Join Bridge Winners

Bridge Winners Profile for Anthony Pettengell

Anthony Pettengell
Anthony Pettengell
  • 22
  • 5
  • 83
  • 0

Basic Information

Member Since
April 30, 2016
Last Seen
6 hours ago
Member Type
Bridge Player
about me

I began playing bridge while at uni in Durham, UK, unfortunately not starting until near the end of my undergraduate degree. I spent 3 years in Nottingham, mainly playing at the Nottingham, Woodborough and Phoenix bridge clubs, and helping to (re)start the university club there. I moved to Middlesbrough in September 2017 and am now playing in Darlington at the St George's Bridge Centre.


I have played Acol, 2/1, Precision, and Polish Club, and I am keen to try new systems. I mainly fall down in defence (don't we all?) or just in making silly errors. We can but try to improve!

United Kingdom

Bridge Information

Member of Bridge Club(s)
Hurworth (St George's Bridge Centre)
BBO Username
ACBL Ranking
Sorry, this user has no cards yet.
Ian Grant's bidding problem: AKQ3 J7532 AK6 8
Oh I'm sure that teaching would suggest 4-card support for both, but that's because among the complexities of bridge it's MUCH easier to simply say you need an 8-card fit to support. Perfectly sound teaching practice. I'm sure many club players therefore would play equivalently, having ...
Ian Grant's bidding problem: AKQ3 J7532 AK6 8
I agree with Richard here. There's very little risk of being in a 7-card fit, as balanced hands will be 15+ so would typically continue with 2N. A Moysian fit opposite 4441 hands will be infrequent and not terrible at the two level. On the other hand there is ...
Ian Grant's bidding problem: AKQ3 J7532 AK6 8
Assuming as usual that 1NT denies 4 spades and (almost) denies 3 hearts (freely raising to 2 with 3), then I take the low road at MPs, fully in the knowledge that occasionally I'll miss a 3NT that other people are in. I would NOT pass at IMPs ...
Martin Lindfors's bidding problem: A4 AKT K943 JT93
Quite. I think I'd take the conservative 2 route at MPs, with the Multi as described (4–9 is still constructive but on the weak side for Vul), but it's a clear 2N invitational enquiry Vul at IMPs.
Martin Lindfors's bidding problem: 643 AT85 AT863 3
I am bidding 4N as two(+) places to play - would that be how it is taken as, or do you play 4!N as natural here?
Martin Lindfors's bidding problem: A2 742 K9 AKQJ92
I definitely prefer 4N to 5 for this reason. Partner should expect this or the equivalent with diamonds for that bid, and can take out to 5m if appropriate. Whether I would bid at all is a different matter, I don't think I would. Pass or double might ...
Preference on how to treat this hand?
Having just woken up, I *literally* looked at this and saw a balanced hand on first glance... on proper consideration, it’s not so clear to me. I have no issue with opening 1NT with a singleton where appropriate, but I much prefer to have two cards in each major ...
Anthony Pettengell's bidding problem: Q97 J7 K742 A432
I think this is a very fair point. Any argument for which bid should be which? Absent such an agreement I'm not surprised at the large majority for double, and it's what I did at the table. I'm confident that it was the best of the options ...
Bill March's bidding problem: AKTxx AJT9xx J x
I understand the second thoughts at the table. Before I'd read the agreements, having seen the hand and auction, my first thought was "I hope 4 is a fit-jump..."; much easier if you can fit-jump to game level. If 5 came back round to me after 3 ...
Martin Lindfors's bidding problem: AJ53 QJ75 AJ87 7
I have quite some sympathy for a 3 bid, and would be perfectly happy if partner chose that with this hand, despite choosing 2 myself.

Bottom Home Top