed clubs by passing, and if my XX asked partner to bid something, if over his 1♦ with a possible 3343 or 3334, my 1♥ now might be a choice between the majors...
Cathy was also flying solo with a bid at the one-level.
CATHY BALDYSZ: 1NT.
What about other options at the two-level?
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: 2♦. Probably I will play 3NT, but it is worth starting with 2♦ as sometimes partner will surprise us.
Nigel at least has a plan…
NIGEL KEARNEY: 2♦. We may have game in NT, hearts, or even clubs if partner has something like Kxx/x(x)/xxx/QJ10xx(x). My style is to overcall 1♥ with 4-5 majors, so I should be able to show a strong hand by bidding 1♥ now, but to avoid ambiguity I will start with 2♦. Partner can bid a three-card major over this. I'm hoping for 2♥ but, more likely, he will bid 2♠ and I can continue with 3♣.
WENFEI WANG: 2NT. I don’t like our pass of South’s redouble, so now, I have to bid 2NT. This should show around 19-21 points.
JILL MEYERS: 2NT. I think this shows around 19ish. Partner was willing to sit for 1♣-doubled, so she must have values. I am going to forget about hearts.
JESSICA LARSSON: 2NT. My excuse? I like to bid. I considered 2♥, but the hand looks like in belongs in no-trump.
ZIA MAHMOOD: 2NT. This sounds about right. I could also bid 3NT or start with a 2♦ cue-bid. All are okay.
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: 2NT. Happy New Year! What a set of problems, and it starts here. Partner is favourite to hold 9-10 black cards, so bidding hearts is probably a waste of time. On the other hand, there is room for 7-8 HCP in his hand. We for sure have a good partscore in clubs, but if we have a game it's probably in NT.
And a couple just bid what they think they can make.
SOPHIA BALDYSZ: 3NT. It looks like South has something along the lines of 4342, probably ♠A-K and ♦A, and maybe the ♥Q. Maybe partner has J-x-x in spades, or non-solid clubs and the ♠K. My alternative would be to look for a heart contract (if partner has something along the lines of 3325 shape).
ALAN MOULD: 3NT. I am not on hugely firm ground here. For me, partner’s pass of 1♦ is not forcing, as he can simply have a lot of clubs and nothing else. So, I want to do a huge number of things at once - show a hand too good for a 1♥ overcall (Marc will have disapproved of the initial double since he doesn't think that animal exists), support clubs, and show a strong balanced hand too good for 1NT. I have no idea whether partner will take 1♥ as the first of those or 1NT as the third of those, or just competing the partscore in either case. I have given up and punt 3NT hoping it has some play. At least I should know where the cards are.
Yes, Alan is right that we could have avoided this whole scenario by starting with a 1♥ overcall, although perhaps this hand is a bit too good even for me, but it’s close. This auction provides plenty for regular partnerships to discuss. They should certainly know whether partner’s pass of 1♦ is forcing. (I think it should be, but Alan disagrees with that, and I know David does too.) Whether it is nor not, do either 1♥ or 1NT from us now show extras or could we just have a 4-4-3-2 12-count? Does 2♣ shows extra values or would it just be an attempt to play there?
This was how the auction began in the Spingold final. Partner had xxx/Qxx/Jx/QJ10xx, so 4♥ was an easy make with the ♣K where you would expect it to be. At the table, West jumped to 3NT which, as Migry accurately predicted, lost four spades and the ♦A. The 2♥ bidders will clearly reach the optimum spot. Do the 1♥ bidders expect partner to take another bid on his flat 6-count?
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
5♣ |
10 |
9 |
11 |
|
4♠ |
8 |
4 |
54 |
|
6♣ |
6 |
8 |
5 |
|
5♦ |
5 |
2 |
10 |
|
6♠ |
0 |
0 |
10 |
|
Dbl |
0 |
0 |
4 |
|
4NT |
0 |
0 |
2 |
|
5♠ |
0 |
0 |
2 |
|
4♥ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
5NT |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
6NT |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 6.22
I thought this hand would be a simple two-way choice-of-game decision, with perhaps a few competitors tempted into a double. However, over a third of the panel had other ideas. We’ll get to them later, but let’s start with the mainstream options.
P-O SUNDELIN: 5♣. With solid clubs and a diamond stopper, partner might easily be off both major-suit aces.
DAVID BIRD: 5♣. North has a vulnerable opening bid, so he is likely to hold the two major-suit aces. Bidding 6♣, hoping partner has solid clubs, the ♦K and a major-suit ace is 'placing him with the perfect hand'.
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: 5♣. With seven or eight solid clubs and a diamond stop, it is okay to bid 3NT over 1♦. So, 5♣. With a major-suit ace more, I think partner would start with a double.
NIGEL KEARNEY: 5♣. Opposite partner's solid suit, 5♣ looks safer than 4♠. We might make slam if partner has a major suit ace as well but, even vulnerable, I think solid clubs plus a stopper is enough for 3NT.
CATHY BALDYSZ: 5♣.
Our French Mixed champions highlight discussion points for regular partnerships.
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: 5♣. This is a matter of partnership agreement. Can 3NT be bid on as little as x/xxx/Kx/AKQxxxx (so you bid 5♣), or do you need one extra ace (and 6♣ is probably laydown)? You had better be on the same wavelength in case you hear "double" in a similar case. We prefer to consider 3NT is more a pre-empt than a positive move: similar to a standard gambling 3NT opening, but with a diamond stopper.
A couple were concerned that it still may not be out hand.
