Join Bridge Winners

Bridge Winners Profile for Mike Nelson

Mike Nelson
Mike Nelson
  • 3
  • 3
  • 0
  • 5

Basic Information

Member Since
March 29, 2011
Last Seen
4 hours ago
Member Type
Bridge Player
United States of America

Bridge Information

ACBL Ranking
Non Life Master
Sorry, this user has no cards yet.
ATB - Flannery
Per my preferred methods pass isn't forcing: North hasn't seen a game bid on power, as South could easily be weaker in high cards but shapely. But South in point of fact [i]has[/i] a game bid on power, so he should make the decision. I would ...
1m-1M (Minimum expected values) (1 of 2)
Perhaps the best way to alert this style (if you choose to do so) is a pre-alert: "frequently respond to 1 of a suit on a 0 count" or whatever wording best reflects your style. The overall frequency of responding on zero that is relevant is not "how many times ...
Save an Exit
This hand is a really good illustration of the value of keeping an exit card. Here the cost of leading the last spade early, was just an 50 for the blown undertrick, but make the North-South hands stronger, and that blown trick can be the fulfilling trick either here, or ...
1m-1M (Minimum expected values) (1 of 2)
It's fine to agree to respond with zero, either "never pass", or "never pass unless very weak with 5+ cards in the minor". It is a failure of disclosure to describe a 1m opening that is never passed as "non-forcing". I personally don't care for the never pass ...
Does this sequence show anything extra?
The reopening call doesn't have to be double, it really shouldn't be with poor defense or a void--a bid will usually work better.
Does this sequence show anything extra?
By "distinctly sub-minimum", I mean at least a full trick (say a king) light on our agreed standards--an opening the I am ashamed of, not just "light". In any case, I don't think automatic reopening is the right way after a jump overcall. The extras needn't be much ...
1M-1 forcing NT (Minimum expected values) (2 of 2)
Please see my comment to the previous poll on 1m-1M.
1m-1M (Minimum expected values) (1 of 2)
This is one of things I insist on discussing before the game. It is important in itself, and will give me a clue about partner's level of aggression (I'm assuming a pickup partnership with limited time for discussion). I'm comfortable with agreeing on something as light as ...
Does this sequence show anything extra?
Unlike back in the ancient days before negative doubles, the double does not imply extra values. I would surely reopen with a double on this shape even though I were minimum, but I reserve the right to pass it out if distinctly sub-minimum. Yes, I have opened those, as have ...
A CC/UI hypothetical
Can't help wondering if this whole CC concept is leading us down a wrong path, with more time-consuming, difficult to adjudicate cases. UI cases are hard, was it a good idea to create more of them? The IB law in the old days may have been draconian, but it ...

Bottom Home Top