luis Posted September 8, 2003 Report Share Posted September 8, 2003 September 9th at 11:00 pm (EST)Onomatopeia vrs Argentina HaspelBrought to you by Bridge Base. We are dead even in the Las Vegas odds. So this may be a close match!As a member of the Haspel team good luck to the Onomatopeia guys and congratulations for reaching the finals! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hrothgar Posted September 8, 2003 Report Share Posted September 8, 2003 There are a LOT of 11:00 AMs in the worldwhich one are you talking about? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inquiry Posted September 8, 2003 Report Share Posted September 8, 2003 Hi Luis, I hope the match is at 11 AM EST as your post suggest. Be alert, however, that the www.bridgebase.pl page list the game as 11 PM EST !!!! Also greg hinze of the Onomatopoeie team has told me the game time is 11 PM EST. This is what is posted on the Polish BBO website. ----------------BBO teams final.. ...between Onomatopoeie (ghinze, nagy, dank, susieq, junyi_zhu, markb, tsanders, clarsen) and Argentina Haspel (carlosp, tenuki, malambo, pastelman, aaronh, lrargerich, AnaA, Val22) will be probably played on Tue, Sept 9th, 11pm EST (5am CET, 4am GMT). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luis Posted September 8, 2003 Author Report Share Posted September 8, 2003 Yes, 11pm EST, my fault.So 11pm EST is the official date for the match :-)Sorry for the confusion! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keylime Posted September 8, 2003 Report Share Posted September 8, 2003 Any odds on the preceding match folks? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inquiry Posted September 8, 2003 Report Share Posted September 8, 2003 Predicting a winner in the finals... Earlier I said Onomatopoeia was playing the best bridge among the teams in the contest, leading me to predict them to defeat the awesome MISFIT team in an earlier round. In the last two rounds, however, the mantle of best play has been picked up by the HASPEL team. To predict a winner, it would be helpful to know who was going to play for which teams. Both team have 8 players so the weaker pairs may play all the match for one team, while only the stronger pairs may play for the other. Thus, it will be very difficult to predict a winner at this time. However, I will go out on a limb. Both teams are populated with very, very good players. Both sides have an achor pair or player that seems to play all the time. But both sides have an occassional pair who have turned in outstanding results when they have played. For Haspel, it is AnaA and lrargerich who turned in three great halfs out of the last 2 matches (the other half, AnaA didn't play). For Onomatopoeia it has been susieq and dank, who have brought back an outstanding card everytime I have watched them play. The other players on both teams have also played very well, of course, or neither team would be in the finals. Having said that, my prediction is: The team that plays the pair listed above the most will win. If the two pairs listed play the same number of hands (either all, half, or none), then the prediction is that Onomatopoeia will win. I look foward to the match. Ben Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keylime Posted September 8, 2003 Report Share Posted September 8, 2003 I for some gut reason like the Ono team. They've not committed errors in IMP tactics, the bidding has been sound, the defense crisp (with one exception). Furthermore the intensity and focus has been there. They are eager to win and more eager not to disappoint their teammates. That's the kind of team I like watching and being part of. I am certain the competition will be high quality. I think the better team will emerge the winners, baring some abnormal problem. Whatever team we send up against the Poles, they will be up against it not just in the bridge arena, but carrying the banner of BBO will be a burden. Being familar with method and tendencies only go so far -- a little luck and skillful plays the key to victory. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inquiry Posted September 10, 2003 Report Share Posted September 10, 2003 The finals of the Onomatopoeia vs ARGENTINA HASPEL was an exciting affair, if a little to late in the evening for me. :-( The results of the match with Onomatopoeia as NS at table 1 and Haspel NS at table two is given in the following table (imps shown are for the winning side, Haspel): Bd NS-Haspel NS-Onoma Imps1 4HE+2 -480 3NW-3 150 -122 2SEx-5 1100 6NS= 1440 -83 3NE-2 200 3NW-2 200 04 4HE= -620 4HW= -620 05 4HE= -420 2HE+3 -200 -66 4HE+1 -650 4HE+1 -650 07 3DN= 110 3SW+1 -170 78 3NS+1 430 3CE-1 50 99 3SWx-2 300 3NEx-2 300 010 5HN= 650 6HN-1 -100 1311 3NW+1 -630 3NW= -600 -112 2SW+1 -140 3NE= -600 1013 1NE= -90 2DE+2 -130 114 2HS= 110 2SN+1 140 -115 3NE= -600 3NE+1 -630 116 3DN= 110 2SW= -110 617 4DEx= -510 2SW= -110 -918 2HW= -110 2HE= -110 019 2HE+2 -170 4HE+1 -650 1020 3NW= -600 3NE+1 -630 121 4SW+1 -450 4SE+1 -450 022 4HE-1 100 4HE= -620 1223 2SW= -110 3NN= 600 -1224 6CW= -920 6CW= -920 0 