[MickyB]

A team of juniors took on Cayne tonight, and achieved a respectable 19 imp loss over 28 boards. Here is a decision I faced on board 2:

Scoring: IMP

The auction commences P-1♠. What's your call on the North hand? If possible, East splinters with 4♥. What now?

---

[the hog]

Yes I would Michaels on this. Why not? You have the right shape. If it were available I would prefer to bid 4C showing C+H. I pass over the splinter with the Sth hand and over 4S with the Nth hand.

[flytoox]

With 6 hearts, I like 2H. If it was 5H6C, I would consider Michaels.

[Free]

2♠ seems quite normal

[Rebound]

I think this hand is too good for Micheals.

[Codo]

I would treat my hand as too strong for michaels (I play michaels as weak or strong and think this hand is inbetween) and bid 2 Heart, so after 4 Heart South passes and after West 4 Spade I must try 5 Club which leads to something between 9 and 11 tricks in 5 Heart.

[Apollo81]

Here's my problem with Michaels here. Suppose it goes 4♠pp back to you (or something similar). Do you feel like you've gotten this hand off your chest? It's favorable, you don't have to have a good 6-5 with a void in their suit. I don't feel like I have described my hand sufficiently.

I would overcall 2♥ and then bid 5♣ over 4♠pp. This better describes my shape by my second call than any sequence where I start with a 2♠ bid. There's also the added bonus that pard may double 4♠....that is very unlikely to happen if I Michaels.

---

Edit: I don't think pass vs. act over 4♠ regardless of the first call is a guess. I think act is right at FAVORABLE. Given I am acting, 2♥ followed by 5♣ is a better description than Michaels followed by anything.

[000002]

Apollo81, on Jan 10 2007, 07:42 AM, said:

Here's my problem with Michaels here. Suppose it goes 4♠pp back to you (or something similar). Do you feel like you've gotten this hand off your chest? It's favorable, you don't have to have a good 6-5 with a void in their suit. I don't feel like I have described my hand sufficiently.

I would overcall 2♥ and then bid 5♣ over 4♠pp. This better describes my shape by my second call than any sequence where I start with a 2♠ bid. There's also the added bonus that pard may double 4♠....that is very unlikely to happen if I Michaels.

Suppose it goes 4♠pp back to you (or something similar). Do you feel like you've gotten this hand off your chest?
suppose u commence 2♥,i think u had to guess a 5♣ overcall or not.



There's also the added bonus that pard may double 4♠....
As i know , (1s-2h-4s-x), this is cooperational DBL, so much as,someone named it takeout .
for instance ,following 2♥ competition,did u pass 4♠ with this hand?
xx
xx
AQxxx
KJxx


regards 000002

[MickyB]

000002, on Jan 10 2007, 01:02 PM, said:

There's also the added bonus that pard may double 4♠....
As i know , (1s-2h-4s-x), this is cooperational DBL, so much as,someone named it takeout .
for instance ,following 2♥ competition,did u pass 4♠ with this hand?
xx
xx
AQxxx
KJxx


regards 000002

Partly for this reason, I wonder if it is better to overcall *four* hearts planning to bid 5♣ over 4♠. Ok, admittedly pard isn't doubling 4♠ very often on this auction!

I probably should have mentioned that pard would usually have opened a dutch 2 as dealer, green with 5♠4m. This makes unilateral action slightly more attractive - the opps are almost certainly heading for 4♠.

[whereagles]

I belive this is an absolutely normal michaels overcall, even if you play weak/strong bounds. If it happens to come back to me in 4♠, then I might have some guessing to do, but I don't see how any other course of action could remove this guess.

[pclayton]

Mike, I watched this hand and I didn't like the Michaels call at either table, even though you had good company with Lea Dupont . Its possible that Benito and Lea play it as top / bottom too.

The problem with a Michaels call, is unless you are prepared to compete with 3♥ over 2N you can't get to a 6-2 heart fit, which might be the only game available.

Great job in this match.

[MickyB]

pclayton, on Jan 10 2007, 05:38 PM, said:

Mike, I watched this hand and I didn't like the Michaels call at either table, even though you had good company with Lea Dupont  . Its possible that Benito and Lea play it as top / bottom too.

The problem with a Michaels call, is unless you are prepared to compete with 3♥ over 2N you can't get to a 6-2 heart fit, which might be the only game available.

Great job in this match.

Thanks Phil.

We passed out 4♠. For Lea, 2♠ showed ♥+♣. Benito then found an aggressive 5♥ bid after his RHO had bid 4♠. This went for 300 against 620.

