Responding to 2-suited bids

[Winstonm]

[hv=d=w&v=e&s=sk9haj1032dk4cq732]133|100|Scoring: IMP

Auction:

 

1H-2H-P-?[/hv]

 

2H is MQ, spades and an unknown minor. Do you settle on 2S or do you look for the speculative minor?

 

 

[hv=d=w&v=e&n=sa8762h4d10cak10986&s=sk9haj1032dk4cq732]133|200|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

Assign the blame:

 

Our auction: 1H-2H-P-2S

3D-P-P-P

 

We played our 6 club hand in 3D their way - not the best of results. North blamed South for not bidding 2N the first time and not bidding 4C the second time. South countered by claiming that MQ was a poor choice with the North hand and that 2C was the obvious bid. Whose side do you take? Assign the blame, please.

[Free]

I would bid 2NT asking for the minor, and if partner shows ♦ I'd probably go for 3NT.

[mike777]

[hv=d=w&v=e&s=sk9haj1032dk4cq732]133|100|Scoring: IMP

Auction:

 

1H-2H-P-?[/hv]

 

2H is MQ, spades and an unknown minor.  Do you settle on 2S or do you look for the speculative minor?

 

 

<!-- NORTHSOUTH begin --><table border=1> <tr> <td> <table> <tr> <td>Dealer:</td> <td> West </td> </tr> <tr> <td>Vul:</td> <td> E/W </td> </tr> <tr> <td>Scoring:</td> <td> IMP </td> </tr> </table> </td> <td> <table border='1'> <tr> <th> <table> <tr> <th class='spades'>♠</th> <td> A8762 </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='hearts'>♥</th> <td> 4 </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='diamonds'>♦</th> <td> 10 </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='clubs'>♣</th> <td> AK10986 </td> </tr> </table> </th> </tr> <tr> <th> <table> <tr> <th class='spades'>♠</th> <td> K9 </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='hearts'>♥</th> <td> AJ1032 </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='diamonds'>♦</th> <td> K4 </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='clubs'>♣</th> <td> Q732 </td> </tr> </table> </th> </tr> </table> </td> <td>  </td> </tr> </table><!-- NORTHSOUTH end -->

 

Assign the blame:

 

Our auction:  1H-2H-P-2S

                    3D-P-P-P

 

We played our 6 club hand in 3D their way - not the best of results.  North blamed South for not bidding 2N the first time and not bidding 4C the second time.  South countered by claiming that MQ was a poor choice with the North hand and that 2C was the obvious bid.  Whose side do you take?  Assign the blame, please.

2clubs easy, can we stop with all of these off shape 2 suited bids and just bid classical shape textbook hands and bid all the rest naturally please? ;)

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

2S.

 

I assume your MQ show 5-5,

and even if spades could be a 4

card suit and clubs maybe

a better place than spade, diamonds

on the 3 level are def. worse than

spades on the 2 level.

 

With no gurantee of a fit, I will also

not invite, 2NT is fine an dandy if

you hit a fit with partner, but ask your

partner, what he will tell you if you go

down -X and there is nothing their way.

 

If this is a MQ depends on your agreements,

if you play continous range, I would bid it,

else not.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[cnszsun]

Maybe north could bid 4♣ after west's 3♦, he has a huge hand if fits were found.

[toothbrush]

I bid 2♠, but after 3♦ I believe you cannot pass. I don't know if a double would mean penalty or some kind of 'pass/correct'. If double is penalty, 4♣ seems the right bid to me.

For 2NT immediately you are far too weak, without knowing about a fit. The only contract you want to play in first place is 2♠.

[inquiry]

A couple of problems here. Let's start off with method. Micheals with undefined minor opens the door for recurring problems like this. You might would?) have played your 6♣ contract in a tame 2♠.

 

Different people have come up with different solutions.. top and bottom cue-bids, roman jump overcalls, misho-funny raptor, Ghestem, etc. Playing Ghestem here, north would have bid 2♥ but showed precisely the black suits. Of course the downside is you lose 3♣ as a preempt (as 3♣ shows diamonds and spades).

