Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Christina Lund Madsen
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I have more pictures, but it's gonna cost… (one of you)
June 19, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You are right, I did and expected it to be ruffed, since I assumed Rosenberg held 4 clubs leading the 2. He was just trying to muddy the waters. You are the first to notice, I don't know if it is possible to edit. Eugene Hung is actually the one posting my articles and he just became a father :-)
June 19, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Not a bad idea… We live very close to each other, however I won't have time the first couple of years, but I do plan to write a book some day. I already have the title ready…
June 19, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yo champ,

I can't help myself:
1. Which is your favorite moment in life?
2. What is your biggest fear?
3. Do you have a recurring dream at night?
4. Are you going to win the Copenhagen Bridge Invitational in 2015?

I think you would be the ideal superstar of the bridge world if you weren't so bloody old…

See you in Vegas (I can't wait to beat you)
April 11, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Hi Eric,

I am little curious as to know who you are as a person and hope you don't mind me taking the opportunity to ask you a few questions while you're present in the well.

How would you describe yourself in three words?

For comparison, which three words would you choose to describe yourself as a bridge player?

What do you consider the biggest disadvantage living your life as a bridge pro?

Feel free to elaborate and thank you for taking your time to reply to all our curious questions.
Feb. 27, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Kit, I understand your point of view. However the excitement I felt I kept inside. I agree that often you can smell it in the air, however both my partner and I are smiling, pokerfaced hitwomen at a bridgetable; most of the tension came from declarer's agony.
He argued elsewhere that he believed the heart 10 would perhaps make it more difficult for partner to perform the right action with AJ behind the king (might rise with the ace to prevent declarer from pitching his hearts on the diamonds after scoring the Q), so I would be more inclined to lead a smaller heart from the queen.
I confess I would never have thought along those lines. I would lead the ten from both AT9 and QT9 without giving it any deeper thought.
Nov. 18, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I confess I did not read all replies, so I may be repeating others.

However having much experience playing weak nt I would like to utter my opinion.

I like to be able to play both 1NTX and 1NTXX. As stated above opponents will rarely let you play 1NTXX; however for me it is essential to show your hand's potential in order to start hunting the opponents (which I like).

My partner and I pass 1NTX with all 4333 hands and, so to pass 1NTX for us does not show a good hand (although it can have up to 10). To pass also gives partner the opportunity to run in her own 5 (or 6) card suit.

Agree that conventions only allowing you to play 1NTXX and not simply 1NTX are pointless (And yet I have played it for several years until abandoning the agreement for life)
Oct. 23, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thank you all for your feedback, it really makes the late nights worth it!
Doug, what you write is exactly what my aim with the articles is - to make the players come alive.

Regarding future interviews I have to let you know that I can only do these interviews face to face and I am so far not attending any major championships like the nationals for the next half year, so I have to disappoint those of you anticipating new contributions.

I really hope to be able to attend more tournaments and write about more of the unique characters of the bridge world.

Christina
Oct. 23, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thank you to all of you taking the time to let me know you appreciate the interviews.
It means a lot to me personally, but also professionally in terms of renewing the way we communicate about bridge.
I really hope to do more in the future. There are plenty of fascinating characters within the bridge world that I would love to portray.
And thank you to Steve, Migry and the rest of you for trusting me with a part of your life.
Oct. 1, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thank you!
Sept. 27, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What about “Bridge to the Future”? I think that would serve as a teaser to both bridge and non-bridgeplayers.
Sept. 13, 2013
Christina Lund Madsen edited this comment Sept. 13, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I am sorry if I offend anyone, but from my point of view it is the most obscene hand to pull with. 4333!?
When you double 4S you don't expect partner to pull without a good reason. I see none.
You say nothing about the vulnerability, however which hand should partner have in which we can make something on the 5-level with my crap 4333 and 4S not go for a number? If partner is 5-5 or longer (which is usually the situation where it is right to bid rather than defend), partner bids 4NT.
An really, if 4SX does make, it is not the end of the world, especially if we go down a lot, had we chosen to bid.
Why are many players so scared of passing doubles? Look at how USA1 play - they surely are not scared to double.
Sept. 5, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This is so funny. I was thinking to myself “What is the problem here? 90 % are gonna double.”
Well, at least now I know which occupation to abstain from…

If I have a close choice between pass and double I like to take action; however investigations have shown that people are more afraid of risking losing than they are eager to take a chance at winning (active vs. passive)
Aug. 30, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Steve - my immense pleasure.
Aug. 23, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Dear Michael,

What is your view on the BB? Who are the favourites, what are your predictions? How will your own team do?

