[Bbradley62]

It very well may be standard (I wouldn't actually know), but I really hate this description of 3N:

---

Is it really useful for the bid to show 18+HCP after opp has opened and pard has shown 12+ total? I understand that there's more than 40 total points in this hand, but still... I (and, presumably, the other players who made the same bid) think it should be to play: 2-♠; 2-♥; 14+ total points; stop in ♦.

[1eyedjack]

Can't say that I am that enamoured of the definition of the Michaels cue itself.

The way I was taught, it was either weak or strong, with intermediate hands showing the two suits by bidding them individually.
I don't know if that is standard. Certainly bow to others if they say that it is not.

The benefits of a weak option are lessened when vulnerable, perhaps to the point of redundancy, so it may simplify matters to have just the one range to cater for all vulnerabilities. And yet there remains scope for assigning a range of values to hands where the two suits are bid naturally. The downside to that is that you may never get a chance to show your second suit, if the opponents bounce the bidding. So I don't have very strong opinion on it.

But if you are expected to wheel out Michaels with the right shape and 12+ total points with no upper limit, it does cause me to wonder how GIB would interpret it if you did choose to bid two suits naturally one after the other (and had the space to do so).

[chasetb]

The bidding description is very poor. 3NT should deny more than 3 Hearts or 3 Spades, and while we can dispute the HCP range, the fact is that it should be capped. If Michaels does start at 10 HCP, then I think 3NT should be like 16-21 HCP; unless you overcall here on a lot of sub 10 HCP hands, you should have a good play for game, and unless a total misfit, you want to be looking for slam with 22+ .