 

Having lost the momentum with 2♠ bid, upon hearing a free 3♦ bid, you might reflect on the three diamond bid. Could partner have spades and diamonds? Would not a double here of 3♦ (after "finding" the spade fit) be I have diamonds? If south is convinced that norths pass of 3♦ shows the black suits, how can he pass? True the ♦ king looks wasted, but the rest of the hand is golden in support of clubs.

 

So I would fault south here more than north, but before I lay too much of the blame on South, lets turn our attention towards north's first bid. Is this hand too "intermediate" for a cue-bid (especially when playing either minor?). Would not a 2♣ overcall then free bid in ♠ show the intermediate hand? What I mean is, don't most people play michaels cue-bid with strong hand or weak hand, but not a intermediate value hand? And if North defense is he thought this was the "strong" hand (certainly has strong playing stregnth if not HCP), shouldn't he bid 4♣ over 3♦ or at least cue-bid 3♥ over 3♦?

 

So I would lay the blame at 60 for south (he has clear 4♣ bid now) and 40 for north (either bid 2♣ planning on rebidding spades if this is an intermediate hand, or bid again he thought this was a strong hand when he bid 2♥). So despite not playing one of the specific two suit showing conventions, NS should have worked this one out ok.

[mcphee]

This hand is offensive and it is our palce to TELL partner the sort of hand we have. The 2 suited cue bid is used for weak or strong hands. The responder bids as though the hand is weak.

 

This 6/5 hand does not fall into the weak group, nor does it fall into the strong group really, because the S suit is weakish in texture. It does however fall into the group of "I think I will keep bidding" and tell my partner about my hand. The bidding plan the player should have adopted is, I am going to o/c in C and later bid S even if the enemy bid to 4H. I need very little to make a game really, and in fact could produce a slam opposite minimum values. The best way to send my partner this message if to do the best I can to show a 6/5 hand.

 

The problem responder faced was, "is it worth the risk to look for the possible 9 card C fit and perhaps place our side at the 3 level in S or D"? Is 3NT a possible contract, sure if partner is strong, but if weak with D then Qxxx C does not look like much of a stop to me before I am able to develop 9 tricks the opps can easily grab 5., especially when there is only 1C on the dummy.

 

I think full blame falls to the cue bidder and that his expectations were based on resulting rather than looking at why the problem took place. It's easier to look at what partners might have done differently to help us reach the right spot, harder to look at what we may have done to make life easier for partners.

 

Another point worth considering is that the cue bid places the emphasis on the S suit to begin with and how difficult it is for parnters under these circumstances. The facts are the suit the cue bidder would like to stress is C and not S.

[hotShot]

I blame south to 75%.

2♠ is the correct bid as MQ can be much weaker and we expect the more usuall 5-5 distribution.

But after 3♦ without partner exposing a psyche, S knows that they have at least a 9 card fit in ♣. Additionally he knows from his 5card ♥ suit, that opps don't have more than 8♥'s and since they must have a fit, it can only be ♦.

Since east passed both times and didn't even made a support dbl, north can't be that weak.

So i think some sort of reopening (e.g.) 4♣ by south is ok.

 

The rest blame goes to north, he is strong enough to bid both of his suits.

[jdonn]

Perhaps things are easier if partner overcalls 2♣ planning on bidding spades next? He has a big suit discrepancy in both length and quality, and just bidding Michaels then passing forever leaves you feeling like you left something on the table.

[Winstonm]

Thanks for the good information thus far. I hope to hear and see more.

[P_Marlowe]

<snip>

The 2 suited cue bid is used for weak or strong hands.

<snip>

A matter of partnership agreement, it is maybe not standard treatment,

but nevertheless a common one, to play the cue as continuos.

 

You will often pay a price, that you cant determine the correct level,

but you will get rewarded in finding your fit more often, take your pick

and accept the price.

 

If you play interm. Michaels cue bids, you have to decide, if the

most importand feature of the hand is the club suit or ths spade

suit.

