UCAR Ali · SAYIN ABIM
vs par split: bidding +1.07 · play -0.79
Strength of schedule: opponents averaged +0.51/bd (a tough draw) → opponent-adjusted -0.10/bd
Card play — on target: opening leads 77.8% · declarer play 60.0% · defence 92.9%
Bidding activity — not a pass: 40.4% (40/99)
| vs NT | vs a suit | |
|---|---|---|
| Opening leads | 100.0% (1) | 75.0% (8) |
| Declarer play | 0.0% (1) | 75.0% (4) |
| Defence | 66.7% (3) | 100.0% (11) |
Opening leads by suit led: ♠ 66.7% (3) · ♥ 100.0% (1) · ♦ 75.0% (4) · ♣ 100.0% (1)
vs par by strain: NT +2.00 (8) · a suit -0.40 (20)
vs par by level: part-score +2.00 (4) · game +0.95 (20) · slam -4.75 (4)
By role: declaring -0.29/bd (-3.00 vs par · 14) · defending -0.92/bd (+3.57 vs par · 14)
By vulnerability: vulnerable -0.74/bd (+0.43 vs par · 14) · not vulnerable -0.48/bd (+0.14 vs par · 14)
By round↑ top
| Round | Partner | Opponents | Room | Bds | Butler | Avg | vs par |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Round 5 | N.Zorlu | J.Luczeczko – S.Grabala | Open | 14 | +6.1 | +0.44 | -0.43 |
| Round 6 | N.Zorlu | J.Balasovs – J.Ilzins | Open | 14 | -23.1 | -1.65 | +1.00 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| +7.8 | Round 5 | GDANSK | 3 | 4♠ | ♥A | = | +0 |
| +6.5 | Round 5 | GDANSK | 13 | 4♦ | ♠K | -1 | +13 |
| +5.1 | Round 5 | GDANSK | 11 | 3NT | ♦7 | = | +0 |
| +4.6 | Round 6 | LATVIA | 17 | 4♠x | ♦3 | -3 | +3 |
| +3.7 | Round 6 | LATVIA | 22 | 4♥ | ♠J | -2 | +6 |
| +3.5 | Round 6 | LATVIA | 23 | 4♠ | ♦3 | +1 | +12 |
| +2.9 | Round 5 | GDANSK | 2 | 3NT | ♠2 | +1 | +1 |
| +2.6 | Round 5 | GDANSK | 12 | 6♦ | ♥5 | = | -2 |
| +1.6 | Round 6 | LATVIA | 18 | 3NT | ♦T | = | +5 |
| +1.2 | Round 6 | LATVIA | 20 | 4♥ | ♠5 | +1 | +0 |
| +0.7 | Round 5 | GDANSK | 9 | 4NT | ♠Q | +1 | +11 |
| +0.5 | Round 5 | GDANSK | 5 | 3♥ | ♦K | +1 | -6 |
| +0.5 | Round 6 | LATVIA | 21 | 1NT | ♠5 | = | +5 |
| +0.3 | Round 6 | LATVIA | 26 | 4♥ | ♣3 | = | -1 |
| +0.1 | Round 5 | GDANSK | 1 | 4♠ | ♦4 | +2 | +11 |
| -0.1 | Round 5 | GDANSK | 14 | 4♠ | ♥K | = | +0 |
| -0.9 | Round 6 | LATVIA | 16 | 4♥ | ♣4 | +1 | +0 |
| -1.1 | Round 6 | LATVIA | 19 | 3NT | ♠Q | +3 | +10 |
| -2.4 | Round 5 | GDANSK | 8 | 2♠ | ♦3 | -1 | -4 |
| -2.5 | Round 5 | GDANSK | 6 | 4♥ | ♣4 | +1 | +0 |
| -2.7 | Round 6 | LATVIA | 27 | 3NT | ♥6 | +1 | -1 |
| -2.8 | Round 6 | LATVIA | 24 | 7♠ | ♣K | = | +0 |
| -3.6 | Round 5 | GDANSK | 10 | 4♠x | ♣K | -1 | -8 |
| -3.7 | Round 5 | GDANSK | 7 | 6♥ | ♠Q | -2 | -17 |
| -6.7 | Round 6 | LATVIA | 28 | 4♠ | ♠7 | = | -10 |
| -7.8 | Round 5 | GDANSK | 4 | 4♥x | ♦5 | = | -5 |
| -9.9 | Round 6 | LATVIA | 15 | 7♠ | ♣2 | = | +0 |
| -14.4 | Round 6 | LATVIA | 25 | 3NTx | ♦J | -4 | -15 |