| 18th European Youth Team Championships | Page 5 | Bulletin 8 - Monday, 15 July 2002 |
|
|
||
|
Juniors Round 15 - Denmark v Italy Italy benched their top pair whereas Denmark fielded their strongest line-up. Part of the Belgium v France match also is covered at the end of this article.
Because 3© over 2¨ would have been non-forcing, Italy's Ruggiero Guariglia invented a 3§ bid to make his subsequent 3© bid forcing. A misunderstanding occurred when Guariglia thought that 3ª and 5¨ were cue-bids setting hearts as trumps, and Stefano Uccello thought they were natural. Thus Italy landed in the wrong slam; minus 50, 11 IMPs to Denmark when the Closed Room bidding was:
On Board 3, Schaltz and Marquardsen defended 2ª better than the Italians, holding it to eight tricks to gain two overtrick IMPs. At the twenty Junior tables, seven reached 6© (France making it
on a tragic ©9 lead), four made 6¨, five played 4©, two were in
5¨ and two failed in 7¨. The successful 6¨ bidders were Anna and
Adele Gogoman for Austria, Matthias Schueller - Andreas Sauter for
Germany, Harold Bergson - David McCrossan for Scotland and Gareth
Birdsall - Ollie Burgess for England.
2¨ showed either 7-11 HCP with 3+ spades or a game-forcing diamond hand. Guariglia's decision to accept the game try looks marginal, but the 4ª contract looked OK until the double came. Stefano Uccello won ©10 lead, and, following the approved approach of setting up the side suit before playing trumps, played a club to the jack and ace. ©K was ruffed with ª8, and Denmark's Boje Henriksen smartly discarded a club instead of over-ruffing. Declarer erred by cashing §K - it seems that he was about to run the clubs as if they were replacement trumps, playing North for five trumps, but ….. He changed tack in midstream, and now played as if he hoped that
spades were 4-1, running ª9, which was correctly covered by the
jack. ªK won but declarer was in the wrong hand and regretted wasting
his club entry. He played a spade to the ace and tried to slip §9
through. It was ruffed by North, who played ¨A and ¨7 to the king.
Declarer was in dire straits and seems to have led a heart from
dummy, discarding as South won ©9 and ©Q at Tricks 10 and 11. The
outcome was 1100 to Denmark, a suitable reward for Boje's good defence.
In the Closed Room, Denmark's Martin Schaltz did very well not to be pushed into bidding 4ª, but had he had a double available as some sort of game try, he would have struck gold with partner passing the double. Schaltz won the heart lead, cashed ªA to discover the bad news (which turned out to be good news for his side), played a club to the jack and ace, and ruffed ©K with ª8. We don't know whether North over-ruffed, as we have no more records of the play. Declarer made eight tricks, 1100 minus 100 was 14 Imps to Denmark, leading 28-0. Of the declarers in spades, one made six tricks, one made seven
tricks, nine made eight tricks and five made nine tricks. That excludes
the North who went for 800 in 1ª doubled.
Normally we write 'All Pass' at the end of auction, but this is exceptional. Surely East knows that if you pull the Pass Card out by mistake, you call the Director who will let you change it to your intended call? Or did he deliberately take a unilateral misguided view to pass in a forcing situation, thinking that his 11 count was not worth much? 3NT is the best contract, and West's delicate start to the bidding
had kept that contract in contention. Kjaer Gjaelbaek made eight
tricks; plus 90.
Stelio led ¨K, and continued with ¨A. ª420 was 11 IMPs to Denmark. 39-0 after 5 boards. Was Denmark really playing against the tearaway leaders? I suppose anyone can have a bad day. Against 4©, only two Junior players found the expert switch to a club at trick two. According to the hand records, they were Dana Tal from Israel and David Vozabal of Czech Republic. By examining dummy and counting declarer's tricks as five hearts, three spades and §A, it logically follows that a club switch is necessary before declarer can pitch a club on ¨Q. It might concede an overtrick if declarer has §Q, but the aim to defeat the contract. Two other pairs had inexact auctions to 3NT, but only Karlo Brguljan
and Vedran Zoric of Croatia showed exactly how to bid to 3NT. Karlo
opened 1©, South doubled, Vedran responded 2NT (a limit heart raise
or better), Karlo showed weakness with 3©, and Vedran offered 3NT
as a choice of contracts, which Karlo passed. The 4-3-3-3 shapes
with four card support for partner are often suitable for no trumps
because the 3-3-3 side suits mean that as well as no ruffing values
in dummy, there are also no long suits in dummy to set up once trumps
have been drawn.
Easy. 4© is believed to be cold. Andreas Marquardsen won ¨A, ruffed three clubs in dummy, and sat back with his great heart pips. The overcall with ©J98764 makes the play simpler than with, say ©J65432, because with the latter Andreas would have had to work harder for his contract, attacking spades early; 620 to Denmark. Only two other Junior pairs reached 4©: Jessica Larsson - Goran Linerudt for Sweden and Thomas Bessis - Julien Gaviard for France.
