Join Bridge Winners

Bridge Winners Profile for Anthony Pettengell

Anthony Pettengell
Anthony Pettengell
  • 16
    Following
  • 3
    Followers
  • 38
    Posts
  • 0
    Favorites

Basic Information

Member Since
April 30, 2016
Last Seen
9 hours ago
Member Type
Bridge Player
about me

I began playing bridge while at uni in Durham, UK, unfortunately not starting until near the end of my undergraduate degree. I spent 3 years in Nottingham, mainly playing at the Nottingham, Woodborough and Phoenix bridge clubs, and helping to (re)start the university club there. I moved to Middlesbrough in September 2017 and am now playing in Darlington at the St George's Bridge Centre.

 

I have played Acol, 2/1, Precision, and Polish Club, and I am keen to try new systems. I mainly fall down in defence (don't we all?) or just in making silly errors. We can but try to improve!

Country
United Kingdom

Bridge Information

Member of Bridge Club(s)
Hurworth (St George's Bridge Centre)
BBO Username
Antonyx
ACBL Ranking
None
Sorry, this user has no cards yet.
Anthony Pettengell's bidding problem: KQT54 32 T AJ875
I really don't like that style. I appreciate that Odvrodka (or whatever variant used) COULD be bid on any hand that is 18+ with 3+ trumps, but the auction can be unweildy when only 3 trumps and responder has 4 if opener is unbalanced. We only bid Odvrodka with ...
Anthony Pettengell's bidding problem: KQT54 32 T AJ875
I discussed the point about 3 with partner, as my gut reaction was 3 denied 3 spades, but we agreed that it didn't necessarily - a hand with a good 6+-card heart suit and 3 can bid 3 here not 3, so 3 ...
Anthony Pettengell's bidding problem: KQT54 32 T AJ875
We don't currently have this agreement, but perhaps we should. I think I prefer 3 showing 5 clubs but not necessarily canapé, could also be 5-5, with 5=X=Y=4 clubs hands rebidding 2 then mentioning clubs later if relevant.
(1H) P (1S) P (2H) X = ?
The balancing seat is definitely different for obvious reasons. The question for me is "is there a hand that would want to double for takeout now, that wouldn't have doubled for takeout earlier?" That depends both on the strength/variance of your initial take-out doubles and the particular auction.
(1H) P (1S) P (2H) X = ?
While you have 2N/2 for takeout to the minors, I still have x as take-out here. It's nice to have an 'optional' takeout that partner can pass, but the main reason is simplicity/system consistency.
Anthony Pettengell's bidding problem: T84 JT986 632 KJ
Yes, correct. Much like in Precision or 'standard' (approach-forcing/2) openings, your 2/1 bids can optionally be GF/US standard/Acol-style, whatever you prefer, and if GF then optionally 1NT as a response can be forcing/semi-forcing. The choice is entirely independent from the general system being Polish.
Anthony Pettengell's bidding problem: T84 JT986 632 KJ
Entirely distinct system choice to the Polish Club bit, sorry I should have specified. This partnership does not currently play 2/1 GF responses so 1NT is non-forcing. If I were playing 2/1 my preference would be for a semi-forcing NT that is passed by a minimum balanced hand ...
Multi 2!D and Weak Twos
I'm not sure Richard/anyone is saying that *only* students/juniors are playing this in the UK! But I have seen it in higher frequency with those demographics. I really quite like it, ideally adjusted for vulnerability - e.g. the last time I played it, a vulnerable 2 ...
Martin Lindfors's bidding problem: KT 8 AKT9543 T84
Changing the spade king to the queen *might* make the difference to me - and not because it's 1 HCP less, but because Qx/QT is significantly worse than Kx/KT a lot of the time. Still, I would nevertheless feel very uncomfortable at these colours, with the lovely suit ...
Ankush Khandelwal's bidding problem: K43 Q753 AK3 QT3
How? What problem does 8–11 have that 6–9 say doesn't, opposite an appropriately increased responding hand?
.

Bottom Home Top