Norway had been waiting for the rematch with Denmark since
Round 1 of the round robin, and now here it was with the gold medal at stake.
They had more than made up the 13 IMP carryover by halfway through the set, but
then Denmark came on strong to finish with a 45-19 IMPs lead.
These were some of the more interesting hands.
Board 1. Dealer North. Love All |
|
|
3 |
|
|
K 10 3 |
|
J 8 5 3 2 |
|
K Q 9 8 |
|
9 8 7 5 4 |
|
|
A K Q 6 |
|
A 9 6 |
|
8 5 4 |
|
K 6 |
|
A 7 4 |
|
J 10 7 |
|
A 6 3 |
|
|
J 10 2 |
|
|
Q J 7 2 |
|
Q 10 9 |
|
5 4 2 |
Closed Room
West |
|
North |
|
East |
|
South |
Kristensen |
|
Mathisen |
|
Nøhr |
|
Kristoffersen |
|
|
|
Pass |
|
1 |
|
Pass |
1 |
|
Pass |
|
3 |
|
Pass |
4 |
|
All Pass |
|
|
|
| |
Open Room
West |
|
North |
|
East |
|
South |
Brogeland |
|
Røn |
|
Saur |
|
Brøndum |
|
|
|
Pass |
|
1NT |
|
Pass |
2 |
|
Pass |
|
3(1) |
|
Pass |
3 |
|
Pass |
|
4 |
|
All Pass | 1 super accept with club
values |
The play in 4 had real potential interest. Double dummy, it's easy to see
the right line of eliminating the red suits, and forcing the opponents to play
clubs. However it's still possible for declarer to go wrong in clubs, and play
for split honours if the defenders work it right. Neither declarer was tested,
and no IMPs changed hands.
Board 2. Dealer East. N/S Game |
|
|
Q 10 9 5 2 |
|
|
A J 6 |
|
J |
|
K 6 4 2 |
|
A K J 4 3 |
|
|
8 7 |
|
K 9 5 2 |
|
Q 7 |
|
9 7 |
|
A Q 10 8 6 4 |
|
10 8 |
|
A Q 7 |
|
|
6 |
|
|
10 8 4 3 |
|
K 5 3 2 |
|
J 9 5 3 |
Closed Room
West |
|
North |
|
East |
|
South |
Kristensen |
|
Mathisen |
|
Nøhr |
|
Kristoffersen |
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
Pass |
1 |
|
Pass |
|
2 |
|
Pass |
2 |
|
Pass |
|
2NT |
|
All Pass | |
Open Room
West |
|
North |
|
East |
|
South |
Brogeland |
|
Røn |
|
Saur |
|
Brøndum |
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
Pass |
1 |
|
Pass |
|
2 |
|
Pass |
2 |
|
Pass |
|
2NT |
|
All Pass | |
Both pairs missed an easy game here on identical auctions, and without
knowing more about their system agreements, it's hard to determine why. Should
2NT be played as forcing? Should West bid game even if it isn't? Perhaps one
pays a price for those super-light opening bids, and it's hard to convince
partner you have real values when the Great Shuffler deals them to you.
Whichever, neither the Canadians nor the Russians in the other
match had trouble getting to game, so it may be back to the drawing board for
the Nordic pairs.
Board 4. Dealer West. Game All |
|
|
4 3 |
|
|
2 |
|
K Q 8 5 |
|
K Q J 10 3 2 |
|
A K 10 8 5 |
|
|
Q J 6 |
|
8 7 6 |
|
K Q 9 5 4 3 |
|
J 2 |
|
10 7 4 |
|
A 9 8 |
|
7 |
|
|
9 7 2 |
|
|
A J 10 |
|
A 9 6 3 |
|
6 5 4 |
Closed Room
West |
|
North |
|
East |
|
South |
Kristensen |
|
Mathisen |
|
Nøhr |
|
Kristoffersen |
|
1 |
|
2 |
|
2 |
|
3 |
4 |
|
5 |
|
5 |
|
Dble |
All Pass |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Open Room
West |
|
North |
|
East |
|
South |
Brogeland |
|
Røn |
|
Saur |
|
Brøndum |
|
1 |
|
3 |
|
Dble |
|
Pass |
3 |
|
Pass |
|
4 |
|
All Pass | |
In the Open Room, Røn bid a meaty 3, and Brøndum
presumably thought too much of his defence or too little of his potential
offence to take the save over 4. While a heart lead would have been more
painless for declarer, the K also did the job, and the Danes scored up
+200.
