Monday, November 28, 2011

Seattle NABC

While many people are just getting into the swing of things at the fall NABC I am on my way back home after 3+ days there. Richard Popper and I started with a good session in the Nail LM Pairs and ended with a great session in the consolation (regional A/X pairs). Unfortunately the two middle sessions were pretty terrible, on both our parts as well as luck. Additionally I scratched with my dad in 2 side games. Strangely, in this my 16th NABC, it is the first one in which I played in no midnight games. Drinking with Mikey and Alli won out one night and kibitzing/wandering around aimlessly won out the other night.

My favorite part of the tournament was certainly our round against Curtis Cheek and Lynn Deas in the LM pairs. We collected 47 out of 50 matchpoints against them. Here is first deal against them (board 9 Friday afternoon):


I opened 1D and wound up in 3NT after Curtis on my left overcalled 1S and was raised. He led away from the SK at trick 1, which gives me trick #8. Trick 9 would have to come from either clubs or hearts. At first it seems that I would have to rely on clubs splitting 3-2 since there isn't adequate time to set up a heart. However, I ran diamonds immediately to see if there would be any interesting discards. Sure enough, Curtis ditched a heart and a spade.

This allowed me to be able to set up a heart trick and lose only 2 spades abs 2 hearts, assuming spades were originally 5-4 as had been indicated. A club pitch from his initial holding of QJxx would have allowed me to set up a 3rd trick easily but had he pitched both of his hearts, I probably would have gone down as relying on a good club split would be the only reasonable option.
Popper and I ran into a couple of situations where we were not on the same page on auctions that cost us dearly. 1NT-2C-X-3C; 3D-P-3H sounds like Smolen to me, and the continuation P-3NT-P-4S sounds like responder is 6-4. Of course, I could have just bid 4S over 3D as that cannot be misinterpreted - it could just wrong side the contract. 1S-P-2S-X; 4S-4NT-P-5D; P. Is this a forcing pass situation? I think so but I suppose there is a good argument for it being not forcing since 4S could be based on a more preemptive hand with playing strength but not much defense.


  1. What happened on board 10?

  2. They reached a not so great 3H contract on a 4-3 fit and took as strange line of play to go down 4.