I'm less worried about the 6th heart than I am about the offensive nature of the hand. My reason for not worrying about a 6-2 heart fit is that I think that it is likely we will need to go to the 5 level to buy it. If we had the spades and the oppos the hearts then I wouldn't consider suppressing my 6th spade. On the other hand, (1♥)-1♠-(4♥) would leave us struggling to ever reach the minor, unless you are of the opinion that

1♥-1♠-4♥-P
P -4♠

should show 6♠5minor - maybe it should iff partner is a passed hand? Hm

[pclayton]

MickyB, on Jan 10 2007, 10:03 AM, said:

pclayton, on Jan 10 2007, 05:38 PM, said:

Mike, I watched this hand and I didn't like the Michaels call at either table, even though you had good company with Lea Dupont  . Its possible that Benito and Lea play it as top / bottom too.

The problem with a Michaels call, is unless you are prepared to compete with 3♥ over 2N you can't get to a 6-2 heart fit, which might be the only game available.

Great job in this match.

Thanks Phil.

We passed out 4♠. For Lea, 2♠ showed ♥+♣. Benito then found an aggressive 5♥ bid after his RHO had bid 4♠. This went for 300 against 620.

My reason for not worrying about a 6-2 heart fit is that I think that it is likely we will need to go to the 5 level to buy the hand. If we had the spades and the oppos the hearts then I wouldn't consider suppressing my 6th spade. On the other hand, (1♥)-1♠-(4♥) would leave us struggling to ever reach the minor, unless you are of the opinion that

1♥-1♠-4♥-P
P -4♠ should show 6♠5minor - maybe it should iff partner is a passed hand? Hm

I didn't see the alert on 2♠ at Benito's, but I'm sure you are right.

Minor rant here: I much prefer 2 suited cue bids to show specific suits. If 2♠ shows exactly hearts / clubs, it has a lot going for it, in spite of the 6M / 5m issue.

I think its easy for Benito to take the push; everything in his hand is working hard; ♠Axx rates to have no losers, ♣Kx is great, and the ♦Q is exposed anyway on the bidding.

4♠ might go down on ♥ lead, win 1st ♠, and play ♣K, ♣, but that requires clubs to be 3-3, so 4♠ looks frigid too.

As far as the 6♠/5m vs 6♥/5m conundrum, (with the delayed 4♠ call) I wouldn't confident pard had a big side suit, but it depends on your preempting philosophy and agreements.

[cherdano]

I like 2♥ followed by 5♣. I don't like selling out to 4♠, but if I bid Michaels, I pretty much have to.

I don't see the advantage of 4♥ over 2♥. I would only bid 4♥ if I saw a small but decent chance that opps don't find their 4♠ bid.

I see several ways 2♥ may work better than 4♥:
- I may be able to show clubs with 4♣ (forcing raise followed by a 3♠ sign-off), then I can leave the 5-level decision to partner.
- Generally, partner will play me for some values. Sometimes he may be able to double 4♠ for penalty (if he can double LHO's forcing raise or cuebid earlier -- I agree that a double of a jump to 4♠ is convertible values and not a trump stack).

[whereagles]

cherdano, on Jan 10 2007, 06:24 PM, said:

I like 2♥ followed by 5♣. I don't like selling out to 4♠, but if I bid Michaels, I pretty much have to.

Isn't that a logical mistake? If you bid michaels, you can still try 4NT over 4♠, showing a 6-5 with 6 hearts (with 6 in the minor you'd bid it instead of 4NT).

[1eyedjack]

whereagles, on Jan 10 2007, 08:43 PM, said:

cherdano, on Jan 10 2007, 06:24 PM, said:

I like 2♥ followed by 5♣. I don't like selling out to 4♠, but if I bid Michaels, I pretty much have to.

Isn't that a logical mistake? If you bid michaels, you can still try 4NT over 4♠, showing a 6-5 with 6 hearts (with 6 in the minor you'd bid it instead of 4NT).

Is it possible that South might be in doubt about the location of North's minor on this auction, and want to play in 5H opposite a particular minor but in 5m opposite the other?

[cherdano]

whereagles, on Jan 10 2007, 09:43 PM, said:

cherdano, on Jan 10 2007, 06:24 PM, said:

I like 2♥ followed by 5♣. I don't like selling out to 4♠, but if I bid Michaels, I pretty much have to.

Isn't that a logical mistake? If you bid michaels, you can still try 4NT over 4♠, showing a 6-5 with 6 hearts (with 6 in the minor you'd bid it instead of 4NT).

That's a possible agreement, but I don't think my partners would ever expect longer hearts than clubs after a Michaels bid (unless I just rebid 5♥ myself). OTOH, if I bid 2♥ and then 5♣, I think their default guess would be 6-5 in those suits.

[000002]

IF it's sufficiency to commence 2♥ following 5♣ ,------------------,the more easy to cuebid an michale then proceed a 3♥.



regards 000002