Bridge: Up for a challenge?

NN wins the regular challenge with +13.00, by 7.25. I beat AA by 9.

Those two to be reissued tomorrow night. Declare-only and NN challenge reissued now.

I win the declare-only with 60.18%, by 5.47%. I lose to NN by 11. Both reissued

I win the regular challenge with +20.25, by 2.25. Reissued, but with District 4 Grand National Teams qualifying coming up, I won’t be issuing any individual challenges before Sunday or maybe later.

Sorry. I didn’t get to our individual challenge. Deadline caught up on me. Sometimes I finish right away, other times I am pushing the deadline. Then I have the dilemma, do I play fast so I finish it, but quality goes down, or just let it expire.

NN wins the declare-only with 60.41%, by 6.35%. N and I tie 2-2 over 16 boards, with 13 pushes. I get busy and don’t even start the match against procrastinator.

I expect to finish the regular challenge before it expires tomorrow, but don’t expect to issue any others before Sunday evening.

oirg romps in the regular challenge, +33.25, the only positive score. Likely to be reissued Monday.

oirg wins the regular challenge with +12.50, by 5.00. Reissued. Also all the individual challenges have been reissued by now.

Warning: if you haven’t played the declare-only, it’s scored by imps, not intentionally. I only realized it was imps after I finished. I’m pretty sure there’s one I would have played differently had I realized it was imps.

Talk about low-scoring. The declare-only, imps by mistake, was won by AA with +3.00, by 2.50. Reissued, correctly as watchpoints.

Also low scoring: I lose to procrastinator by 2, 6-4 with 13 pushes, losing because I didn’t watch the spots and went down by not covering a 6 with an 8, when covering would make to contract 100%, setting up my 4 to win the 4th round over RHO’s 3. (OTOH, there was no conceivable reason for RHO to have played his 5 earlier, so I should have been doomed.) Also reissued

ETA: lose to NN by 11. Reissued

A score I thought I would never see in a 5-way match: oirg wins with +60.50, by 43.50. I win by 66 vs AA. Both reissued.

ETA: I win by 16 vs procrastinator, with only 2 swings, each where I stayed out of game, he went down. Both very reasonable games, ballpark 50-50. Reissued

EATA: I win by 14 vs NN. Reissued

Back to the very close group challenges, at least for first. procrastinator wins with +10.50, by 0.25. I lose to AA by 1. Both reissued.

I win the declare-only with 57.81%, by 2.34%. I lose to procrastinator by 15. Both reissued.

Another rout. Oirg wins the regular challenge with +41.75, the only + score. I lose to NN by 5. Both reissued

ETA: I beat AA by 2. Reissued

I win the declare-only with 57.81%, by 0.78%. I beat procrastinator by 1. Both reissued

Another regular challenge where oirg has the only + imp score. Not nearly as impressive as the other times. Only +9.66, with only 3 players completing the challenge. I beat NN by 16. Both reissued.

ETA: I win by 3 vs AA. Reissued.

NN wins the group declare-only, completed by only 3, with 51.56%, by 0.52%. :swear: I lose to procrastinator by 7, after we both misdefend a vul game exactly the same way, really an inexcusable error. I was sure I must have been losing imps. He probably thought the same. I won 5 imps when CHO through this curveball at us:

It seems unlikely that CHO really has that shape, which would imply a stiff heart. I trusted CHO, and made the contract when CHO had a stiff K, but LHO’s opening lead was the trump Q from AQJxx, RHO’s 10 falling under the K. About the only possible way to lose only 1 trump trick. procrastinator defended 2S X, making.

But did I get burned trusting CHO on this deal:
Screenshot 2023-02-20 at 10.34.25 PM

5C, per the explanation, is 5-7 points, strong rebiddable clubs. Seemed like an easy call to me: 6C, since partner must have a stiff after the 2S opening and raise. Right about the spades, but his "strong rebiddable clubs were J1087xx. No idea how he thought he had 5-7 points. Procrastinator passed 5C, making.

Both reissued

I win the regular challenge with +19.00, by 15.75. I lose to NN by 30, a confirmation that taking phantom sacrifices is not a successful strategy, even if you go for less than their game, if makable, would have been worth. Both reissued.

I win by 24 vs AA where CHO clearly had the worst match.

One hand, routine at AA’s table, saw these explanations at mine.

Given that S passed the 1D opening bid, the 5- HCP seems right. But 7+ total points, and spades, for having passed the opening bid. Seems questionable but not outrageous.

But then this happened with this explanation


Will CHO really have passed the double with 5 diamonds and 5 spades? And 3-card diamonds and 5+ diamonds seem incompatible (also opening 1 diamond with 3-card diamond and 5+ spades).

Fortunately I decided to pass 3S. Lie was favorable, and I made exactly 3. AA had a more comfortable time in 2 spades. The hands? I had misclicked, passing 1D when I surely should have bid 1S with 9 HCP and 4 spades. Almost enough to get me to raise 3S to 4S. CHO: 4 spades, 4 hearts, 3 diamonds, 2 clubs, 13 HCP. I can’t imagine why he bid 3S instead of 2S.

Then CHO handed me 16 imps on this board.
Screenshot 2023-02-22 at 8.15.32 PM

I think AA’s double of 2S was not best (I just jumped to 4H over 2S), but it was nowhere near as bad as CHO sitting for the double with a 0=6=1=6 hand, know his side had at least 11 hearts. 6H would have been a great contract, cold if hearts were 1-1 and likely to make even if they weren’t. (No one would reach 6H, but almost as few would sit for a penalty double here.)

Reissued

Hmm, on that last one, seems like CHO was walking the dog, but then got distracted and forgot to keep stepping.

oirg wins the declare-only with 60.16%, by 7.03%. I beat procrastinator by 8 (40-32!) Both reissued

Unless someone objects, I will add my regular Precision partner to the declare-only challenges, starting next time. That means each of you will be sitting out 1/5 of the declare-only, since I can only invite 4 players for a challenge. (We had some stouts before, since at various times VeniVidiVici and BTDT and Runewell participated.)

He’s not an actuary. Maybe plays better than me, but not drastically better.