Join Bridge Winners

Bridge Winners Profile for David Parsons

David Parsons
David Parsons
  • 2
    Following
  • 6
    Followers
  • 404
    Posts
  • 0
    Favorites

Basic Information

Member Since
Nov. 6, 2015
Last Seen
Aug. 15
Member Type
Bridge Player
about me

Actuary, Ranked Chess and Othello Master, now retired and studying Bridge.

Bridge Information

Bridge Accomplishments
Recently, 4/75 at the District 3 NJ Regional, 1/57 at the Eastern States Regional Open Pairs in NYC, 42/364 in Silodor at the Spring NABC in Philly.
Regular Bridge Partners
Paul Frean, David Libchaber, Irving Gewirtzman, David Carter
Member of Bridge Club(s)
Honors in NYC
Favorite Conventions
Not a convention, but I love New Losing Trick Count (NLTC) for hand evaluation.
BBO Username
parsonsdav
ACBL Ranking
Ruby Life Master
Parsons Libchaber
Two over One (Larry Cohen's Style)
Copy to my cards View/Print
David Parsons's bidding problem: QJ984 T9 54 AKJ4
Yes, I expect all the 2 bidders would open it in all seats. I guess it is worth an upgrade.
David Parsons's bidding problem: QJ984 T9 54 AKJ4
Would you open this hand in first seat?
David Parsons's bidding problem: --- 654 AT975 QT652
The 4 bidder's hand was: KJ975 QT872 8 J9
David Parsons's bidding problem: --- 654 AT975 QT652
Partner's hand was: Q43 KJ KQ63 A874
David Parsons's bidding problem: J7654 83 Q8 AQ86
For the actual hand, pass was the winning bid.
David Parsons's bidding problem: --- 654 AT975 QT652
In the actual hand, partner had Qxx of spades and 4 made. I passed, with the idea that 4 making was improbable when we had the balance of power.
David Parsons's bidding problem: K5 97 A53 KT9432
DD simulation shows that opposite the hand you describe, 3NT makes only 45% of the time.
David Parsons's bidding problem: KJ954 K9532 --- AQT
Paul, I didn't mean it to apply to you...you have been quite fair in your acceptance of simulation results. Sorry, I now realize it did sound like I was applying it to you. :-( Nevertheless, the simulation I ran was heavily biased (probabilistically, it is likely that partner has ...
David Parsons's bidding problem: KJ954 K9532 --- AQT
Paul, I've heard challenges to double dummy analysis galore, and I'm not at all convinced that it is biased over single dummy analysis. Put it this way -- when determining a lead in matchpoints against a slam, do you lead your lone Ace? Don't you wish you could ...
David Parsons's bidding problem: KJ954 K9532 --- AQT
Richard, thanks for noting your abstention and thanks for your comments...as you suggest, my partnership uses the "jump to 4S" to show a minimum NLTC=7.5 hand, with no extras (like a 30-point deck) given the shown shortness. And yes, you are right that North should not have ...
.

Bottom Home Top