Join Bridge Winners

Bridge Winners Profile for Kit Woolsey

Kit Woolsey
Kit Woolsey
  • 24
  • 612
  • 177
  • 63

Basic Information

Member Since
July 29, 2010
Last Seen
6 seconds ago
Member Type
Bridge Player
about me
Kit Woolsey is a world-class bridge and backgammon player, analyst, and writer. His most recent major victory was winning the Cavendish Invitational Pairs in 2011. He was elected to the ACBL Hall of Fame in 2005 and lives in Kensington, CA.

Bridge Information

ACBL Ranking
Kit - Sally
Copy to my cards View/Print
Draw the Line
It can work quite well. The point is that responder doesn't worry about opener being super-light and needing a 14-count to make a 2/1. Responder just goes ahead and makes that 2/1 with 13 or a decent 12. If occasionally you land in a 23-point game, that ...
The opening leads (part 2)
Yes, that is what I am trying to accomplish. I (and anybody else) can pick out a few hands and say: Boy, that these actions look pretty suspicious. But those hands will exist for any pair, cheating or honest, particularly if the players involved tend to be imaginative. What I ...
Draw the Line
These are real hands which happened. Sometimes the best bids and plays aren't made in real life.
IMPs: KTxxx opposite 20-21 balanced, vulnerable
These results certainly don't surprise me. As they say, 9 tricks are easier than 10.
Draw the Line
I most surely wouldn't. With the North hand, I would be very happy if we took 8 tricks opposite partner's favorable vulnerability multi.
Hesitation Issue - How Would You Rule?
In theory the huddle might be ambiguous. But in practice, most partnerships will know what the huddle shows. That is why I think one should look at the huddler's hand and determine what he was huddling about -- and then assume that this was the UI conveyed.
Hesitation Issue - How Would You Rule?
Now that argument makes sense. While West can't be sure what the huddle is conveying, it definitely shows some kind of extras. This information makes it less likely that the 5 save will go for too much. And that does suggest bidding 5 instead of passing. Okay ...
Fighting against cheating the "Highly Suspicious" clause.
Thanks for the simulation. You might be interested in why I said I would lead a spade against most competent pairs (obviously at IMPs only -- at matchpoints I think a heart lead is clear). The reason is that today good pairs have efficient methods of showing distributional hands when partner ...
The opening leads (part 2)
Well, the hands are all in the bbo archives, so you can draw your own conclusions about that.
Adjusted Scores - not related to cheating
Jeff, That statement is as clear as mud to me. How am I supposed to know if an explanation is implausible or not? And if I think it is implausible, what am I supposed to do? Am I supposed to say: Do you really mean that?

Home Back to Top