Michaels

[Peri ma2]

Hi, have a question

 

This happens the other evening

 

1st seat ..... my pd ..... opps........ me

1 club pass 1 diamond 2 clubs my question is that Michaels showing 5-5 in the majors

 

i had 14 hcp with 3 spades, 2 hearts, 3 diamonds, and 5 clubs (AKxxx)

i really had problem showing my hands.

My pd and I are playing 2/1

[aguahombre]

Hi, have a question

 

This happens the other evening

 

1st seat ..... my pd ..... opps........ me

1 club pass 1 diamond 2 clubs my question is that Michaels showing 5-5 in the majors

 

i had 14 hcp with 3 spades, 2 hearts, 3 diamonds, and 5 clubs (AKxxx)

i really had problem showing my hands.

My pd and I are playing 2/1

 

Just to clarify: you are in fourth chair

 

(1C)-p-(1D)-? and you have something like KXX AX XXX AKXXX --and considered bidding 2C?

 

If so, passing comes to mind instead of bidding even if 2C is not Mike. Your system (2/1) doesn't seem to be a consideration.

 

Whether 2C is natural (longer clubs than you had) or Michaels would depend on your agreements. If Sandwich NT were available to show ten cards in the other two suits, you might not need 2C to do the same thing. But it seems that people are moving away from that, back to strong NT in fourth seat of a live auction.

 

If, in fact you bid 2C natural with the given hand, I would be glad, as opener, that we don't play support doubles.

Edited February 12, 2011 by aguahombre

[ggwhiz]

The treatment is called Sandwich Notrump and you can probably get a full description by googling it.

 

Basically, any time the opponents bid 2 suits at the one level to you in 4th chair, 1nt (alertable) shows a weak or distributional takeout a la michaels.

 

Double is still takeout but an opening hand. You can double with a strong notrump too but partner is probably broke.

 

Bidding either suit the opponents have already bid is natural.

 

One of the more common ones is 1♣ - p - 1♠ to you where the 1♠ response was on 4 petunias and you have 5 or 6 good ones. Now you can bid them.

[Bbradley62]

For those of us who do not play sandwich NT, most make the agreement that 2♦ would be Michaels because 1♦ is more likely to be a real suit than 1♣ is, therefore you are more likely to want 2♣ to be natural than you are to want 2♦ to be natural.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

( 1C ) - p - ( 1D ) - ??

 

In 4th seat:

1NT = natural ( NOT Sandwich by an UNpassed hand ).

 

2C! = Michaels ( works out to be lowest of the opps' 2 bid suits ... for memory purposes; see next for reasoning).

 

2D = natural ( you rather be behind the Diam bidder.. that is another reason 2C should NOT be natural, because you are in front of the Clubs ).

[CSGibson]

For those of us who do not play sandwich NT, most make the agreement that 2♦ would be Michaels because 1♦ is more likely to be a real suit than 1♣ is, therefore you are more likely to want 2♣ to be natural than you are to want 2♦ to be natural.

 

I disagree with that reasoning. Frequently 1♦ is a waiting action with less than 8 HCP, especially playing 1♣-1N as 8-10 HCP, which is a somewhat common agreement. Frankly, I would like both 2♣ and 2♦ as natural. It is analogous to the auction 1♣-Pass-1♥-2♥, which is frequently played as natural as well.

 

If you have a Michaels hand and don't play sandwich NT, just overcall 1♠ with the intention of rebidding ♥, X, or use 2N.

[mtvesuvius]

I have always played BOTH suits are natural here unless LHO opened 1M, you have to bid 2N to show the unbids or you just bid a suit normally.

[Zelandakh]

Note also that it is not uncommon to play all of X, 2D and 2NT as 2-suiters on this auction (1D - 2C) and in that case 2D will typically either show a preference for the higher-ranking suit (spades), or else show lesser values than double and lesser shape than 2NT. Naturally this all comes down to agreements but I would expect 2D to be understood as majors with a random pick-up partner here unless they had Novice or Beginner in their profile.

[wank]

as has been said by other people, how you play 2 clubs depends on your agreements with partner. natural and micheal's are both valid agreements.

