Join Bridge Winners

Bridge Winners Profile for Michael Rosenberg

Michael Rosenberg
Michael Rosenberg
  • 4
  • 767
  • 11
  • 42

Basic Information

Member Since
Dec. 25, 2010
Last Seen
10 hours ago
Member Type
Bridge Pro
about me

I am a full time professional player, and have been so since 2004 (before that, I was semi-professional). I play in all the Nationals, a few Regionals, and do a little online teaching. My wife Debbie is also a full-time professional. We have a son, Kevin. I have two daughters, Ivana and Jahna, from a previous marriage

Bridge Information

Favorite Bridge Memory
Winning the 1994 Rosenblum
Bridge Accomplishments
Winner of Rosenblum, 1998 Par Contest, 5 US Trials, Spingold(2), Vanderbilt(2), Reisinger(2), More
Regular Bridge Partners
Zia Mahmood, Debbie Rosenberg, Chris Willenken
Favorite Tournaments
World Championship(any), US Trials
Favorite Conventions
KeyCard Blackwood, Transfers, Jacoby 2N
BBO Username
ACBL Ranking
Grand Life Master
Sorry, this user has no cards yet.
The Talk That Never Was: The Blue Team Rule
I think the hand to which Eduard was referring was an opening lead by Pabis-Ticci, playing with D'Alelio.
Follow ups to 2NT overcall of weak 2
Craig Z: All tha"Here's a way to handle advancer's 4=5 and 5=4 majors, find 4=4 major suit fits, and discover if overcaller has a 5 card major" For those that don't play, and don't want to play, a form of Puppet Stayman ...
Follow ups to 2NT overcall of weak 2
Looks like too much science for 3. Especially since I don't see how you handle advancer having 4-4 in majors; or 5-4. You can handle one of 4-5 or 5-5 via 3 then 3 - but not both.
I found this news nauseating. It made my skin crawl. Of course, I fully support Marion and the OP. If the WBF permits Fantoni-Nunes OR Fisher=Schwartz to play in a WBF event, I think it's clearly time to break away from the WBF and form a better 'world ...
Table feel vs Cheating
As long as your 'reading' is of the opponents only, and as long as your 'bluffing' is via legal bids and plays, and as long as you give no extraneous information to partner (UI), then poker is a legitimate and (for me) interesting part of bridge. Albeit not a large ...
The Talk That Never Was: The Blue Team Rule
Bob H: "Do your clients like it when you do that?" I think they like that they are being treated with the same respect as any other partner. If one never does what you term "self-destruct", it's a sign that one tends to take advantage of UI. I almost ...
The Talk That Never Was: The Blue Team Rule
Bob H: "you know that if you try for game and it works, your result will be rolled back" Again, this is the crux. You do NOT "know" that. I guarantee if you play against me and my clone, and you have a reasonable game try hand, that there will ...
The Talk That Never Was: The Blue Team Rule
Bob H: ""All in would nullify this sort of thing." So would a rule that says you should make your normal lead and let the directors adjudicate the UI." Not a valid comparison. Just because somebody SAYS it's their "normal" action, that doesn't ipso facto make it so ...
The Talk That Never Was: The Blue Team Rule
Bob H: "To..make a call that you know will not be rolled back even though you suspect it is probably wrong also is imo gaming the rules." How can you say someone is "gaming the rules" if they are doing what they legitimately believe that's what the Laws ...
Table feel vs Cheating
I think it ought to be. But the Laws are not clear here. There is a prohibition against "staring". My belief has long been that whatever you can 'get' from the opponents when looking at your cards and the table, and seeing what is bid/played is fine. Also, if ...

Bottom Home Top