FRUSCOLONI Leonardo · OVERDECK
vs par split: bidding -1.64 · play +0.14
Strength of schedule: opponents averaged -0.24/bd (an easy draw) → opponent-adjusted -0.51/bd
Card play — on target: opening leads 66.7% · declarer play 60.0% · defence 80.0%
Bidding activity — not a pass: 42.5% (17/40)
| vs NT | vs a suit | |
|---|---|---|
| Opening leads | 100.0% (1) | 50.0% (2) |
| Declarer play | 0.0% (1) | 75.0% (4) |
| Defence | 50.0% (2) | 100.0% (3) |
Opening leads by suit led: ♥ 100.0% (1) · ♦ 50.0% (2)
vs par by strain: NT -1.60 (5) · a suit -1.44 (9)
vs par by level: part-score -3.00 (4) · game -0.90 (10)
By role: declaring -1.19/bd (-4.11 vs par · 9) · defending +1.40/bd (+3.20 vs par · 5)
By vulnerability: vulnerable -0.63/bd (-2.14 vs par · 7) · not vulnerable +0.10/bd (-0.86 vs par · 7)
By round↑ top
| Round | Partner | Opponents | Room | Bds | Butler | Avg | vs par |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Round 6 | A.Gerli | B.Krawczyk – F.Kurlit | Open | 14 | -3.7 | -0.26 | -1.50 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| +5.8 | Round 6 | EMI | 28 | 4♠ | ♦5 | -2 | +13 |
| +3.6 | Round 6 | EMI | 19 | 3NT | ♦A | -2 | +6 |
| +2.8 | Round 6 | EMI | 25 | 4♥ | ♦9 | -1 | +5 |
| +2.0 | Round 6 | EMI | 23 | 3NT | ♣4 | +1 | +1 |
| +1.0 | Round 6 | EMI | 24 | 1NT | ♥3 | +2 | -6 |
| +0.8 | Round 6 | EMI | 27 | 4♦ | ♠T | = | +0 |
| +0.5 | Round 6 | EMI | 16 | 3♦ | ♥K | = | +0 |
| +0.2 | Round 6 | EMI | 17 | 4♠ | ♣6 | = | -1 |
| -0.7 | Round 6 | EMI | 21 | 3♠ | ♥A | = | -6 |
| -1.2 | Round 6 | EMI | 20 | 4♥ | ♠A | -3 | -7 |
| -2.4 | Round 6 | EMI | 15 | 4♠x | ♣A | -2 | -5 |
| -4.0 | Round 6 | EMI | 18 | 3NT | ♥J | +1 | -1 |
| -5.9 | Round 6 | EMI | 22 | 3NT | ♠3 | -2 | -8 |
| -6.2 | Round 6 | EMI | 26 | 4♠ | ♥5 | -1 | -12 |