Thinks got off to a shaky start for team haspel, as they had trouble dealing with the defense to big club that the ono team used. Ana started the auction with a moscito 1C for Haspel and junyi_zhu overcalled 1S holding S-T H-86 D-Q972 C-KJ8743. This was alerted as showing EITHER the red suits or clubs. After luis passed with a fair hand (S-QJ3 H-Q742 D-T64 C-QT2) to show a negative response, ghinze made a tactical raise (pass correct) to 2H on 4-3-2-4 hand. If his partner has clubs, they will find that fit at the three level. Indeed this is what happened after Ana doubled 2H, the NS pair retreated to 3C, which if doubled, would have been down only one. Luis bid 3NT, which turns out to have been a mistake, as 12 tricks were there for the taking in hearts (5S, 4H, 2C ruff, 1D). But the haspel team seemed not to have an effective method for getting into hearts after it was bid at the two level by the opposition. 3NT would have been +1 with a lucky guess in clubs to lose one imp, but when luis guessed wrong, he went down three and Ono was up a quick 12 imps. SusieQ and dank had an unmolested natural auction to 4H’s, not even sniffing out the possibility of slam. Board 2 provided some fireworks. What would you do first seat not vul versus vul holding S-ATxxx H-xxx D-xx C-xxx. For Ono, dank decided this looks very much like a 2S opening bid and so he bid that. The bidding went 2S-P-P-X-all pass, and just as quickly he was down five for –1100. Fortunately for Ono, 6NT was not only cold NS, it was bid by his teammates at the other table, so that was another quick 8 imps for Ono. 22 Boards to play, but after two board, Ono had taken a 20 imp lead (they also jumped out to quick leads in their previous two matches only to have their opponents fight back to make it a contest). Board 3 an 4 were pushes, a 3NT that can’t make and a 4H that can be defeated bid at both tables. Then came board 5. where your partner opens 1NT, and you hold S-T6 H-AJxxx D-J963 C-92. SusieQ bid 2D to transfer to 2H’s but here partner bid 2NT, a 3 card support super accept. Susie retransferred to hearts with a 3D bid, and then with a combined 23 hcp maximum and only an 8 card fit, and with being not vul, she pushed to game anyway. She was right, as the cards lay, the contract was unbreakable despite a 4-1 trump split. At the other table, the bidding started in a similar manner (going through 1C-1D before the 1NT bid), and this hand signed off in 2H with a transfer. That was 6 more imps to Ono, who had a 26-0 lead after just five boards. Board 6 was a boring 4H making 5 at both tables, and then haspel drew its first blood of the match by making part-scores at both tables. This is also the hand that caused the commotion discussed in another thread about a possible appeal of the match results. After 2 passes, both norths opened 1C, and when it got to south he had to decide what to bid with the following hand. S-xx H-xxxx D-AKxxxx C-xx. For the ono team, south bid his four card major, and West, who passed initially, overcalled 1S on AJT9x of spades and the club Ace. This allowed EW a chance to find their 9 card spade fit, and they competed to 3S which can not be defeated, in fact 4S makes. At the other table, the haspel player decided not to mention the anemic heart suit, and instead jumped to 3Diamonds. There was no alert and the bidding went all pass. The west hand, in addition to the spade suit, held four hearts, 3 clubs and a stiff diamond. Applying what Larry Cohen called OBAR bids (opponents bid and raise), she might very well have made a takeout double of 3D which could have lead, perhaps, not only to a spade contract but a spade game. So instead of losing 7 imps, ono might have picked up 10 imps. A potential 17 imp swing. AS USUAL Neither side had a filled out convention card, adding to the problem. And in addition, some words were exchanged over the failure to alert that were, unnecessary. The facts were clear, and the players should have just played on with Ono reserving the right to appeal. This left Ono ahead 26-7. Board number 8 was unlucky for Ono team, who have a fine agreement in place. The bidding went 1NT-(P)-2C-(x)-2D. The 2D bid a) denied a four card major, and ;) denied a club stopper. The stayman bidder held four diamonds and the club KT. Fearing a club lead through the club King would doom 3NT, he passed 2D, making 3. At the other table, the opening bid was 1D and NS got to 3NT for the side of the table that had bid stayman. 