| Mar
20, 2007.
I just returned from the Nationals in St. Louis. What a letdown
after the previous Nationals in Honolulu! Maybe St. Louis has the
arch, the Cardinals, and nice suburbs, but the downtown area was
dark, deserted, and depressing. Oh well--we were there to play
bridge.
The most shocking deal of the week brought back memories of one
of my favorite bridge stories. Many years ago, Mark Cohen (NJ)
went minus 4600 on a partscore deal. His teammates were -140
against 2 .
Anyone who knows the IMP scale, is aware that it "ends"
at 4,000. At that point, the maximum swing of 24 IMPs is lost.
Knowing this, Mark was ready for the score comparison. When his
teammates innocently read out, "minus 140," he replied,
"Lose 'em All." His teammates didn't get it.
"What?" they asked. "Lose 'em All" Mark
repeated. Still not understanding that this "meant lose all
24 IMPS," one of them asked, "We could have held it to
minus 110--would that have made a difference?"
I've been waiting many years to have a chance to say "Lose
'em all." (Well, not really--I'd rather say "Win 'em
all.") In the St. Louis 2-Day National Swiss, some good
friends of mine came running up to me with a deal. Sure enough,
they "lost 'em all." Click
here to read how.
I can't say it was a great tournament for me. Just a bit
mediocre with overall placings in every event, but nothing higher
than 7th. If you can't do, you can write. At least I was chosen to
be the Bridge World magazine
reporter (a very prestigious job) and I wrote up the story of
Henner-Welland's win in the Vanderbilt.
On one wild deal, a special lead agreement was the key--click
here to read about it. I did have one other triumphant moment
when I made a spade slam with a 4-0 break. The Q1087
were behind my AJ653,
but one of those losers disappeared into thin air. To read Barry
Rigal's report of the deal, click
here.
Return to Larry's
website
|