JOEY SILVER: 5♣. Playing it straight, however this hand is not for sale below the six-level.
SAMEH MAKRAM EBEID: 5♣. Partner is showing at least seven solid clubs and a diamond stopper, so we are likely to be off two major-suit aces, most probably with the opener. 5♦ may even be making if the ♣A is not cashing. I will bid 5♠ if they bid 5♦ as lead directing, and correct to 6♣ after the expected double as an insurance against a miraculous 6♦ making on the wrong lead. 6♣-1 may be a good result and maybe even making if my analysis is wrong. Nice problem!
Giorgio highlights what is surely the key point of the deal.
GIORGIO DUBOIN: 5♣. With all this bidding by vulnerable opponents, my partner can’t have a major-suit ace as well as a diamond stopper and solid clubs.
Hold that thought while we deal with those who preferred the alternative game.
MARTY BERGEN: 4♠. Definitely an interesting auction.
HANOI RONDON: 4♠. I'm going to try for game in my major. I hope partner understands I have some club support too in case he's void in spades or something like that.
Andrew makes an excellent case for ten tricks rather than eleven.
ANDREW ROBSON: 4♠. My first thought was 5♣, as this rates to make facing partner's presumed solid clubs (plus diamond stopper). But, it won't make if there's a (spade?) ruff against it, and 4♠ will probably make even facing x/xx/Kxx/AKQJxxx. Also, bidding 4♠ may enable partner to compete to 5♠ over 5♦ with something like xxx/x/Kx/AKQJxxx.
SALLY BROCK: 4♠. With solid clubs and extreme spade shortage, no doubt he will remove. Slam could be on, but partner may not have either major-suit ace and I don’t know how to find out.
Perhaps the most obvious answer to Sally’s question is to listen to the bidding. Looking at all these major-suit honours, it is not easy to construct a 52-card layout consistent with the vulnerable opponents’ bidding in which East holds a major-suit ace. Fine players that they all are, I think the rest of the panel answered this question after a little too much New Year’s Eve cheer… (I join in with the holiday spirit by giving them some marks anyway).
BARNET SHENKIN: 6♣. I should get good trumps in dummy.
WENFEI WANG: 6♣. Partner has shown a solid club suit and a strong hand.
SIMON DE WIJS: 6♣. Pass is not forcing for me, so I will have to take a guess myself. I am going high since I think it's likely partner will have one of the major suit aces
JILL MEYERS: 6♣. Partner must have solid clubs, so I am going to also play her for an ace and take a shot at slam.
ALAN MOULD: 6♣. Let’s live a little! Partner's 3NT is obviously based on good clubs and a diamond stop. Provided the major suit aces are not off the contract, this ought to be cold.
SOPHIA BALDYSZ: 6♣. It looks to me like partner has clubs and a diamond stopper. Did he really bid 3NT with nothing in either major? I hope he has at least one of the aces, and wish for no unfavorable splits.
JESSICA LARSSON: 6♣. Partnership style determines whether you bid 5♣ or 6♣. With my regular partners, I would opt for slam.
MIGRY zur CAMPANILE: 6♣. I can’t believe partner has solid clubs a diamond stopper and two aces.
That would indeed leave the opponents with about a combined 7-count, but that didn’t stop a couple of partygoers from looking anyway.
ZIA MAHMOOD: 5♦. How do we get to seven? More likely perhaps that we go down in six when partner has only solid clubs and the ♦K, but I’ve got to hope for two aces.
LARRY COHEN: 5♦. I assume partner has long running clubs, and he will bid 6♣. But, just in case he has both major-suit aces and running clubs (Ax/A/Qxxx/AKQ10xx), I'll waste a little time and have some fun.
On this deal from an Australian national team final, an over-zealous West jumped to 5♠. Partner had 8x/10/Axx/AKQ109xx. North was 4-4-4-1, which is not unlikely, as South is marked with very few points, so something like ♦Q-x-x-x-x-x is likely to justify his vulnerable 4♦ bid. This means that the only making game is 4♠, which loses a heart and two trumps. As Andrew surmised, game in clubs loses two aces and a spade ruff. If partner’s major-suit lengths are reversed, both black-suit games are likely to make, so the 4♠ bidders can certainly claim the moral victory, if only 8/10 here. Note that more than half of competition entrants chose 4♠, so I think this is one of those rare occasions where they outbid the panel.
The 10% of competitors who chose to double should note that you get only a club, a heart and a diamond against 4♦-doubled, so -710 is clearly worse than going down in slam or the wrong game.
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
Dbl |
10 |
17 |
30 |
|
Pass |
7 |
1 |
20 |
|
3♥ |
6 |
2 |
25 |
|
2NT |
5 |
1 |
9 |
|
4♥ |
5 |
1 |
7 |
|
3♠ |
5 |
1 |
3 |
|
3♦ |
0 |
0 |
3 |
|
3NT |
0 |
0 |
3 |
|
4♠ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 6.85
This deal provides regular partnerships with something to discuss, and also illustrates one of the difficulties of setting good problems. The objective was to discover the meaning of double in this fairly straightforward auction. Did we do so? Emphatically, no, so it turned out to be a New Year’s gift for competitors, as those panelists who thought double was for penalties, those who thought it was for takeout and those why didn’t care, all chose that same action. Alan hits the nail on the head…
ALAN MOULD: Dbl. This presumably is a test for the panel as to whether they think double of 2♠ is takeout or penalties. It is still takeout for me, so I shall make it and see what that brings.
Agreeing with Alan are…
BARNET SHENKIN: Dbl. Not penalty, but just showing values,
WENFEI WANG: Dbl. I hope partner can understand that double shows points, not penalty.
