OFIR Gilad · Israel White
vs par split: bidding -0.41 · play -0.59
Strength of schedule: opponents averaged -0.33/bd (an easy draw) → opponent-adjusted -0.98/bd
Card play — on target: opening leads 50.0% · declarer play 75.0% · defence 92.9%
| vs NT | vs a suit | |
|---|---|---|
| Opening leads | 0.0% (1) | 66.7% (3) |
| Declarer play | 0.0% (1) | 85.7% (7) |
| Defence | 83.3% (6) | 100.0% (8) |
Opening leads by suit led: ♠ 0.0% (2) · ♥ 100.0% (1) · ♦ 100.0% (1)
vs par by strain: NT +3.00 (8) · a suit -2.33 (24)
vs par by level: part-score -1.43 (14) · game +0.08 (13) · slam -2.60 (5)
By role: declaring -0.68/bd (-4.22 vs par · 18) · defending -0.59/bd (+3.14 vs par · 14)
By vulnerability: vulnerable -1.61/bd (-2.19 vs par · 16) · not vulnerable +0.33/bd (+0.19 vs par · 16)
By round↑ top
| Round | Partner | Opponents | Room | Bds | Butler | Avg | vs par |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Semifinal | D.Padon | E.Wladow – M.Elinescu | Closed | 16 | +13.0 | +0.81 | -0.38 |
| Final | D.Padon | J.Kalita – M.Nowosadzki | Open | 16 | -33.6 | -2.10 | -1.62 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| +10.6 | Semifinal | Burghausen 1 | 15 | 2NT | ♠7 | -1 | +12 |
| +6.1 | Semifinal | Burghausen 1 | 7 | 3NT | ♠4 | -1 | +12 |
| +5.7 | Semifinal | Burghausen 1 | 11 | 6♣ | ♥Q | +1 | -11 |
| +3.9 | Final | Consus Kalisz | 12 | 6♠ | ♣9 | = | +0 |
| +3.7 | Semifinal | Burghausen 1 | 4 | 2♠x | ♥2 | -1 | -2 |
| +3.2 | Semifinal | Burghausen 1 | 8 | 4♥ | ♠3 | +1 | +0 |
| +2.8 | Semifinal | Burghausen 1 | 6 | 4♠ | ♣4 | -2 | +6 |
| +2.3 | Final | Consus Kalisz | 1 | 3♥ | ♠6 | -1 | -2 |
| +1.7 | Semifinal | Burghausen 1 | 3 | 3♦ | ♠K | = | +0 |
| +0.7 | Final | Consus Kalisz | 7 | 1NT | ♦2 | = | +0 |
| +0.5 | Semifinal | Burghausen 1 | 14 | 2NT | ♠2 | = | +0 |
| +0.2 | Semifinal | Burghausen 1 | 12 | 2♠ | ♠3 | +1 | +0 |
| -0.0 | Final | Consus Kalisz | 2 | 4♠ | ♦Q | +1 | +0 |
| -0.1 | Semifinal | Burghausen 1 | 16 | 3NT | ♥5 | +1 | -1 |
| -0.3 | Final | Consus Kalisz | 14 | 3♦ | ♥5 | = | +0 |
| -0.6 | Final | Consus Kalisz | 5 | 4♥ | ♠5 | +3 | +9 |
| -0.8 | Semifinal | Burghausen 1 | 9 | 2♠ | ♣A | +1 | -10 |
| -1.5 | Semifinal | Burghausen 1 | 1 | 4♠ | ♣6 | -1 | -4 |
| -1.7 | Final | Consus Kalisz | 3 | 5♦ | ♠J | = | -5 |
| -1.9 | Final | Consus Kalisz | 6 | 3NT | ♠2 | +1 | +0 |
| -2.2 | Semifinal | Burghausen 1 | 5 | 4♦ | ♠K | -1 | +2 |
| -2.6 | Semifinal | Burghausen 1 | 2 | 2♥ | ♦A | -1 | -4 |
| -3.1 | Final | Consus Kalisz | 16 | 6♠ | ♣2 | = | +0 |
| -3.3 | Final | Consus Kalisz | 9 | 2♣ | ♦A | -1 | -12 |
| -3.4 | Final | Consus Kalisz | 15 | 4♠ | ♥K | -1 | -11 |
| -3.9 | Final | Consus Kalisz | 11 | 2NT | ♦6 | = | +1 |
| -4.9 | Final | Consus Kalisz | 4 | 4♥ | ♦3 | = | +1 |
| -5.1 | Final | Consus Kalisz | 13 | 3♥ | ♦K | -1 | -5 |
| -5.6 | Final | Consus Kalisz | 10 | 6♥ | ♦Q | +1 | -13 |
| -6.7 | Final | Consus Kalisz | 8 | 6♣ | ♠K | = | +11 |
| -6.9 | Semifinal | Burghausen 1 | 10 | 3NT | ♥3 | +2 | +0 |
| -7.4 | Semifinal | Burghausen 1 | 13 | 5♦ | ♠2 | -1 | -6 |