Join Bridge Winners

Bridge Winners Profile for Chris Gibson

Chris Gibson
Chris Gibson
  • 282
  • 80
  • 128
  • 103

Basic Information

Member Since
June 18, 2010
Last Seen
6 hours ago
Member Type
Bridge Player
about me

Professional anti-money laundering investigator, amateur bridge nut living in the Portland, OR metropolitan area.  I don't play as much as I would like to, and that probably isn't going to change soon.  I am married to a wonderfully supportive non-bridge player, and now have a little boy, Teddy, who was born April 23, but I hope to remain active in playing bridge while I balance my new family life.

United States of America

Bridge Information

Favorite Bridge Memory
Making the round of 16 in the 2013 Spingolds with Chris Wiegand, Sam Punch, and Stephen Peterkin - the first time I had entered the event. Now up there: Getting my top 4 matchpoint finishes with 3 different partners at nationals in 2016 at Reno, including placing in the Platinum pairs.
Bridge Accomplishments
6 top 10 national finishes, all in the past 7 years.
Regular Bridge Partners
Chris Wiegand, Eric Sieg, and Jeff Ford
Favorite Tournaments
any NABC, all GNT competitions, Portland and Seaside regionals
Favorite Conventions
Stayman and follow-ups derived from it. I played 15 years of home bridge with my parents without knowing stayman, so I really appreciate how wonderful it is.
BBO Username
ACBL Ranking
Sapphire Life Master
Sorry, this user has no cards yet.
Is filing a recorder form warranted.
Another possible answer - if you think partner is going to bid game based on the UI, it might be better to just give him a choice of games so that the defense has to play him for a wider array of hand types (assuming they don't take the same ...
Peter Flom's bidding problem: AJ542 AK3 AQ2 A8
While I agree in concept, partner will almost certainly be bidding at the 2 level - are you sure that a 2N rebid still shows 20+-22, or is it now 18+-20?
Who Will Direct the Directors?
In the ACBL, at least, it doesn't matter whether the question was phrased properly - any question about a call is supposed to get a full and complete explanation as to the agreements about the call. I'm sure Ed could quote it directly.
Jeff Rogers's bidding problem: Q42 KJT5 KQJ 963
invite aggressively and accept conservatively is the worst of both worlds - who likes to consistently play in 3M or 2N, where the chance of a minus is greater with no corresponding upside?
Bad Habits of Intermediates
Managing the trump suit - don't automatically draw trump, but instead plan the play to see if you need to trump in the short hand, or use the trump suit for entries to do other things. Take inferences from the opening lead as declarer (and 3rd seat). Why did they ...
Precision help wanted 2
If E upgrades aggressively, hopefully that is disclosed at the table. As it is, east needs to make a take-out double. you may be lucky he didn't, though; its far from clear from looking at the E-W hands that 1H goes down or that E-W make anything.
Precision help wanted 1
After a 0-4 pass, a double and pull by the 1C bidder should be game forcing IMO.
Would you roll this back?
Ed - why is it based on UI? Let's say that South thought the agreement was 5+ take-out - 3N still shows a non-minimum. We really have to understand what South thought the agreement was initially (or common alternative agreements) to understand what UI he actually had from the explanation IMO.
Christopher Moh's bidding problem: A96 K84 J963 A86
funny, I play 2N then 3N as a club suit with GF values and a stopper (not implying that is standard, but I wouldn't assume doubt or a weaker 3N are standard either)
Soner Cubukcu's bidding problem: QJ7 KQJ3 Q943 A7
Is 2 also weak? If it is opening strength, I pass.

Bottom Home Top