DEWASME Isabelle · BRUSSELS BRIDGE CLUB
vs par split: bidding +0.91 · play -0.28
Strength of schedule: opponents averaged -0.17/bd (an easy draw) → opponent-adjusted -0.15/bd
Card play — on target: opening leads 100.0% #1 of 56 · declarer play 57.1% #49 of 56 · defence 82.4% #43 of 56
| vs NT | vs a suit | |
|---|---|---|
| Opening leads | 100.0% (1) | 100.0% (7) |
| Declarer play | 60.0% (5) | 50.0% (2) |
| Defence | 100.0% (3) | 78.6% (14) |
Opening leads by suit led: ♠ 100.0% (2) · ♥ 100.0% (2) · ♦ 100.0% (1) · ♣ 100.0% (3)
vs par by strain: NT +0.25 (8) · a suit +0.75 (24)
vs par by level: part-score -1.20 (15) · game +3.06 (16) · slam -11.00 (1)
By role: declaring +1.41/bd (+0.40 vs par · 15) · defending -1.20/bd (+0.82 vs par · 17)
By vulnerability: vulnerable -0.06/bd (+1.25 vs par · 16) · not vulnerable +0.10/bd (+0.00 vs par · 16)
By round↑ top
| Round | Partner | Opponents | Room | Bds | Butler | Avg | vs par |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Semifinal | D.Kurgan | M.Wrobel – R.Szczepanski | Closed | 16 | -3.3 | -0.21 | +0.94 |
| Final | D.Kurgan | M.Pilipovic – O.Stanicic | Closed | 16 | +4.0 | +0.25 | +0.31 |
Every board — best Butler first↑ top
vs par = IMPs this pair scored above (+) or below (−) the board’s double-dummy par — what bidding and play (theirs and the opponents’) added or gave away against perfect play.
| Butler | Round | Opponents | Bd | Contract | Lead | Res | vs par |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| +10.8 | Final | JT2 | 12 | 4♠x | ♣A | = | +13 |
| +5.3 | Semifinal | ESKOM WARSZAWA | 3 | 3NT | ♣6 | = | +7 |
| +4.8 | Semifinal | ESKOM WARSZAWA | 4 | 2♥ | ♣4 | +2 | +10 |
| +3.9 | Semifinal | ESKOM WARSZAWA | 5 | 4♥ | ♦7 | = | +11 |
| +3.6 | Semifinal | ESKOM WARSZAWA | 15 | 4♠ | ♥A | -1 | +6 |
| +3.4 | Semifinal | ESKOM WARSZAWA | 13 | 5♦ | ♥9 | = | +0 |
| +2.6 | Final | JT2 | 7 | 4♥ | ♣J | = | +9 |
| +2.4 | Final | JT2 | 8 | 2♥ | ♠T | +1 | +1 |
| +1.9 | Final | JT2 | 1 | 3NT | ♥T | = | +0 |
| +1.4 | Final | JT2 | 9 | 2♥ | ♥A | = | +0 |
| +1.3 | Semifinal | ESKOM WARSZAWA | 6 | 5♦ | ♦J | +1 | +0 |
| +1.2 | Final | JT2 | 4 | 3♠ | ♠9 | = | +0 |
| +0.9 | Semifinal | ESKOM WARSZAWA | 14 | 2♥ | ♦7 | = | +0 |
| +0.8 | Final | JT2 | 3 | 4♥ | ♥9 | -1 | +10 |
| +0.4 | Final | JT2 | 5 | 4♥ | ♣6 | = | +1 |
| +0.4 | Final | JT2 | 14 | 3NT | ♦3 | +1 | +0 |
| +0.3 | Semifinal | ESKOM WARSZAWA | 9 | 6♥ | ♠7 | = | -11 |
| +0.2 | Final | JT2 | 6 | 3♣ | ♥K | -2 | -1 |
| -0.1 | Final | JT2 | 2 | 3NT | ♦6 | +2 | -10 |
| -0.3 | Semifinal | ESKOM WARSZAWA | 10 | 2♠ | ♥6 | -1 | -1 |
| -0.7 | Semifinal | ESKOM WARSZAWA | 2 | 2♥ | ♦9 | +1 | -1 |
| -1.2 | Final | JT2 | 10 | 3♥x | ♣K | -1 | -9 |
| -1.3 | Semifinal | ESKOM WARSZAWA | 1 | 3♣ | ♠5 | -1 | -2 |
| -2.0 | Semifinal | ESKOM WARSZAWA | 11 | 2♥x | ♦A | -1 | +0 |
| -2.5 | Semifinal | ESKOM WARSZAWA | 16 | 1NT | ♠A | = | +0 |
| -2.7 | Final | JT2 | 13 | 3NT | ♣5 | +1 | +0 |
| -3.5 | Semifinal | ESKOM WARSZAWA | 12 | 4♦ | ♠3 | -1 | -9 |
| -4.6 | Final | JT2 | 11 | 4♠ | ♣K | = | -8 |
| -4.6 | Final | JT2 | 16 | 4♥ | ♦5 | = | +0 |
| -4.9 | Final | JT2 | 15 | 2♣ | ♠9 | +2 | -1 |
| -6.7 | Semifinal | ESKOM WARSZAWA | 8 | 3NT | ♥3 | +1 | +10 |
| -9.8 | Semifinal | ESKOM WARSZAWA | 7 | 1NTx | ♥3 | -3 | -5 |