Defense against Michaels Cuebid

[skaftij]

After 1♣ - (2♦), it would be nice to distinguish between a sound raise to 3♣ and a competitive raise. On the other hand, we are stuck with our decent 5 card heart suit if we double or pass and LHO bids 3 or 4 spades.

[Hanoi5]

Double is usually used as penalty oriented in either one or in both suits. You have two (known) cue-bids available, you can use either one of them to show a forcing or inviting hand with clubs and the other with diamonds. You just have to agree which Major shows clubs and which diamonds and what strength they show.

 

Normally you don't want to play in any of their five-card suits (even if you had a fit) so bidding a Major naturally should be out of the question.

[awm]

You don't really need a natural 2NT bid here, since such a hand can always double. Perhaps something like:

 

Double = general good hand, 10+ points with no other suitable bid

2M = natural good 5+ suit and inv+ values, usually short/weak in other major

2NT = invitational or better club raise

3♣ = less than invite club raise

3♦ = natural and weak (double first with better diamond hands)

[BobElliott]

Since when is 2!D michaels ????????????????????

[skaftij]

Since when is 2!D michaels ????????????????????

Pardon, it is not. Some people just like to bid 2♣ naturally, especially if 1♣ only promises 2 cards and let 2♦ show majors

[mgoetze]

Since when is 2!D michaels ????????????????????

 

This is part of a French scheme called "Michaels précis". If you think that's bad, wait until you find out what the Poles call "Michaels".

[inquiry]

I like Martens' suggestion here, which is pretty close to what I played before I read his "world of transfers" book (I bought the pdf, which is fine for all of his bidding books I think).

 

He suggest,

 

Dbl = penalty oriented, like everyone else

3C and 3D = natural 10 to 11 ish and the bid suit

2H = "transfer to clubs" either WEAK or FORCING (rebid will tell)

2S = "transfer to diamonds" either WEAK or FORCING, ditto

2NT = natural (not entirely sure this is best yet, but it adds more teeth to the double

 

At the vary least this solves the constructive raise versus good raise that the op "raised" in his post.

[benlessard]

Yep ive been playing those weak or GF transfer for a couple of years and i think they are superior. What i hate about limit or better bid is when you have better but dont know if the extras are worth another move. While if you make a single raise and partner bid game you are sure you are worth another move. Also when they compete over you its less problems. You have to have some agreement about not making non-vul presacrifice bids.

 

1S-(2Nt)-3D(S fit 5-9 or GF)-(X)

 

here opener cannot bid 4S as a sacrifice/preemptive bid. Since responder with the bid GF hand will always make another move.

 

Also there is more competitive bid since you are going to be 5-9 more often that limit you aare losign some of the preemptive effect or raising directly with 5-9.

 

Also i think its superior to play low= low and high = high rather than low = fit (wich is more common). It allow for game try bids vs the larger raise rather tahn vs the limit raise. It sometimes allow for partner refusal and a good suit.

 

1D-(2D)-

 

if 2H show clubs it allow for responder to bid 2S as i dont like clubs but my D are nice and 2Nt as a game try.

 

1S-(2Nt)-3C(hearts)-

 

3D game try vs 5-9

 

1S-(2Nt)-3D (Spades)

3H = game try.

 

While if you play lower cue= fit

 

1S-(2Nt)-3D (hearts)

 

you dont have a game try available.

 

 

 

Also X and pull is neg.

 

1S--(2Nt)--

 

with 2551,2542,2451 i will X and bid 3H when partner X 3C.

 

Pass and X is weak takeout