3NT turns out to be unbreakable, unlucky for Ono whose methods generally work very well on this kind of auction. Another pick up for haspel, who after the first third now only trailed by 10 imps 26-16. Board 9 was excting. What would you bid after 1NT (weak)-P-P-? holding S-AKQJxx H-JT8x D-Kx C-x if playing some two suit showing bid. At the table, this hand treated his hand as a major two suiter, and when his partner’s 2H’s was doubled for penalty, he reevaluted his decision and ran to 2S. But his partner, who was 1-2-5-5 pulled 2Sx, and he had to play 3Sx, down two. At the other table, the contract was 3NTx which won the same 7 tricks, for a push. The discussion among the kibitzers was that with such an unbalanced two suiter (really good spades, really weak hearts), that maybe treating this as a one suiter would have worked out better. Board 10 the NS Ono team bid a slam off the top two tricks in clubs, despite clubs being bid by the opponents. This was not successful. The Haspel team forced the Ono team to 5Hearts, and let them play there when they had a cheaper save in 6Diamonds, but they could not be sure that 6Hs was not making or that 5H was not going down. Still this was a 13 imp pick up for Haspel, who now gained the lead they for the first time, 29-26, and they would never relinquish that lead. Board 11 was an overtrick in a 3NT, then came a vul game swing to haspel when the Ono team played poor defense. The haspel player opened 2S on a 6-2-3-2 hand with SPADE-KJxxxx and two minor suit jacks and the diamond 9. His partner used Ougust and after hearing bad hand, bad suit response, bid 3NT holding S-xx H-AJ8 D-AT54 C-AK62. The defense started with a club away from the CLUB-QTxxx, giving them a club trick on the go. The defense then gave declearer two heart tricks. That was one trick too many, as he now scrambled to 2H, 3C, 3D, and 1S. At the other table, a safer 2S contract was played, making the expected overtrick. That was 10 more imps to Haspel, who now lead 39-27. After one imp swings on boards 13, 14, 15, board 16 produced some excitement, were haspel once again made spade and diamond partials at the two tables. This is LOTT hand, were Haspel took the push to 3D on a nine card diamond fit, and Ono stayed out of 3S over this on an 8 card fit. 2S was cold for haspel at table one, and 3D takes a heart lead from S-Kxx H-JT94 D-AJx C-xxx to beat it one. That was 6 more imps to Haspel who began had a great second set, winning by 29 imps, on Ono mistakes. The score stood at 47-28. The last stanza began with a surpising swing for Ono, when Haspel with a 19 imp lead doubled on a part-score hand. The double was ok, in a sense, as the contract (4D) should be down one. But the defense slipped and allowed it to make. That was 9 imps for Ono, who cut the lead to a very manageable one of only 10 imps with 7 boards to play, 47-37. But after a flat hand, there was a vulnerable game swing in the favor of Haspel. After an initial pass, both WEST player faced a partner who opened in third seat 1H with a fair fitting hand: S-AQx H-QJxx D-53 C-JT86. For Ono, SusieQ bid a very reasonable 2C (drury or reverse drury), and her partner not all that happy with this opening rebid 2H. Being vul, Susie might try for game, but after all, third seat partner may be very weak perhaps for this 2H rebid so she passed. At the other table, obviously drury was not an option, and WEST jumped to 2NT showing 8+HCP (remember passed hand), and 4+ hearts. His partner did not hesitate, and placed the contract in 4Hs, which as the cards were sitting, could not be broken. That was 10 more imps to haspel, who now stretched the lead to 20 imps, 57-37. After two virtually flat boards, there was yet another vul game swing for Haspel, where they made a vulnerable 4H at one table and defeated the same contract at the other. Four hearts really had no play, but the Ono defender failed to cash the trump ace (pulling dummy’s last trump) which allowed the contract to make. The haspel defender in the same situation made no such error. That was ten more imps to haspel, to take a unbeatable 70-37 imp lead with two boards to play. On board 23, the Ono team bid a 3NT contract that could be defeated, but wasn’t while Haspel stayed low in 2Ss. That was 12 imps to Ono to make the score closer, but it was too little, too late. The last board was tame push, and Haspel survived the grueling knockout matches to emerge the victor with a 70-49 victory. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luis Posted September 10, 2003 Author Report Share Posted September 10, 2003 As usual an awesome! report Ben, thanks! I played the 1st 8 boards where we lost some imps I think that in board 1 we faced the problems all big club systems have: the 1c opening itself. They did well to crowd the auction but I think I have no bid different than 3NT with my 4333 hand and Ana should pull that 3NT with that excellent hand and a club void (AKxxx, AKxx, KJxx,-) a 4c bid is my choice after 3nt. I bid 4h and that ends the auction with a push and some nice fireworks for the kibitzers. The rest of the hands were perfectly normal I think. And that 4h game non-vulnerable still looks against the odds to me but.... I can't argue with success... Bring the poles! