Join Bridge Winners

Bridge Winners Profile for Ambrose Mackie

Ambrose Mackie
Ambrose Mackie
  • 98
  • 12
  • 26
  • 0

Basic Information

Member Since
Feb. 26, 2013
Last Seen
9 minutes ago
Member Type
Bridge Player
United Kingdom

Bridge Information

Favorite Conventions
One way reverse Drury, Weak 2D, support doubles
BBO Username
ACBL Ranking
Sorry, this user has no cards yet.
You be the Judge - missed game over weak 2
East made a courtesy raise when he has a good raise.
How strongly do you feel?
Michael, we are a very long way from single-dummy simulations it's true. But we are not far from the study I suggest. I hope that it will be done and this question can be put to bed once and for all.
How strongly do you feel?
It is one thing to say that a double-dummy analysis is vastly inferior to a single-dummy analysis. It is quite another to say that DDA is "irrelevant". A wager: I bet that at some point in the next five years someone performs an analysis on historic hand data and shows ...
Ethics, gamesmanship and the law
I would say impolite to lie but not unethical and blatantly not illegal. If you had played out two rounds of hearts there would probably be people here saying that you had wasted time by not claiming. Sometimes you can't win.
David Parsons's bidding problem: J9 --- AKQJ854 AKQ9
Lots of people criticising double. It's not my choice but realistically, what is the danger?
Onur Akdoğan's bidding problem: Kx Axxx Axxx AKx
What are the doublers doing after (p) 2?
Rowland Reeves's bidding problem: AQJ 7 9865 KQJ96
Not my cup of tea either but if this handtype is possible for the partnership then "not bridge" is way too strong.
Rowland Reeves's bidding problem: AQJ 7 9865 KQJ96
Yes, and what would 2 have meant (and how would it differ from 1 2)
Ambrose Mackie's bidding problem: Q3 A7 AQJ987 832
AT THE TABLE . . . I passed and 4 went one off. 5 is also one off so double-dummy this was the correct thing to do. However, as the opps have a ten card it is possible that they will take insurance in 5 given the vulnerability. I scored ...
14-16 1NT
I play it the same way and I prefer it that way round as you have more room to enquire when opener has the three card support.

Bottom Home Top