Why the change in fortune? Mainly because, after some high-powered transfer negotiations by the captain, we were able to field some of the county's strongest players. But also because the rest of us played rather better than in previous years. And we had more than our share of good fortune, such as opponents revoking to concede a cold game, or not bidding a grand slam with 17 top tricks.
Even with a stronger team, our realistic hopes were for mid-table respectability, as our group included three very powerful teams in Middlesex, Surrey and Cambridge, as well as a Hampshire squad that included the EBU chairman, a Dorset resident playing under a flag of convenience.
Dorset last qualified for the Tollemache final about 20 years ago (with a team that included four of this year's selection) and on that occasion our group also included a Hampshire team with a Dorset resident who had unwisely chosen to play for the opposition. That proved to be a good omen, as we were always near the top of the table, in first place overnight and still leading with one round to go. Ann and I were sitting out and watching anxiously on the rolling scoreboard as Middlesex overtook us and Cambridge closed to within 1 VP, but we held on to second spot and a place in the final.
This freak was a key hand in our match against Cambridge, for we gained 31 imps.
This was the auction at our table where we faced Paul Barden and Jon Cooke. The bids up to 4♥ seem fairly automatic. West might now punt 6♣ and hope partner has two aces, but 5♣ was the right action on the actual hand. North's double was not alerted but was intended as some sort of action double, asking partner to bid 5♥ unless he has enough in his own hand to want to defend. My 5♦ was a bit dubious, but worked well when it encouraged South to double rather than bid on. With the ace of spades onside, 5♦ was cold and we scored up 550.
At the other tables Daphne and Mike played in a sensible 5♣, while Janet and Alan sacrificed in 5♥ for -300. At the fourth table the Cambridge East chose to bid 5♦ at his first turn. West bid 6♣ which went one down.
This hand from our match against Hereford had challenges in both bidding and play, but I failed on both counts.
That was the bidding at our table, playing 2-over-1 game forcing. I think that I should have bid 4♠ at the end of the auction, as my hearts are not good enough for 3NT opposite a singleton, and maybe Ann should also have bid 4♠. Looking at the North-South hands, all game contracts are dubious but 4♠ is the best of a bad bunch.
Against my 3NT West kicked off with a heart and East showed an odd number, so I ducked the first two rounds and won the third, discarding diamonds from dummy. 3NT can be made by crossing to dummy in a minor suit and leading the 10 of spades. If East covers you set up spades and make four spades and two clubs to go with your three top tricks in the red suits. If East ducks you give up on spades and play a club to the 10, instead making three spades and three clubs.
I'm not beating myself up about missing this line - and nor should I as West is more likely to have a doubleton honour than a small doubleton in spades. I just played spades from the top and went down. I might have done better by ducking the second round of spades to try and endplay East, but dummy has been squeezed on the third round of hearts and forced to come down to two cards in one of the minors. East can defeat the contract by exiting in that minor.
4♠ would have been an interesting contract to play. It seems as if you have four losers - two spades, a club and a diamond but you also have ten winners - two spades, ace of hearts and two heart ruffs, two diamonds and three clubs. There are several winning lines, but say you win the heart lead, ruff a heart, cash the king of spades and duck a spade. East will return a red suit which you win in hand and play a club to the 10. Eventually, one of declarer's losing diamonds goes on a club winner and the other falls on the same trick as East's trump winner - a trump elopement. That would have been a great play to find, and maybe not impossible as West's take-out double had given a clue to the distribution.
At the other tables both Hereford pairs went down in 3NT. Mike played in 4♠ and made it, though only after a mis-defence.
At the other tables Daphne and Mike played in a sensible 5♣, while Janet and Alan sacrificed in 5♥ for -300. At the fourth table the Cambridge East chose to bid 5♦ at his first turn. West bid 6♣ which went one down.
This hand from our match against Hereford had challenges in both bidding and play, but I failed on both counts.
That was the bidding at our table, playing 2-over-1 game forcing. I think that I should have bid 4♠ at the end of the auction, as my hearts are not good enough for 3NT opposite a singleton, and maybe Ann should also have bid 4♠. Looking at the North-South hands, all game contracts are dubious but 4♠ is the best of a bad bunch.
Against my 3NT West kicked off with a heart and East showed an odd number, so I ducked the first two rounds and won the third, discarding diamonds from dummy. 3NT can be made by crossing to dummy in a minor suit and leading the 10 of spades. If East covers you set up spades and make four spades and two clubs to go with your three top tricks in the red suits. If East ducks you give up on spades and play a club to the 10, instead making three spades and three clubs.
I'm not beating myself up about missing this line - and nor should I as West is more likely to have a doubleton honour than a small doubleton in spades. I just played spades from the top and went down. I might have done better by ducking the second round of spades to try and endplay East, but dummy has been squeezed on the third round of hearts and forced to come down to two cards in one of the minors. East can defeat the contract by exiting in that minor.
4♠ would have been an interesting contract to play. It seems as if you have four losers - two spades, a club and a diamond but you also have ten winners - two spades, ace of hearts and two heart ruffs, two diamonds and three clubs. There are several winning lines, but say you win the heart lead, ruff a heart, cash the king of spades and duck a spade. East will return a red suit which you win in hand and play a club to the 10. Eventually, one of declarer's losing diamonds goes on a club winner and the other falls on the same trick as East's trump winner - a trump elopement. That would have been a great play to find, and maybe not impossible as West's take-out double had given a clue to the distribution.
At the other tables both Hereford pairs went down in 3NT. Mike played in 4♠ and made it, though only after a mis-defence.
