Val and I played all eleven days of the NABC (about 600 hands in total). This was my first NABC. Val and I had a successful tournament in terms of masterpoints: we won 141 each, including 40 platinum points. We won two two-session Regional-rated pairs events, and we finished 17th in the Jacoby Open Swiss event on the last two days of the tournament (it was a very tough field, we had great teammates – Ifti Baqai, Mitch Dunitz and Mark Itabashi — and we were 7th going into the final match).
My most difficult challenge was to play as well as I could, which in turn required getting enough sleep, paying attention, and following the clues (rather than relying on instinct and general principles).
After the second day of the NABC, I started reviewing the hand records after dinner and before going to sleep, to identify hands for later discussion with Val. As part of that process, for the two-session Open Pairs event (Sunday, March 16) I jotted down the key points for each hand and was impressed that almost every key point was something we address in the Real World Bridge books. Here are the key points for the morning session:
- Board 1 offered four-level competitive bidding decisions for both sides; both sides had 6-3 fits, and the HCP were relatively evenly divided. The Law of Total Tricks (18 Total Trumps) pointed to the winning decisions for both sides.
- Board 2 was a declarer play challenge for West in three notrump – to find the best line of play for an overtrick. The winning line wasn’t difficult to find, but declarer had to think about an overtrick.
- For Board 3, EW have a vulnerable slam in either red suit, but if North bids high quickly in clubs, EW might not find their slam.
- For Board 4, NS needed to bid 3NT instead of a club part-score, and EW needed to defend well to defeat three notrump.
- For Board 5, North could win the board by opening light, otherwise East could win the board by opening 1NT with a singleton King of diamonds.
- For Board 6, if North failed to open 1NT (15 HCP, 2=5=2=4 shape), NS often failed to reach their good four heart contract.
- On Board 7, East was very strong with six hearts and two spades, and West was very weak with seven spades and three hearts. Four spades makes but four hearts goes down. As usual, it’s best for the weak hand’s long suit to be the trump suit.
- The key for Board 8 was whether West made a tenth trick in three notrump. If North led a heart from Q1087, that gave declarer a tenth trick immediately. As usual at matchpoints, passive defense was best.
- Board 9 was a three notrump for NS; declarers typically made eight or nine or ten tricks. The key for the defenders was to make the safest possible opening lead.
- For Board 10, EW needed to stop quickly (with 17 opposite 5 HCP) while finding their 4-3 spade fit.
- The results for Board 11 revolved around whether EW bid game on 23 combined HCP with a 5-3 heart fit. Usually, bidding a thin game tends to lose matchpoints in the long run, but on this layout bidding the thin game was the winning decision.
- For Board 12, NS had 21 HCP, a 5-3 heart fit and a 6-2 club fit; NS could make ten tricks in hearts with careful play but usually made only nine tricks. EW had 19 HCP and a 6-3 spade fit; EW had nine tricks in spades. The Law of Total Tricks pointed to winning decisions for both sides.
- On Board 13, North (20 HCP, 2=5=4=2 shape) faced a decision whether to open one heart, two clubs, or two notrump. As often happens, that decision was critical.
- On Board 14, EW (24 combined HCP, no fit) need to stay out of 3NT. As usual, bidding a thin game lost matchpoints.
- Board 15 gave EW a “three over three” competitive bidding decision; the Law of Total Tricks pointed to the winning decision.
- Board 16 was an exercise in passive defense for NS; the goal was to prevent an overtrick in the EW four heart contract.
- On Board 17, if South (15 HCP, 3=5=3=2 shape) overcalls 1NT rather than 2H, NS will bid and make game, otherwise NS usually stop in a part score for a below average score.
- On Board 18, declarer (usually West) needs to establish a side suit prior to drawing trumps.
- On Board 19, EW have slam in clubs, but NS can throw sand in the gears by competing aggressively in hearts.
- As with Board 7, on Board 20 it was vital for the weak hand’s long suit to be trumps.
- Board 21 presented both sides with interesting low-level competitive bidding challenges after the auction started with a one diamond opening bid and a takeout double.
- The key issue on Board 22 was whether East would open high or low with lots of offense and not much defense, at unfavorable vulnerability. On this layout, opening high gave EW the best chance at a good matchpoint score.
- On Board 23, a key issue for NS was whether to bid three notrump with 24 combined HCP and no fit. A key issue for EW was how vigorously to compete (East had an attractive 5-5 two-suiter, but West had no fit and only one useful high card). More often, 3NT (EW) went down, but sometimes that contract was successful.
- On Board 24, NS had a very good slam in diamonds that only about half of the field bid. NS had only 29 combined HCP but had a ten-card diamond fir including all five honors plus a lot of distribution.
- Board 25 presented challenging low-level competitive bidding decisions for all four players at most tables.
- The usual contract on Board 26 was two hearts EW, but declarer could go down if declarer played trumps too early.