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inquiry Posted September 11, 2003 Report Share Posted September 11, 2003 The team that survived the seven round BBO knockout, Argentina Haspel, lined up to play the national champions of Poland. The match was played in three 12 board segments. The first segment went completely for Haspel and the Polish champions dug themselves a huge hole from which they would have to try to fight back. Haspel got off to a quick start on board one. Dlr N Vul none Q7 K965 KQT842 7 KJT86 95282 743963 AAJ5 KQT986 A43 AQJT J75 432 The haspel south opened 1NT and when north bid 2C Stayman, East with good clubs doubled. South bid his four card major and when WEST raised clubs, EAST took the 5C saved against 4H NS. Four hearts was making for Haspel, but 5Cx was three down for +500. At the second table, the auction went a different way. South opened 1C in third seat and luis overcalled 1S. After a negagtive double by north, East bid 2C (no alert), and with this hand it is hard to tell if this showed clubs or good spade support. I think it shows sound spade raise. Over 4Hs, east bid 4S, which is an even better save than 5C. To add insult to injury, it is not clear if 4S was bid to make or as a sacrifice so it wasn’t even doubled, for only -50. That was 10 fast imps for Haspel.Dlr E Vul NS Q73 932 94 KT854 AJ95 KT842QJ4 8K832 7582 AQJ76 6 AKT765 AQJT6 3 The polish EAST opened 2S showing 5 spades, another 5 card suit and 6-10 hcp. Carlosp for Haspel had an answer. He bid 4D as leaping Michaels showing hearts and diamonds. 4H had no play and was one down, +100 for the polish team. But at the second table, EAST opened 1S (moscito) showing 10-14 hcp and 4+ spades. South overcalled 2S (showing hearts and unknown minor), and WEST bid 2NT as a spade fit with no shortage, EW stopped in 3S and made 5. That was a 3 imp pickup for Haspel, to go up 13-0. The polish team picks up their only imps of the first round by taking a slightly superior line in a 1NT contract played at both tables. Dlr S Vul EW KQ5 Q964 KT72 95 AT32 J764K72 J3A65 QJAT3 J8642 98 AT85 9843 KQ7 Both tables got a low diamond lead (a heart would be better). Both lead a low club from dummy to the TEN, which won. Then the declearers went separate ways. The polish declearer banged the spade ace and continued a spade, and built 2S, 2C, 2D, and a slow H to make. The haspel declearer tried a low club at trick 3 instead. The right play is to play on spades, he could cash the club ace first, but he needs to go after the second spade before NS get both red suits going. Dlr WVul Both AJ92 -- J874 AQJ98 Q73 --QJ8653 KT729 AKQT5K65 T743 KT8654 A94 632 2 The polish pair used an interesting auction, West opened 2D (multi showing a weak two in one of the majors). North with a nice hand, passed, presumably planning on doubling 2H when it comes back to him. But East choose to pass 2D. The haspel declearer choose to pass the hand out rather than reopen with a spade bid. Doing so, Haspel missed a vulnerable 4S game (have to ruff 4th diamond with KING, and hook the spade Q). But unfortunately for the polish champs, their NS pair got too high (5S) and went down. On their auction, north opened an ambiguous 1C (could be very strong). East overcalled 1D naturally enough, and south bid 1H!!! showing a spade suit. North, whose 1C could be very strong indeed jumped to 4S. South thought his hand was then too good to pass so he made a slam try and ended up losing the first 3 diamonds in five spades, 5 more imps for Haspel. Haspel was lucky on the board 4 that they didn’t lose a vulnerable game swing. Their luck held up on board 5 where they managed to win a non-vulnerable game swing and 11 imps. EW held the following hands… S-AKQxxx 74H-xxxx Q7D-J AT9xxC-98 AQxx The polish pair bid 4S, which after a small struggle was quickly down two. The excitement was the moscito auction. East opened 1D (less than 4H and 4S, maybe as few as 0 diamonds). West bid 1H, a “negative relay” where EAST will bid 1S if holding 3 spades. East bid 1NT, and west leaped to 3NT. When south lead a club, EW had very easy 9 tricks, and another 11 imps for haspel who now lead 29 to 5 after five boards. Board 6 the polish pair had a bidding problem. The polish EAST held S-AQxxx H-JT D-xx C-KTxx passed in first seat to hear this auction. P-(1D)-1H-(1S)-x-(2D)-P-(P)-? His double of 1S was card showing. Here he choose to double again. Not a good choice as it went all pass and 2Dx made two doubled overtricks. 3D undoubled was played at the other table. That was another 6 imps for haspel, to lead 35 to 5.Dlr S Vul both Q63 Bd 7 62 8632 AK82 K82 A59875 AT4A97 QJT4QJ6 T743 JT974 KQJ3 K5 95 On board 7, EAST has to decide what to do after 3 passes. The polish EAST, applied the rule of 15 and passed. But the Haspel EAST opened 1D allowing south to make a takeout double. 