Summer Seniors Pairs - A Final 07/07/2007 Session 2 Section Red Top = 18
Board 16
NS EW Contract Dec Lead Score MP MP NS EW
1 16 PASS N 0 0 18 Sitch & Wing Stanford & Franklin
6 11 3S+1 N 170 7 11 Smart & Lunn Harper & Hackett
5 19 4S= N 420 16 2 Wright & Watson Hedley & Hedley
10 14 3S+1 N 170 7 11 Freedman & Freedman (v) Cooke & Lucy
4 17 3S+2 N 200 12 6 Crofts & Crofts (v) Heath & Heath (v)
9 12 4S= N 420 16 2 Slatcher & Holland Cornell & Beer
3 15 3C+1 S 130 2 16 Nicolle & Bridge Turnage & Cruickshank
8 20 4S= N 420 16 2 Jacobs & Fisher Dias & Hair
13 2 3S+1 N 170 7 11 Serby & Moore Carlisle & Marsh (v)
18 7 3S+1 N 170 7 11 Jackson & Gordon Bingham & Osmer (v)
Board 17
NS EW Contract Dec Lead Score MP MP NS EW
1 16 4S= S 420 13 5 Sitch & Wing Stanford & Franklin
6 11 4H-2 N -100 0 18 Smart & Lunn Harper & Hackett
5 19 3H= N 140 4 14 Wright & Watson Hedley & Hedley
10 14 3S+1 S 170 8 10 Freedman & Freedman (v) Cooke & Lucy
4 17 4S+1 S 450 17 1 Crofts & Crofts (v) Heath & Heath (v)
9 12 2S+2 S 170 8 10 Slatcher & Holland Cornell & Beer
3 15 4S= S 420 13 5 Nicolle & Bridge Turnage & Cruickshank
8 20 3H-1 N -50 2 16 Jacobs & Fisher Dias & Hair
13 2 3S+1 S 170 8 10 Serby & Moore Carlisle & Marsh (v)
18 7 4S+1 S 450 17 1 Jackson & Gordon Bingham & Osmer (v)
Board 18
NS EW Contract Dec Lead Score MP MP NS EW
1 16 2H+1 S 140 3 15 Sitch & Wing Stanford & Franklin
6 11 3H+1 S 170 11 7 Smart & Lunn Harper & Hackett
5 19 2H+1 S 140 3 15 Wright & Watson Hedley & Hedley
10 14 3H+1 S 170 11 7 Freedman & Freedman (v) Cooke & Lucy
4 17 2S+1 S 140 3 15 Crofts & Crofts (v) Heath & Heath (v)
9 12 3H= S 140 3 15 Slatcher & Holland Cornell & Beer
3 15 2H+2 S 170 11 7 Nicolle & Bridge Turnage & Cruickshank
8 20 2H+2 S 170 11 7 Jacobs & Fisher Dias & Hair
13 2 4H= S 620 18 0 Serby & Moore Carlisle & Marsh (v)
18 7 2H+3 S 200 16 2 Jackson & Gordon Bingham & Osmer (v)
Board 19
NS EW Contract Dec Lead Score MP MP NS EW
2 17 5H-1 W 100 13 5 Carlisle & Marsh (v) Heath & Heath (v)
7 12 6H-1 W 100 13 5 Bingham & Osmer (v) Cornell & Beer
1 15 5Sx-1 N -100 6 12 Sitch & Wing Turnage & Cruickshank
6 20 4H= W -620 0 18 Smart & Lunn Dias & Hair
5 18 5H-1 W 100 13 5 Wright & Watson Jackson & Gordon
10 13 5Sx-1 N -100 6 12 Freedman & Freedman (v) Serby & Moore
4 16 5Sx-2 N -300 2 16 Crofts & Crofts (v) Stanford & Franklin
9 11 4Sx= N 590 18 0 Slatcher & Holland Harper & Hackett
14 3 5H-1 W 100 13 5 Cooke & Lucy Nicolle & Bridge
19 8 5Sx-1 N -100 6 12 Hedley & Hedley Jacobs & Fisher
Board 20
NS EW Contract Dec Lead Score MP MP NS EW
2 17 1NT+1 E -120 1 17 Carlisle & Marsh (v) Heath & Heath (v)
7 12 1NT+1 E -120 1 17 Bingham & Osmer (v) Cornell & Beer
1 15 3S-1 N -100 8 10 Sitch & Wing Turnage & Cruickshank
6 20 1NT= E -90 15 3 Smart & Lunn Dias & Hair
5 18 3S-1 N -100 8 10 Wright & Watson Jackson & Gordon
10 13 1NT= E -90 15 3 Freedman & Freedman (v) Serby & Moore
4 16 3S-1 N -100 8 10 Crofts & Crofts (v) Stanford & Franklin
9 11 3S-1 N -100 8 10 Slatcher & Holland Harper & Hackett
14 3 1NT-2 E 200 18 0 Cooke & Lucy Nicolle & Bridge