The light two-over-one response encouraged Guariglia to stay out of the auction, costing Italy badly. The case for passing is that the suit is bad, the lead-directing factor is bad, you have length in their suits and you appear to be sandwiched between two strongish hands so they can readily double you for penalties, vulnerable. The case for bidding is that 6-4-2-1 shapes play very well if you can find a fit, the clubs look well placed, partner might have short clubs with no club overruff possibility if a heart fit exists, you may have a vulnerable game on, 2© might pre-empt them from finding their diamond fit and the texture (pips) in both long suits is good. I used to be a passer but seeing the Juniors in action has convinced me that bidding 2© is best. We oldies might as well learn from you. Boje Henriksen did well to duck the heart lead to the queen, destroying the defence's communications. Stefano Uccello, not expecting his partner to have such long hearts, deduced that declarer was holding up the ace with the intention of ruffing some hearts in dummy from a holding such as ©Axxx, so he switched to his singleton trump, to the eight, jack and queen. §9 lost to the ten, and ©A was removed belatedly. Henriksen played a spade to the king and picked the diamonds neatly by leading one through the ace. A heart for a ruff and discard here seems to create difficulties, but East upon winning ¨A cashed §A and Boje claimed his hard-earned contract. It seems that repeated heart leads are the best defence, giving away worthless ruff-and-discards but attacking declarer's trump control. 620 plus 110 was 12 IMPs to Denmark; 51- 0 after 7 boards. I wonder if Boje's first name is pronounced the same way as Norway's Boye Brogeland? (Boye B has become an Open superstar recently, winning the Silver Medal at the World Open Bridge Championships, after being one of the top players in the Juniors from 1995 to 1999). On Board 8, Denmark ceased being in magic touch. Holding ªQ87 ©A1065
¨ AK2 §AQ7 opposite ªJ10 ©J42 ¨QJ6543 § 86, they bid 1©- 2©- 3NT-
4¨ - 4© - Pass. A diamond was led, so West got a diamond ruff for
three down, minus 150. The 4© bid looks wrong, playing four card
majors, as cards like ªJ10 could be useful to boost the spade stopper
in 3NT, but will be relatively worthless in 4©. Perhaps the 4© bidder
thought that with a balanced 18-19 HCP, partner would make the disciplined
rebid of 2NT, so 3NT would show something like a 6-3-2-2 shape.
At the other table Italy scored 130 in 4¨, after Schaltz opened
2ª as dealer. What would you want next if you were 44 IMPs up against the leaders
after 8 boards? A long string of boring hands? On the next 10 boards
Italy outscored Denmark 5 IMPs to 4.
2¨ showed both majors, and 4NT was alerted. North took only a few seconds to decide to bid 6¨. Given that they were finishing about 45 minutes early, he might have considered 5© which keeps 7§ or 7¨ in the picture. The auction might also have been easier if South had have called 5§, allowing North to cue-bid 5© more comfortably. Still, bidding grand slams after the opponents have bounced the auction is always perilous. The Italian auction was even briefer:
A flat board. Italy picked up 7 IMPs on Board 20, so Denmark won the match by 36 IMPs which was on the cusp, 37 IMPs would have made it a 23-7 win instead of the actual 22-8 win to Denmark. I don't think they minded. Overall, Italy still led the European Junior Teams Championship by 20 VPs from France and Denmark. Eighteen of the twenty Junior pairs bid slam, with only Hungary
and France stopping in 5§. Five reached the grand slam. The Tournament Director Jan Boets from Belgium offered the Dutch npc Schelte Wijma a bet. Belgium had won their first match of the day 24-6 from the well-performed Croatian team, and seemed to be in good form. Jan offered to bet that Belgium would score at least 18 VPs in their second match on Saturday. Schelte accepted the bet as Belgium overall were well down the field with an average of only 14 VPs per match. When Belgium scored 18 VPs for their bye, Schelte paid up. The Dutch can't seem to win a trick here in Torquay. If they storm home to win a medal, I will have egg on my face. Karl Van Overloop from Belgium provides the following report from Belgium's third match on Saturday: After Belgium's good 24-6 win against Croatia in the morning and
the 18 VP win over the absent Romanians in the afternoon, expectations
for the clash against the main contenders France were lifted seriously.
However Board 19 was needed to save the Belgians from suffering
a huge defeat In the Open Room the Van Parijs brothers managed to
reach 7§ when Wim was woken up by Thomas Bessis' 6© sacrifice.
North's pass of 1ª was forcing, as effectively was South's 2§. 2ª was artificial. After the gentle start, the bidding took off until the stratosphere was reached. Given the auction, it is hard to blame the French for not taking the 7© sacrifice. In the Closed Room the conventional 2NT opening showing both minors
and 6-11 HCP exploded right into Guillaume Grenthe's face. Although
his partner had shown an opening bid with both majors, Piet Van
Parijs managed to take the good decision to pass over North's 5§
bid.
Karl continues the report: Personally I had the chance to watch the English pair David Gold
- Alex Hydes bid very nicely to the grand slam:
Pia Nurmi's 2¨ showed the majors or the black suits (spades plus another). Maria Ahonen was therefore at a disadvantage relative to those East/West pairs who used Michaels Cue-bid, as she thought her partner had the black suits, making heart pre-emption impossible. This gave North/South enough bidding space for David Gold to realise that a grand slam was possible when Alex Hydes made the huge leap to 5§. Gold's 5© cue-bid gave North/South the opportunity to work out the major suit holdings perfectly, resulting in a good grand slam for 11 IMPs to England when Finland played in 6§ at the other table. Like the French, the Finland girls suffered from not being able to pre-empt North/South, and with the heart fit undisclosed the 7© sacrifice was impossible for the Finnish girls to find. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
| Page 5 |