SIMON DE WIJS: Dbl. This seems automatic, except for those who play this as penalty.
ANDREW ROBSON: Dbl. Not penalties. My first thought was to jump to 4♥, as we have a great hand for partner. But partner is non-vul in the protective seat, and we don't want to punish him. This take-out-ish double will elicit more info and help us to judge.
Migry points out the most important question…
MIGRY zur CAMPANILE: Dbl. I wish I knew what double shows and, more importantly, I wish I knew what partner thinks it shows. If positive it’s takeout, I would double. If not, I might take a shot at 4♥.
Some were not particularly bothered what partner thought…
SALLY BROCK: Dbl. I’m not sure how penalty-orientated this is, and I don’t really care.
LARRY COHEN: Dbl. Whatever it means. Facing a partner who couldn't open 2♥, I don't know that we can handle the taps in 4♥.
HANOI RONDON: Dbl. I have some values and might be available for anything my partner wants to do: defend or compete. I'm eager to read the comments and see what people play this double as, since my definition seems so vague.
JESSICA LARSSON: Dbl. Yuk! How am I doing? 😀 I double, even knowing that it's probably not the best bid.
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: Dbl. I'm happy whatever partner does.
That doesn’t seem to be a very satisfactory situation to me. I am in the same camp as the largest faction amongst the doublers…
MARTY BERGEN: Dbl. Penalties. I am seduced by the vulnerability, the form of scoring, and the easy diamond opening lead.
JILL MEYERS: Dbl. At matchpoints, I double. If I go -670, so be it.
DAVID BIRD: Dbl. Since I said nothing over 1♠, this double is clearly for penalties. I would double at IMPs too, so it's clear-cut at matchpoints. Raising hearts when partner did not open a weak-two is unattractive.
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: Dbl. Penalty. Will it be +500 or -670? Who knows? This is a typical matchpoints decision.
NIGEL KEARNEY: Dbl. There's no guarantee, but it looks like we will defeat this much more than half the time.
SOPHIA BALDYSZ: Dbl. I’m hoping partner didn't bid on x/Jxxxx/Jxx/Jxxx. I’m hoping we can make two diamonds, two hearts, the ♣K, and maybe something gets promoted.
There were a handful of mavericks. A couple settled for a natural competitive raise…
GIORGIO DUBOIN: 3♥. Of course, my normal bid should be Double. However, in an undiscussed partnership, that is probably for penalties which, for me, is nonsense.
P-O SUNDELIN: 3♥. Assuming opener has something like AKQJxx/x/Qxx/AQx. We play weak twos, so I am guessing what partner thinks is worth a protective bid but not a one-level opening.
Sameh competed in an alternative strain.
SAMEH MAKRAM EBEID: 2NT. This describes my hand and could get us a good plus score.
Whilst a couple decided to be more ambitious….
JOEY SILVER: 4♥. I have enough prime cards to make a game try, even in the face of East's original pass.
ZIA MAHMOOD: 3♠. I like a double here as just showing some values, not for penalties. This is a slight overbid but, hopefully, we may be able to make something.
…and Cathy was flying solo in the other direction.
CATHY BALDYSZ: Pass.
I had the hand at the table, playing with a student. It seemed clear to double if I knew partner would pass, but I was mindful of Migry’s observation above. I thought it likely that we could get +200 defending 2♠ undoubled, which would beat all those making +140 or +120. Partner had J8/Kxxxx/Qxx/AJx. With hearts 3-3, you can make 4♥, or 3NT by finding the ♣Q, but we were probably never bidding game. Declarer did not play the hand to best advantage and we scored 90% for beating 2♠ by four for +400. Of course, +1100 would have been better, but I suspect that at the table double would have led to only +170.
This is a common enough type of auction. Whether you agree that double is penalties or takeout-ish, regular partnerships should make sure that they know what partner will expect.
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
Pass |
10 |
12 |
31 |
|
Dbl |
8 |
6 |
11 |
|
5♠ |
6 |
5 |
55 |
|
6♠ |
0 |
0 |
2 |
|
6♣ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 7.28
This is a classic high-level three-way decision. The comments of many panelists suggest than the option chosen by more than half of competitors is the wrong one. The first big question to answer is whether you are in a forcing pass situation…
SALLY BROCK: Pass. I don’t think this is forcing. I’m happy for partner to do whatever he thinks best.
ANDREW ROBSON: Pass. The question is whether my pass is forcing. I say, “No”. But actually, I think pass sums up our hand either way ie not sure whether to bid 5♠ or not. The Law would say, “Yes”: they have 11 hearts, we have 10/11 spades. But I have a hunch it will overestimate here, as we have a lot of stuff in our short suits.
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: Pass. Not forcing for us (we would play it as forcing vulnerable against not). The law of total tricks (11-12 hearts, 10-11 spades, so 21-23 total tricks) is normally a strong argument for bidding 5♠ ourselves, but these ♣Q or ♦J can be more useful in defence, and everyone knows the five-level belongs to opponents. Let's hope our partner will have some element of judgment himself.
Many didn’t address the issue, and simply left things to partner with varying degrees of enthusiasm (or misgivings).
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: Pass. I transfer the problem to partner, as I am unsure whether to double or bid 5♠.
GIORGIO DUBOIN: Pass. I have nothing more to say.
ALAN MOULD: Pass. I am not committing to 5♠ on this hand, and neither am I doubling to warn partner off – 5♥ could easily be cold for a start. Let partner get the decision wrong instead.
