Versace was outstanding

[Walddk]

[hv=d=w&v=n&w=sj75haqj4daj875c8&e=skh863dq106432ck75]266|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

Don't know about you, but as I saw it, Alfredo Versace of Italy was the outstanding individual player in Estoril. Lots of examples; here is one of the prettiest. He opened 1♦, LHO overcalled 1NT, and Lauria jumped to 4♦, all pass.

 

Lead: ♣A.

 

Trick 1: ♣A, 5, J, 8

Trick 2: ♣4, K, 2, ♥4

 

Next Versace ruffed a club and led a spade. Ace from North who exited with a low spade. Take over please.

 

Roland

[Guest Jlall]

I'll pitch a heart from dummy, playing north for the SQ. If this works, ruff spade, play ace and a diamond and it's curtains.

[Winstonm]

It appears that RHO holds the spade Q and the club J10 and a diamond void yet did not act over 4D - with Qxxxx, xxx, void J10xxx he might have found a call and with Qxxxxx, xx, void, J10xx he would have tried 4S. Most likely LHO is a tad offshape and preferred 1N to 1S because the spade suit wasn't so hot.

 

What would LHO bid holding these hands:

 

AQxx(x),

Kx,

Kx,

AQxx(x)

 

and

 

Axxx(x)

Kx

Kx

AQxx(x).

 

Seems with the first a spade try would be in order over 1D and with the rest NT is the most descriptive because of the weakish spade suit - in all cases it appears likely that LHO is 2/2 in the reds so I take the simple line and strip the hand and play ace and a low diamond and then play LHO for Kx of hearts. If LHO has

AQxx(x), Kxx, Kx, AQx(x) I pay off to the beefy overcall.

 

Winston

[Winstonm]

I'll pitch a heart from dummy, playing north for the SQ. If this works, ruff spade, play ace and a diamond and it's curtains.

 

If the Queen is with RHO you still have a diamond to lose for 1 down. And if LHO holds the Q he has AQxx(x), Kx(x), Kx, AQxx - kind of beefy for 1N overcall.

 

Winston

[Guest Jlall]

I'll pitch a heart from dummy, playing north for the SQ. If this works, ruff spade, play ace and a diamond and it's curtains.

 

If the Queen is with RHO you still have a diamond to lose for 1 down. And if LHO holds the Q he has AQxx(x), Kx(x), Kx, AQxx - kind of beefy for 1N overcall.

 

Winston

If RHO has the SQ and LHO has the HK, I cannot make the hand. If LHO has the SQ and RHO has the HK, I will always make the hand.

 

If RHO has the SQ and the HK and the CJ, LHO will have SA, DK, CAQ, not a 1N bid. I think an 18 point 1N is more likely than a 13 point 1N.

 

I cannot see any squeeze (they can break it up) when they get in by leading another spade. I can try a swindle of leading a diamond from my hand towards the board, but I don't think it will work.

[Walddk]

Excellent analysis, Justin. LHO was dealt

 

AQxx

Kx

Kx

AQxxx

 

Maybe the American defender should have defeated the contract after seeing dummy. He must cash ♠A at trick 2 before continuing clubs; then he will always come to 4 tricks. The endplay is no longer possible, because North can afford to give declarer a ruff and discard after the elimination, ♦A and another.

 

It didn't matter much though; 2 IMPs to be precice, because at the other table the Italian NS pair bid and made 4♠. So Italy gained 13 IMPs, but would still have won 11 if 4♦ had been 1 down.

 

Roland

[Guest Jlall]

so the true hero of the board was lauria for his 4D bid. I admit, I wouldn't have thought of it.

[Finch]

Or possibly the true hero is the Italian at the other table who didn't make a warped (and over strength) 1NT overcall.

[mike777]

Excellent analysis, Justin. LHO was dealt

 

AQxx

Kx

Kx

AQxxx

 

Maybe the American defender should have defeated the contract after seeing dummy. He must cash ♠A at trick 2 before continuing clubs; then he will always come to 4 tricks. The endplay is no longer possible, because North can afford to give declarer a ruff and discard after the elimination, ♦A and another.

 

It didn't matter much though; 2 IMPs to be precice, because at the other table the Italian NS pair bid and made 4♠. So Italy gained 13 IMPs, but would still have won 11 if 4♦ had been 1 down.