And one more question if I may:
Do you have any opponent you dread to meet? Pair, player, your wife? (…at the bridge table)

See you in Bali :-)

Christina
Aug. 23, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Dear Peg and Yehudit,

I apologise for my late reply. I have small children, and having just returned from Atlanta, they demand and deserve my attention.

Yehudit: If I were third in a strong open competition, you are right, I would not mind at all to be acknowledged. However being third would be what I would wish to be acknowledged for. Lets say I were only 22nd. I wouldn't consider that result worthy of celebration (perhaps except the World Open Pairs).

However, and this is also my respond to Peg, I always try to support new ideas and I am by no means against the suggestion. But I would not replace it with women's events, rather make it a supplement to begin with and see if it affects the female competition.

I might even like the idea if it would induce more women to play open events. ALthough most top players I know even prefer to play open events, but for various reasons they often play the women's (i.e. because they are on the national women's team in their home country, income etc.)

So I would keep the women's competitions for the less successful players and attempt to make the event more suitable for this specific group. My impression is that they are the ones missing.

Last a remark to Yehudit:
“If I am right, it implies, that you do not think that women (even the very best of the pairs in women events) would rank high in the open filed. In such case, why in your opinion winning a women's event **should** be considered on the same premises as open, when it is clearly not the same level of competition?”

I have never said that I think women's events should be considered on the same premises as open. I don't care about master points and whether I play a regional or national event, I just want to play against the strongest possible opponents if I get the chance. However I might choose to play the women's if I have ambitions to win. But winning a women's event, however sweet it would be, could never be compared to winning an open event.

I am not saying that women could not be as good as men. I am tremendously happy for Sabines success this year since she proves to the world that it is possible for women to compete at the same level as men. However very few women have the time, possibility and perhaps even the ambition to strive to achieve this goal.

My ambition is to become a world champion, but never an open - women's or mixed is where I see my chances. And maybe that is a wrong and lazy approach - it is just so much more realistic. However lets say I win it all - then I might do as Sabine and set a new goal.

Let me take a WC as a start and then let me get back to you :-)

Aug. 17, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As a European woman who just crossed the Atlantic to participate in Atlanta I would like to give my opinion regarding women's events.

First of all: There is no doubt that eliminating women's events will do great damage to the professional female players. Furthermore I think that a lot of female players who are not top players and would never dare dreaming of winning an open event would be sorry not to have the chance to achieve some glory in competition with other women. I base this point of view on conversations with female players in Denmark where I come from.

Is that a valid argument for having women's events? If it encourages more women to play bridge, I definitely think so.

The format: This is where I would make some changes. I agree with Gavin that gathering a team and travel a far distance to play possibly only one day in a women's knockout is not optimal. My suggestion is to change the Wagar into a round robin followed by knockouts between the first four. It would extend the tournament and give the weaker teams a chance to at least get some experience and compete with the teams at their own level.

It is hardly a coincidence that there are twice as many women's teams participating at the spring swiss than the Wagar knockout. However I would also extend the spring swiss to two days of qualification. In 2012 I was sent to Memphis representing Denmark in the women's event; however it was a once in a lifetime opportunity, since it is simply too much money to spend for our federation for a two-day tournament (one had we failed to qualify).

I know that these conditions are the same for the Vanderbilt and the Spingold; however there are lots of pick-up tournaments for the open. Of course the women can compete in the same events, however some women may not like to compete in open events (as some women do not like to compete in women's events).

