Bridge Winners Profile for Marc Bonnet
Basic Information
- Member Since
- Sept. 30, 2013
- Last Seen
- 2 hours ago
- Member Type
- Bridge Player
- about me
Scientist (in the applied math department of a Paris area university), married and father of 3.
Experienced France-based player.
System: French standard (5-card majors, strong NT, multi 2!D, 2M weak 2-suiters) with US twists (forcing 1NT replies over 1M openings, Jacoby 2NT, 2/1 almost GF) and many specialized treatments.
- Country
- France
Bridge Information
- Bridge Accomplishments
- One national teams title (Division Nationale 4 open teams, 2016); one third placing in national pairs championship (Division Nationale 3 open pairs, 2016) ; several regional wins.
- Member of Bridge Club(s)
- Antony, France
- Favorite Tournaments
- I only play in FFB-organized competition (except for BBO practice sessions)
- BBO Username
- m_bo
- ACBL Ranking
- None
Sorry, this user has no cards yet.
- How'd we get so high? ATB (Matchpoints)
- Well, I can only say that expert French standard bidding overcalls (not doubles) with 5-4 M unless really strong, and that I happen to play it and like it. This option is obviously debatable, but certainly not ludicrous.
- How'd we get so high? ATB (Matchpoints)
- I don't mind too much South's 2♦. Then, North's hand is not worth playing in game facing a minimum 2♦ bid, so 2♥ seems enough. South can then try for game with extras, and will in that case bid 2♠ with 4 cards ...
- What are you done with?
- I would much prefer that BW feature separate categories for (a) all discussions on ACBL (and its sub-entities) as an institution, (b) all posts dealing with any litigation-related matter.
- A play problem
- A strange non-♦ lead indeed! Playing ♠ non-queen caters for (a) ♠Ax with East AND the opponents being unable to promote West's putative ♠J. This seems near-impossible against competent defenders: if West is void, we are dead, and why would West possibly not lead a stiff ♦, especially ...
- When they double 3NT
- Unless the previous bidding was strongly competitive (in which case opponents might conceivably decide to remove the double and bid 4 of something if feeling insecure), opponents are only going to defend against whatever contract we decide to alight in (in which case the bluff idea seems pointless).
- When they double 3NT
- I'd say B=4 is enough, because (unless opener has a too-small stiff ♠) defenders cannot take 5 spade tricks on the go.
- When they double 3NT
- For my main partnership: after such specific-suit double of 3NT, XX by either player denies a half-stop or better (can be remembered succinctly as "SOS XX"), pass by either player shows at least a half-stop. Hence: (X) XX: partner leaves in only with a full stopper, otherwise pulls (X) P ...
- How do you bid first ?
- Cannot respond to poll as offered since choices in fact depend on vulnerability (see Ben's comment, which I endorse).
- Do not misplay this slam (like I did ....)
- As said, E can be safely assumed not to have ♠AK! Then, the best line seems to depend on whether ♠ honors are (a) split, or (b) both with West. If (a), play as Mark K. (ruffing finesses with 2 ♦ discards, hoping to later set up a ♦ winner ...
- Compete?
- This hand is rather soft (worth significantly less than its HCP count), an our spades may run against their vul 1NT. Hence my pass vote.
See all comments
Not following anyone yet