[peachy]

My partner and I want to solidify our agreements. When we open 1m and they overcall 2m (Michaels), our current bids are the following:
2H = heart stopper, may have spade stopper
2S = spade stopper, denies heart stopper
2NT = undefined
3 our minor = good raise, constructive to a bad limit raise
3H, 3S = splinters
Gameforcing raises go via splinter or a stopper show, and 2H and 2S are forcing to 3NT or 5m. A direct raise to 4 our minor is RKC for the suit.

As you can see, there are holes! How to fix the holes? We want to keep the stopper shows because frequently 3NT must be intelligently reached if it is there. If you are going to say "Your system sucks", fine, but in that case have the heart to give a better one that is complete

[TylerE]

It would seem so obvious to have both stopper asks to deny the other, with 2N showing both, that I must be missing something.

[gwnn]

I don't like all these stop showings. When I have AQTx I'd like to defend generally, so I won't show the stopper anyway. So it only gains when we have QJx xx or something in the majors and really really want partner to stop the other one; but what if he has xx AQTx? Now we must play some 3NT that maybe isn't so good.

Better is
first round x = interested in penalties
first round 2H=clubs good
first round 2S=diamonds good

[jdonn]

Agree with gwnn. And how is this unusual versus unusual anyway? You are neither "versus unusual" (you are versus michaels) nor are you playing the comparable convention in any case (it would be what gwnn suggests, lower cuebid = lower suit, higher cuebid = higher suit).

[bluecalm]

Your system lacks what is one of the most important bid after michaels: weakish raise.
You really don't want to pass holding for example: (after 1♦)

xx
xx
KTxx
Axxxx

I would go with something similar to what gwnn said. One of the 2M bids should be limit raise+ and 3m should be weakish hand which may want to compete.
One thing you can do is differ between limit and gf raise (2♥/2♠) or use those bids for good hands with clubs/diamonds (as gwnn said).

[cherdanno]

You can still explore stoppers at the 3-level. If you are looking for 3NT, you can start with a forcing bid showing your long clubs or your support. If you don't have either, you should be doubling anyway.

[TimG]

jdonn, on Aug 15 2010, 03:52 AM, said:

Agree with gwnn. And how is this unusual versus unusual anyway? You are neither "versus unusual" (you are versus michaels) nor are you playing the comparable convention in any case (it would be what gwnn suggests, lower cuebid = lower suit, higher cuebid = higher suit).

I think it is slightly better for lower cuebid = unbid suit and higher cuebid = raise. The reason for this is that it provides opener with a punt when responder shows the unbid suit.

For instance, if it starts 1♥-(2N)-3♦ where diamonds = spades, opener may not have rebiddable hearts, spade support, or a suitable hand for 3N and will be under pressure to find a mis-description. If instead 1♥-(2N)-3♣ shows spades, now opener can punt with 3♦ when he has nothing much to say.

[Cascade]

Definitely one cue-bid is best played as a raise.

The other cue-bid is usually played as a forcing bid in the unbid suit allowing you to make a negative free bid in the unbid suit.

Start almost all other strong hands with a double.

[peachy]

Thanks for responses so far. Given that I like to humor my partner and therefore want to keep the stopper showing bids, is there a way to fix the holes? I understand what y'all are saying about switching methods, and I hear you loud and clear.

[aguahombre]

Double seems to work out the stopper situation, sometimes with a side benefit ---that of defending. So you get U vs U and stopper exploration, too. That fills in most of the holes.

I don't think there is enough space available to fill in holes if bidding their suits shows stops; and they get a license to steal. I know that isn't what you want, but .....

[mikeh]

peachy, on Aug 15 2010, 10:05 PM, said:

Thanks for responses so far. Given that I like to humor my partner and therefore want to keep the stopper showing bids, is there a way to fix the holes?  I understand what y'all are saying about switching methods, and I hear you loud and clear.

you have a choice: play something that is profoundly flawed and keep partner happy (while, since you posted the issue, presumably keeping you unhappy) or play something logical and get partner to change.

There are two negatives to the first option. Partner may be reluctant to follow the 2nd option....but you should then consider whether this partner is the right partner for you. You have posted to the forum, so you seem to be interested in improving your game. Your partner, if he or she refuses to change, isn't. You do the math.