2S would make for NS, but when WEST bid 1NT, no one bid any more. 1NT can’t be broken, and that was 3 more imps to haspel. On board 8, WEST has an obvious 4H opening bid, which haspel let the EW pair play right there. But the Polish south holding AK865 Q76 K97 K3 doubled, and his partner pulled to 5C which was doubled and down three. That was yet another 11 imps for Haspel. The remaining 4 boards of the first segment was game contracts bid and made at both tables, including the 5C contract luis incorrectly thought he mis-defended. None of the these four games were breakable. So as a result, Haspel lead 49 to 5 at the one third mark. In the middle segment, the polish team was knew they were far, far behind. They had a chance to start off with a bang when they bid a close game that Haspel did not bid. But the game is not easy to make (the haspel declearer made 10 tricks). The hands were (4H by EAST):Dlr E Vul EW Q832 T864 A32 AT AJT974 KQ75 AKJ92Q5 98763 KJ94 65 3 KJT64 Q8752 South lead a dismond to the ace, and north-south continued two more rounds of diamonds ruffed in dummy. All it takes is a club to the King to make. The bad luck for the polish team continued when a low club was played to the JACK losing to the queen. Another 6 imps for Haspel. Nothing much happened to boards 5 and 6 of the second segment. Both ended up being game swings for the polish pair. On 5, the polish pair reached the superior 4S contract, but the 3NT contract that Haspel played could have made, but went down two. That was a game swing and 11 imps for the polish champs. The next hand, the polish WEST showed excellent judgement holding… S-QJxx H-x D-AKxxxx C-Qx. He opened 1D in third seat and heard a one heart overcall and a negative double followed by a redouble. Here he judged that 4S will have some play, so he jumped to 4S, which can’t be broken. The Haspel team didn’t bid the 19 hcp game. That was another 10 imps for the polish team who had begun to claw their way back into the match. 55-31 After a board 7 push, however, Haspel picks up three swings on the next four boards to effectively put the match away. The first of which was a double game swing with a remarkable counter-intuitive LOTT decisions at both tables. The hands were…Dlr W Vul none 6 AQJ7 A83 AQJ85 Q7 AKT943K32 98KT 9754976432 K J852 T654 QJ62 T For the polish NS, the bidding went (P)-1C-(1S)-P, (1NT)-X-2S-X-all pass. Assuming 1NT-x shows takeout double of Spades, South can imagine an 8 card fit in hearts for themselves, and 8 card fit in spades for EW (assume partner is 1-4-4-4). This double is too close for me, and it came back to punish the NS pair as the defense dropped a trick and let 2Sx make. The other remarkable LOTT decision occurred at the other table, where the Polish east evaluated his hand quite differently than the Haspel East. Here the polish player preempted, and not even to 2S but rather 3S over 1C. This was passed around to north who reopened with a double. South, now still expecting something like 1444 in north, should (according to the LOTT) pass 3Sx, decided to declarer a contract of 4Hs on a known maximum 8 card fit. 3Sx could be down two, but declarer made the most of his chances in 4 H’s, just making. So that was 13 imps to haspel. Needless to say the decision to bid 4H instead of pass generated a lot of discussion among the kibitizer, most of which I couldn’t understand as it was in polish. The next board was a double part-score swing for 6 imps to Poland, then this slam hand went haspel’s way.Dlr EVul both J8763 Q9 962 A85 2 AKQKT87 A65AJ5 KQ43QT732 K94 T954 J432 T87 J6 For the polish pair, the auction went quickly, perhaps too quickly to 3NT. East opened 1C and over 1H response, jumped to 2NT (18-23). South bid 3C (forcing) and East bid 3Hs. West retreated to 3NT. The haspel East opened 2NT and West forced to 6 clubs, which made, 12 more imps for haspel. 6 more imps for haspel when their west bid 3H;s over a 1C opening bid holding 7 QJT8532 A643 K, just making while the Polish West jumped to 4 hearts. So the second segment ended with haspel holding a 53 imp with 12 boards to go. The final segment was anticlimactic. Three mistakes by haspel gave three 10 impish swings to the polish team. One a polish 3S was doubled and it was cold. The second was haspel south let Poland play vul 4S when holding.. xx Kx AQJT9875 x where 5D was a very inexpensive save. And on board 10, the polish west made a great pscyh that talked the haspel team not only out of slam, but they missed their cold vul game contract. The polish player responded 1S to his partners 1D opening bid holding… J8 Q64 KJT875 Jx. That was 10 more imps for Polish pair, but that was the end of the run, and haspel represnted the BBO community nicely scoring a 33 imp win over 36 boards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erkson Posted September 11, 2003 Report Share Posted September 11, 2003 ... that was the end of the run, and haspel represnted the BBO community nicely scoring a 33 imp win over 36 boards. First thing in the morning for me : to read Ben's report.Many thanks, Ben, for the excellent reports. Erkson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the hog Posted September 11, 2003 Report Share Posted September 11, 2003 I wonder if anyone else feels a sense of letdown at the final. The top Poles did no play and one suspects that if Pszczola-Kwiecien had have played the result would well have been otherwise. I also suspect that if a stronger team than Argentina Haspell, such as Onomotopeia or the Misfits had made the final the result would have been even more definitive. Nevertheless it was an entertaining exercise and I hope one that gets repeated. Lets hope that the p.layoff, however, is between the best teams each group can field. