LI Yongchuan · GUANGZHOU PEARL RIVE
vs par split: bidding +0.71 · play +1.26
Strength of schedule: opponents averaged -0.44/bd (an easy draw) → opponent-adjusted +1.26/bd
Card play — on target: opening leads 80.0% #114 of 277 · declarer play 90.0% #38 of 277 · defence 86.7% #95 of 277
| vs NT | vs a suit | |
|---|---|---|
| Opening leads | · | 80.0% (5) |
| Declarer play | 80.0% (5) | 100.0% (5) |
| Defence | 100.0% (2) | 84.6% (13) |
Opening leads by suit led: ♠ 66.7% (3) · ♣ 100.0% (2)
vs par by strain: NT +2.58 (12) · a suit +1.65 (23)
vs par by level: part-score +1.06 (17) · game +2.33 (15) · slam +5.33 (3)
By role: declaring +2.24/bd (+0.95 vs par · 20) · defending +0.96/bd (+3.33 vs par · 15)
By vulnerability: vulnerable +2.41/bd (+3.56 vs par · 18) · not vulnerable +0.93/bd (+0.29 vs par · 17)
By round↑ top
| Round | Partner | Opponents | Room | Bds | Butler | Avg | vs par |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Round 1 | J.Luo | W.Guo – X.Xue | Closed | 7 | +15.5 | +2.21 | +2.29 |
| Round 2 | J.Luo | Y.Huang – X.Hu | Closed | 7 | +5.7 | +0.81 | +2.86 |
| Round 4 | J.Luo | G.Manna – K.Samant | Closed | 7 | +33.9 | +4.84 | +3.14 |
| Round 5 | J.Luo | I.Ivanov – R.Gunev | Closed | 7 | -2.6 | -0.37 | +1.14 |
| Round 6 | J.Luo | H.Zhang – P.Gao | Closed | 7 | +6.7 | +0.96 | +0.43 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| +11.9 | Round 4 | PODDAR DEVELOPERS | 28 | 3♠x | ♦K | = | +14 |
| +10.8 | Round 1 | BEIJING LAWYERS | 3 | 3NT | ♦Q | = | +10 |
| +9.9 | Round 2 | PING AN CHINA | 10 | 4♥ | ♠K | -1 | +12 |
| +8.1 | Round 4 | PODDAR DEVELOPERS | 23 | 3NT | ♠3 | +1 | +10 |
| +7.3 | Round 6 | BRIDGE ASSOCIATION OF FUJIAN P | 9 | 6♣x | ♥4 | -2 | +5 |
| +6.7 | Round 2 | PING AN CHINA | 13 | 4♠ | ♦4 | +2 | +17 |
| +6.2 | Round 4 | PODDAR DEVELOPERS | 22 | 4♥ | ♠7 | = | +1 |
| +5.1 | Round 4 | PODDAR DEVELOPERS | 26 | 2♠ | ♣A | = | +6 |
| +3.2 | Round 1 | BEIJING LAWYERS | 1 | 3NT | ♦7 | +1 | +0 |
| +3.2 | Round 4 | PODDAR DEVELOPERS | 24 | 1NT | ♥4 | +2 | +2 |
| +3.2 | Round 5 | HAUGE | 4 | 4♠ | ♣9 | -1 | +6 |
| +3.1 | Round 1 | BEIJING LAWYERS | 4 | 1NT | ♣A | = | +12 |
| +2.7 | Round 5 | HAUGE | 3 | 3NT | ♥5 | +1 | +1 |
| +2.3 | Round 1 | BEIJING LAWYERS | 2 | 3♥ | ♣10 | +1 | +10 |
| +2.1 | Round 6 | BRIDGE ASSOCIATION OF FUJIAN P | 11 | 3♣ | ♣5 | = | +0 |
| +1.7 | Round 6 | BRIDGE ASSOCIATION OF FUJIAN P | 12 | 4♠x | ♦3 | -3 | +4 |
| +1.1 | Round 6 | BRIDGE ASSOCIATION OF FUJIAN P | 8 | 3♠ | ♦K | -1 | -2 |
| +0.7 | Round 1 | BEIJING LAWYERS | 5 | 3♥ | ♠K | = | +0 |
| +0.4 | Round 5 | HAUGE | 1 | 4♥ | ♠K | = | +1 |
| +0.1 | Round 5 | HAUGE | 2 | 3♥ | ♥2 | -1 | -1 |
| -0.0 | Round 6 | BRIDGE ASSOCIATION OF FUJIAN P | 14 | 2NT | ♠8 | +1 | +1 |
| -0.2 | Round 1 | BEIJING LAWYERS | 6 | 1NT | ♥4 | +1 | -10 |
| -0.2 | Round 4 | PODDAR DEVELOPERS | 25 | 3NT | ♦6 | = | +0 |
| -0.4 | Round 4 | PODDAR DEVELOPERS | 27 | 4♠ | ♥6 | = | -11 |
| -0.7 | Round 2 | PING AN CHINA | 11 | 3♠ | ♦2 | +1 | -2 |
| -0.7 | Round 5 | HAUGE | 6 | 6NT | ♦Q | = | +11 |
| -1.7 | Round 6 | BRIDGE ASSOCIATION OF FUJIAN P | 10 | 3♦ | ♠J | +1 | +0 |
| -1.8 | Round 2 | PING AN CHINA | 12 | 5♦ | ♣2 | -2 | +0 |
| -2.0 | Round 2 | PING AN CHINA | 8 | 1NT | ♦J | +1 | +0 |
| -2.4 | Round 2 | PING AN CHINA | 14 | 2♠ | ♦2 | +1 | -1 |
| -3.6 | Round 5 | HAUGE | 5 | 4♠ | ♠2 | -1 | -10 |
| -3.8 | Round 6 | BRIDGE ASSOCIATION OF FUJIAN P | 13 | 3♠ | ♠2 | -1 | -5 |
| -4.0 | Round 2 | PING AN CHINA | 9 | 3NT | ♣J | -1 | -6 |
| -4.4 | Round 1 | BEIJING LAWYERS | 7 | 2♣ | ♦6 | +1 | -6 |
| -4.7 | Round 5 | HAUGE | 7 | 6♥ | ♠A | = | +0 |