Join Bridge Winners

Bridge Winners Profile for Thorbjørn Willoch

Thorbjørn Willoch
Thorbjørn Willoch
  • 5
  • 1
  • 15
  • 0

Basic Information

Member Since
Sept. 6, 2015
Last Seen
11 hours ago
Member Type
Bridge Player

Bridge Information

BBO Username
ACBL Ranking
Sorry, this user has no cards yet.
Lose the Bermuda Bowl With Me
Bd#1 The double looks strange. But not raising seems ok. I think that in 1957 you could trust that the opponents had some points for their bidding. The concept of voluntary bid showing extras existed then. Bd#4 What do you suggest he should bid? Pd might have 4 ...
Lose the Bermuda Bowl With Me
Page 2: «only 223 after this one» What does it mean?
Deal rotated in the board
English is a second language, and I do not know the "bridge" subset of it. So any suggested improvement in presentation welcome.
UI: What does it suggest? (Part 3)
But RHOs BIT could only mean he was either considering doubling, or sacrifice . Regardless he has spades. So partner has none. And his BIT is AI, so could I not use that to pull?
Claims - online game
After the latest 2017 rules, all (including dummy) can agree to play on.
Should this slam be made ?
From my lead problems I see that spades lead fell to a 3rd when I changed the J to a . Given the answers to the poll I would guess it is about even odds for the two lines. With 3 small hearts and this bidding I have a hard ...
Should this slam be made ?
From the spade return from east I do draw the inference that the spades are 2-5. The main point is that west led in a bid suit instead of leading a small heart. A small trump from 2 or 3 small must be a better passive lead than dummys suit.
Should this slam be made ?
To lead from Txxx in dummys suit seems risky. East would surely return a club if he had kxx in spades. Now he had a hope of a singelton in west.
Thorbjørn Willoch's bidding problem: QT974 KJxx J Jxx
I waited for 40 votes before I commented. I did the same as you at the table, for the same reason.
Thorbjørn Willoch's bidding problem: QT974 KJxx J Jxx
It was 3 down, 5 was also 3 down. That gave a good score for us. But doubled would have given lots more.

Bottom Home Top