[mike777]

Here is an idea in Bridge Today from Matthew Granovetter

2d over 2c shows the majors, 3c shows a good D bid, 3D shows a weak 2D hand type.

This was the famous Paul Soloway hand versus Nunes:

AQT9x...J9753....75....2
both vul imps
(2c)=?

[joshs]

mike777, on Mar 13 2006, 05:57 PM, said:

Here is an idea in Bridge Today from Matthew Granovetter

2d over 2c shows the majors, 3c shows a good D bid, 3D shows a weak 2D hand type.

This was the famous Paul Soloway hand versus Nunes:

AQT9x...J9753....75....2
both vul imps
(2c)=?

Yes a famous hand. I think paul bid 2S and they never found there big heart fit...

[awm]

While certainly this solves the problem on that one particular hand, it seems to me that:

(1) You can often double with 5-5 majors shape (perhaps using equal level correction)
(2) Overcalling 2♠ won't necessarily work out badly with the 5-5 hand (although it could)
(3) Hands with diamonds where you want to bid are probably more common than 5-5 major hands.
(4) The losses on hands where you want to bid diamonds and have to go to the three level may exceed the gains when you have the 5-5 majors hands.

Several of my regular partnerships have played without a "michaels" bid for quite some time (we use top+bottom cues as part of Hardy's structure of two-suited overcalls) and have found very few times when we missed the inability to show both majors (usually we bid 1♠ with those hands). You only lose when your best fit is in hearts and you can't get them into the auction later, which is only some of the time on what's an infrequent hand type to begin with. Trading this off against times when the opponents get some advantage in the bidding or play because of knowing about the two suits, I'm not convinced Michaels is a long-term win at all, much less that it's worth not having the alternate options (in this case a natural diamond bid).

Then again, this is just my guess.

[joshs]

awm, on Mar 13 2006, 06:30 PM, said:

While certainly this solves the problem on that one particular hand, it seems to me that:

(1) You can often double with 5-5 majors shape (perhaps using equal level correction)
(2) Overcalling 2♠ won't necessarily work out badly with the 5-5 hand (although it could)
(3) Hands with diamonds where you want to bid are probably more common than 5-5 major hands.
(4) The losses on hands where you want to bid diamonds and have to go to the three level may exceed the gains when you have the 5-5 majors hands.

Several of my regular partnerships have played without a "michaels" bid for quite some time (we use top+bottom cues as part of Hardy's structure of two-suited overcalls) and have found very few times when we missed the inability to show both majors (usually we bid 1♠ with those hands). You only lose when your best fit is in hearts and you can't get them into the auction later, which is only some of the time on what's an infrequent hand type to begin with. Trading this off against times when the opponents get some advantage in the bidding or play because of knowing about the two suits, I'm not convinced Michaels is a long-term win at all, much less that it's worth not having the alternate options (in this case a natural diamond bid).

Then again, this is just my guess.

Adam is guessing. I am sure that adam is right.............. By transitivity, that means I am guessing. ?!

[mike777]

Soloway choose to pass and the online commentary agreed with his bid at the time.

[luke warm]

mike777, on Mar 13 2006, 05:57 PM, said:

Here is an idea in Bridge Today from Matthew Granovetter

2d over 2c shows the majors, 3c shows a good D bid, 3D shows a weak 2D hand type.

This was the famous Paul Soloway hand versus Nunes:

AQT9x...J9753....75....2
both vul imps
(2c)=?

i play 2♦ over 2♣ as hearts and spades or spades only, so that works here also

[Gerben42]

Quote

Soloway choose to pass and the online commentary agreed with his bid at the time.

I still agree with pass. 2♣ was intermediate (10 - 13 HCP) and you just don't bid with a hand like this over 2♣. If 2♦ is Michael's what do you do with a normal 2♦ bid?

[whereagles]

Well, I don't think you need any gadget here. With that 55 you can double, intending to correct any diamond call by pard to hearts (which should not be a good one-suited hand, a GOSH). If pard bids a major, so much the better.

[kenrexford]

On a similar note, most of my regular partnerships feature a 2D advance to a double as a Herbert Negative, akin to Lebensohl. Thus, after 2C-X-P-?, 2D is artificial and weak, 2M shows values (minimal, but values).