Join Bridge Winners

Bridge Winners Profile for Chris Gibson

Chris Gibson
Chris Gibson
  • 282
  • 81
  • 130
  • 103

Basic Information

Member Since
June 18, 2010
Last Seen
9 hours ago
Member Type
Bridge Player
about me

Professional anti-money laundering investigator, amateur bridge nut living in the Portland, OR metropolitan area.  I don't play as much as I would like to, and that probably isn't going to change soon.  I am married to a wonderfully supportive non-bridge player, and now have a little boy, Teddy, who was born April 2017, but I hope to remain active in playing bridge while I balance my new family life.

United States of America

Bridge Information

Favorite Bridge Memory
Making the round of 16 in the 2013 Spingolds with Chris Wiegand, Sam Punch, and Stephen Peterkin - the first time I had entered the event. Now up there: Getting my top 4 matchpoint finishes with 3 different partners at nationals in 2016 at Reno, including placing in the Platinum pairs.
Bridge Accomplishments
6 top 10 national finishes, all in the past 7 years.
Regular Bridge Partners
Chris Wiegand, Eric Sieg, and Jeff Ford
Favorite Tournaments
any NABC, all GNT competitions, Portland and Seaside regionals
Favorite Conventions
Stayman and follow-ups derived from it. I played 15 years of home bridge with my parents without knowing stayman, so I really appreciate how wonderful it is.
BBO Username
ACBL Ranking
Sapphire Life Master
Sorry, this user has no cards yet.
Kevin O'Dea's bidding problem: --- AKQ9876 Q843 A6
Anant - I don't know that it matters that much, as long as you've defined it one way or another. The only partner I've had who played it preferred it to be as I defined.
Per-Ola Cullin's bidding problem: 9832 AK2 98 AKT2
Ronald - if you don't think there is such thing as a mild slam try, ignore my arguments. Personally, I do believe that there is such a thing, and I also believe that my opinion is the majority one in US expert bridge, at least.
Per-Ola Cullin's bidding problem: 9832 AK2 98 AKT2
As Richard implied, I think you have lost the thread here, David. Partner had two options, forcing past the 4 level, and signing off at 4; there was no last train available. 4 does not deny a diamond control the way I play, merely because I don't want ...
Common Game Tuesday 12 February Deal 14
yeah, I lost thread there.
Common Game Tuesday 12 February Deal 14
Not quite. In the ending where you have run the trump and come down to K -- AK9 J85, W does best to pitch to Ax -- T73 K9. At that point E is basically forced to come down to 2=0=2=3 shape or 3=0=1=3 shape to ...
Common Game Tuesday 12 February Deal 14
Howard Sandler's bidding problem: AKJT6 864 Q962 T
I don't hate 1. In fact, my instinct was to open 1, but I've been playing a lot of big club, so I recalibrated. That being said, if partner opened a spade, I'd support it. All of my points are in my long suits, I ...
David Sackett's bidding problem: 7 AKT7 QT985 T97
I have a meta-rule that covers this - we don't introduce new suits at the 4 level in uncontested auctions, making 4 a slam-oriented hand with hearts agreed by inference (since all other suits can be agreed/suggested at a forcing level). I am 100% confident that it would ...
Common Game Tuesday 12 February Deal 14
Interesting, but an easy solution if given to deductive reasoning. Honestly, I like his chances regardless of whether he is in the N or S, I think the chances of finding the killing defense in the scenario where it matters to be small - though perhaps so is finding the winning ...
Tilman Seidel's lead problem: AQT97 J4 QT3 Q82
I want to lead shortness so that I can try and avoid some of the endplays coming my way. Nothing else appears to be particularly solid anyway.

Bottom Home Top