SIMON DE WIJS: Pass. I will leave it up to partner to take the final decision here. My hand isn't great for either offense or defense.
JOEY SILVER: Pass. With my kingleton heart I'll leave it up to partner to decide what to do.
Zia offers a typically philosophical view of the situation.
ZIA MAHMOOD: Pass. Let partner screw it up. I don’t know what to do, except that I would have opened 2♠ on this hand.
P-O SUNDELIN: Pass.
WENFEI WANG: Pass.
BARNET SHENKIN: Pass. I can’t double, and why would I bid spades in front of partner?
Perhaps some can explain the reasoning for Barnet…
LARRY COHEN: 5♠. I have an extra spade and short hearts, so I am committing the rare act of bidding 5-over-5. It could be a make, but will be right if either side has 11 tricks.
SAMEH MAKRAM EBEID: 5♠. Pass is forcing, so Pass then 5♠ would show a better hand. 5♠ now shows the very weak hand that I have. A 2♠ opening anyone?
JESSICA LARSSON: 5♠. Partnership agreements will determine whether 4♥ shows a void or whether it could be just a singleton. I bid like it’s a void and go to 5♠, which seems like it should be weaker than passing.
CATHY BALDYSZ: 5♠.
JILL MEYERS: 5♠. My partner and I each have stiff hearts? This is tough. Double is tempting, but I am going to bite and commit to the five-level.
I confess that I am in full agreement with the next group.
MIGRY zur CAMPANILE: Dbl. I need to tell partner we have a bad hand for 5♠.
HANOI RONDON: Dbl. I have a terrible hand that prefers to defend than to play. Pass would be forcing, and I don't want partner to think the five-level belongs to us.
MARTY BERGEN: Dbl. I don't want to encourage partner to bid 5♠. FYI: I would have passed originally.
NIGEL KEARNEY: Dbl. I don't really like it, but I am obligated to double since we are in a forcing situation and I have a hand that is very unsuitable for declaring.
SOPHIA BALDYSZ: Dbl. Yuk! Even at the five-level, the contract could be in jeopardy. I do have one of the worst possible hands for partner. The only offensive assets are the ♣A and the sixth spade. Sometimes they'll make it and, if partner has a much better hand, he can always pull.
The man who sent me the hand sums up.
DAVID BIRD: Dbl. Partner’s 4♥ surely set up a forcing-pass situation. With jack-high spades and a wasted ♥K, it must be right to warn him against bidding on.
Partner’s heart shortage is not good news: it means that, to make 5♠, you will need to restrict your losers to just one in the other three suits, with no ruffs available in either hand. To make 11 tricks, you will need partner to have a very good hand opposite this junk. At the table, West made a forcing pass, which seems too much too me, and East duly carried on to 5♠ with KQxxx/x/AKxx/xxx. With neither side able to make 11 tricks, bidding 5-over-5 was not the right thing to do on these cards. Perhaps East should double when 5♥ is passed around to him, but it seems to me that West should get there first.
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
5♥ |
10 |
8 |
6 |
|
4♣ |
8 |
5 |
2 |
|
4♦ |
8 |
3 |
8 |
|
6♥ |
7 |
4 |
6 |
|
4NT |
5 |
2 |
25 |
|
4♥ |
3 |
1 |
47 |
|
3NT |
0 |
0 |
3 |
|
3♠ |
0 |
0 |
2 |
|
Pass |
0 |
0 |
2 |
|
4♠ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 4.48
The panel is widely divided on this one, with six different options supported. The one thing on which just about everyone agrees is that the competitors’ most popular choice, a raise to 4♥, is simply not enough. 22 out of 23 panelists make some kind of move towards slam. Let’s start with the scientists…
MIGRY zur CAMPANILE: 4♣. I hope this shows a good 4♥ bid.
ANDREW ROBSON: 4♣. This should probably say nothing about clubs, simply showing a good 4♥ bid at this stage.
SIMON DE WIJS: 4♣. A slam try in hearts. We are not introducing a second suit in this auction. With my heart holding I am not that worried that partner will bid too high.
CATHY BALDYSZ: 4♣.
JOEY SILVER: 4♣. Missing the top two heart honors, I cannot expect partner to accept any slam invitation at this point in the auction, but maybe I can get him cue-bidding. I intend, of course, to bid 4♠ over 4♦ and, hopefully, from there we can sort out if slam will be a good proposition.
Thus was my choice when Alan first sent me the problem.
JILL MEYERS: 4♦. I am going to phony cue bid my diamond control. My hand is too good just to raise to 4♥.
SOPHIA BALDYSZ: 4♦. This seems to be the least of all evils. We may be missing a club control, e.g. KQJ/QJ10xxx/AK/Jx. But if partner has ♦A-K, the ♣A and ♥Q-J, then slam is a possibility.
NIGEL KEARNEY: 4♦. It seems like I am worth one slam try. 5♥ doesn't describe this hand and I don't have a control to cue bid. 4♦ is the least misleading option.
A number disagree with that assessment…
DAVID BIRD: 5♥. I am too good for 4♥ and have no minor-suit cue-bid to make. 5♥ describes my hand admirably.
SALLY BROCK: 5♥. This surely shows good trumps and no minor-suit cue-bid.
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: 5♥. A general invitation.
Alan contributed this excellent problem, and eloquently sums up the case for the largest faction on the panel.
