Bidding over Michaels

[el mister]

gib rolled out the following 2S bid on me recently - what does / should it show?

 

[hv=pc=n&s=saj97hq92daqj84c6&d=w&v=n&b=12&a=ppp1d2d2s]133|200[/hv]

 

Thanks.

[dicklont]

In my system 2♠ would be a limit raise or better with diamonds.

Does GIB play the same methods? I don't know.

When you click on any call made by GIB is explains what it means.

Easy, but don't be too disappointed when GIB's hand doesn't match the description, this happens sometimes.

[helene_t]

When the opponents have shown two suits you have two cuebids. You can use one of them to show support for partner and the other to show a good hand with length in the 4th suit.

 

I don't think there is any standard for which is which so you have to discuss it with partner. Here, it is more practical to use the cheaper cue (2♥) to show the 4th suit and the more expensive cue (2♠) to show support. This is because you need less bidding space when you have established a fit already.

[el mister]

Thanks - the description threw me a little as it said constructive, 5+ clubs. Wasn't sure why the bid would be so narrowly defined, so the ensuing auction was a mess.

 

How do you play 2♥ in your system dicklont?

 

ETA - Thks Helene, I didn't know that - makes sense.

[gwnn]

I always played that the lower suit means the lower suit and the higher suit the higher suit. I.e. in this case hearts mean clubs and spades mean diamonds. The only time in which this way makes less sense is when they are bidding non-touching suits and we can stop in one suit below game, let's say:

 

1H-(3C) where 3C shows spades and diamonds. In that case, clearly 3D should show inv values with hearts as we can stop in 3H.

[PhilKing]

So there are basically 3 approaches to the "2 cue bids" situation:

 

1. Lower for lower.

 

2. Lower for fourth suit.

 

3. Lower to show the raise.

 

I play number 3. The reason I prefer that method is that, in my experience, the good raise is way more frequent than the good hand with the fourth suit. This is particularly true opposite a major suit, of course, but it would be madness to change our approach depending on which suit is opened.

 

As an aside, I use 2NT here as showing both minors and limited, so here it would tend to show 5+ clubs and 3 diamonds (or possibly 45 if you open a diamond on three).

[dicklont]

Thanks - the description threw me a little as it said constructive, 5+ clubs. Wasn't sure why the bid would be so narrowly defined, so the ensuing auction was a mess.

 

How do you play 2♥ in your system dicklont?

 

ETA - Thks Helene, I didn't know that - makes sense.

 

I play it like Helene, the lower cuebid is gameforcing and shows the fourth suit (clubs in this case), the higher cuebid shows support and is limit or better.

Bidding the fourth suit (3♣) is 8-11, supporting partners suit is competitive.

The cuebidding does not appear often. My somewhat selfish memory-aid for it is: "me first, then you." :rolleyes:

[aguahombre]

Whichever method you use for the pre-cues of the opponents' two suits, the one which shows the 4th suit MUST be forcing to game or the rot will set in.

[SteveMoe]

A fourth option summarized by Hardy uses the major suit cue bid as GF investigating stoppers for NT. Assumes priority is NT before minors with Majors out of the question. Responder might have a fit for opener's minor or a minor suit of their own. Cue bidding differs from double - double shows inv+ values and ability to penalize one of their suits after your opening bid (usually Hxxx or better).

[aguahombre]

A fourth option summarized by Hardy uses the major suit cue bid as GF investigating stoppers for NT. Assumes priority is NT before minors with Majors out of the question. Responder might have a fit for opener's minor or a minor suit of their own. Cue bidding differs from double - double shows inv+ values and ability to penalize one of their suits after your opening bid (usually Hxxx or better).

Yep, this is what we learned way back. Then u vs u, and the equivalent concept of u vs Mike, kinda grabbed us. We don't seem to lose altogether the possibility to play in 3NT....we just go through an initial double to get there --- and sometimes even penalize the other guys.

 

In other words we get more toys when they perpetrate Michaels, without losing anything.

[zillahandp]

4c (splinter)

[case_no_6]

My understanding is the "standard" agreement over a Michaels cue bid promising spades and hearts these days is that the lower cue bid (2H) shows support for opener's suit (in this case diamonds) while the higher cue bid (2S) shows a good hand with the 4th suit (in this case clubs). When bid naturally at the lowest level possible, the 4th suit is merely competitive.

[1eyedjack]

Thanks - the description threw me a little as it said constructive, 5+ clubs. Wasn't sure why the bid would be so narrowly defined, so the ensuing auction was a mess.

One of the "features" of robot events is that you get to see what GIB's bids mean during the auction as soon as they are made, and you get to see the meanings of your own bids before committing to them. That may not be "bridge" to you, but that is the playing field and it is a level one. It is not all beer and axolotls, however, as there is a tendency for bids and descriptions to diverge. But you use any edge provided. Here, you are, should you enquire, aware that 2S shows 5 Clubs, as well as limitation on strength, as soon as the bid is made. Likewise, you are aware that your own 4S bid is wildly adrift of GIB system expectations, so you should not then be surprised by the ensuing disaster.

[brettnj]

Many of the prior posts are cogent. I personally, with most of my partnerships, play a lower/lower cue-bid system (i.e., if you opened 1c, 2h would be a L/R+ in clubs, and 2s forcing with d's; if you opened 1d, 2h FORCING with clubs, and 2s l/r+ in d's). Such a system allows for non-forcing bids of 2d and 3c, and 3c and 3d, respectively, and to show both good hands and hands that merely want to compete. The important thing is to have agreements thereafter against a 2-suited o/c system: Let say it goes 1d-2d(o/c) by the PITA opps, and you bid 2h (forcing with clubs)-- you need to establish whether a subsequent bid of 2s or 3h by partner SHOWS a stopper, or asks for one, in an effort to get to 3n or 5 of a minor.