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luis Posted September 11, 2003 Author Report Share Posted September 11, 2003 I wonder if anyone else feels a sense of letdown at the final. The top Poles did no play and one suspects that if Pszczola-Kwiecien had have played the result would well have been otherwise. I feel insulted. First of all Pszcola-Kwiecen did play. They rotated their three pairs. BBO teams played a huge KO tournament to meet this team so don't come and tell me know that if "foo had played" I assume they fielded their best formations. They even choose the date and time for the match which made things very difficult for 7 of the 8 Haspel players who live in Argentina. I also suspect that if a stronger team than Argentina Haspell, such as Onomotopeia or the Misfits had made the final the result would have been even more definitive. Insulted again, I'm afraid the teams you mention didn't won't the KO tournament that we did win so define "stronger". Maybe they are strong to you. Our team fielded one the best players in our Country (tenuki), one of our best youths (CarlosP) and the best female player of the country (AnaA), the rest of the team were good players that usually produce good results. We may not have enough money to play at international level but we are entitled to some respect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luis Posted September 11, 2003 Author Report Share Posted September 11, 2003 Ben report's was excellent as usual. In the third segment everything was already decided but a very interesting hand come up. This were the NS hands QAKQJAKQJ92xx Kxxxxx-AJ96542 NS vul, east opened 4s. With the south cards I passed, pd reopened with 4NT and I bid 5c, she pulled to 5d as expected and I "corrected" to 5h that was passed after a long hesitation. We have an agreement that when pd shows a two suiter a "direct" paradox bid in one of the suits show some support, corrections always show a missfit. That's why I can't bid a direct 5h. 5h went down 1 when diamonds were 6-0 with the ten not falling void :-). I wonder if there's a better way to handle this cards..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erkson Posted September 11, 2003 Report Share Posted September 11, 2003 Hi, The_Hog. I wonder if anyone else feels a sense of letdown at the final. The top Poles did no play and one suspects that if Pszczola-Kwiecien had have played the result would well have been otherwise. The Poles, as anyone else, wanted to win, but they wanted, also, to have their whole team playing, not only the strongest. One aspect of the challenge is to succeed in gathering 6 or 8 very good players. In all the teams which competed there are naturally stronger and weaker. It is part of the game. There are on BBO stronger players than some members of Argentina Haspel, but the strongest 8 as a team were Argentina Haspel.Nevertheless, I admit that Fred defeat is very unlucky and against the odds : I remember that they pretty well bid a 75% slam that went down, and with only 16 boards it is hard. I also suspect that if a stronger team than Argentina Haspell, such as Onomotopeia or the Misfits had made the final the result would have been even more definitive. No other team made the demonstration that it is better than Argentina Haspel. All the contrary.BTW, Anaa, you are impressive !Luis, you are not far from her :) (and you behave very gently). Nevertheless it was an entertaining exercise and I hope one that gets repeated. It was, and I do hope too. Lets hope that the p.layoff, however, is between the best teams each group can field. It has been. Erkson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erkson Posted September 11, 2003 Report Share Posted September 11, 2003 I feel insulted.... Don't feel insulted, Luis. The_Hog, probably, knows himself if he chose that nickname !I don't know much english, but if I remember ok from the high school, The_Hog = El Cerdo (o sea el verraco después de castrado) Please, The_Hog, don't feel insulted ! It is just a joke :).although I can't imagine that you didn't guess that what you wrote was most unpleasant and unfair. And Luis, again, many congratulations for the whole serie of good matches. Erkson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inquiry Posted September 11, 2003 Report Share Posted September 11, 2003 Ben report's was excellent as usual. In the third segment everything was already decided but a very interesting hand come up. This were the NS hands QAKQJAKQ952xx Kxxxxx-AJ96542 NS vul, east opened 4s. With the south cards I passed, pd reopened with 4NT and I bid 5c, she pulled to 5d as expected and I "corrected" to 5h that was passed after a long hesitation. We have an agreement that when pd shows a two suiter a "direct" paradox bid in one of the suits show some support, corrections always show a missfit. That's why I can't bid a direct 5h. 5h went down 1 when diamonds were 6-0 with the ten not falling void :-). I wonder if there's a better way to handle this cards..... It was late, so I glossed over the last segment last night. In addition, even though I kibitzed the