Join Bridge Winners

Bridge Winners Profile for Michael Shuster

Michael Shuster
Michael Shuster
  • 42
  • 57
  • 53
  • 90

Basic Information

Member Since
June 22, 2010
Last Seen
20 minutes ago
Member Type
Bridge Pro
United States of America

Bridge Information

Favorite Bridge Memory
psyching 1S vs NZ 2nd seat red in world play. Win 16.
Bridge Accomplishments
2nd O/A 1996 Dallas 2-day Swiss. 3 time USA Junior team member.
Regular Bridge Partners
Sam Dinkin, Alex Kolesnik, Andrew Kaufman
Favorite Tournaments
Fall NABC (MPs all the way!)
Favorite Conventions
Roman Jump overcalls. Direct cuebids showing 2 known suits.
BBO Username
ACBL Ranking
Emerald Life Master
Infernal Machine Light
Copy to my cards View/Print
Shuster / Kolesnik
Standard American with Relay
Copy to my cards View/Print
“Never preempt over a preempt”...what’s the intuition? (If you agree)
It isn't "Never preempt over a preempt." It is "You cannot preempt over a preempt."
Opening 1N with a singleton Ace
DD sim is exactly the wrong way to evaluate 1NT openers with stiff K and stiff Q, as the opponents never underlead their honor holdings (or insert a spot from third hand.) Stiff A holdings for NT is only interesting if you compare it with other likely contracts arrived at ...
Permissible enquiry?
How about if a defender asks dummy "Is your partner a sneaky card player?" Or "Does he know a lot about squeezes?" I think these types of questions aren't matters of partnership agreement, so do not fall under the disclosure umbrella. However, there are matters that do. For example ...
Opening 1N with a singleton Ace
"Stiff ace is a negative" doesn't go nearly far enough to demonstrate my feelings about it. I interpret such an action as deliberate sabotage of the partnership. It is trying to not win.
Director Ruling
East should have explained that he didn't take 4 as kickback. If it was the pro that failed to do so, thumb screws. The client probably didn't know better, but if they can document that it was a mistaken bid (they probably can't) then I'd ...
Floyd McWilliams's bidding problem: 97 AQ72 97532 AT
Spades are 4-4. There is no asking bid for the diamond ace, so might as well just bid 3NT, since it will usually make.
2 parter
They didn't cover themselves in glory from either side of the table. let's see, I agree with their first three calls: 1; pass; double. Everything after that was somewhere between poorly judged and horror-show.
Phil Clayton's bidding problem: KJ83 AKQJ 3 A963
Is this a trick question?
Bigger than Bridge
need to have an instagram account though...
2 parter
Yes, but also I'm listening to partner's auction (which admittedly is more consistent with 3=0=4=6 than 2=0=4=7.) I don't think it IS a 5-or-7 hand, just that there are hands consistent with the auction that put a grand in the picture.

Bottom Home Top