Grand slam in U.K. and Ashburton

Press, 19 July 1983, Page 16

Grand slam in U.K. and Ashburton

Though bridge is not an, easy game to present on television, in the past two

years great strides have been made in Britain. First came two 13 week series of “Grand Slam” on 8.8. C. 2. In each a match between teams from Britain and the United States was played, with the cards bidding and play all recorded. Then the players repeated it all, bid for bid, play for play, with the T.V. cameras rolling. A “thought track” was super-imposed, on

CONTRACT BRIDGE

J.R. Wignail

which the players could speak their thoughts, explaining why they took certain actions. The format was generally successful, though it suffered from the drawback that bridge players are not normally great actors. A third series, with a slightly changed presentation, is expected to have even greater audience appeal. Meantime, 8.8. C. Channel 4 is at present showing “Master Bridge”, featuring eight top rubber bridge experts playing pre-dealt hands with and against each other, with two commentators endeavouring to explain the play. It is done live, with the emphasis, on the personalities. By all accounts it is fascinating stuff, attracting a far bigger viewing audience than expected and with distinct export prospects. Perhaps we will one day see it locally, perhaps. This year’s Canterbury Main Centre Pairs was held at the Ashburton Bridge Club and used the popular “two long sessions in one day” format. So it was that 18 tables of hardy bridge players duly assembled at 9.30 a.m. to play two boards at each table, finishing the first round nearly four hours and a half later. After a break for lunch, they returned for a second . session of 36 deals. The format leaves something to be desired, for any one pair will not play against 25 per cent of the field, but it has the merit of cutting out a lot of unnecessary delays. The event resulted in a popular home town win for Mrs R. Lovelock and Mrs P. Sutherland of Ashburton, who started slowly but finished strongly. The runnersup were Mrs J. Thomas and J. D. Thomson of Christchurch. Third placing went to Mrs J. Evitt and Mrs J. Kerr ./Christchurch), who led the after the first sessi<® but slipped back in the second. This deal, the first they

met after lunch, did their cause no good at all. South was the dealer, with only her side vulnerable: N. 4> - V AKIO4 ♦ AQ1062 ♦ Q 1073 W. E. <4>K976 «AQJIOB2 V 975 Q 632 ♦ J 543 ♦ 987 $B2 ♦ - S. ♦ 543 V J 8 ♦ K $ AKJ9654 Mrs Evitt and Mrs Kerr held the East-West cards against Mrs D. Brophy and Mrs F. Sheehy, all of them trialists for this year’s New Zealand womens team. This was the auction at their table: S. W. N. E 1$ No If If 24 24 4NT No 54 No 64 64 No No 74 All Pass As soon as she heard her partner held a rebiddable club suit, Mrs Sheehy as North lost no time in using Blackwood before settling for a small slam in clubs. At this point East decided, quite correctly, that her side had little defence against six clubs and that her opponents were about to score at least 1370 (including the usual duplicate bonus of 500 for bidding and making game). It seemed a good idea, therefore, to sacrifice in six spades, at a cost of a “mere” 900 for a five trick defeat. East was indeed right up to a point. But her opponents were not satisfied with a non-vuinerable penalty, and pushed on to the grand slam in clubs. This was passed out, with varying degrees of hilarity. The contract soon proved to be unbeatable, and NorthSouth had scored 2140 on the board, pushed to the optimum spot by their opponnents. East-West were left with the slightly sour reflection that even if they had sacrificed at a cost of 1100 they would still have scored badly on the board, for virtually no other NorthSouth reached even the small slam.