session, for some reason the movie was saved on my computer. I think it was because when you finished play at your table, I didn't join the other table, and as a result it wasn't saved. :-( I did remember this hand, and I agree there is better ways to handle it during the bidding. I would have doubled, and if partner bid clubs, bid diamonds since this is not really a two suiter. A double works out well, as Ana will pass, and 4S loses 3H, 1D, 1S, 1C, for down three. The best way, however, was for you to make the game your vulnerable game in the 4-2 fit. You need hearts to be 4-3 to have a chance, and North has a known 7 card spade suit, and played a club. So he has at most 2Diamonds. Thus you need to play to ruff one diamond in dummy. If you had done so, you would have made your contract. The most plausable line is to win the club switch as you did, heart to ACE, low diamond ruff, spade king. South does best not to ruff (not that it matters), but you also discard a loser, ruff to your hand, cash you last two hearts and run your diamond winners. This comes to 11 tricks. Your line, of playing trumps then playing on diamonds seems doomed to fail, as North with 7 spades and the hoped for 3 (or 4) hearts plus the club he had shown up with, means diamonds can not split. I suppose he could have had a singleton diamond Ten, but that is not good odds of course. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luis Posted September 11, 2003 Author Report Share Posted September 11, 2003 Yup Ben I should have made that game I thought the club switch was a singleton. In fact after seeing dummy I decided that if the 4s opening was "normal" then our 5h contract was actually a very good contract, with 5d or a slam likely going down in the other room. We were up by 53 so I played to collect some imps by going down 1 in 5h :-) Maybe they were doubled in 5d or 6d in the other room.... If I play to ruff a diammond how do I get back to dummy? The only way to get back to dummy is ruffing a spade or a club and then even with hearts 4-3 someone will have more trumps than dummy and I lose control of the hand. My line wins if the dT drops doubleton in east (I thought he was 7-3-2-1) and goes down 1 otherwise.....They did bid 6d down 2 in the other room and I won 3 imps :-) You said a reopening double is better than 4nt, I agree but I think I'd have pulled the double to 5c with a 7 card suit... wouldn't you? I have a defensive trick in spades and one in clubs so 4s maybe down 1 or 2 but we can easily win 5c vulnerable with my 7 card suit and diamond void.... Pd will pulll 5c to 5d and there we go again....What do you think? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inquiry Posted September 11, 2003 Report Share Posted September 11, 2003 I am going to have to take strong disagreement with Ron's comment about the match between the polish champs and haspel. The argentinian team won the right to play in the match through fierce competition. There were arguably four (probably more) very good teams in the knockout matches. The BG3 System team (the top ranked when the tournment started, with six gold star members), who self destructed in an early match. The onomotopeia team, which played the best bridge in the first four rounds of all teams, and which beat the misfit team. The misfit team, which had some of the best players Australia could field, wasn't top seeded, probably in a large point due to the stronger team members seemed to have join after the seeding process. Then there was haspel. Haspel entered the event as the second seeded team. And they played their best bridge in the 5th round and the semi-finals. To be honest, ono lost the finals of the knockout against the haspel team more than the haspel team won it. That finals was not excellent bridge, but I don't mean those comments to detract for the haspel victory. After seven rounds of knockout play, and the lateness of the knockout match itself, probably at the end of long work day for all the participants, the conditions were not conducive for excellent bridge. And anyone looking at the hands from yesterday's match can not say that Haspel did not represent the BBO community with flair and excellent bridge. Congradulations again to Haspel, and to the BBO community. I think anyone who fought the good fight in the knockouts against haspel, or misfits, or BG3, or cauldron, or onomaptopeia now know that the quality of the bridge being played on the BBO is very high indeed. If you lost a match here by a few imps, or even around 10, to one of these teams, it should give you pause to think that you might be competitive at a very high level indeed. And if you got badly beaten? No dishonor in that, but rather an opportunity to evaluate your game, a challenge to improve, and opponents to look for again in the future to measure your improvement. Thanks to http://www.bridgebase.pl for running this event, and Alex (libido) for his hard work. Ben Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inquiry Posted September 11, 2003 Report Share Posted September 11, 2003 You said a reopening double is better than 4nt, I agree but I think I'd have pulled the double to 5c with a 7 card suit... wouldn't you? I have a defensive trick in spades and one in clubs so 4s maybe down 1 or 2 but we can easily win 5c vulnerable with my 7 card suit and diamond void.... Pd will pulll 5c to 5d and there we go again....What do you think? I would have doubled and pulled to 5D. In 5D you still pick up imps, because your opponents played 6D. Since clubs are 2-2, the ruff a spade (or club) back to your hand doesn't lose control. You just take your winners. 