HAYMAN PIAFSKY Jessica · HAYMAN

19rank
+0.8Butler · 14 bds
+0.06per board
±3.6swing
+1.29vs par /bd
-0.05adjusted /bd
by round

vs par split: bidding +0.57 · play +0.71

Strength of schedule: opponents averaged -0.11/bd (an easy draw) → opponent-adjusted -0.05/bd

Card play — on target: opening leads 100.0% · declarer play 50.0% · defence 88.9%

Card play by contract type — on target
vs NTvs a suit
Opening leads100.0% (3)100.0% (2)
Declarer play0.0% (1)100.0% (1)
Defence80.0% (5)100.0% (4)

Opening leads by suit led: ♠ 100.0% (1) · ♥ 100.0% (1) · ♦ 100.0% (2) · ♣ 100.0% (1)

vs par by strain: NT +3.83 (6) · a suit -0.62 (8)

vs par by level: part-score +0.43 (7) · game +2.17 (6) · slam +2.00 (1)

By role: declaring -0.28/bd (+1.00 vs par · 5) · defending +0.24/bd (+1.44 vs par · 9)

By vulnerability: vulnerable -0.54/bd (+0.14 vs par · 7) · not vulnerable +0.66/bd (+2.43 vs par · 7)

By round↑ top

RoundPartnerOpponentsRoomBdsButlerAvgvs par
QuarterfinalG.BrewiakK.Mccallum – L.BakerOpen14+0.8+0.06+1.29

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.

ButlerRoundOpponentsBdContractLeadResvs par
+7.1QuarterfinalBAKER53♣♥Q=+12
+6.9QuarterfinalBAKER133NT♥5-2+7
+3.1QuarterfinalBAKER22♦x♠A-2+8
+2.9QuarterfinalBAKER83NT♠Q-3+6
-0.0QuarterfinalBAKER13NT♦7+2+0
-0.0QuarterfinalBAKER113NT♦5+2+0
-0.7QuarterfinalBAKER33♠♣A-1-2
-0.9QuarterfinalBAKER63NT♦4+3+11
-1.0QuarterfinalBAKER42♦♦9=+0
-1.4QuarterfinalBAKER101NT♦3=-1
-2.4QuarterfinalBAKER93♣♠A-2-11
-2.6QuarterfinalBAKER146♣♠Q=+2
-4.3QuarterfinalBAKER73♥♣6-2-3
-5.9QuarterfinalBAKER124♠♦J-2-11