Join Bridge Winners

Bridge Winners Profile for Martin Lindfors

Martin Lindfors
Martin Lindfors
  • 51
    Following
  • 3
    Followers
  • 62
    Posts
  • 0
    Favorites

Basic Information

Member Since
Sept. 24, 2017
Last Seen
22 minutes ago
Member Type
Bridge Player
about me

I started bridge in 2017, and mostly play at my local club in Sweden.

Outside of bridge, I'm a graduate student doing machine learning research. 

Country
Sweden

Bridge Information

Member of Bridge Club(s)
Filbyter Bridge
ACBL Ranking
None
Sorry, this user has no cards yet.
Martin Lindfors's bidding problem: K543 J96 --- AKQ986
That ship has sailed by now, we needed to make that call last round. Alas.
Shiang Chen's bidding problem: 65 AQJ9643 A7 65
Off two tricks is our rule for strong jumps. I can count seven.
Bidding minor suit hands after partner opens 2NT
Drop Gerber and make 4 a natural slam invite. Opener can always show a diamond slam invite through minor suit stayman.
Metin Öztürk's bidding problem: AKQxx AKQJx A xx
Agreed that it seems right to open a forcing bid. Now, if there is a correct approach, I think it is to torture partner with cues in everything except clubs until the five level. If partner still can't help, we'll stop there.
Shawn Drenning's bidding problem: KQ3 83 KJ94 K976
If you think 3 is forcing, I agree. I am not so sure. In my methods, I would have known whether pard has extras, since I wouldn't have made a call that forced partner to keep quiet.
Ankur Rathi's bidding problem: A86 865 JT843 54
We have 20 to 22 points. We have a balanced hand opposite a balanced hand. We are nonvulnerable. All factors point to passing. Make the ace a small one, and move a club to a major. Then garbage stayman, I think, is better.
Shawn Drenning's bidding problem: KQ3 83 KJ94 K976
Redouble should deny three or more spades, in my view. We can salvage this by bidding game. Note that our minor honors are likely to cash thanks to the double.
Shawn Drenning's bidding problem: KQJ3 63 9763 AJ2
Not good enough to double, although it is very close. If partner was passed, I would act (1 or double both seem attractive).
Craig Zastera's bidding problem: AKQ32 4 AKT3 953
In my methods this call is impossible. Partner has a weak hand without pointed suit tolerance; we would open those hands with a weak two bid. That solves this problem.
MULTI 2D Responses
I like that idea, and there is a good case to be made for paradox responses. 2 - 3 - ? 3: support for hearts, ambiguous about clubs 3: no support for hearts, support for clubs 3: support for neither hearts nor clubs 2 - 3 - ? 3 ...
.

Bottom Home Top