Summer Seniors Pairs - A Final 07/07/2007 Session 1 Section Red Top = 18
Board 1
NS EW Contract Dec Lead Score MP MP NS EW
1 11 3NT+2 S 460 15 3 Sitch & Wing Harper & Hackett
6 16 4H+1 N 450 9 9 Smart & Lunn Stanford & Franklin
5 14 3NT+1 S 430 5 13 Wright & Watson Cooke & Lucy
10 19 4S= N 420 1 17 Freedman & Freedman (v) Hedley & Hedley
4 12 4H+1 N 450 9 9 Crofts & Crofts (v) Cornell & Beer
9 17 3NT+2 S 460 15 3 Slatcher & Holland Heath & Heath (v)
3 20 4H= S 420 1 17 Nicolle & Bridge Dias & Hair
8 15 3NT+2 S 460 15 3 Jacobs & Fisher Turnage & Cruickshank
2 18 3NT+1 S 430 5 13 Carlisle & Marsh (v) Jackson & Gordon
13 7 3NT+2 S 460 15 3 Serby & Moore Bingham & Osmer (v)
Board 2
NS EW Contract Dec Lead Score MP MP NS EW
1 11 4NT+1 W -460 2 16 Sitch & Wing Harper & Hackett
6 16 6S-1 E 50 17 1 Smart & Lunn Stanford & Franklin
5 14 4S+1 E -450 8 10 Wright & Watson Cooke & Lucy
10 19 3NT+3 W -490 0 18 Freedman & Freedman (v) Hedley & Hedley
4 12 5S= E -450 8 10 Crofts & Crofts (v) Cornell & Beer
9 17 5S= E -450 8 10 Slatcher & Holland Heath & Heath (v)
3 20 4S+1 W -450 8 10 Nicolle & Bridge Dias & Hair
8 15 6S-1 E 50 17 1 Jacobs & Fisher Turnage & Cruickshank
18 2 5S= E -450 8 10 Jackson & Gordon Carlisle & Marsh (v)
13 7 4S= E -420 14 4 Serby & Moore Bingham & Osmer (v)
Board 3
NS EW Contract Dec Lead Score MP MP NS EW
1 11 3H= E -140 12 6 Sitch & Wing Harper & Hackett
6 16 2S= S 110 16 2 Smart & Lunn Stanford & Franklin
5 14 4S-4 S -200 4 14 Wright & Watson Cooke & Lucy
10 19 4D+1 E -150 8 10 Freedman & Freedman (v) Hedley & Hedley
4 12 2S= S 110 16 2 Crofts & Crofts (v) Cornell & Beer
9 17 5D= W -600 2 16 Slatcher & Holland Heath & Heath (v)
3 20 2S= S 110 16 2 Nicolle & Bridge Dias & Hair
8 15 4D+1 W -150 8 10 Jacobs & Fisher Turnage & Cruickshank
18 2 4Dx+1 W -910 0 18 Jackson & Gordon Carlisle & Marsh (v)
13 7 4D+1 E -150 8 10 Serby & Moore Bingham & Osmer (v)
Board 4
NS EW Contract Dec Lead Score MP MP NS EW
2 12 4H= E -620 7 11 Carlisle & Marsh (v) Cornell & Beer
7 17 4H= E -620 7 11 Bingham & Osmer (v) Heath & Heath (v)
1 20 4H= E -620 7 11 Sitch & Wing Dias & Hair
6 15 4H= E -620 7 11 Smart & Lunn Turnage & Cruickshank
5 13 4H= E -620 7 11 Wright & Watson Serby & Moore
10 18 4H-1 E 100 18 0 Freedman & Freedman (v) Jackson & Gordon
4 11 3S+1 W -170 16 2 Crofts & Crofts (v) Harper & Hackett
9 16 4H= E -620 7 11 Slatcher & Holland Stanford & Franklin
3 19 4H= E -620 7 11 Nicolle & Bridge Hedley & Hedley
14 8 4H= W -620 7 11 Cooke & Lucy Jacobs & Fisher
Board 5
NS EW Contract Dec Lead Score MP MP NS EW
2 12 4S= S 620 0 18 Carlisle & Marsh (v) Cornell & Beer
7 17 4S+1 N 650 7 11 Bingham & Osmer (v) Heath & Heath (v)
1 20 4S+1 N 650 7 11 Sitch & Wing Dias & Hair
6 15 4S+1 N 650 7 11 Smart & Lunn Turnage & Cruickshank
5 13 4S+2 S 680 16 2 Wright & Watson Serby & Moore
10 18 4S+2 S 680 16 2 Freedman & Freedman (v) Jackson & Gordon
4 11 4S+1 N 650 7 11 Crofts & Crofts (v) Harper & Hackett
9 16 4S+1 N 650 7 11 Slatcher & Holland Stanford & Franklin
19 3 4S+2 S 680 16 2 Hedley & Hedley Nicolle & Bridge
