Join Bridge Winners

Bridge Winners Profile for Kit Woolsey

Kit Woolsey
Kit Woolsey
  • 25
    Following
  • 1336
    Followers
  • 493
    Posts
  • 63
    Favorites

Basic Information

Member Since
July 29, 2010
Last Seen
an hour ago
Member Type
Bridge Player
about me

Kit Woolsey is a world-class bridge and backgammon player, analyst, and writer. His most recent major victory was winning the Cavendish Invitational Pairs in 2011. He was elected to the ACBL Hall of Fame in 2005 and lives in Kensington, CA.

Bridge Information

ACBL Ranking
None
Kit - Sally
Precision
Copy to my cards View/Print
Is the Best Defense Double Dummy?
If declarer isn't void in clubs you are always beating the hand, so assume he is. It is hard to see how ruffing and exiting with a trump can be inferior to leading a diamond or putting down the ace of clubs. I love Tony's construction. Of course ...
What do you do about this curious explanation
When you get that kind of explanation, the magic word is: DIRECTOR
Low-level Penalty
Right Andy. If you overcall 1 with AKJx of hearts and out you don't have to worry about later rounds of bidding, since you aren't going to bid anything else unless partner forces you to do so. When you do so on a strong hand where you ...
How do you play Picture Bid when the choice is 3M or 4M?
If it is this complicated, perhaps that is an indication that you shouldn't be playing picture bids.
Low-level Penalty
Overcalling on a 4-card suit is a sure way to get partner to over-compete, since he will misjudge the combined trump length.
Defensive Problem
You have to cash the heart. If partner has a doubleton heart, cashing may be necessary to take the setting trick. Why did partner continue with the 10 of hearts? If he started with A10x, it would be normal for him to continue with a small heart. Declarer isn't ...
Low-level Penalty
Of course you should be thinking about your opening lead whether or not you double.
Low-level Penalty
There is no such thing as always. But usually that would be correct.
What is fair.
Even if West only bid 3, East (assuming his partner has shown the majors and is not inviting game) has a very clear 4 call. Thus, E-W would get to 4 in all variations if West bids his cards, not his UI.
What is fair.
Several issues here: Did the partnership really have the agreement that 2 showed the majors? If that is firmly established, then N-S are not entitled to an adjustment based on MI, since they didn't receive any MI. If that is not firmly established, then the assumption is mistaken ...
.

Bottom Home Top