Join Bridge Winners

Bridge Winners Profile for David Parsons

David Parsons
David Parsons
  • 2
    Following
  • 6
    Followers
  • 404
    Posts
  • 0
    Favorites

Basic Information

Member Since
Nov. 6, 2015
Last Seen
7 hours ago
Member Type
Bridge Player
about me

Actuary, Ranked Chess and Othello Master, now retired and studying Bridge.

Bridge Information

Bridge Accomplishments
Recently, 4/75 at the District 3 NJ Regional, 1/57 at the Eastern States Regional Open Pairs in NYC, 42/364 in Silodor at the Spring NABC in Philly.
Regular Bridge Partners
Paul Frean, David Libchaber, Irving Gewirtzman, David Carter
Member of Bridge Club(s)
Honors in NYC
Favorite Conventions
Not a convention, but I love New Losing Trick Count (NLTC) for hand evaluation.
BBO Username
parsonsdav
ACBL Ranking
Ruby Life Master
Parsons Libchaber
Two over One (Larry Cohen's Style)
Copy to my cards View/Print
David Parsons's bidding problem: QJ984 T9 54 AKJ4
Yes, I expect all the 2 bidders would open it in all seats. I guess it is worth an upgrade.
David Parsons's bidding problem: QJ984 T9 54 AKJ4
Would you open this hand in first seat?
David Parsons's bidding problem: --- 654 AT975 QT652
The 4 bidder's hand was: KJ975 QT872 8 J9
David Parsons's bidding problem: --- 654 AT975 QT652
Partner's hand was: Q43 KJ KQ63 A874
David Parsons's bidding problem: J7654 83 Q8 AQ86
For the actual hand, pass was the winning bid.
David Parsons's bidding problem: --- 654 AT975 QT652
In the actual hand, partner had Qxx of spades and 4 made. I passed, with the idea that 4 making was improbable when we had the balance of power.
David Parsons's bidding problem: K5 97 A53 KT9432
DD simulation shows that opposite the hand you describe, 3NT makes only 45% of the time.
David Parsons's bidding problem: KJ954 K9532 --- AQT
Paul, I didn't mean it to apply to you...you have been quite fair in your acceptance of simulation results. Sorry, I now realize it did sound like I was applying it to you. :-( Nevertheless, the simulation I ran was heavily biased (probabilistically, it is likely that partner has ...
David Parsons's bidding problem: KJ954 K9532 --- AQT
Paul, I've heard challenges to double dummy analysis galore, and I'm not at all convinced that it is biased over single dummy analysis. Put it this way -- when determining a lead in matchpoints against a slam, do you lead your lone Ace? Don't you wish you could ...
David Parsons's bidding problem: KJ954 K9532 --- AQT
Richard, thanks for noting your abstention and thanks for your comments...as you suggest, my partnership uses the "jump to 4S" to show a minimum NLTC=7.5 hand, with no extras (like a 30-point deck) given the shown shortness. And yes, you are right that North should not have ...
.

Bottom Home Top