 

Roland

Did we not just discuss this hand as a Max 4 card major overcall in another post?

[Fluffy]

This hand comes every day :D

[nickf]

Don't know about you, but as I saw it, Alfredo Versace of Italy was the outstanding individual player in Estoril.

There's no doubt all three Italian pairs are class acts. I was always impressed with Lauria when I watched him play.

 

On a related note, however, the discussions I've had with friends (including some who played in Estoril) is that Fantoni-Nunes are not only no longer the third-string Italian pair, but possibly the best pair in the world.

 

nickf

sydney

[keylime]

I felt Versace and Lauria were due, especially when they had the "oops" that cost them a playoff in 2003. I'm very happy for them.

 

I would have no clue who the 3rd string pair of that team is; they ALL are incredible.

 

Change of pace: A concern I have as a partisan American. Hamman-Soloway's performance in the last leg was rather...."scary". Furthermore, Soloway's performance in 2003 coming down the stretch was under a lot of scrutiny. I refuse to think that they've lost a step but....is this the first sign of trouble?

[Rebound]

I must admit my surprise to seeing Hamman/Soloway miss 2 games in one set in the final vs. Italy, but I'm uncertain whether this was due to the system. That having been said, what the heck do I know about bridge at that level? (For your edification, the answer has the initials S.F.A. lol)

[mike777]

I must admit my surprise to seeing Hamman/Soloway miss 2 games in one set in the final vs. Italy, but I'm uncertain whether this was due to the system. That having been said, what the heck do I know about bridge at that level? (For your edification, the answer has the initials S.F.A. lol)

Commentary was:

1) One was a very aggressive Michaels bid by Italy that I think Soloway passed on, Most if not all the world class commentary agreed with his pass.

2) Hand 2 seemed to be either a system fix or a very conservative view taken by partner. Commentary felt more a system fix as they all said in a more natural system partner could make a courtesy raise to 3clubs but more difficult in a strong club system.

3) Hand 3 was Hamman's lead of 7 from QJ7 and Soloway's not reading it and switching at trick 2.

 

Everyone played great. I think the entire 8 segments were easily the best Vugraph bridge I have every seen played by anyone at any level. USA! and USA2 was very high quality also. Consider over the last few years we have seen a lot of tired and exhausted bridge played in many final rounds.

[han]

Change of pace: A concern I have as a partisan American. Hamman-Soloway's performance in the last leg was rather...."scary". Furthermore, Soloway's performance in 2003 coming down the stretch was under a lot of scrutiny. I refuse to think that they've lost a step but....is this the first sign of trouble?

Are we talking about one of the pairs of the team that just lost a very close final of the Bermuda Bowl to the incredibly strong Italian team? Do you think that there was any other team that was likely to do better against the Italians?

 

Throughout the whole tournament it was clear that Italy was the team to beat. USA1 came very close. I'm willing to bet you that they will be back in 4 years, playing for the gold.

[paulg]

Don't know about you, but as I saw it, Alfredo Versace of Italy was the outstanding individual player in Estoril.

There's no doubt all three Italian pairs are class acts. I was always impressed with Lauria when I watched him play.

 

On a related note, however, the discussions I've had with friends (including some who played in Estoril) is that Fantoni-Nunes are not only no longer the third-string Italian pair, but possibly the best pair in the world.

 

nickf

sydney

I watched the Italians quite a bit on BBO and Fantoni-Nunes certainly appeared the standout pair. Versace-Lauria played their normal solid game (bid everything, try to make it) but I thought Bocchi-Duboin had a quiet tournament given the exceptionally high standards that they all play to.

 

All three Italian pairs seemed to have a poor time in the slam zone, especially prior to the final, which kept their opponents interested for longer than normal. But their cardplay was kept to a very high level and I thought that, in particular, Fantoni-Nunes defence was at an unbelievably high standard.

 

Fantoni-Nunes also played the last four sets in the final, perhaps indication of how the Italian captain saw it too.

 

Meckwell were also outstanding but did not cause the "chaos" they have done in the past. Perhaps the Italians were better prepared, or more likely, better rested. I didn't get to see enough of the other USA1 pairs to comment on them.

 

I'm already bored waiting for the next time they will meet! Great to have the BBO coverage to see it all.

