Join Bridge Winners

Bridge Winners Profile for Craig Zastera

Craig Zastera
Craig Zastera
  • 0
  • 21
  • 139
  • 0

Basic Information

Member Since
June 28, 2012
Last Seen
4 hours ago
Member Type
Bridge Player
about me

Retired software engineer (Microsoft), living in Woodinville, WA.

Have played bridge since high school (starting 1965).

One national championship (Silver Ribbon Pairs) and a couple of 2nds in under 5000 national events.

United States of America

Bridge Information

ACBL Ranking
Diamond Life Master
Sorry, this user has no cards yet.
Christopher Donnelly's bidding problem: AQ9 9 T752 AKQ76
Reverse with only 4-5 shape requires minimum of 16 “quality” points, i.e. mainly or entirely in the long suits, particularly when short in partner’s suit. After 1-1-?, with 3=1=4=5 shape, something like xxx-x-AKQx-AKxxx would be a minimum for 2—some might even ...
Steve Moese's bidding problem: xx Axx x QT9xxxx
It’s not the ace that worries me, nor the 3 s. It’s the missing J. BTW, a good agreement over partner’s (1st/2nd) 3 openers is to use 3 response to ask for a 3 card major. If opener has one, he rebids 3 of ...
Crowd-Sourcing the Bridge World's March 2020 MSC Contest
2 is sufficient on problem D.
Ronald Vickery's bidding problem: A7 KQ82 962 J762
Usually that agreement (which I don’t like in any case) goes along with “BART” because practitioners of that convention want to increase its frequency of occurrence. BART also allows distinguishing a weak 2 card preference (6-7) from a constructive one (8-10) by rebidding 2 directly with one while ...
Steve Moese's bidding problem: xx Axx x QT9xxxx
Maybe at matchpoints I’d try a modern daring 3, but not at IMPS.
Christopher Donnelly's bidding problem: AQ9 9 T752 AKQ76
I disagree. It is not an uncommon partnership agreement that opener's same suit rebid promises 6. The more the partnership is willing for opener to rebid 1NT with a stiff in responder's suit, the more likely it is that that partnership will play that opener's same minor ...
How strongly do you feel?
Here's one I really like--ONLY the Q lead beats 3NTE:[code] AQ87 A875 43 Q74 KJ93 65 J K9632 K972 AQ85 AJ92 K6 T42 QT4 JT6 T853 [/code] Cool because over all deals, the Q is by far the worst lead. Yet here is a deal where it is ...
Richard Granville's bidding problem: Q976 Q7 QJ643 JT
Don't understand 2NT with no stopper. 2 seems like a safe bid since partner knows we don't have 5 (else would not have made a negative double). The alternative to me would seem to be 3 (picked by no one so far) as otherwise partner ...
How strongly do you feel?
Actually, for awhile we tried playing "3rd and low" leads vs. NT thinking it might have similar benefits (better read on count in the suit) to the same convention vs. suit contracts. But we quickly found out that leading "3rd" from 4 card suits fairly often blew a trick, so ...
How strongly do you feel?
4 cannot be beaten with best play no matter what you lead. But it is true that on actual deal a lead gives you a better chance vs. 4 than does a .
Not following anyone yet

Bottom Home Top