Join Bridge Winners

Bridge Winners Profile for Harald Berre Skjæran

Harald Berre Skjæran
Harald Berre Skjæran
  • 85
  • 38
  • 15
  • 89

Basic Information

Member Since
May 16, 2011
Last Seen
21 hours ago
Member Type
Bridge Player
about me

Started playing bridge at home when i was 9 years old - filling in when there was only three players.


Started playing in a club at age 12, and played my first tournament at 13, with my brother (one year junior to me).


Became a district authorized TD at age 17 and certified as a national TD in 1991. Got an A+ at the EBL TD seminar in Amsterdam 1992. Been chief TD in our national pairs championships final 10 out of the last 12 years.


I don't play very much, later years mostly in our national league, in the 2nd division and in our national club teams championships, and in one or two tournaments on our national bridge festival. My team won the Norwegian Swiss Teams Championship at the festival in 2010 (quite a surprise to all participants), netting an average of 22 VPs (max 25) over the last eigth matches.


I've been working at the Norwegian Bridge Federations office in Oslo since October 1991.




Bridge Information

Favorite Bridge Memory
Becoming a Norwegian Bridge Champion
Bridge Accomplishments
Nordic School Teams Champion 1987, Norwegian Swiss Teams Champion 2010
Member of Bridge Club(s)
bliBest.bridge (Larvik)
Favorite Tournaments
NOR Club Teams, NOR Team League, NOR Swiss Teams
BBO Username
ACBL Ranking
Sorry, this user has no cards yet.
Prepping for the Daily Bulletin
Agree with the K discard too.
Does a correction to 4H on this hand bar partner under current rules (ACBL)?
That’s true, Steve. But now you’re talking about a different law. In the law defining the word «bid», specify refers to the denomonation of the bid. In laws regarding irregularities, specify refers to the agreed meanings of the irregular calls. Don’t confuse matters.
Does a correction to 4H on this hand bar partner under current rules (ACBL)?
Steve. Please explain how a bid can undertake to win a specified number of tricks in another denomination than the one named. Keep in mind than whatever any bid actually means, it might actually be passed out. What you say is NOT what the law says.
Does a correction to 4H on this hand bar partner under current rules (ACBL)?
Ask yourself this question: Did 3 imply diamonds? If yes, 4 MIGHT be a comparable call. If no, it’s definitely not comparable, and partner is barred from bidding.
Clear pass being on lead vs 1NT; expected score defending is higher than declaring. In balancing position it’s less clear. However, with both red queens an Jxxx, any lead from partner is OK, so it’s still a pass for me.
The 2018 Marit Sveaas International Bridge Tournament
Yeah, 21 is a mis typing. There where players from 20 countries.
Creating a movie as part of an article?
I've used this tool in an article soon to be published. Great tool! :)
How would you rule?
Why do people think pass by north is a logical alternative over 4? What is a forcing (if it is) going to achieve? North has a 1st, 2nd and 3rd round control in spades. And can assume (not certain, though) south has a singleton heart. From north’s point ...
a simple forcing, invitation, not forcing question
Without any other discussion than mentioned in the OP and comments upthread, this bid doesn’t exist. The double showed exactly 44M F1, no more, no less.
Double, what's it this time?
I really hope all my opponents agree with you, Ian.

Bottom Home Top