14 8 4S+1 N 650 7 11 Cooke & Lucy Jacobs & Fisher
Board 6
NS EW Contract Dec Lead Score MP MP NS EW
2 12 2S+2 W -170 1 17 Carlisle & Marsh (v) Cornell & Beer
7 17 4S-1 W 100 14 4 Bingham & Osmer (v) Heath & Heath (v)
1 20 2S+1 W -140 5 13 Sitch & Wing Dias & Hair
6 15 4S-1 W 100 14 4 Smart & Lunn Turnage & Cruickshank
5 13 2S+1 E -140 5 13 Wright & Watson Serby & Moore
10 18 2S+2 W -170 1 17 Freedman & Freedman (v) Jackson & Gordon
4 11 4S-1 W 100 14 4 Crofts & Crofts (v) Harper & Hackett
9 16 4S-1 W 100 14 4 Slatcher & Holland Stanford & Franklin
19 3 4S-1 W 100 14 4 Hedley & Hedley Nicolle & Bridge
14 8 2S= E -110 8 10 Cooke & Lucy Jacobs & Fisher
Board 7
NS EW Contract Dec Lead Score MP MP NS EW
3 13 1NT+2 W -150 3 15 Nicolle & Bridge Serby & Moore
8 18 1NT= W -90 16 2 Jacobs & Fisher Jackson & Gordon
2 11 2NT= W -120 10 8 Carlisle & Marsh (v) Harper & Hackett
7 16 1NT+2 W -150 3 15 Bingham & Osmer (v) Stanford & Franklin
1 19 1NT+2 E -150 3 15 Sitch & Wing Hedley & Hedley
6 14 1NT+1 W -120 10 8 Smart & Lunn Cooke & Lucy
5 12 1NT+1 W -120 10 8 Wright & Watson Cornell & Beer
10 17 1NT+2 W -150 3 15 Freedman & Freedman (v) Heath & Heath (v)
4 20 1NT= W -90 16 2 Crofts & Crofts (v) Dias & Hair
9 15 1NT= W -90 16 2 Slatcher & Holland Turnage & Cruickshank
Board 8
NS EW Contract Dec Lead Score MP MP NS EW
3 13 3NT= N 400 5 13 Nicolle & Bridge Serby & Moore
8 18 3NT+1 N 430 14 4 Jacobs & Fisher Jackson & Gordon
2 11 3NT+2 N 460 18 0 Carlisle & Marsh (v) Harper & Hackett
7 16 3NT= N 400 5 13 Bingham & Osmer (v) Stanford & Franklin
1 19 3NT+1 N 430 14 4 Sitch & Wing Hedley & Hedley
6 14 3NT+1 N 430 14 4 Smart & Lunn Cooke & Lucy
5 12 3NT= N 400 5 13 Wright & Watson Cornell & Beer
10 17 3NT= N 400 5 13 Freedman & Freedman (v) Heath & Heath (v)
4 20 3NT= N 400 5 13 Crofts & Crofts (v) Dias & Hair
9 15 3NT= N 400 5 13 Slatcher & Holland Turnage & Cruickshank
Board 9
NS EW Contract Dec Lead Score MP MP NS EW
3 13 3NT+1 N 430 12 6 Nicolle & Bridge Serby & Moore
8 18 3NT+1 N 430 12 6 Jacobs & Fisher Jackson & Gordon
2 11 1NT+3 N 180 6 12 Carlisle & Marsh (v) Harper & Hackett
7 16 6C= N 920 17 1 Bingham & Osmer (v) Stanford & Franklin
1 19 3NT-1 N -50 0 18 Sitch & Wing Hedley & Hedley
6 14 3NT+1 N 430 12 6 Smart & Lunn Cooke & Lucy
5 12 5C+1 N 420 8 10 Wright & Watson Cornell & Beer
10 17 PASS N 0 2 16 Freedman & Freedman (v) Heath & Heath (v)
20 4 3C+3 N 170 4 14 Dias & Hair Crofts & Crofts (v)
15 9 6C= N 920 17 1 Turnage & Cruickshank Slatcher & Holland
Board 10
NS EW Contract Dec Lead Score MP MP NS EW
4 14 4S-1 E 100 8 10 Crofts & Crofts (v) Cooke & Lucy
9 19 6C-1 W 100 8 10 Slatcher & Holland Hedley & Hedley
3 12 5C= W -600 2 16 Nicolle & Bridge Cornell & Beer
8 17 4S-1 W 100 8 10 Jacobs & Fisher Heath & Heath (v)
2 20 4S-1 W 100 8 10 Carlisle & Marsh (v) Dias & Hair
7 15 3NT-1 W 100 8 10 Bingham & Osmer (v) Turnage & Cruickshank
1 18 4S-2 E 200 16 2 Sitch & Wing Jackson & Gordon
6 13 6C-2 W 200 16 2 Smart & Lunn Serby & Moore
5 11 4S-2 E 200 16 2 Wright & Watson Harper & Hackett
10 16 3NT+1 W -630 0 18 Freedman & Freedman (v) Stanford & Franklin
