Join Bridge Winners

Bridge Winners Profile for Bob Heitzman

Bob Heitzman
Bob Heitzman
  • 11
  • 88
  • 46
  • 137

Basic Information

Member Since
Sept. 17, 2010
Last Seen
9 hours ago
Member Type
Bridge Player
about me

Actuary; avid interests in bidding theory and professional basketball; teaching the games to 5 grandsons, now ages 5-11.

Bridge Information

Favorite Bridge Memory
A sectional swiss ten+ years ago where my team tied for first with a team that included several world class players; my partner was my daughter, Carla, and my teammates were my wife, Helen and our friend Alex Perlin.
Bridge Accomplishments
100+ sectional and regional wins; 2 seconds in NABC+ events
Regular Bridge Partners
Alex Perlin, James Sundstrom, Mike Prahin, Alex Allen, Jeff Morgan
Member of Bridge Club(s)
(the original) Cavendish in NYC
Favorite Tournaments
Nationals; my favorite site is Wash DC; second favorite is New Orleans except the food is too good to play bridge well
Favorite Conventions
Drury Doubles; Ultra Hi Def
BBO Username
ACBL Ranking
Emerald Life Master
Sorry, this user has no cards yet.
Michal Czerwonko's bidding problem: AKQJ865 --- Q762 T5
Oh. I assumed I was playing with bots, in which case 6 seems clear. With a human partner, it's a different problem.
Leo Lasota's bidding problem: --- KJT8643 A2 AQ84
As for heart-club freaks, I would choose between 2 initially, planning to rebid hearts, or treating it as a heart 1-suiter. I would not be trying to introduce a new strain at the 5-level. If I double and 4 or 5 (or both) is cold, will the ...
Leo Lasota's bidding problem: --- KJT8643 A2 AQ84
I'm not crazy about 4 either, but starting with double rates to put you in a weaker position over their 4 because partner won't know about your hearts. I think it's a pure guess whether to double or bid now. (Preempting then doubling is often ...
Will Engel's bidding problem: 6 854 A43 AKT865
I doubt if anyone plays that 2 is GF, but I still think there is a strong case for playing this situation as forcing. It seems pretty clear who is preempting and who is trying to have a constructive auction. Therefore partner's failure to double indicates interest in ...
Stephen Male's bidding problem: Ax KJx Kxxxx AJx
Russell Samuel's lead problem: xx ATxx Q98xxx x
Imo, this isn't a lead-directing double. It is a 2 overcall. If you play it as merely lead-directing, it will backfire way too often. It says you think maybe we should be competing to 3 if partner has some values and a fit. In the meantime, the ...
Stephen Male's bidding problem: Ax KJx Kxxxx AJx
My round-suit holdings suggest 3N at matchpoints. There is the added complication that imo this sequence doesn't promise 4 diamonds altho I suspect that is controversial. Second choice would be 3 but it is ambiguous.
What do you assume? What should they be?
The first two are easy for me. One is takeout, two is a spade overcall. However, in a very sophisticated partnership I would play what Martin suggests above for two. As for three, I normally abhor defending 2M-doubled because the risk-rewards are so onerous, and would tend to play it ...
Leo Lasota's bidding problem: 9 QT86432 753 JT
I like 5 because it makes it more difficult for them to bid the slam that responder doesn't think they have. 5 would leave a 5 cue available; pass would give them the whole 5-level. Of course I don't plan to save over 5.
Mike Cassel's bidding problem: Q753 KT94 8 AKJT
At these colors, double is not on the radar screen. We have a red game and maybe a slam. We may not be able to beat 2-doubled four. Besides, they probably have a playable diamond fit. The best way to explore for slam is to cue 3. Reverse ...

Bottom Home Top