Join Bridge Winners

Bridge Winners Profile for Martin Lindfors

Martin Lindfors
Martin Lindfors
  • 80
  • 5
  • 186
  • 0

Basic Information

Member Since
Sept. 24, 2017
Last Seen
an hour ago
Member Type
Bridge Player
about me

I started bridge in 2017, and mostly play at my local club in Sweden.

Outside of bridge, I'm a graduate student doing machine learning research. 


Bridge Information

Member of Bridge Club(s)
Filbyter Bridge
ACBL Ranking
Sorry, this user has no cards yet.
Change of Heart
That makes sense. So partner is known to be balanced. Then, the only issue with this structure is that you can have a GF opposite the balanced hand but want to stop with the minimal unbalanced hand. That seems hard. Something has to go away and one approach would be ...
“Never preempt over a preempt”...what’s the intuition? (If you agree)
If 1NT is strong, I think there is a fair argument that 3 should be a weak jump. That will be more common than an intermediate jump. But it should be a pretty solid preempt. You should not make a shaky preempt when opener has limited his hand quite ...
“Never preempt over a preempt”...what’s the intuition? (If you agree)
That's not a preempt. Kit held a hand with nine playing tricks. He just bid what he thought he could make. Now, for a strong jump you would ideally want to hold some defense. But the world isn't perfect.
“Never preempt over a preempt”...what’s the intuition? (If you agree)
According to the rule of 2-3-4, a standard preempt in first seat shows: Unfavorable: 2 playing tricks below what is contracted for Equal: 3 below Favorable: 4 below I have observed that over a standard natural opening, bridge players seem to follow the rule of 2-3-4 pretty well, at least ...
Change of Heart
A Precision inverted minor structure where responder cannot figure out whether opener is balanced or unbalanced seems kind of broken honestly. In this case it is plausible that both 3 and 3 should deny a club stopper. One can be used for the unbalanced hand and the other ...
Fred Pollack's bidding problem: AT52 A32 A9 9852
You are not becoming "a conservative bidder". You are simply taking into account that partner is allowed to be slightly aggressive, in that partner doesn't require 13 working points to double.
Fred Pollack's bidding problem: AT52 A32 A9 9852
That is not a GF opposite a takeout double.
Martin Lindfors's lead problem: 9 QJ65 Q52 K8765
The lead did not influence the result at the table (slam making in either case) but in the post-game analysis I thought partner's heart honor lead seemed unattractive. I would have led a club.
What is Cue
If 1m is quasi-nat [b]and[/b] X shows 4* exactly, we shouldn't worry too much since we are playing against opponents with inferior methods. If 1m is nat (3+, better minor) I like for 2m to be a cue and 1 to be nat. If 1m ...
Johan Karlsson's bidding problem: AT 982 AKQJ8754 ---
Sorry, mixed my black suit cards up.

Bottom Home Top