 

Paul

[Gerben42]

Fantoni-Nunes also played the last four sets in the final, perhaps indication of how the Italian captain saw it too.

 

Weren't we all left with the same feeling after the Olympiad? AND they are world MP champions...

 

Agree that their defence is deadly, that combined that their system causes trouble for even the best pairs who might land in a suboptimal contract which they then beat. And why did we call Fulvio "Deep Fantoni"? Well... because he made so many tough contracts as declarer.

 

The 6♣ at the very end was tough, even they can't make them all, but they come close.

[Rebound]

I feel I should mention in spite of my previous post, that it was a previlege to watch the BB and I can safely say I have never seen such a high standard of play in my life - but then, I have little connection with world-class competition. I didn't get to see nearly as much as I would have liked, but I found the USA1 vs. USA2 match to be an absolute treat to watch.

 

Thanks to everyone involved, competitors, operators, commentators, and fans - I sincerely hope it was the first of many I will get to see.

[EricK]

Are we talking about one of the pairs of the team that just lost a very close final of the Bermuda Bowl to the incredibly strong Italian team? Do you think that there was any other team that was likely to do better against the Italians?

There may not be another team there who could have come close but that doesn't mean that replacing, for example, one pair from the USA1 team with one pair from the USA2 team wouldn't have made an even stronger USA1 team.

 

Is it really the case that each pair in USA1 is stronger than each pair in USA2?

 

Eric

[Gerben42]

Is it really the case that each pair in USA1 is stronger than each pair in USA2?

 

I doubt that is true. As I said in another thread I think Greco - Hampson are better than at least two of the three US1 pairs <_<

[Wiste1]

Is it really the case that each pair in USA1 is stronger than each pair in USA2?

 

I doubt that is true. As I said in another thread I think Greco - Hampson are better than at least two of the three US1 pairs <_<

Agree Gerben

[Dwingo]

Is it really the case that each pair in USA1 is stronger than each pair in USA2?

 

I doubt that is true. As I said in another thread I think Greco - Hampson are better than at least two of the three US1 pairs :P

Without judging the capabilities of each of these pairs of USA1 and USA2, lets for argument sake, replace the best pair of USA2 with the worst pair of USA1 ( assuming the 1st pair of USA2 is better than the 3rd pair of USA1)

 

Do you think, USA1 would have had a better chance of taking on the Italians?

 

I doubt it. Even though on paper, it may seem that the 3 best pairs should form an outfit to represnt USA1, there is more to it than just fielding the 3 best pairs.

 

A lot of intangibles like team dynamics come in to play. This aspect is very much underplayed.

 

Godwin

[EricK]

Is it really the case that each pair in USA1 is stronger than each pair in USA2?

 

I doubt that is true. As I said in another thread I think Greco - Hampson are better than at least two of the three US1 pairs :)

Without judging the capabilities of each of these pairs of USA1 and USA2, lets for argument sake, replace the best pair of USA2 with the worst pair of USA1 ( assuming the 1st pair of USA2 is better than the 3rd pair of USA1)

 

Do you think, USA1 would have had a better chance of taking on the Italians?

 

I doubt it. Even though on paper, it may seem that the 3 best pairs should form an outfit to represnt USA1, there is more to it than just fielding the 3 best pairs.

 

A lot of intangibles like team dynamics come in to play. This aspect is very much underplayed.

 

Godwin

To an extent. I expect the Italians field their best three pairs however. Maybe they are just lucky that they gel together as a team as well.

 

With the USA teams, a bigger intangible is that of money.

 

Eric

[Walddk]

Money is certainly an issue for the Italians too. The major difference between USA and Italy is that as far as Italy is concerned, the sponsor does not insist on being in the team as a player.

 

Before anyone gets a fit, let me emphasize that sponsors are great for the game, and that some sponsors are fine bridge players too.

 

Major sponsors in Italy are Madame Lavazza and Francesco Angelini. In USA (among many others) Nick Nickell, Russ Ekeblad, Richard Schwartz, Rita Shugart, Rose Meltzer, Jimmy Cayne, Roy Welland and Lou Ann O'Rourke.

 

Roland

[Chamaco]

Didn't anyone have the impression that if Nickell-Freeman had played a couple of rounds more to substitute and give a break to rest to Hamman-Soloway, the match would have been closer ?

 

I think Nickell-Freeman performed quite reliably.