19 8 2H-1 S -100 8 10 Hedley & Hedley Jacobs & Fisher
Board 21
NS EW Contract Dec Lead Score MP MP NS EW
2 17 3NT-3 E 150 18 0 Carlisle & Marsh (v) Heath & Heath (v)
7 12 3H-1 E 50 16 2 Bingham & Osmer (v) Cornell & Beer
1 15 4S-3 S -300 3 15 Sitch & Wing Turnage & Cruickshank
6 20 2S-3 S -300 3 15 Smart & Lunn Dias & Hair
5 18 2S-2 N -200 8 10 Wright & Watson Jackson & Gordon
10 13 2S-3 S -300 3 15 Freedman & Freedman (v) Serby & Moore
4 16 3S-3 S -300 3 15 Crofts & Crofts (v) Stanford & Franklin
9 11 3H+1 E -170 10 8 Slatcher & Holland Harper & Hackett
14 3 4D= W -130 12 6 Cooke & Lucy Nicolle & Bridge
19 8 3C-1 N -100 14 4 Hedley & Hedley Jacobs & Fisher
Board 22
NS EW Contract Dec Lead Score MP MP NS EW
3 18 5Cx-2 N -300 3 15 Nicolle & Bridge Jackson & Gordon
8 13 5Cx-2 N -300 3 15 Jacobs & Fisher Serby & Moore
2 16 5Cx= N 550 18 0 Carlisle & Marsh (v) Stanford & Franklin
7 11 5Cx-2 N -300 3 15 Bingham & Osmer (v) Harper & Hackett
1 14 5Cx-2 N -300 3 15 Sitch & Wing Cooke & Lucy
6 19 5C-2 N -100 8 10 Smart & Lunn Hedley & Hedley
5 17 5H-1 E 100 14 4 Wright & Watson Heath & Heath (v)
10 12 5C-1 N -50 11 7 Freedman & Freedman (v) Cornell & Beer
15 4 5C-1 N -50 11 7 Turnage & Cruickshank Crofts & Crofts (v)
20 9 4C+1 N 150 16 2 Dias & Hair Slatcher & Holland
Board 23
NS EW Contract Dec Lead Score MP MP NS EW
3 18 3S-1 E 100 2 16 Nicolle & Bridge Jackson & Gordon
8 13 4S-3 E 300 8 10 Jacobs & Fisher Serby & Moore
2 16 3S-1 E 100 2 16 Carlisle & Marsh (v) Stanford & Franklin
7 11 4Sx-2 E 500 11 7 Bingham & Osmer (v) Harper & Hackett
1 14 3Hx= S 730 16 2 Sitch & Wing Cooke & Lucy
6 19 3S-1 E 100 2 16 Smart & Lunn Hedley & Hedley
5 17 3NT-5 E 500 11 7 Wright & Watson Heath & Heath (v)
10 12 4Hx+1 S 990 18 0 Freedman & Freedman (v) Cornell & Beer
15 4 4H= S 620 14 4 Turnage & Cruickshank Crofts & Crofts (v)
20 9 3S-2 E 200 6 12 Dias & Hair Slatcher & Holland
Board 24
NS EW Contract Dec Lead Score MP MP NS EW
3 18 6Hx= N 1210 18 0 Nicolle & Bridge Jackson & Gordon
8 13 4H+2 N 480 7 11 Jacobs & Fisher Serby & Moore
2 16 4H+2 S 480 7 11 Carlisle & Marsh (v) Stanford & Franklin
7 11 4H+3 N 510 14 4 Bingham & Osmer (v) Harper & Hackett
1 14 4H+2 N 480 7 11 Sitch & Wing Cooke & Lucy
6 19 4H+1 N 450 1 17 Smart & Lunn Hedley & Hedley
5 17 4H+2 N 480 7 11 Wright & Watson Heath & Heath (v)
10 12 4H+3 N 510 14 4 Freedman & Freedman (v) Cornell & Beer
15 4 4H+3 N 510 14 4 Turnage & Cruickshank Crofts & Crofts (v)
20 9 4H+1 N 450 1 17 Dias & Hair Slatcher & Holland
Board 25
NS EW Contract Dec Lead Score MP MP NS EW
4 19 4Sx= N 590 18 0 Crofts & Crofts (v) Hedley & Hedley
9 14 4H-1 E 100 15 3 Slatcher & Holland Cooke & Lucy
3 17 4Hx= W -790 0 18 Nicolle & Bridge Heath & Heath (v)
8 12 4Sx-1 N -100 12 6 Jacobs & Fisher Cornell & Beer
2 15 4H= E -620 8 10 Carlisle & Marsh (v) Turnage & Cruickshank
7 20 3NT+1 W -630 4 14 Bingham & Osmer (v) Dias & Hair
1 13 4H= E -620 8 10 Sitch & Wing Serby & Moore
6 18 4H+1 E -650 2 16 Smart & Lunn Jackson & Gordon
16 5 4H= E -620 8 10 Stanford & Franklin Wright & Watson
10 11 4H-1 W 100 15 3 Freedman & Freedman (v) Harper & Hackett