5D (1 ruff), 1C, 1S, 4H. The long heart with the long diamonds saves you. Of course, this requires 2-2 clubs, but if clubs are 3-1 I and diamonds 5-2, your line wins only if diamond Ten is doubleton. Your line may be safer, from the standpoint of going down fewer tricks, so the question is do you want to play out out to make or to go down fewest as possible. With a huge lead (which actually was shrinking), maybe down fewest is best bet. Surely the team behind huge might try for slam on this hand...as indeed they did. Ben Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luis Posted September 11, 2003 Author Report Share Posted September 11, 2003 The most plausable line is to win the club switch as you did, heart to ACE, low diamond ruff, spade king. South does best not to ruff (not that it matters), but you also discard a loser, ruff to your hand, cash you last two hearts and run your diamond winners. This comes to 11 tricks. Ben I have 4 hearts in dummy, I take the cA, heart to Ace and ruff a diamond, spade King wins the trick. Then I have to ruff "something" to enter dummy and someone will have more trumps than me :-) since after ruffing dummy has only 2 trumpies :-)) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inquiry Posted September 11, 2003 Report Share Posted September 11, 2003 Ok luis, one of us has a blind spot, so lets play out my line and see who it might be.... Q AKQJ AKQJ93 xx3 AJT9xxxT972 xxxT7xxxx xKT Qx Kxxx xx - AJ96542 The play begins spade to ACE, and club to ACE. Now, heart wins, low diamond ruff... to reach this position. - AKQ AKQJ9 x- JT9xxxT97 xxT7xxx -K Q Kxx - - J96542 Now you lead spade King. What is WEST to do? Ruff, you over ruff, pull trumps, and and endplay with a club after you find the bad news in diamonds. So he pitches, and you throw a club on spade king, now you ruff a club, to reach this position, having lost one trick. - AK AKQJ9 -- JT9xxT97 xxT7xx - - xx - - J9542 You cash the heart AK, then run four top diamonds. West last trump wins the last tricks. Ben Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luis Posted September 11, 2003 Author Report Share Posted September 11, 2003 :-)) I'm not saying your line doesn't win I'm saying that I can lost control since after ruffing back to dummy someone will have more trumps than me! It was too risky to play intentionally to lose control of the hand and rely in clubs 2-2 and hearts 4-3, can easily be a disaster on a different layout. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erkson Posted September 11, 2003 Report Share Posted September 11, 2003 If I play to ruff a diammond how do I get back to dummy? The only way to get back to dummy is ruffing a spade or a club and then even with hearts 4-3 someone will have more trumps than dummy and I lose control of the hand. ...but win 5H (says Deep Finesse). Here is a .lin file to test with Deep FinesseYou can copy this text and save it with a .lin extension, and then play with it and DF with the BBO viewer. pn|mlodybog,AnaA,schpon,lrargerich|st||md|3S3H279TD24567TCTK,SQHJQKAD39JQKAC27,S5789TJAH346D8C4Q,|rh||ah|Board 9|sv|e|mb|4S|mb|p|mb|p|mb|4N|mb|p|mb|5C|mb|p|mb|5D|mb|p|mb|5H|mb|p|mb|p|mb|p|pg||pc|S3|pc|SQ|pc|SA|pc|S2|pg||pc|C4|pc|CA|pc|CT|pc|C2|pg||pc|H8|pc|H2|pc|HJ|pc|H3|pg||pc|HQ|nt|Oops! Deep Finess told you to play 3 of Diamonds now !|pg||up|1|pf|y|nt|You can now experiment with how the play of this deal could go by selecting the cards that you want to play for all 4 players. Click on the cards that you want to play. The ^$6 button on the toolbar below can be used at any point to take back the last card that you played. | Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inquiry Posted September 11, 2003 Report Share Posted September 11, 2003 :-)) I'm not saying your line doesn't win I'm saying that I can lost control since after ruffing back to dummy someone will have more trumps than me! It was too risky to play intentionally to lose control of the hand and rely in clubs 2-2 and hearts 4-3, can easily be a disaster on a different layout. Ok. I misunderstood your previous response to be that you would lose control with no way back to your hand and you would go down on the diamond ruff line. My misunderstanding stems from the fact that I acknowledged in my response you replied to that playing this way to make requires clubs 2-2 and given the state of the match, you might be willing to take down one instead of risk down many http://forums.bridgebase.com/in...msg6293#msg6293 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.