I prefer to show the spade whenever I have the suit, but I can

understand if you simply overcall 2C.

After 2C you loose the spade, if they raise premptivly / constructive

to 3H. Feel free to bid 3S, but be sure you are playing MP, because

it could be expensive.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[hatchett]

I dislike playing Michaels as M+ unspecified minor and this is a good example why. South can deduce that partner has clubs. West sounds like 5/5 in the reds and if partner has 5 diamonds that would make give east at most one diamond and 2/3 hearts so he would give prefence.

Playing 2H as S+unspecified minor I think you should bid 2C.

[whereagles]

I disagree with all the answers above :lol: They put most of the blame on the methods instead of putting it on poor judgement from both players, which was, I believe, what happened. Sure, in this case different methods might have avoided disaster, but good judgement would also have avoided it.

 

1♥ 2♥ pass 2♠

3♦ pass pass pass

 

2♥: this was a fine bid. If you play weak/strong michaels it might have been better to stick to discipline and bid 1♠ or 2♣, but it certainly is playable to bid michaels with any strength.

 

2♠: seems fine to me as well. 2NT runs the obvious risk of ending up playing in the 5-2 fit one level higher.

 

North's pass: it's hard to believe South won't have at least 2 clubs or 3 spades. You can't dbl because that would show a good hand with diamonds and a cue probably shows a much stronger hand. But hey, you can try 4♣... sometimes you have to take chances. It's a bidder's game.

 

South's pass: knowing where 6 or 7 cards in diamonds are, as opposed to 4 cards in clubs, there are very good odds that pard has clubs. 4♣ is in order then. This sort of reasoning is a very good way to deal with the ambiguity of michaels cues. (I've never failed on me..) There is nothing wrong with ambiguous michaels as long as you know a trick or two. Just like the multi. If the ♦K were somewhere else, you could even cue 3♥.

 

So I think North and South both made slight judgement errors which ended up in pessimistic passes. System is fine :lol:

[jdonn]

I dislike playing Michaels as M+ unspecified minor and this is a good example why. South can deduce that partner has clubs. West sounds like 5/5 in the reds and if partner has 5 diamonds that would make give east at most one diamond and 2/3 hearts so he would give prefence.

Playing 2H as S+unspecified minor I think you should bid 2C.

You made a reasonable statement, but then proved the opposite.

 

I mean, if south can tell that north has clubs anyway, then why is this hand a 'good example why' you dislike Michaels with an unspecified minor?

[hatchett]

You made a reasonable statement, but then proved the opposite.

 

because the auction could have easily ended in 2S if West hadn't rescued you.

[jdonn]

That's fair enough, even though I still think it had to do with using the bid on this particular hand rather than the methods themselves. But now I understand :lol:

[Codo]

1. 2 Spade is "clearcut. The chance of playing Clubs in agreat fit are remote- before you see mhos hand.

 

I prefer michaels with weak or strong hands. To have an unspecific range with an unclear second suit is clearly searching for disaster.

And this system had found a disaster in this hand.

 

After 3 ♦ you need good understanding or some agreements like: X is always negative or it always shows extra strength or whatever...

 

I am from the "X is neg. until we found a fit" school. As we did not found a fit yet, North should double. Of course, this will lead to a disaster when South is not on the same wavelength.

 

So 70 % for the system, 25 % for not knowing, what pass from North showed.

[HeartA]

I would bid 2NT asking for the minor, and if partner shows ♦ I'd probably go for 3NT.

ditto

[Codo]

[hv=d=w&v=e&s=sk9haj1032dk4cq732]133|100|Scoring: IMP

Auction:

 

1H-2H-P-?[/hv]

 

2H is MQ, spades and an unknown minor.  Do you settle on 2S or do you look for the speculative minor?

 

So 13 HCPs with a known misfit is enough to make 3 NT opposite a typical 2 Heart bid MQ bid?

 

This is quite new for me, because till know, I thought that 22 HCPs without a fit or a running suit do not make a good 3 NT often

.

Or do you Free and HeartA play that a MQbid promises at least 12 HCPS?