Board 11
NS EW Contract Dec Lead Score MP MP NS EW
4 14 1NT+2 E -150 5 13 Crofts & Crofts (v) Cooke & Lucy
9 19 2S+1 W -140 12 6 Slatcher & Holland Hedley & Hedley
3 12 1NT+2 E -150 5 13 Nicolle & Bridge Cornell & Beer
8 17 1NT+2 E -150 5 13 Jacobs & Fisher Heath & Heath (v)
2 20 1NT+2 W -150 5 13 Carlisle & Marsh (v) Dias & Hair
7 15 1NT= E -90 16 2 Bingham & Osmer (v) Turnage & Cruickshank
1 18 1NT-3 E 150 18 0 Sitch & Wing Jackson & Gordon
6 13 1NT+2 E -150 5 13 Smart & Lunn Serby & Moore
11 5 1NT+2 E -150 5 13 Harper & Hackett Wright & Watson
16 10 2S= W -110 14 4 Stanford & Franklin Freedman & Freedman (v)
Board 12
NS EW Contract Dec Lead Score MP MP NS EW
4 14 4H= S 620 14 4 Crofts & Crofts (v) Cooke & Lucy
9 19 3Sx-1 E 100 5 13 Slatcher & Holland Hedley & Hedley
3 12 4Sx-1 E 100 5 13 Nicolle & Bridge Cornell & Beer
8 17 4H= S 620 14 4 Jacobs & Fisher Heath & Heath (v)
2 20 3H= S 140 8 10 Carlisle & Marsh (v) Dias & Hair
7 15 4H= S 620 14 4 Bingham & Osmer (v) Turnage & Cruickshank
1 18 4H= S 620 14 4 Sitch & Wing Jackson & Gordon
6 13 2S+1 E -140 0 18 Smart & Lunn Serby & Moore
11 5 5H-1 S -100 2 16 Harper & Hackett Wright & Watson
16 10 4H= S 620 14 4 Stanford & Franklin Freedman & Freedman (v)
Board 13
NS EW Contract Dec Lead Score MP MP NS EW
5 15 6NTx-1 E 200 17 1 Wright & Watson Turnage & Cruickshank
10 20 3NT+4 E -720 0 18 Freedman & Freedman (v) Dias & Hair
4 13 6D-1 W 100 9 9 Crofts & Crofts (v) Serby & Moore
9 18 6D-1 W 100 9 9 Slatcher & Holland Jackson & Gordon
3 11 6NT-1 E 100 9 9 Nicolle & Bridge Harper & Hackett
8 16 6NT-1 E 100 9 9 Jacobs & Fisher Stanford & Franklin
2 19 5D= W -600 2 16 Carlisle & Marsh (v) Hedley & Hedley
7 14 6NT-1 E 100 9 9 Bingham & Osmer (v) Cooke & Lucy
1 17 4H-2 E 200 17 1 Sitch & Wing Heath & Heath (v)
6 12 6NT-1 E 100 9 9 Smart & Lunn Cornell & Beer
Board 14
NS EW Contract Dec Lead Score MP MP NS EW
5 15 1NT+1 N 120 10 8 Wright & Watson Turnage & Cruickshank
10 20 3NT+1 N 430 18 0 Freedman & Freedman (v) Dias & Hair
4 13 3NT= N 400 15 3 Crofts & Crofts (v) Serby & Moore
9 18 3NT= N 400 15 3 Slatcher & Holland Jackson & Gordon
3 11 2H-2 W 100 6 12 Nicolle & Bridge Harper & Hackett
8 16 1NT-1 W 50 2 16 Jacobs & Fisher Stanford & Franklin
2 19 1NT-2 W 100 6 12 Carlisle & Marsh (v) Hedley & Hedley
7 14 2NT+1 S 150 12 6 Bingham & Osmer (v) Cooke & Lucy
1 17 1C-2 W 100 6 12 Sitch & Wing Heath & Heath (v)
12 6 3NT-1 N -50 0 18 Cornell & Beer Smart & Lunn
Board 15
NS EW Contract Dec Lead Score MP MP NS EW
5 15 4S= S 620 13 5 Wright & Watson Turnage & Cruickshank
10 20 4S= S 620 13 5 Freedman & Freedman (v) Dias & Hair
4 13 5S-2 S -200 4 14 Crofts & Crofts (v) Serby & Moore
9 18 4S-1 S -100 8 10 Slatcher & Holland Jackson & Gordon
3 11 5Cx+1 E -650 0 18 Nicolle & Bridge Harper & Hackett
8 16 4S-1 S -100 8 10 Jacobs & Fisher Stanford & Franklin
2 19 5Hx= S 850 18 0 Carlisle & Marsh (v) Hedley & Hedley
7 14 4S-1 S -100 8 10 Bingham & Osmer (v) Cooke & Lucy
17 1 5Sx-2 S -500 2 16 Heath & Heath (v) Sitch & Wing
12 6 5S= S 650 16 2 Cornell & Beer Smart & Lunn