michel's bid

[navit]

DO YOU USE MICHEAL'S AND UNUSUAL NT ONLY AS A DIRECT OVERCALL? AFTER OPPONENTS OPENING BID. WHAT'S THE MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM POINT?

[helene_t]

A cuebid is Michael's only in direct position. In the balancing seat it's some strong hand unsuitable for a t/o double. This means any two-suiter, but not necesarily 5-5. Some 6-4 hands start with a cuebid as well.

 

If both opps have bid, a cuebid may still show a 2-suiter by agreement. I think it's better to agree that in that situation (the "sandwich" position), cuebids are natural unless specifically agreed otherwise.

 

2NT is not unusual in balancing but natural. I think appr. 19 points is "standard" if a such exists.

 

In the sandwich position, 2NT shows the two unbid suits unless otherwise agreed.

 

Many play the two-suit bids as two-way, either quite weak or very strong. This is logical if you play sound overcalls: most hands that are worth a bid but too weak for a simple overcall can either make a jump overcall or Micheals/Unusual.

 

The disadvantage of that approach is that you will often end up defending, and then the information that you're 5-5 is often more useful for declarer than for partner. Therefore, it's popular here in the Netherlands to play the two-suiters as quite sound, at least opening values.

 

In any case, there's no maximum. In fact, Michael's and Unusual2NT are most useful when you have a really strong hand.

[barmar]

While it's apparently the minority opinion, I think Lawrence recommends using two-suiter bids at any strength, rather than the more common split-range. I think Klinger makes a similar recommendation in "The Power of Shape" (naturally, given the book's emphasis). The usual justification for bidding suits with intermediate strength is that you'll have a chance to bid them naturally; the counterargument is that if you're distributional the opponents are likely to be as well, so they may preempt you out of your second bid. So a bid that gives your partner more information about your shape is likely to be more useful to him.

 

While I appreciate these arguments, I'm generally in the split-range camp.

[jocdelevat]

also this is a good link http://www.prairienet.org/bridge/michaels.htm

[paulg]

As I've mentioned in the past, Lawrence threw most of Scotland into confusion when he recommended using Michaels on any strength during a bridge tour here. Sabine Auken also recommended this approach in her book and notes that Meckstroth was instrumental in her change of methods.

 

Having said that, I'm sure they refine their approach based on vulnerability and position in the auction and, although the range is not specified, will not bid Michaels on every 5-5 hand.

 

p

[the hog]

This is the beginners/intermediates section so I won't be too comlpicated. It is also obviously a result of another post.

 

You need to make a distinction between

(1x) P (P) and (1x) P (1y)

 

Some people play that after (1x) P (1y) both 2x and 2y are natural.

Others play that 2x and 2y show the other two suits with the emphasis on the higher/lower ranking. 2NT by these players shows a gf 2 suiter in the other 2 suits. 1NT shows 16-18 bal or so.

 

So what you play needs agreement with your partner. Best to avoid this sort of ambiguity in a pick up partnership.