Playing in the last round of a Swiss event you have a small lead with several teams a few VP’s behind. This is the last board of a match that seemed pretty flat, so you need to get it right.
You pick up 
A J 9 6 5 4 
— 
A T 
A T 7 5 3.
With neither vul, your partner opens 1 in first seat. You respond 1 and he rebids 3, opponents passing throughout. You rebid 3 and partner now bids 5.
What do you make of this, and what should be your plan?
Playing in a Swiss Teams, you pick up the following exciting hand: — A 5 4 3 A K Q 9 8 6 5 4 5.
With neither vulnerable, your partner opens 1 and RHO passes. You are interested in only three specific cards in partner’s hand. What is your plan for getting this information?
To kick things off, let us suppose that you had exclusion Blackwood available. Your partnership has, in a general way, agreed to play this. My preliminary poll of players shows that the agreed step responses vary widely. Do you have an agreement with your partner? How does the queen ask work?
I was thinking back about bridge results in 2006 and noticed something unusual, at least for me. It caused me to take a closer look.
Back in the 70′s the top team in the Upper Midwest was the Minneapolis crew including Dave Lehman, Dick Melson, Jim Hall, Howie Weinstein, and Steve Garner, in various combinations. They created some interesting statistics like “slugging percentage” and the like. They kept track of percentage of possible masterpoints won, percentage of swiss team matches won (it was mostly W-L in those days) and other statistics. The top competitors with them were a Madison team consisting of Phil Warden, Steve Reuschlein, Steve Bloom, and Denny Hoover. Arriving in Madison with over 200 MP’s, it was my objective to earn a place on that team!
I have never tracked my record in such a statistical fashion, but I do like to make note of certain goals and achievements. 2006 was interesting.
On the national front, things were disappointing. In 2003 I made the quarters in the Long Beach Spingold. In 2004 I made the quarters in the Reno Vandy (once again with Bill Wickham as pard, but a completely different team). In 2005 I made the semi’s of the Senior KO in Denver with a completely different team. While I picked up some platinum points in 2006, I had no high finishes in NABC’s, no reflection on my good teams and partners.
As has been the pattern for the last several years of business demands, I did not play the mid-week regional games, so my competition was a few regional and sectional weekend plus part of two NABC’s. I entered 33 events and finished first or second in eleven. The surprising part of this was that my top finishes included EIGHT different partners and TWENTY-TWO different teammates.
My only multiple top finishes were with Brad Carmichael. Had he not moved to KC, I would have played even more with him, as I have in past years. 
Brad is an extremely talented player, a good analyst, and a fine partner both at the table and after the game. After three years of medical school, five years of residency, and one year of a fellowship, he is joining a medical practice full-time. Now that he has more vacation time, Brad will start playing in the NABC’s.
A highlight of the year was winning the Chicago Invitational Pairs. This is the toughest pair event in our area, drawing players who have won in the past year throughout the District as well as some of the “old-timers” who accept the invitation to compete. At the time we won, we were also the holders of the District GNT championship. I do not have the complete records, but I cannot find a case when a pair held both championships simultaneously. My confident young partner wonders what the big deal is, since his only other entry (with me) was a second place finish three years ago. Ahh, to be young again, pre-empting with such abandon. I guess it is good for the old guy to have a young partner like Brad:)
I appreciate the fine efforts of my partners and teammates in 2006. One of the nice aspects of the year was getting a little more content on this site. I hope that readers will comment and contribute more in 2007, and I will try to pose some more interesting problems.
There are several players who have interest in playing with our group, so perhaps we can do more to put the team methods on the site.
Good luck in the new year to all, and best of luck at the tables.