| 48th European Bridge Team Championships | Page 3 | Bulletin 12 - Thursday 24 August 2006 |
| |
||
|
Women Teams - France v Netherlands (Round13) by Jos Jacobs When this match started on Tuesday afternoon, England were leading the field with 227 VP, ahead of Germany on 219, Netherlands on 218 and France on 216 VP. So far, these four teams, all among the pre-championships favourites, had been doing, more or less, what was expected from them. Strangely enough this was to be the Netherlands’ last match against any of the current top six teams. When I looked this up, I also noticed that France-Poland, Denmark-England and England-Germany are the only other direct matches involving the current top six left at this point. The significance of the remaining programme for each team should not be stressed too much as we all know that most bridge matches are lost rather than won. This match proved no exception, though on board 2 one would rather think the opposite:
Open Room
2♦ showed majors and the contract easily made after declarer went up with the trump ace when West led the ♥J, probably also having the standard safety play in mind. France +620. Closed Room
When Sylvie Willard made a psychic response of 1♥, pretty safe with her diamond fit, North had a difficult problem. She could overcall 1♠ for the time being but when East continued the French good work with a jump rebid of 3♦ it had suddenly become virtually impossible for North to show her second suit. When she sold out to 3♦ Cronier went one down for +50 to the Netherlands but 11 IMPs to France. The hand thus was a perfect example of a winning action in bridge. Allez les Bleues! A few boards later, we saw the difference in style between the two teams: the Standard francais as opposed to the forcing NT.
Open Room
Especially when non-vulnerable, South’s 1NT is considered normal in France and so is North’s pass of it. Had spades been 4-2 we would have had a different story to tell you, too. As it was Gaviard, with a little help from her friends, collected no less than 11 tricks. France +210. Closed Room
The advantage of the forcing NT is that opener has to bid again – this obvious principle usually being extended to the 1NT response on passed hands. So with her non-minimum hand North bid again, and so did South with her invitational hand. In fact, had she held the ♠10 instead of the ♠9 game would have been an excellent proposition. Anyway, once dummy’s ♦J held the first trick after West led the ♦5, Michielsen had few further problems when the spades broke 3-3. Netherlands +430 and a gain of 6 IMPs. Two boards later the Dutch missed a slam when the opponents did not interfere:
Closed Room
Would you rebid 3NT over North’s 1♥? Would you go on as North over partner’s 3NT rebid? Three overtricks, Netherlands +490. Open Room
1 3 or fewer spades After the preemptive raise Gaviard, knowing that partner had already denied four spades, had an easy cuebid accepted by d’Ovidio as she cuebid her spade king. Simple and efficient. France +920 and 10 more IMPs to lead by 12 now. On the next board, the Dutch North was the only one who showed any sense of enterprise:
Open Room
Over the 1♠ overcall, there is much to be said for a limit raise to 3♥ on this nice twosuiter: had Gaviard jumped the French would certainly have bid game. Looking at so many very low cards one can understand why d’Ovidio gave up, in spite of the known 5-4 fit. France +170. Closed Room
Maybe it was Willard’s negative double that induced Meike Wortel to compete once more, showing her diamond asset in the process. Whatever the reason it was an inspired decision. Wortel also played the hand well. The ♠A was led followed by a club. She won the ace, cashed the ♥A and played off three rounds of diamonds, throwing her club loser. This works with diamonds 3-3 and also when someone had to ruff the third diamond with the ♥K – a better chance than the♥K being right, even more so in view of the auction. Netherlands +420 and 6 IMPs back to trail by 6. Little happened until the last 5 boards arrived. On board 16 the French NS overbid to game and thus lost 4 IMPs to lead 22-20. Then we saw this:
Open Room
A review of the results showed that about one third of the declarers did not make 10 tricks in hearts. Maybe they played like d’Ovidio did: duck the lead, win the ♠A at trick 2, cross to ♦A and take the losing club finesse. East wins and continues a spade for you to ruff. Next, you unblock the ♣A, ruff a diamond in dummy and lead a trump. West wins and defeats the contract with yet another spade as East’s ♥J gets promoted. Netherlands +50. Closed Room
At the other table, Wortel followed a more succesful line after Michielsen showed a fit with 2NT. She won the spade lead and crossed to dummy’s ♦A to lead a trump. West won and continued spades but Wortel was in full control. She ruffed the 3rd spade, drew the outstanding trumps and simply played ♣A and another. The diamond ruff would present the necessary entry for the established clubs. Netherlands +420 and 10 Imps to regain the lead.
Open Room
For once, the lead-directing overcall by North backfired when South competed a bit too often. As you can see, declarer was four down, vulnerable, before she got the lead for the first time. Netherlands +400. Closed Room
This was a normal, sound result on the hand though you might even make game, if necessary to do so, on the actual very declarer-friendly layout. France +140 and 6 more IMPs to Netherlands who now led by 14. And the next board:
Open Room
Give West one more club together with (or instead of one of) her spades and there would have been a squeeze but as it was, the contract could not be made. Netherlands +50. Closed Room
The junior pair showed less ambition and thus came nowhere near reaching the slam. Well done, Netherlands +450 and another 11 IMPs. When France recouped 6 IMPs on a partscore/game decision on the last board the Dutch had won an important victory by 47-28 or 19-11 VP. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |
| Page 3 |