Board 26
NS EW Contract Dec Lead Score MP MP NS EW
4 19 3NT= W -600 2 16 Crofts & Crofts (v) Hedley & Hedley
9 14 3NT= W -600 2 16 Slatcher & Holland Cooke & Lucy
3 17 3NT-2 W 200 17 1 Nicolle & Bridge Heath & Heath (v)
8 12 4H-1 E 100 11 7 Jacobs & Fisher Cornell & Beer
2 15 3NT-2 W 200 17 1 Carlisle & Marsh (v) Turnage & Cruickshank
7 20 4H-1 W 100 11 7 Bingham & Osmer (v) Dias & Hair
1 13 4H-1 W 100 11 7 Sitch & Wing Serby & Moore
6 18 3NT= W -600 2 16 Smart & Lunn Jackson & Gordon
16 5 4H-1 W 100 11 7 Stanford & Franklin Wright & Watson
11 10 3S-3 S -300 6 12 Harper & Hackett Freedman & Freedman (v)
Board 27
NS EW Contract Dec Lead Score MP MP NS EW
4 19 4H= E -420 9 9 Crofts & Crofts (v) Hedley & Hedley
9 14 2Cx-2 S -300 16 2 Slatcher & Holland Cooke & Lucy
3 17 3NT+1 E -430 2 16 Nicolle & Bridge Heath & Heath (v)
8 12 3NT+1 W -430 2 16 Jacobs & Fisher Cornell & Beer
2 15 4H= W -420 9 9 Carlisle & Marsh (v) Turnage & Cruickshank
7 20 3NT+1 E -430 2 16 Bingham & Osmer (v) Dias & Hair
1 13 4H= E -420 9 9 Sitch & Wing Serby & Moore
6 18 4H= E -420 9 9 Smart & Lunn Jackson & Gordon
16 5 3D+2 W -150 18 0 Stanford & Franklin Wright & Watson
11 10 3NT= W -400 14 4 Harper & Hackett Freedman & Freedman (v)
Board 28
NS EW Contract Dec Lead Score MP MP NS EW
5 20 3C-2 E 100 18 0 Wright & Watson Dias & Hair
10 15 3S-1 E 50 11 7 Freedman & Freedman (v) Turnage & Cruickshank
4 18 3NT-1 W 50 11 7 Crofts & Crofts (v) Jackson & Gordon
9 13 2NT-1 W 50 11 7 Slatcher & Holland Serby & Moore
3 16 3C-1 W 50 11 7 Nicolle & Bridge Stanford & Franklin
8 11 4C-1 E 50 11 7 Jacobs & Fisher Harper & Hackett
2 14 3NT= W -400 0 18 Carlisle & Marsh (v) Cooke & Lucy
7 19 2S-1 E 50 11 7 Bingham & Osmer (v) Hedley & Hedley
12 1 2NT= W -120 2 16 Cornell & Beer Sitch & Wing
17 6 2S= E -110 4 14 Heath & Heath (v) Smart & Lunn
Board 29
NS EW Contract Dec Lead Score MP MP NS EW
5 20 3S= W -140 11 7 Wright & Watson Dias & Hair
10 15 2S+2 W -170 5 13 Freedman & Freedman (v) Turnage & Cruickshank
4 18 2S+1 W -140 11 7 Crofts & Crofts (v) Jackson & Gordon
9 13 2S+2 W -170 5 13 Slatcher & Holland Serby & Moore
3 16 2S+1 W -140 11 7 Nicolle & Bridge Stanford & Franklin
8 11 3H-2 N -200 2 16 Jacobs & Fisher Harper & Hackett
2 14 3H-1 N -100 17 1 Carlisle & Marsh (v) Cooke & Lucy
7 19 2S+1 W -140 11 7 Bingham & Osmer (v) Hedley & Hedley
12 1 3H-1 N -100 17 1 Cornell & Beer Sitch & Wing
17 6 1NT-4 S -400 0 18 Heath & Heath (v) Smart & Lunn
Board 30
NS EW Contract Dec Lead Score MP MP NS EW
5 20 4H= E -420 3 15 Wright & Watson Dias & Hair
10 15 4S= W -420 3 15 Freedman & Freedman (v) Turnage & Cruickshank
4 18 4H= W -420 3 15 Crofts & Crofts (v) Jackson & Gordon
9 13 3NT-1 W 50 14 4 Slatcher & Holland Serby & Moore
3 16 2Cx-2 N -300 10 8 Nicolle & Bridge Stanford & Franklin
8 11 3NT-2 W 100 18 0 Jacobs & Fisher Harper & Hackett
2 14 3NT= W -400 8 10 Carlisle & Marsh (v) Cooke & Lucy
7 19 4H-1 E 50 14 4 Bingham & Osmer (v) Hedley & Hedley
12 1 4H= E -420 3 15 Cornell & Beer Sitch & Wing
17 6 3NT-1 W 50 14 4 Heath & Heath (v) Smart & Lunn