In the Closed Room, however, Nøhr was paying no attention to adage
that 'the five-level belongs to the opponents'. Perhaps he feared that 5 was
making, given his general lack of defence, but in any event, 5 was very wrong
on the hand, and cost his side 7 IMPs.
Board 5. Dealer North. N/S Game |
|
|
2 |
|
|
9 4 3 |
|
J 10 5 |
|
A K Q 9 8 5 |
|
K 8 4 3 |
|
|
Q J 9 7 5 |
|
A Q J 10 6 5 |
|
K 8 7 |
|
2 |
|
Q 8 3 |
|
J 4 |
|
10 2 |
|
|
A 10 6 |
|
|
2 |
|
A K 9 7 6 4 |
|
7 6 3 |
Closed Room
West |
|
North |
|
East |
|
South |
Kristensen |
|
Mathisen |
|
Nøhr |
|
Kristoffersen |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Pass |
|
1 |
1 |
|
2 |
|
2 |
|
3 |
4 |
|
Pass |
|
Pass |
|
4 |
Pass |
|
5 |
|
All Pass |
|
| |
Open Room
West |
|
North |
|
East |
|
South |
Brogeland |
|
Røn |
|
Saur |
|
Brøndum |
|
|
|
1 |
|
2 |
|
3 |
4 |
|
5 |
|
All Pass |
|
| |
None of the four pairs playing North-South reached the laydown club slam on
their cards, and in fact the Canadians didn't even get to game. Saur's
2 bid on what was for him a good suit created havoc, and left the Danish
pair little room to investigate anything. Brøndum must have
thought about going on, but took the safe way out and stayed in game. Mathisen
and Kristoffersen had a better chance; perhaps North should have trusted
his partner to have the heart control for his 4 cue-bid. Of course, since 6
(not 6, because of the spade ruffs) is a cheap save, perhaps they all did well
to score +620.
Board 7. Dealer South. Game All |
|
|
6 3 |
|
|
J 9 3 |
|
Q 6 5 |
|
Q J 10 8 5 |
|
K J 10 9 8 |
|
|
Q 2 |
|
A Q 7 |
|
K 10 6 4 2 |
|
A 7 |
|
J 9 3 |
|
9 7 6 |
|
K 3 2 |
|
|
A 7 5 4 |
|
|
8 5 |
|
K 10 8 4 2 |
|
A 4 |
Closed Room
West |
|
North |
|
East |
|
South |
Kristensen |
|
Mathisen |
|
Nøhr |
|
Kristoffersen |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
1 |
|
All Pass |
|
|
|
| |
Open Room
West |
|
North |
|
East |
|
South |
Brogeland |
|
Røn |
|
Saur |
|
Brøndum |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
1 |
|
Pass |
|
1NT |
|
Pass |
2NT |
|
Pass |
|
3 |
|
Pass |
4 |
|
All Pass |
|
|
|
| |
This was the board on which Norway made up the carryover, and took
the lead, albeit briefly. We can sympathize with Nøhr's problem
in responding to the 1 overcall, but we do not believe that playing a a green
card should have been a serious option. In North America, where the 'heavy'
overcall style means that West could have much more than he actually has and
still bid 1, making some of kind of response as East would be mandatory. The
Norwegians holding the same cards rolled into 4 from the East side,
which takes a diamond lead to beat; when Brøndum tracked the A,
11 IMPs moved across the table with it.
Board 8. Dealer West. Love All |
|
|
8 7 6 4 2 |
|
|
10 9 8 |
|
10 9 8 2 |
|
J |
|
K 10 3 |
|
|
A Q 9 5 |
|
Q 6 3 |
|
K 7 5 2 |
|
Q J 3 |
|
A K 7 5 4 |
|
K 9 7 6 |
|
|
|
|
J |
|
|
A J 4 |
|
6 |
|
A Q 10 8 5 4 3 2 |
Closed Room
West |
|
North |
|
East |
|
South |
Kristensen |
|
Mathisen |
|
Nøhr |
|
Kristoffersen |
|
1NT |
|
Pass |
|
2 |
|
4 |
Dble |
|
All Pass |
|
|
|
| |
Open Room
West |
|
North |
|
East |
|
South |
Brogeland |
|
Røn |
|
Saur |
|
Brøndum |
|
Pass |
|
Pass |
|
1 |
|
2 |
Pass |
|
Pass |
|
Dble |
|
4 |
All Pass |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
In this match, this board was noteworthy largely for Brogeland's
lack of activity. This must surely be the strongest hand he has passed all week,
and it is hard to understand why he didn't take action over 2, and even harder
to fathom how 4 got away undoubled.