[mike777]

Thanks - the description threw me a little as it said constructive, 5+ clubs. Wasn't sure why the bid would be so narrowly defined, so the ensuing auction was a mess.

 

How do you play 2♥ in your system dicklont?

 

ETA - Thks Helene, I didn't know that - makes sense.

 

 

opener has shown d suit

2d bidder has shown h and s

 

It sounds like GIB plays a cue in spades as inv+ hand with club suit, the unbid suit.

It sounds like GIB plays a cue in hearts as limit raise or better in your suit, diamonds.

3d raise would be competitive, roughly 7-10

3c bid would be competitive with long clubs, roughly 7-10

 

Please note this pattern need NOT be the same for other cuebids or unusual vs unusual bidding,

[dave_beer]

This is particularly true opposite a major suit, of course, but it would be madness to change our approach depending on which suit is opened.

Playing against normal Michaels you have to change your approach depending on which suit is opened.

 

When you open a minor your opponent has the majors so there two phantom cue-bids; when you open a major your opponent has the other major and an unknown minor so there is only one phantom cue-bid. If you want a 2nd cue-bid when you open a major I suggest 2NT.

[gnasher]

So there are basically 3 approaches to the "2 cue bids" situation:

 

1. Lower for lower.

 

2. Lower for fourth suit.

 

3. Lower to show the raise.

 

I play number 3. The reason I prefer that method is that, in my experience, the good raise is way more frequent than the good hand with the fourth suit. This is particularly true opposite a major suit, of course, but it would be madness to change our approach depending on which suit is opened.

 

As an aside, I use 2NT here as showing both minors and limited, so here it would tend to show 5+ clubs and 3 diamonds (or possibly 45 if you open a diamond on three).

 

There's also:

 

4. Lower for fourth suit, unless there is only one cue-bid below three of our suit.

[cherdano]

So there are basically 3 approaches to the "2 cue bids" situation:

 

1. Lower for lower.

 

2. Lower for fourth suit.

 

3. Lower to show the raise.

 

I play number 3. The reason I prefer that method is that, in my experience, the good raise is way more frequent than the good hand with the fourth suit. This is particularly true opposite a major suit, of course, but it would be madness to change our approach depending on which suit is opened.

It is more frequent, but does it really need more space?

 

Consider 1H (2N): If responder has a good hand with spades, opener may want to show a preference for hearts with a min, or a good hand with no clear direction, or bid spades with a min. If the cuebid is 3♦, he has to go to the four-level with the "no clear direction hand". You are also muddling the slam tries. If responder has a good hand with hearts, the only gain for the additional space from bidding 3♣ is either starting your slam tries two steps lower, or having a re-invite available.

[nige1]

It is more frequent, but does it really need more space?

Consider 1H (2N): If responder has a good hand with spades, opener may want to show a preference for hearts with a min, or a good hand with no clear direction, or bid spades with a min. If the cuebid is 3♦, he has to go to the four-level with the "no clear direction hand". You are also muddling the slam tries. If responder has a good hand with hearts, the only gain for the additional space from bidding 3♣ is either starting your slam tries two steps lower, or having a re-invite available.

More than forty years ago, Eric Crowhurst compared the available options, and came to the same conclusion as Cherdano.

[PhilKing]

It is more frequent, but does it really need more space? The only gain for the additional space from bidding 3♣ is either starting your slam tries two steps lower, or having a re-invite available.

 

Well that's two advantages. How many do you need? Just kidding - I know you can't use step one for both ... ;)

 

We are slightly off topic, but after 1H 2NT 3C, I would play 3D as specifically a game try, 3S as a artificial mild slam try, and 3NT+ as strong tries.

 

After, 1H 2NT 3D I can bid 3H/S/NT natural and 4C/D to show slam tries in spades. My main computer is back in hospital, but I will check it for relevant situations.

[PhilKing]

More than forty years ago, Eric Crowhurst compared the available options, and came to the same conclusion as Cherdano.

 

You are comparing apples and pears. In a four card major system, the Crowhurst solution, in which the lower cue showed the fourth suit plus tolerance for partner, made much more sense.

[aguahombre]

You are comparing apples and pears. In a four card major system, the Crowhurst solution, in which the lower cue showed the fourth suit plus tolerance for partner, made much more sense.

Still, the logic of lower for 4th suit -- not guaranteeing tolerance for the first suit --- is valid.

 

My problems are: 1) can't do it on 1D (2N), for instance; 2) after years of lower for lower, old dogs would screw it up; and 3) it is a distinction without a difference when the opening bid was in Spades.

[Lovera]

gib rolled out the following 2S bid on me recently - what does / should it show?

 

[hv=pc=n&s=saj97hq92daqj84c6&d=w&v=n&b=12&a=ppp1d2d2s]133|200[/hv]

 

Thanks.

So, following the subsquent discussion, seems that Michaels is started but actually is not defined or completed. I think that bidding of partner must realize two objectives : make a sort of "disturbing" against opp and help partner indicating force and/or support before that it' s too late. I think that 2♠ (or 2♥) had to indicate major shortness in suit bidded occupaying space + force in (here) diamond suit of partner (being implicit the fourth suit).