ALAN MOULD: 5♥. I sent this hand in after it was sent to me. Firstly, I don't think 3♠ is a cue for hearts, but do believe that 4m is a cue agreeing hearts (well, at least 95% of the time anyway). I could psyche a 4m cue, or I could drive it with 4NT and just hope. But a jump to 5♥ seems to portray my hand well - a slam try with no minor-suit control. If we don't have two top losers I expect good play for slam. I strongly suspect partner has seven hearts as I am looking at the A-K.
ZIA MAHMOOD: 5♥. This jump to the five-level should show either both minors controlled, or neither with great major-suit cards. Partner will be able to tell which from his own hand. It is a good idea to play 4♣ as an artificial slam try in this type of auction.
GIORGIO DUBOIN: 5♥. This seems like a fair description of my hand. With a regular partner, I could advance with 4♣ to agree hearts and show interest without suggesting a club control.
I am obviously getting old! Either I am out of touch with modern bidding or Marty is going crazy. (Or maybe he has been celebrating early in anticipation of his Chiefs’ Superbowl victory.)
MARTY BERGEN: 5♥. If you chose this example to prove that it is NOT correct to respond 1♠, I agree 1000%.
I’m really supposed to establish a game force by responding 2♣ on this hand? This is perhaps something that we will explore in a future month, to discover whether the world really is going to hell in a handcart!
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: 5♥. Partner’s non-forcing 3♥ rebid shows something like a five-loser hand. A slam invitation is therefore merited with three top cards and some extras. When we don't cue in a minor, we hope to give a pretty good picture of our hand. Of course, we don't know whether our diamonds are good or bad news. Nobody's perfect. We cannot bid only 4♥ when 13 tricks will be available opposite partner's perfect hand: x/QJ10xxxx/AKx/Ax. Those who play Gazzilli here have an advantage because they have two sequences for two different hand shapes – 3♥ or 2♣ followed by 3♥.
A couple simply chose to roll out the old Black…
WENFEI WANG: 4NT. Key-card for hearts. We may have a grand slam.
JESSICA LARSSON: 4NT.
…whilst some of our most senior panel members choose judgement over science and simply just blast it.
LARRY COHEN: 6♥. Abandoning science, and just guessing we are not off two quick tricks (and even if we are, they might not take them).
BARNET SHENKIN: 6♥.
P-O SUNDELIN: 6♥.
HANOI RONDON: 6♥. If partner is missing ♥A-K and still could jump, the rest of his hand must be excellent so I think we might make the slam.
Only Sameh was willing to settle for game.
SAMEH MAKRAM EBEID: 4♥. I am endplayed! I cannot think of anything better. Slam is possible if partner makes a further move
Slam was a marginal proposition opposite Qx/QJ10xxxx/Ax/AQ. Entry problems mean that a spade lead beats 6♥ (South has two low spades and three trumps). However, 6NT will always make if you correctly guess which minor-suit finesse to take. Getting to that contract is far from easy.
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
Dbl |
10 |
13 |
31 |
|
4♣ |
8 |
6 |
38 |
|
5♣ |
8 |
2 |
20 |
|
Pass |
5 |
2 |
8 |
|
4♠ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 8.14
It is sometimes hard to see the wood for the trees, but experts often seem able to dodge the bullet by anticipating the problem. I think the panel failed to do so on this one. Some were perhaps seduced by the form of scoring…
JILL MEYERS: Dbl. At IMPs, I would bid 5♣, but at matchpoints it may be important to play in the major. Having doubled, if North bids 4♠, I can bid 5♣ on the next round.
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: Dbl. It is difficult to ignore the possible 4♥ contract at matchpoints. And, our options are limited as, for us, 4♣ would be a transfer to diamonds. No system is perfect.
ANDREW ROBSON: Dbl. I see no reason not to find our 4♥ game. Admittedly, it is a bit nerve wracking - partner passing the double and finding that his ♣A-K are taking precisely zero tricks (okay, so that's a reason for not doubling).
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: Dbl. I start with a double. I can always support clubs later.
ALAN MOULD: Dbl. At last, a breather. What else?
Sameh has a plan for all eventualities, although I wonder if this strategy will perhaps lead to playing 4♣+1 too often.
SAMEH MAKRAM EBEID: Dbl. Inviting partner to bid 3NT, 4♥, 4♣ or Pass. I will pass 4♣ and bid 5♣ if North bids 4♠.
SIMON DE WIJS: Dbl. Let's try for 4♥. 3NT from partner would be a problem, as I would want to bid a non-forcing 4♣ over that, but I guess that would be forcing now. I will wait for that problem in next month's problem set.
LARRY COHEN: Dbl. Nobody has partners who bid 4♥, but I have a fallback plan.
MIGRY zur CAMPANILE/JESSICA LARSSON/CATHY BALDYSZ: Dbl.
Only Barnet even considered 3NT…
BARNET SHENKIN: Dbl. Flexible, but maybe 3NT is the winner.
Whilst Wenfei is choosing between Double and Pass…
WENFEI WANG: Dbl. I want to do something. Maybe double is a bit of an overbid.
…and a couple did take that option.
P-O SUNDELIN: Pass.
GIORGIO DUBOIN: Pass.
The rest all decided that six-card support for partner’s suit was worth mentioning…
MARTY BERGEN: 4♣. Support with support.
SALLY BROCK: 4♣. I guess I could double, which works well if partner has four hearts (maybe), but 4♣ looks more what my hand is worth.
ZIA MAHMOOD: 4♣. I think he can still bid 4♥ as an offer to play. A double by us risks opening a can of worms.
NIGEL KEARNEY: 4♣. As they have pre-empted, my bid is constructive. Therefore, 4♣ is enough. Suppressing club support in an attempt to aim for 3NT or 4♥ seems likely to do more harm than good, especially if LHO continues to 4♠.