We must offer some small amount of sympathy, too, on this hand for David
Levy, who sat South in the bronze medal match, and heard Sozonov
open 1 (Polish Club) on his right. He passed for now (this we don't condone,
but it will have its supporters for tactical reasons), heard West bid 1NT, and
East 3NT. Trusting to partner to have a club, and no doubt dreaming of Kx in
the dummy, he doubled for a club lead. Khokhlov redoubled, and chalked
up the Russians' second 1000 number of the set.
Board 10. Dealer East. Game All |
|
|
A K 8 4 3 |
|
|
9 4 2 |
|
8 |
|
A 8 7 3 |
|
10 9 |
|
|
5 |
|
K J 7 6 3 |
|
A 10 8 |
|
A K Q 9 6 |
|
J 10 5 3 2 |
|
Q |
|
K 10 4 2 |
|
|
Q J 7 6 2 |
|
|
Q 5 |
|
7 4 |
|
J 9 6 5 |
Closed Room
West |
|
North |
|
East |
|
South |
Kristensen |
|
Mathisen |
|
Nøhr |
|
Kristoffersen |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pass |
1 |
|
1 |
|
2 |
|
2 |
4 |
|
Pass |
|
Pass |
|
4 |
Pass |
|
Pass |
|
5 |
|
Pass |
Pass |
|
Dble |
|
All Pass |
|
| |
Open Room
West |
|
North |
|
East |
|
South |
Brogeland |
|
Røn |
|
Saur |
|
Brøndum |
|
|
|
|
|
Pass |
|
Pass |
1 |
|
1 |
|
Dble |
|
3 |
4 |
|
Pass |
|
4 |
|
All Pass | |
Denmark picked up 5 IMPs here on what looked like a partnership
miscommunication between Mathisen and Kristoffersen. We don't
believe South's pass of 5 here should be played as forcing, but North must have
thought so, for he surely could not have been doubling based on his own
defensive values. The play could have been interesting had the defenders cashed
their black aces and tapped the dummy with a spade, trying to deceive declarer
into thinking that they were protecting the queen in North's hand. It is
doubtful whether even this would have been a success, though, for Kristensen
quickly ruffed a spade to dummy himself, and ran the 10, for an easy 11 tricks.
Board 11. Dealer South. Love All |
|
|
A K 10 8 6 5 2 |
|
|
8 6 5 |
|
9 5 4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Q 7 |
|
K 10 9 2 |
|
Q J 4 3 |
|
3 2 |
|
Q 8 7 6 |
|
K Q J 8 6 5 2 |
|
9 7 4 |
|
|
J 9 4 3 |
|
|
A 7 |
|
A K J 10 |
|
A 10 3 |
Closed Room
West |
|
North |
|
East |
|
South |
Kristensen |
|
Mathisen |
|
Nøhr |
|
Kristoffersen |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1NT |
4 |
|
4 |
|
All Pass |
|
| |
Open Room
West |
|
North |
|
East |
|
South |
Brogeland |
|
Røn |
|
Saur |
|
Brøndum |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
2 |
|
2 |
|
Pass |
|
3 |
4 |
|
5 |
|
Pass |
|
5NT |
Pass |
|
7 |
|
All Pass |
|
| |
We are considering writing a Bols tip about not bidding grand slams
unless you can count at least 14 tricks, because too often the opponents are
only in game. There has been plenty of material in this week's hands, and this
was another example.
After a strong no-trump, the 4 overcall endplays North into 4, and South
has a real problem. If he bids again, however good his hand, and it is wrong, he
will do serious damage to partnership confidence. On the other hand, he has a
monster on this auction. Kristoffersen passed, as most of us would, with
great reluctance. After long thought, Petrounine chose to bid on against
Canada, and was rewarded for his courage when 6 turned out to be an excellent
contract.
Røn and Brøndum were given more room, and it
almost proved their undoing when they drove to 7 which depends on the diamond
finesse. With 26 IMPs now hanging on the position of the Q, they were giving
13-1 odds on a 50% shot; not winning bridge in the long run, but successful on
this occasion.
|