Michaels

[dickiegera]

[hv=pc=n&w=st93hakj62dat765c&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1spp2s]133|200[/hv]

 

Is a cuebid in pass out seat Michaels?

 

If so what should the requirements be?

Obviously should not be weak, could pass the hand out.

What should point range be?

 

Does this hand meet the requirements for a 2♠ bid?

 

Thank you

[TWO4BRIDGE]

Depending on your partnership's preference, the cuebid in balancing position can have one of two meanings:

1 - A two-suited hand (the Michaels convention); or

2 - A strong, game-forcing takeout.

 

I think most would prefer Michaels.

 

Whether OP's 6-loser hand is strong enough for Michaels ( having to go to the 3-level ) is anybody's guess .

[Lovera]

P.14. Michaels cue-bid (Mike Michaels) At the opening of 1 c or 1 d the overstatement of the opponent's suit, two-tone indicates a hand of 9 + cards in the colors of noble strength and 6-11 H. The partner says to the minimum level color he prefers .On opening played in 1 s or 1 h, the overstatement of the opponent's suit shows a hand in the other two-tone color and higher in a lower color strength H 6-11 (9-11 H if the partner forces to intervene at the level of three) . The companion replied: - 2 SA without three cards to color greater implication, in which case the first defender declares its color to rank statement; - The color noble implied with three or more cards in the suit. The only answer 'forcing' is a second cue-bid of the respondent in the opponent's suit. The agreement can also be used with ambiguous meaning, in the sense that the overstatement of the color of opening can also be carried out with a mighty hand: in this case and followed by a statement on the jump. The usefulness of the Convention is 'very doubtful: in addition to preclude the use of the overstatement of the color of opening opponent in the traditional sense, is rarely applicable and rather risky. (Nino Ghelli "The conventions in the bridge," p. 177 and 178)

[SteveMoe]

Here's a post with a good treatment from Mike Savage:

http://bridgewinners.com/article/view/balancing-michaels/

[hrothgar]

P.14. Michaels cue-bid (Mike Michaels) At the opening of 1 c or 1 d the overstatement of the opponent's suit, two-tone indicates a hand of 9 + cards in the colors of noble strength and 6-11 H. The partner says to the minimum level color he prefers .On opening played in 1 s or 1 h, the overstatement of the opponent's suit shows a hand in the other two-tone color and higher in a lower color strength H 6-11 (9-11 H if the partner forces to intervene at the level of three) . The companion replied: - 2 SA without three cards to color greater implication, in which case the first defender declares its color to rank statement; - The color noble implied with three or more cards in the suit. The only answer 'forcing' is a second cue-bid of the respondent in the opponent's suit. The agreement can also be used with ambiguous meaning, in the sense that the overstatement of the color of opening can also be carried out with a mighty hand: in this case and followed by a statement on the jump. The usefulness of the Convention is 'very doubtful: in addition to preclude the use of the overstatement of the color of opening opponent in the traditional sense, is rarely applicable and rather risky. (Nino Ghelli "The conventions in the bridge," p. 177 and 178)

 

I find the claim that Michaels cue bids show 9+ cards in the primary suits very surprising.

[aguahombre]

I find the claim that Michaels cue bids show 9+ cards in the primary suits very surprising.

From reading some posters, I find that they agree with you. My Michaels bids are 5+5+, so I find 9+ in the two suits to be inaccurate the other way. What is common for you, 7 or 8 cards in the two suits?

[hrothgar]

From reading some posters, I find that they agree with you. My Michaels bids are 5+5+, so I find 9+ in the two suits to be inaccurate the other way. What is common for you, 7 or 8 cards in the two suits?

 

I'd have 5-5 shape 99+ % of time...