DAVID BIRD: 4♣. If you don't show your club support now, you will probably have to bid 5♣ later. It is better to describe your hand now and let partner have a say in the matter.
SOPHIA BALDYSZ: 4♣. Ah, the convenience of natural systems. In Polish Club, this would be forcing. I wouldn't mind being in 4♥ if partner has ♥A-K and ♣A-K.
Only a couple appreciated the pre-emptive value of getting to game quickly.
JOEY SILVER: 5♣. Who knows what we can make but, it being matchpoints, I go for what I think is our safest, and highest scoring plus score.
HANOI RONDON: 5♣. I'd rather consume all the space I'm willing to, instead of doubling and allowing North an easy 4♠ bid.
Hanoi hits the problem on the head. If you bid 4♣, it goes 4♠-5♣-5♠ back to you. If you double, it goes 4♠-5♥-5♠ to you. The latter may get you to lead a heart against 5♠, which at least saves the overtrick. Partner had K/KJ10x/xxx/AKJxx so you can make 11 tricks in clubs and oppo make 11 or 12 in spades depending on the lead.
It is perhaps hard to appreciate that the hand may not belong to your side. An immediate jump to 5♣ may get a double from North on xxx/Ax/KQJxxx/xx. If you let him bid 4♠, you then need to save at the six-level to get many matchpoints. A moral victory for Joey and Hanoi on this one.
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
2♥ |
10 |
18 |
48 |
|
1♠ |
6 |
5 |
39 |
|
2♠ |
2 |
0 |
7 |
|
Dbl |
0 |
0 |
3 |
|
2♣ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
2NT |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
3♠ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 7.28
I usually try to avoid setting problems with only two realistic options, and this one turned out to be very one-sided. It came about as I was intending to set the East hand as a problem. Discussing the deal with the Abbot, he maintained that the poor result occurred because of West’s ‘absurd 2♥ overcall holding six spades.’ I said I thought 2♥ was right, so we agreed to disagree and see what the panel thought. I’m glad to report that this is 1-0 to Smith!
SOPHIA BALDYSZ: 2♥. Getting both suits in.
HANOI RONDON: 2♥. Isn't it better to show ten cards than five?
GIORGIO DUBOIN: 2♥. I prefer to show two suits rather than only one.
WENFEI WANG: 2♥. This is normally 5-5, but showing two suits quickly may be important on this hand.
Some have reservations, but…
JILL MEYERS: 2♥. I don't really like to bid Michaels with six cards in the other major, but this is the best way to describe a two suiter.
BARNET SHENKIN: 2♥. I know, I have an extra spade, but let’s get two suits in before the auction gets out of control.
ANDREW ROBSON: 2♥. I never used to like Michaelsing with a sixth card in the major, but it seems to work quite well and it does show 10/13ths of our cards (although admittedly partner doesn't know the minor).
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: 2♥. I’ll start by showing spades and a minor. Perhaps I will be able to bid spades to show 6-5 on the next round.
Marty highlights the major problem with overcalling 1♠ on this hand.
MARTY BERGEN: 2♥. I'd usually prefer to overcall 1♠ and later bid clubs but, with my heart void, I expect N/S will be in 4♥ before I get a second turn.
SALLY BROCK: 2♥. I don’t usually like to Michaels with a six-card major. However, it looks likely that North will raise hearts here, so I’d like to describe my hand as accurately as possible in one bid while I have the chance. If I had two hearts and a void diamond, I would overcall 1♠.
SAMEH MAKRAM EBEID: 2♥. This shows spade and a minor. Let’s try to describe our hand type before it gets dangerous to act again (eg. after a raise to 4♥ by North)
P-O SUNDELIN/CATHY BALDYSZ/2JESSICA LARSSON: 2♥.
JOEY SILVER: 2♥. My lack of spade quality persuades me to show a black two suiter rather than bidding spades originally, despite holding six of them.
Both Simon and our French Mixed champions raise a second issue…
SIMON DE WIJS: 2♥. Playing in an unfamiliar partnership, I would bid 2♥ to show spades and a minor. However, I am a strong believer that it is better to show specific two-suiters. Playing with Bauke, 2♥ would show spades and diamonds, and we would bid 3♥ to show this hand with both black suits.
I agree with Simon on this, although I prefer to show spades and clubs with 2♥. You then have the option of using a 3♣ overcall to show spades and diamonds, a la the old Ghestem.
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: 2♥. For us, this shows specifically spades and clubs. Usually, we hate to do this with six cards in the major. This hand is worthwhile as an exception because of the poor quality of the suit and, also, because we probably won't be able to show the sixth card in any case.
Zia makes a telling point that no one else mentioned.
ZIA MAHMOOD: 2♥. When I bid 4♠ next (if the opponents jump to 4♥), we will at least be in with a fighting chance. A 1♠ overcall does not offer anywhere near as many options.
So, let’s hear from the (small) alternative camp.
LARRY COHEN: 1♠. This is the wrong shape/strength for Michaels.
ALAN MOULD: 1♠. Another breather. It is generally frowned on to bid Michaels (surely the only alternative) with six cards in the major.
NIGEL KEARNEY: 1♠. I don't like Michaels with 6-5. I will have a problem on the next round if they raise to 4♥, but that doesn't always happen.
DAVID BIRD: 1♠. I have an oft-expressed dislike for bidding Michaels with a six-card major. It can misfire in so many ways. Yes, North may bid 4♥ and we then miss a great club fit. However, if you bid 2♥ and partner does hold five clubs, he will place you with diamonds as the second suit anyway, so he will not bid 5♣ over North’s 4♥.