 

however, more importantly, you shouldn't be overcalling at the 2 level on balanced hands. just because you've got 14 points doesn't mean you need to bid.

[Lurpoa]

Hi, have a question

 

This happens the other evening

 

1st seat ..... my pd ..... opps........ me

1 club pass 1 diamond 2 clubs my question is that Michaels showing 5-5 in the majors

 

i had 14 hcp with 3 spades, 2 hearts, 3 diamonds, and 5 clubs (AKxxx)

i really had problem showing my hands.

My pd and I are playing 2/1

 

 

Playing BWS2001Defaults, it certainly is Michaels. I quote:

An unpassed-hand's cue-bid in opener's suit, in either direct or reopening position, shows either a weakish or a very strong hand with

(a) both majors if the cue-bid is in a minor, or

(B) the unbid major and an unspecified minor if the cue-bid is in a major. The same bid by a passed hand shows a strength range consistent with security and the initial pass.

end Quote.

 

Playing ACBL SAYC ... It is less explicit....

Without specific agreement, I would asume yes.....

 

One more thing that ACBL should specify in their next update of SAYC. Same for UNT. :rolleyes:

[Zelandakh]

Lurpoa, you are neither in direct (2nd) seat nor in re-opening (4th seat after 2 passes) position. When LHO opens and RHO responds this is often referred to as the sandwich position. When the response is at the 2 level interference can be rather dangerous since they have already announced the balance of power, so wank's advice about not interfering on balanced hands is well placed.

[Cyberyeti]

Waht I play which is non standard is that 2♣ = 5♥/4♠, 2♦ = 5♠/4♥, 2N = 5-5, 1N = 15-17, stop in ♦ guaranteed but not necessarily in ♣.

[ArtK78]

In the circles that I play in, both 2♣ and 2♦ in this position are natural. Bids of either of the opponents suits in the sequence (1x) - P - (1y) - ? are natural. As Zelandakh already pointed out in discussing the BWS agreement, this is neither in direct seat or in balancing seat. Direct seat would be the pass over 1x in the sequence shown. Balancing seat is after two passes.

 

Double shows the majors. How strong the double is depends on whether you play Sandwich NT. If you do play Sandwich NT, 1NT shows the majors with distribution while double strongly implies (but does not absolutely promise) the majors and shows values. You have to have some way to show a strong hand even if you don't have 4-4 or better in the majors.

[Lurpoa]

Lurpoa, you are neither in direct (2nd) seat nor in re-opening (4th seat after 2 passes) position. When LHO opens and RHO responds this is often referred to as the sandwich position. When the response is at the 2 level interference can be rather dangerous since they have already announced the balance of power, so wank's advice about not interfering on balanced hands is well placed.

 

 

Oh, Indeed. Was too quick to answer... didn't read the question carefully... Sorry.

A good question !

And indeed you need to agree this with your partner.

BWS2001 makes following suggestions:

QUOTE

Actions in sandwich position:

 

Over an opposing opening bid and one-over-one response:

 

(a) one notrump, two or more of opener's suit, or two of responder's suit is natural;

(B) two notrump shows the unbid suits;

© three of responder's suit asks for a stopper in that suit for three notrump (suggesting a solid suit elsewhere).

Over an opposing opening and one-notrump response:

 

(a) double is takeout of opener's suit;

(B) a two-level cue-bid is similar to that bid directly over the opening bid;

© two notrump shows the two lowest unbid suits.

Over an opposing opening and two-over-one response:

 

(a) a cue-bid in opener's suit or two notrump is takeout;

(B) a cue-bid in responder's suit is natural.

UNQUOTE

 

I think those are very sound defaults, and I would like to recommend them to any partnership.

[Quantumcat]

One of the more common ones is 1♣ - p - 1♠ to you where the 1♠ response was on 4 petunias and you have 5 or 6 good ones. Now you can bid them.

 

I knew someone who always responded 1♠ with very few of them with a particular partner who refused to raise unless they had four cards. He had a few mishaps but pissed off his opponents quite often :-)