More often than not, aggression pays in big pairs events like this one. Numerous successful examples have found their way to numerous previous Bulletins. So it feels like sort of a relief to watch players who seem to be concentrating on sensible bridge before anything else and who are doing well nevertheless.

Board 15. Dealer South. NS Game ª A 10 8 7 6 4 © 5 ¨ 9 § J 10 8 6 4 ª Q 9 ª J 5 © K Q 10 4 © A J 3 2 ¨ K J 3 ¨ Q 7 6 4 2 § 9 7 3 2 § A 5 ª K 3 2 © 9 8 7 6 ¨ A 10 8 5 § K Q

This time, the overcall on a four-card suit was O.K., but 2¨ turned out to be less effective, as it enabled South to show her spade support at a low level. That was all North needed. When the spades broke 2-2 he was home easily, but -650 netted only 109 m.p. for EW and 305 for NS.

On the next board the same East player, Dorthe Schaltz, bid and played very well to escape with an over-average score in an under-average contract:

Board 16. Dealer West. EW Game ª 10 © Q 8 5 4 2 ¨ 3 § A J 8 6 5 3 ª 9 7 6 4 ª K J 5 3 © J 9 6 © A 10 3 ¨ A 10 7 6 4 ¨ K J 5 § Q § K 9 7 ª A Q 8 2 © K 7 ¨ Q 9 8 2 § 10 4 2

How many of the East players gathered here would have the courage to prefer 3NT played by themselves to settling for at least a 4-4 fit played by West? Four Spades would have gone down one at least, but in 3NT, the prospects did not look very much better, even less so when South led a low club. East won the third round and played off the ¨KJ. When South covered the jack with the queen, she won the ace only to receive more bad news. North then covered dummy's ©J with the queen, so South was on lead again with his ©K when declarer won her ©A and continued the ©10. Being out of clubs, she had to continue a diamond, but dummy could win this and throw South in again with a diamond to open up the spades. Scoring one spade trick while the ©9 was still there as an entry to the last diamond, declarer had managed to escape with eight tricks for a just over average score of 237 m.p.

Husband Peter also gave us a nice example of how well he can play, even in the lowliest of contracts. How often have you seen a final contract of 1§ in a pairs event? This time, declarer really had to work for it, but he showed how to use all the inferences available.

Board 23. Dealer South. Game All ª A J © J 7 4 2 ¨ K Q 5 § A 9 3 2 ª K Q 10 ª 8 5 3 2 © A K 6 © 9 8 5 ¨ A 10 6 ¨ 8 7 2 § K 7 5 4 § Q 10 6 ª 9 7 6 4 © Q 10 3 ¨ J 9 4 3 § J 8

North found the best lead of a heart, won by declarer's ace. Next came the ©K and another, on which North did not dare to play low. On lead again, he thus had to find a switch. The K duly came out next, followed by the queen when West played low. After winning the ¨A, West led his last diamond to South how now had to open up the spades. In with the ªA, what could North do? A low trump probably works very well, but how could North possibly see this? When North returned the more logical ªJ instead, the situation cleared up for declarer when he led his §Q and North won the ace. North had not overcalled 1NT, South had not protected, so the clubs might well be 3-3 or, more likely, 4-2 with the jack doubleton. Had North led his last heart, South would have been able to ruff with her §J, whereafter North would have scored his §9 as the setting trick on a spade overruff. However, North led another club on which declarer, according to his plans, went up with the king. When the jack duly dropped, all was well. One Club just made for a score of +70 but 331-83 m.p. to EW.

Results	Contents
Mixed Pairs 3rd Qualification Session 1st Final/Consolation Session	Qualifying Session II High Rollers Qualifying Session III Thoughtful Bridge Dutch Treat