Bridge Winners Profile for Jonathan Mestel
Basic Information
- Member Since
- Oct. 8, 2015
- Last Seen
- Nov. 8
- Member Type
- Bridge Player
- about me
The picture lies - I have no hair or snakes any more.
Bridge Information
- ACBL Ranking
- None
Sorry, this user has no cards yet.
- You hold: !S87 !HAQ !DJ873 !CJ8432
- If I'd know he thought that was a 3♦ bid I'd have doubled too. Grossly lucky majors.
- You hold: !S87 !HAQ !DJ873 !CJ8432
- Actually, it looks like my -380 for 2Dx+1 could be worth quite a few matchpoints. RHO expects to be doubled in 3♦ yet bid it anyway. I am surprised so many people double - whom are you playing against? I think 2♦ was more likely to go down ...
- You hold: !S87 !HAQ !DJ873 !CJ8432
- I would sometimes pass 2♦x. Since I have the UI from the future auction that this would be wrong, I'd better do it....!?!?
- Dirty Talk
- I suppose it comes down to whether exasperation that oppo have been lucky again counts as "a demonstrable bridge reason." Do you believe declarer should always be allowed to make the contract after this silly remark by South, however he plays and however the cards lie?
- Dirty Talk
- Unless South had ♦A up his sleeve and clubs were running. North has some sort of guess, and so does declarer,
- Dirty Talk
- Obviously S should have kept his mouth shut, whether he held ♣Q or not. But I suspect he was annoyed by his partner's strange decision to play a 2nd spade, removing a likely losing option. "You need something else as well!?" would be an appropriate reaction, though one best ...
- Michael Rosenberg's bidding problem: 9 8 AK52 KJ97542
- Interesting. I think 4♣ is clear, and also best played forcing. We can still play 4NT, 5♣, 6♣. Are we really going to make precisely 9 tricks in NT? I would also bid 4♣ over a slow 3NT, but it seems from the majority view I ...
- Orlando Entertainment
- Quite so. For example, cash your 8 side suit winners, then ♠5 to the 7, return to the ♠10 and score ♠Q en passant by ruffing a ♦. I think it's possible to have a hand where one side can make 6♠ and the other 7♠.
- Patrick Gaudart's bidding problem: QT9832 J A96 Q54
- I disagree - once partner has passed, he is not invited to bid 4♠ over 4♥ at red - 1♠ is constructive. With the ♥ shortage, I expect to get away with a disruptive 2♠, even when perhaps I shouldn't.
- Hanoi Rondón's bidding problem: AKQ843 KJ3 J95 A
- Surely partner's 3NT should discourage anything other than a 4♠ conversion? I'll pass.
See all comments
