World Championship Semifinals: November 1-2, 2005
As the Semifinals of the Bermuda Bowl, Venice Cup, and Senior
Bowl began
Tuesday the Americas could be proud to have teams remaining in each of
these
events. In the Bermuda Bowl both American teams reached the Semifinals
where,
by rule, they faced each other, with the winner to battle either Italy
or
Sweden in the finals.
The match between USA1 and USA2 featured many of the best bridge players and partnerships in America.
The USA1 squad (Nickell Team) are
the defending Bermuda Bowl champions and are
familiar to anyone who has followed American or international bridge in
recent
decades. It is to no one's surprise that they have reached the
Semifinals and
are back to defend their title. The USA2 team (Ekeblad Team) followed a
strong
victory in the Spingold (premier knockout teams event at the Atlanta
2005
Summer NABC) with a hard-fought overtime win in the national team
trials in
Houston against another tough American team, anchored by the world
class
partnership of Larry Cohen and David Berkowitz. In reaching the
Semifinals,
where they expected to face the other American team, USA2 had
accomplished
their first goal for the Bermuda Bowl. But they were not satisfied and
fully
expect to accomplish their two remaining goals - beating their fellow
countrymen and winning their first Bermuda Bowl. Eric Greco and Jeff
Hampson
have proven themselves to be one of the top pairs in the world, capable
of
holding their own against any partnership, even the mighty Meckwell.
The key
for the USA2 squad would be the partnership of Fred Gitelman and Brad
Moss. Gitelman-Moss had not fully hit their stride in the
Quarterfinals. If USA2 were to going to knockoff the defending
champions then Gitelman-Moss were
going would need to step up their level of play and challenge
Hamman-Soloway. It is
interesting to notice the partnership interactions and personalities of
the
top pairs in the world. Hamman-Soloway and Meckstroth-Rodwell hardly
ever say
anything to each other during competition and they stay cool towards
their
partners even after disastrous results. Lauria-Versace (the top Italian
pair),
amazingly, seem to argue after almost every hand, even with good
results. Gitelman-Moss are much friendlier and more supportive of each
other at the
table. They use the same reassuring behavior that most players do,
telling
the
other things like "good lead" and "sorry, partner" between hands. This
encouraging behavior, though different from many of the top
professional
pairs, has served them well and has provided them with the
confidence
they needed to take on USA1, the dominant force in American bridge. The
Semifinal match consisted of six 16-board segments. The first two
segments
were relatively even with both teams feeling each other out. USA1
started
with a 5 IMP carryover and gained 8 IMPs and 5 IMPs in the first and
second
segments, respectively, to give them an 18 IMP lead going into the
third
segment. The third segment was important for USA2 with Gitelman-Moss
sitting
against Hamman-Soloway. Though USA1 won the segment 55-28 and increased
their
lead to 45 IMPs, Gitelman-Moss played well and more than held their own
against Hamman-Soloway. Gitelman-Moss were able to hold their mistakes
to a
minimum and avoid any disasters when they did make mistakes. Meanwhile,
they
put pressure on Hamman-Soloway and felt confident that they were
gaining the
upper hand on almost every board. Hamman-Soloway regained their focus
and
control, obtaining many positive scores late in the segment, but most
of the
IMPs for USA2 were not lost at this table. Though the third segment
resulted
in USA1 greatly extending their lead, the important thing for USA2 was
that it
showed that Gitelman-Moss could play with both Meckwell and
Hamman-Soloway. This helped set the stage for a great battle in the
final three segments the
next day. In the fourth 16-board segment Gitelman-Moss sat against
Meckstroth-Rodwell. The session was solidly played by both pairs, with
Gitelman-Moss keeping Meckwell from performing any of their magic.
