[CSGibson]

---

Opponents are good enough to have recently reached the round of 8 in the Spingolds. They play constructive weak 2 bids, and 2N was a feature ask. Your own agreements include leaping Michaels over this sequence (3♠ would be a stopper ask, which is why it was not listed as a poll option). This is a teams game. What do you do?

[Fluffy]

4 clubs sounds perfect, I'd bid 3♠ woithout agreements

[mfa1010]

4♣. Great to get both suits in immediately.

[mikeh]

My only concern is that partner may play me for a lot more than I have if I bid 4♣. 2N is a common psyche, especially at this vulnerability....when white and especially when favourable, it is usually better, against competent opps, to jump to 4♠ but at this heat, 4♠ may be too rich....the opps will more often double and defend than at other heats. So partner may think that we have the same hand we'd hold for a direct 4♣ over 2♠...and I'm a full King short of that, since it is (for me and, based on a recent thread, for most) forcing.

Having said that, if RHO is for real, and bids 4♠ over my 3♣ (regardless of what LHO does, and 3♣ allows him to convey information, whether negative or positive that 4♣ doesn't), I'm going to want to bid again...presumably 4N to bring hearts back into the picture.

It is that factor that persuades me to bid 4♣ now, and hope to survive.

[rogerclee]

I would bid 4C at all colors except r/w, in which case I would just settle for 3C.

[Cyberyeti]

In play my leaping michaels as forcing and much better than that.

I suppose there's a case for playing it weaker over 2M-2N, possibly worth discussing, but people psyche 2N often enough that I probably still want to keep it strong.

[MrAce]

If 4♣ or 4♦ here are used to show m+♥ strong hands ( and in another topic when i asked everyone replied they play this leaping 4 minor forcing to game) Why can't we bid 4♠ with this, especially at these colors ?

[Hanoi5]

I don't play leaping Michael's but it seems to work just fine here.

[gnasher]

I think 4♣ shows the same strength as directly over 2♠. I think it's best played as forcing, but not promising the strength to insist on game - I just accept that sometimes we'll be too high.

Even with that agreement, I still think this is a bit light. If the majors were reversed, I'd probably bid 4♣, but when we don't have the boss suit there's less to gain by insisting on game. I'd just bid 3♣.

[straube]

I voted 4C, but I think I would pass if we were vulnerable. Seems at least slightly more likely that this is the opponents' hand. I want to involve partner in a decision to bid over 4S when NV. They might even bid 4S even when doubling might score better. When vul, I'm concerned about a large penalty.

[mtvesuvius]

4♣ I guess, 3♣ at equal, pass if R/W... Not thrilled about any of my options, but it seems counterproductive to come in with 3♣, which removes no room from the opponents, will almost always lose the ♥ suit, and isn't really a suit we want led.

That being said, I hate 4♣ too because I play it as forcing, and showing a MUCH better hand, and am very afraid partner will try for slam if he has a good hand. Pass also isn't an option since we're going to want to bid later anyway, and it's very likely we have a good save.

I'm a very unhappy 4♣ bidder here though.