MIGRY zur CAMPANILE: 1♠. If I had a way to show specifically spades and clubs, I might do that. Otherwise 1♠ and, hopefully, I will have time to describe my hand.
I won’t show you the other half of this deal from Argentina, as it may show up in a future set (as originally planned).
|
ACTION |
MARKS |
PANEL |
Competitors' |
|
3♣ |
10 |
10 |
32 |
|
Dbl |
9 |
6 |
5 |
|
3♥ |
8 |
7 |
34 |
|
4♥ |
4 |
0 |
21 |
|
Pass |
2 |
0 |
4 |
|
2NT |
0 |
0 |
2 |
|
3♦ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
3♠ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Competition Entrant Average Score: 7.29
We finish this set with an every-day situation that splits the panel three ways. With 16-of-23 panelists making a game try of some sort, I relegated the competitive 3♥ into third place, but almost everyone scores fairly well. Let’s start with the pessimists…
DAVID BIRD: 3♥. Only eight trumps, yes, but I don't mind going one down for -100 against their 110 in 2♠.
SALLY BROCK: 3♥. I want to bid on because I have a singleton spade, but I don’t really think I am worth a game try.
NIGEL KEARNEY: 3♥. It's close to a game try, but I think this is not quite enough.
PIERRE SCHMIDT & JOANNA ZOCHOWSKA: 3♥. Not enough for a game try, especially non-vulnerable.
MIGUEL VILLAS-BOAS: 3♥. I don’t have enough for a game-try double, so I just compete to 3♥.
LARRY COHEN: 3♥. Not quite enough to make a game try, but too short in spades to pass and possibly defend. If partner has nothing in spades and maybe Axxx in hearts and a card, he isn't barred from bidding game.
Zia offers an insight into how the mind of a true genius works.
ZIA MAHMOOD: 3♥. This is a bit feeble, I admit. If playing in Heat 1, I might jump to 4♥, intending to double their 4♠ save. That is the sexy way!
The largest faction on the panel advanced with a length-suit game try.
MARTY BERGEN: 3♣. It is definitely possible that we belong in game.
WENFEI WANG: 3♣. Natural and invitational.
JILL MEYERS: 3♣. This is very close. I can see hands where we make 4♥, so it is worth a try.
MIGRY zur CAMPANILE: 3♣. The basic question is, “Is this hand worth an invite?” If the opponents had been silent, definitely not. Their bidding and supporting spades is encouraging, as I hope partner doesn’t have values in spades. So, yes, I’ll give it a try. It would have been helpful to know if partner had a mixed three-card raise available.
No. Just standard methods in this straightforward auction.
SAMEH MAKRAM EBEID: 3♣. Primarily to help partner decide whether to bid game. It will also help him to make a decision if there is more bidding from the opponents.
CATHY BALDYSZ: 3♣.
JESSICA LARSSON: 3♣. Way too optimistic, as usual.
JOEY SILVER: 3♣. Making a tepid game try on the way to competing to 3♥.
HANOI RONDON: 3♣. This is the middle of the road: I don't want to commit to game or just to compete. For me this is an invitational hand.
BARNET SHENKIN: 3♣. An unlikely game for us, but possible, and maybe even a good save against 4♠ if partner has long clubs.
We finish with the bulls in the china shop…
ANDREW ROBSON: Dbl. Extra values, take-out. I don't want to pick a minor here, as it will distort my hand - it's more of a three-suiter than a two-suiter. As ever, double is the most economical call. The Italians have been doubling in these situations for years and they judge these competitive auctions pretty well as a result.
Andrew’s observation emphasizes Giorgio’s comment on this hand.
GIORGIO DUBOIN: Dbl. What else?
P-O SUNDELIN: Dbl.
SIMON DE WIJS: Dbl. Takeout. I have extra values, but no other bid available. I do play penalty doubles after finding a fit, but only from the three-level upwards.
Sophia highlights a key reason for preferring Double if you are going to make a game try.
SOPHIA BALDYSZ: Dbl. Showing some extra values. A number of contracts could be right. Once in a great while he will have ♠K-J-10-x. If that is the case, we automatically agree to play the next tournament together - too lucky a partner to let go.
I’ll leave the last word to a man who remembers the hand.
ALAN MOULD: Dbl. I know this hand - it comes from the WBG semi-final in Argentina between Poland and Switzerland. After identical starts, one West bid 3♥ and that made +140, whilst the other West chose double, and that made +800. So, it boils down to what double means in your partnership. John insists that after you have found an eight-card major suit fit, all doubles are penalties, so that would not be an option on this hand. As I am not sitting opposite John today, I’ll double and claim my +800 please 😊
Sophia was not far out with her prediction, as partner held K10xx/A9x/J10x/Jxx. After a spade overcall and a raise to the two-level, will partner not will hold four spades fairly often? If his trumps are good enough for him to choose to defend, your singleton ♠Q might prove to be a very useful asset. Only 9/10 here, but a definite moral victory for the doublers.
We have a tie at the top of the expert list this month, with Brazilian stalwart Miguel Villas-Boas (leading the panel for the second consecutive month) and French Mixed champions Pierre Schmidt & Joanna Zochowska both scoring 76/80. Andrew Robson (75/80), Marty Bergen and Sally Brock (both with 74/80) complete the maiden podium for 2025.
With a relatively low winning score and less than half of the panel scoring in the 70s, it looks like this was a difficult set. So, kudos to all competition entrants who return a good score to open their account in this year’s annual competition.