Gitelman-Moss bid to solid contracts, played steady defense, and
escaped their
mistakes with little or no loses. USA2 gained 10 IMPs to close the gap
to +35
IMPs for USA1. In the fifth 16-board segment Gitelman-Moss sat against
Nickell-Freeman. Gitelman-Moss played their strongest set yet in the
Semifinals. They gave Nickell-Freeman few chances to gain IMPs and they
skillfully bid and played to gain 24 IMPs on just three boards (#2, 7,
12). The following hand is a nice example of both Gitelman and
Moss using good bidding and good judgement. For result of 3NT+1,
they gained 10 IMPs. |
| Brd: 2 |  K 9 8 5 3 |
|
| Dlr: E |  9 7 4 |
|
| Vul: NS |  A 10 8 |
|
 K 2 |
||
| A Q |
J 10 7 4 |
|
| A K 10 8 6 5 |
Q |
|
| J 9 5 4 |
Q 3 2 |
|
| A |
Q 9 8 6 3 |
|
| 6 2 |
||
| J 3 2 |
||
| K 7 6 |
||
| J 10 7 5 4 |
| East | South | West | North |
| Moss | Freeman | Gitelman | Nickell |
| Pass | Pass | 1 |
1 |
| Pass | Pass | 2NT (1) | Pass |
| 3NT (2) | All pass |
| 1= Good hand with long hearts (1NT would show 18-19 HCP Balanced) |
| 2= Great secondary values for Notrump |
| Contract: 3NT by W |
|
In total, USA2 gained 17 IMPs
on the segment to close to 18 IMPs behind with
one final 16-board segment to play. For the final 16-boards
Gitelman-Moss
faced Meckwell in the closed room, while Greco-Hampson faces
Hamman-Soloway in
the open room. Facing Meckstroth-Rodwell in the final 16-boards of the
Bermuda Bowl, down 18 IMPs, is a daunting task for anyone. But
Gitelman-Moss played well and gave a valiant effort. Sitting against
Meckwell in this situation, a partnership needs to continue to play
good
bridge, which Gitelman-Moss did, but one can not just sit back and play
steady
bridge. A pair trailing late in a match needs to put pressure on their
opponents and force them to make difficult decisions. This is
particularly
true playing against a pair like Meckwell who, though more often than
not
accomplish brilliance at the bridge table, are prone to some disastrous
results. Gitelman-Moss did exactly that, playing active bridge and
forcing
the set to be filled with many swings. Over the 16-board set there were
swings of 14, 12, 11, 11, 10, 7, 5, 5, 4, and 2 IMPs. That is exactly
the
kind
of set that USA2 needed in order to overcome their deficit.
Unfortunately for
USA2, some of the Gitelman-Moss aggression did not go in their favor
and
Greco-Hampson were forced into many difficult play and defensive
situations
that, in general, did not go their way. USA1 also play steady enough
bridge
to not give away many unearned IMPs. The final score for the sixth
segment
was 51-30 to USA1, resulting in a USA1 victory over USA2, 211-172.
In the end, USA2 did not have it in them to overcome the reigning champions. But they proved to everyone that they are a team on the rise and will be major players in the years to come. In spite of the disappointment of losing to their fellow Americans, USA2 should be proud of what they accomplished in this Bermuda Bowl. In the other Semifinal Bermuda Bowl match, Italy had little trouble with Sweden, forcing the Swedes to concede after just five segments. Thus, the 2005 Bermuda Bowl will culminate with the much anticipated rematch from the previous Bermuda Bowl Finals - USA1 vs. Italy. In the Venice Cup Semifinals USA1 faced the dominant French team. The American women battled hard, but were unable to overcome a difficult start that left them trailing 50-1 after just 8 boards. France cruised to a 262-150 victory. In the other Semifinal match, Germany was forced into a tough battle with the Netherlands for the first five segments. But in the final segment, Germany blew the match open with a 71-8 win and triumphed 241-164. Thus, Germany and France will face off in a rematch of the last Venice Cup Final, with France hoping to avenge their defeat. In the Senior Bowl Semifinals, Indonesia made a late exciting comeback against a strong Denmark squad. Down 38.5 IMPs after four segments, Indonesia managed to win by a final score of 168.5-156. Meanwhile, USA1 dominated the Netherlands, with the Netherlands conceding 223-117 after just five segments. Thus, USA1 will face Indonesia in the Senior Bowl Finals. The Transnational Team continued
the preliminary Swiss-stage of the event over
the past two days, preparing for the final knockout-stage. The
leaders are currently a strong Russian team (777). |