Join Bridge Winners

Bridge Winners Profile for Tom Townsend

Tom Townsend
Tom Townsend
  • 0
  • 111
  • 9
  • 65

Basic Information

Member Since
Dec. 9, 2010
Last Seen
33 minutes ago
Member Type
Bridge Pro
about me

Bridge columnist, London Daily Telegraph.

United Kingdom

Bridge Information

Member of Bridge Club(s)
Young Chelsea, TGR
Favorite Conventions
Gerber, Flannery, Fruit Machine Swiss
BBO Username
ACBL Ranking
Sorry, this user has no cards yet.
Congratulations Greg Lawler
Congratulations. We're privileged to have your expert assistance.
Do you open this hand in 1st seat Love All at IMPs?
Just a matter of partnership expectation. If we've agreed normal weak twos, I do not consider bidding.
Eric Hamilton's bidding problem: J AT93 653 JT764
A Lebensohl position for me, hence 2NT. Otherwise 3.
What are the ruling principles here?
Routine adjustment to 7 doubled given the North hand.
Liam Milne's bidding problem: T 743 AKQ82 AKT7
Three low hearts will suit us fine.
Tom Townsend's lead problem: KJ42 T86 J643 JT
No good deed goes unpunished.
Tom Townsend's lead problem: KJ42 T86 J643 JT
A bit harsh on a call (pass) that gained 12 IMPs. The lead was for five more. My choices were a trash Multi and an 8-11 constructive 2. I didn't deem either appropriate.
Tom Townsend's lead problem: 97 984 832 KJT52
Perhaps I misunderstood and you did a manual simulation of the problem, in which case fair play.
Tom Townsend's lead problem: 97 984 832 KJT52
The computer thinks the J or 10 best because declarer will duck a low-card lead in dummy with Qxx facing xxx. I think Stayman except on (43)33 is a reasonable rule for simulations. As is no shortage in dummy, although there are obviously exceptions.
Leonard Helfgott's bidding problem: JT9 AKQ85 AJ87 Q
My point is that even the (nearly) worst holding is not too bad.
Not following anyone yet

Bottom Home Top