As always, thanks to all members of the panel for their contribution. Everyone at RealBridge and all of our readers appreciate the time you take each month to both entertain and educate all of us. We hope to see you all again next month. Thanks. Marc.
|
Pierre SCHMIDT & Joanna ZOCHOWSKA |
2NT |
5♣ |
Dbl |
Pass |
5♥ |
Dbl |
2♥ |
3♥ |
76 |
|
Miguel VILLAS-BOAS |
2♦ |
5♣ |
Dbl |
Pass |
5♥ |
Dbl |
2♥ |
3♥ |
76 |
|
Andrew ROBSON |
2♥ |
4♠ |
Dbl |
Pass |
4♣ |
Dbl |
2♥ |
Dbl |
75 |
|
Marty BERGEN |
2♥ |
4♠ |
Dbl |
Dbl |
5♥ |
4♣ |
2♥ |
3♣ |
74 |
|
Sally BROCK |
2♥ |
4♠ |
Dbl |
Pass |
5♥ |
4♣ |
2♥ |
3♥ |
74 |
|
Simon DE WIJS |
2♥ |
6♣ |
Dbl |
Pass |
4♣ |
Dbl |
2♥ |
Dbl |
73 |
|
Hanoi RONDON |
2♥ |
4♠ |
Dbl |
Dbl |
6♥ |
5♣ |
2♥ |
3♣ |
71 |
|
David BIRD |
2♥ |
5♣ |
Dbl |
Dbl |
5♥ |
4♣ |
1♠ |
3♥ |
70 |
|
Giorgio DUBOIN |
2♥ |
5♣ |
3♥ |
Pass |
5♥ |
Pass |
2♥ |
Dbl |
70 |
|
Alan MOULD |
3NT |
6♣ |
Dbl |
Pass |
5♥ |
Dbl |
2♥ |
Dbl |
70 |
|
Barnet SHENKIN |
1♥ |
6♣ |
Dbl |
Pass |
6♥ |
Dbl |
2♥ |
3♣ |
69 |
|
Wenfei WANG |
2NT |
6♣ |
Dbl |
Pass |
4NT |
Dbl |
2♥ |
3♣ |
69 |
|
Migry zur CAMPANILE |
2♥ |
6♣ |
Dbl |
Dbl |
4♣ |
Dbl |
1♠ |
3♣ |
68 |
|
Jill MEYERS |
2NT |
6♣ |
Dbl |
5♠ |
4♦ |
Dbl |
2♥ |
3♣ |
68 |
|
Nigel KEARNEY |
2♦ |
5♣ |
Dbl |
Dbl |
4♦ |
4♣ |
1♠ |
3♥ |
66 |
|
Joey SILVER |
1♥ |
5♣ |
4♥ |
Pass |
4♣ |
5♣ |
2♥ |
3♣ |
66 |
|
Cathy BALDYSZ |
1NT |
5♣ |
Pass |
5♠ |
4♣ |
Dbl |
2♥ |
3♣ |
65 |
|
Jessica LARSSON |
2NT |
6♣ |
Dbl |
5♠ |
4NT |
Dbl |
2♥ |
3♣ |
65 |
|
Sophia BALDYSZ |
3NT |
6♣ |
Dbl |
Dbl |
4♦ |
4♣ |
2♥ |
Dbl |
64 |
|
Zia MAHMOOD |
2NT |
5♦ |
3♠ |
Pass |
5♥ |
4♣ |
2♥ |
3♥ |
63 |
|
P-O SUNDELIN |
1♥ |
5♣ |
3♥ |
Pass |
6♥ |
Pass |
1♠ |
Dbl |
59 |
|
Sameh Makram EBEID |
Dbl |
5♣ |
2NT |
5♠ |
4♥ |
Dbl |
2♥ |
3♣ |
58 |
|
Larry COHEN |
Dbl |
5♦ |
Dbl |
5♠ |
6♥ |
Dbl |
1♠ |
3♥ |
57 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOP SCORE |
2♥ |
5♣ |
Dbl |
Pass |
5♥ |
Dbl |
2♥ |
3♣ |
|
|
HAND 1: |
2♥ 10 |
2♦/2NT 8 |
1♥ 6 |
Dbl/3NT 5 |
1NT 4 |
3♥ 3 |
|
HAND 2: |
5♣ 10 |
4♠ 8 |
6♣ 6 |
5♦ 5 |
|
|
|
HAND 3: |
Dbl 10 |
Pass 7 |
3♥ 6 |
2NT/3♠/4♥ 5 |
|
|
|
HAND 4: |
Pass 10 |
Dbl 8 |
5♠ 6 |
|
|
|
|
HAND 5: |
5♥ 10 |
4♣/4♦ 8 |
6♥ 7 |
4NT 5 |
4♥ 3 |
|
|
HAND 6: |
Dbl 10 |
4♣/5♣ 8 |
Pass 5 |
|
|
|
|
HAND 7: |
2♥ 10 |
1♠ 6 |
2♠ 2 |
|
|
|
|
HAND 8: |
3♣ 10 |
Dbl 9 |
3♥ 8 |
4♥ 4 |
Pass 2 |
|
|
HAND 1: |
6.28 |
|
HAND 2: |
6.22 |
|
HAND 3: |
6.85 |
|
HAND 4: |
7.28 |
|
HAND 5: |
4.48 |
|
HAND 6: |
8.14 |
|
HAND 7: |
7.38 |
|
HAND 8: |
7.29 |
