USBC Part 6
The trials were now down to the KO phase; win or go home. The schedule was for thirty boards
to be played Sunday evening (2 fifteen board segments) and 60 boards to be played on Monday
(4 fifteen board segments). The matches would be all held upstairs in hotel rooms. There
was a recorder on hand (sometimes) and vugraph equipment in the room; though not all matches
would be broadcast. Kibitzers were again allowed. Before play began, there was a process
to determine seating rights. One of the two teams in each match has the rights for each
segment. The teams choose in advance what segments those will be (in a draft-like
selection process). The team with the rights waits until the opposing team has taken their
seats in each room. They can then determine who will play from their team and against which
pair. The Meltzer team had the rights for the first segment. We were an unknown quantity,
they opted to have their strong club pair against ours. We faced Alan Sontag (author of
"The Bridge Bum") and Roger Bates, both defending world champions. Howard and Tony faced
Rose Meltzer and Kyle Larsen, the other pair on the current squad from last year's winners.
The 2nd match we faced Meltzer-Larsen while teammates faced Ron Smith-Billy Cohen. I would
like to report that we continued our momentum from the round-robin and jumped out to an
early lead but it didn't happen. If we did something good for our side, it was matched
at the other table. If we made mistakes, they were punished. We didn't play our best, by any
means, but we were still in striking range after the first two matches. This was one of
our bright spots:
94
K98654
72
Q54
|
T873
AQ
Q64
KT92
|
---
JT72
AKT93
8763
|
AKQJ652
3
J85
AJ
|
| Me(South) |
LHO |
Bill |
RHO |
1 (1) |
P |
2 (2) |
P |
3 (3) |
P |
4 |
All Pass |
(1) Our multi-purpose club
(2) A weak 2 in hearts (5-9, 6 hearts)
(3) A 9 trick hand
Bill guessed to bid game hoping his honors would be valuable. The hands did not fit well
but our opponents did not have much to go on and I got a favorable lead which gave me a chance.
9, Q, 3, J
A couple reasons for covering the trick in dummy. If RHO has the
K,
I want the defenders to think I have a club loser. That might give me tempo to ruff a diamond
in dummy. The other reason is a layout like above. It's very difficult for RHO to duck a diamond
led from dummy, and he has no trump to lead. Double-dummy they can set me but it's very hard.
I continued with my plan to ruff a diamond.
2, K, 5, 4
6, A, 2, 4
J, Q, 7, 3
K, 5, 7,
2
Here I made a slight mistake, I should probably ruff a diamond, playing RHO to have no spades
given the lack of a trump shift at trick 3. It might not have been clear to do so, however,
and I opted to play 1 round of trumps in case a stiff T was lurking.
A, 3, 4,
8
8, 6,
9, 9
What looked like a sure thing a moment ago was now in peril. If RHO gets in, he can lead a diamond
to promote a trump trick for his partner. This is why I should not have taken a round of trumps,
the 4-0 trump split was more likely than 6-2 diamonds. I was pretty sure LHO held the
A
on the bidding. If so, I can force her to win the trick.
K, 2, 3, A
Thanks to the fortunate layout, LHO had to win the first heart regardless, but this made sure of it.
I was now safe and had my 10 tricks. A nice result. At the other table, our teammate led a
trump, killing any chance for declarer. A nice gain for our side. We trailed by 41 IMPs after the first 2 segments. There were 60 boards to play so we still
had a chance, but time was running out. We'd need a good start in the 3rd segment.
It didn't happen. We faced Smith-Cohen in the 3rd quarter. They play very few conventions,
but are extremely capable (and a lot of fun to boot).
NV vs V, I faced an early decision:
JT98
75
KT842
AQ
| Cohen |
Bill |
Smith |
Me |
3 |
P |
4 |
P |
| P |
4 |
5 |
5 |
| X |
All pass |
I couldn't be sure who could make what. Most likely both 5 level contracts
would fail. On the chance that either (or both) could make I played the
odds and bid 5
. Had the
club finesse worked (a huge favorite on the auction), we'd have gained IMPs.
It was not to be and we finished down 1. 5
would also have been down 1. We needed the bulk of the good fortune if we were to have any
chance.
This was the main swing hand from the 3rd segment:
J986
T754
--
T8743
|
AK
3
AKQT543
KJ5
|
T7532
A98
9
AQ62
|
Q4
KQJ62
J8762
9
|
I stuck in a heart overcall for the lead after a strong 2
opening from Cohen. The opponents were on their way to slam when Bill threw in a wild 6
call. We needed to make something happen. Cohen bid 6N suggesting solid diamonds and Smith
raised him to 7. Most times, this would be a great contract for them. The foul diamond split spoils
it, fortune was on our side here.
Our 2 bids generated another swing at the end of the
set but our opponents were too much for us again, adding another 20 IMPs to their lead.
The 4th segment saw us rematched with Sontag-Bates. It was time to start swinging, not crazy yet,
but with close decisions, choosing actions that our opponents may not select. The 1st board
of this set was the most-published hand of the KO phase. Sadly I was caught napping.
KQ2
76
AKJ832
A9
|
T9653
A832
6
Q74
|
---
Q954
5
KJT86532
|
AJ874
KJT
QT974
---
|
| Bill |
Sontag |
Me |
Bates |
| 3N (1) |
P |
4 (2) |
4 |
| P |
6 |
All pass |
(1) Minor suit preempt
(2) I thought our opponent might try something different so I made a conservative bid.
When Sontag bid 6
, I remember
hoping that Bill had a stiff heart so we could set this. The opening lead was the
4,
I was convinced it was a singleton. Then dummy hit with only 3 hearts making the singleton
unlikely. Rather than scrapping my initial thought, I tried to visualize a layout where Bill
could have a stiff heart. I came up with one, but it did not stand up to analysis. Unable to
shake my first thought, I foolishly returned a heart, allowing the contract to make.
There were wild results all around on this one, several pairs played 7
!
We were not able to make any headway the rest of the segment and we were down 80 IMPs with
30 boards to play.
While still technically possible, we realized we were not going to win the match. Our
teammate from Minnesota was driving back that evening and asked to withdraw with 2
segments to play. Since we were a four man team, we were unable to continue. I would liked
to have played those last 30 boards, for the experience if nothing else but we acceded to his wishes.
Our team had a great time in Chicago. Next time we'll add a 3rd pair, maybe we'll be
fresher in the later stages. Playing 186 boards over 2.5 days definitely takes a toll.
That leads to my final tip: the best way to improve your game is to play with and against
better players. I learned a few new tricks during the tourney, and Bill/I found some
improvements in some sequences, due in part at least, to watching our opponents in action.
Experienced players are also more likely to punish you for your mistakes, allowing you to
learn from them (if so, then I learned a lot in Chicago!). That's not to say that you
should play the top bracket in every KO or the highest rated pair events all the time,
but once in a while you might try playing a level higher than normal. The first few times,
you'll probably take your lumps but it's good experience, and there's no rule that says
you can't win. Over time, your game will be the better for it.
The Nickell team, which had a bye to the semi-finals, won the trials, though not without
some nervous moments. You can read all about the trials (and the womens, seniors, and juniors as well) by clicking
here. |