Join Bridge Winners

Bridge Winners Profile for Niko Roemer

Niko Roemer
Niko Roemer
  • 38
    Following
  • 17
    Followers
  • 52
    Posts
  • 130
    Favorites

Basic Information

Member Since
Sept. 30, 2011
Last Seen
July 24
Member Type
Bridge Player
Country
Germany

Bridge Information

Member of Bridge Club(s)
BC Troisdorf, BC Kultcamp Rieneck, Acol BC München, BC München
BBO Username
Niko Roe
ACBL Ranking
None
Sorry, this user has no cards yet.
ATB .. partner opened 3S, what spade support is needed to bid 3NT?
No matter what the agreements, the technically correct card always has priortiy. And this hands shows why it is necessary to lead the small diamond. You need help in diamonds anyway and opponents' diamond values are expected with declarer, not dummy.
Your call--ethical bidding problem
It might be clear that the wheels have come off even without the UI, but without the UI you'd have no way to know at which point in the bidding. Since the UI suggests bidding on, I think you have to pass here.
Alec Fettes's bidding problem: --- AQ A9764 AJ9532
For me, 4NT would be RKC for hearts.
Paul Grünke's bidding problem: AJ973 KJ8 95 762
2NT is scrambling, not to play.
Florian Alter's bidding problem: 864 A3 QJ93 Q752
2 and pass 2. Not even close for me.
Lauritz Streck's bidding problem: AKQ87643 4 Q5 J4
Agree. I don't want to hear (3)-4-(5)-X-(p)-? to me and be guessing. I'd rather have partner decide after (3)-3-(4)-p/X-(p)-4-(5)-? when he has a reasonable idea what I hold.
Paul Grünke's bidding problem: AJ973 KJ8 95 762
I really don't want to defend 2X when partner couldn't act over 1 with a spade void.
Florian Alter's bidding problem: AK7 KT52 A982 A3
Is a 2 opening limited to being too weak for precision 1 or do the ranges overlap?
Mike Heins's bidding problem: AQ QT8542 3 K983
For me 2NT-then-3 is the invitation and a direct 3 is forcing. But whatever you have agreed, I would always use the forcing (route to) 3. No reason to preempt our bidding with 4...
Florian Alter's bidding problem: AT98xx x AJ9xx x
It is still important, because if partner could have doubled 2 for penalties but didn't, there is a case for running. If 3 was his first opportunity for a penalty double, it is clear to sit. If, as I take it, double of 2 was unclear ...
.

Bottom Home Top