As for rewarding the best female pair in an open field, for me personally I would feel downgraded. I would want to win and be rewarded on the same premises as men if I played in an open event. However I may not be representative for women in general since I seriously believe I will win a open event some day.

Me and my partner have chosen not to play the women's teams in Denmark after winning it five years in a row. However this is most likely for the opposite reasons of the low participation in the Wagar, since the opposition simply was too weak because all the best women due to time challenges had chosen to only play in the open league.

I think that as long as sponsors and strong players participate in these events, it is suicidal to women's bridge to terminate them.

As to mixed events it seems they are enjoyable for all, and frankly I do not understand why there is not a mixed swiss or knock out and only a board a match mixed teams at the nationals. It looks obvious to add it to the fall program (with mixed pairs in the spring and board a match in the summer) and perhaps having a mixed team event might fly some more women in for the women's teams, as several people suggest.

The mixed teams are highly popular in all European tournaments and also transnationals as in Lille and the world mixed teams next year in China.

I hope to see the ACBL renew the women's events and add a mixed teams as soon as possible.

Aug. 14, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Just a quick comment:
a) you are probably right - range plus not knowing the suit
b) Even opponents WITH agreements have challenges dealing with multi - I sometimes do myself when facing it - that is part of the charm

About creating swings both ways: Again, I can only say that from my experience we only swing one way - we haven't missed games or slams (however we may a few times have been in game with 3MA being the limit, but that is our aggressive style to blame rather than the multi) and we never laid a number.
However I did have a difficult lead recently - had to choose between 985 in spades and 742 in hearts - Being on lead is perhaps the only situation where not knowing the suit can be a disadvantage, however as stated earlier our wide ranged multi-use is destructive to say the least and bears no demands to suit quality, so if you can't tell which major to lead, try your own suit instead.

My last comment as to your point about opponents playing against multi all the time: Multi is highly popular in Denmark and widely abused by players of all skill levels. Yet I dare say that only a handful have all the necessary agreements, and they are all in contention for the national team…
July 17, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I play multi according to the same principles as Kit;
1. No strong options (and it has happened more than once that we have passed a 2D multi NV on a balanced hand with no points)

2. Lots of agreements about what to do in competition. Also we play Multi as 0-10 (2-11 VUL) so after a 2NT enquiry we can show a minimum, medium and maximum hand. To me one of the dangers of Multi is that it strikes right back if you lack agreements, especially about what you do when the opponents interfere.

3. For us playing Multi allows us to open hands we would never dare if we had to open 2M. Like QT98xx, xx, x, xxxx first seat vul we would usually open 2D (unless we for some reason don't feel like it) but not 2S.
Opening 2D gives us the option to get out in 2H or 2D (we play that 2D (D) RD is relay to 2H to get off in our own suit and 2H is P/C). The opponents will often be more likely to bid their own suit if they don't know our suit and the biggest advantage is that it can be difficult to catch us unless the opps have very good agreements - a classic example is 2D (D) 2H (P/C) D = ? Penalty or T/O? I am constantly amazed how many high level pairs don't have an agreement about this. And let's say you play D as T/O and have AQT9 in hearts and a king on the side. Then you have to pass and hope partner doubles again if the opponents do indeed have hearts, and it can be very unpleasant for partner with a minimum hand, having already doubled once.s

Our success rate is huge. Our opponents miss games, slams, and I cannot in this instant remember a time we got caught where the opponents couldn't make at least game in return.

We have also had good experience preempting on crap hands after 2D (P) with only 2-3 or 2-4 in the majors (NV)

My experience playing against multi is also that it is poisonous. I just pulled myself off the podium in the women's pairs at the recent European Championships in Ostend because I raised my partner's jump to 6 clubs to 7 in a complicated bidding sequence after a multi-opening.

Finally I would like to state that although I think it is very difficult to handle a multi opening, I think it is outrageous that it is suddenly allowed to consult written defenses. I think remembering your defense to multi is the same as remembering your NT-system.

Best regards,
Christina Lund Madsen
July 13, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Love it! See you all there
June 13, 2013
.

Bottom Home Top