[sceptic]

How reasonable or unreasonable is my bidding here, 2 clubs by me

we were vuln v's non vuln

Scoring: IMP

---

West North East South

 -     -     1♣    2♣
 Pass  2♦    3♣    5♦
 Pass  Pass  Pass  

[coyot]

Depends on what your agreement for 2♣ is. If it shows spades + another, 5/5 or better and any strength, then it is ok.

I think this hand would even qualify for Unusual CB when you play it weak/strong only.

I would, however, bid 4♣ instead of 5♦ - you have a great hand after all.

[mike777]

Wayne I understand your bidding.

Just to confuse you and me more.

On the theory bid game when vul.....bid game all the time when vul......
perhaps 1s then 4h is a silly option.

Please note this falls under the theory of bid game on any silly hand at imps.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

5D is insane, sry, I would use stronger words,
but since you posted in Beginner/Intermediate ...,
maybe even "insane" is to strong.

Why? The answer is simple. If partner is looking
for your 2nd suit, i.e. the cue promised spade and
another, Partner may just hold a 3 card suit,
if the cue promised both mayors, 2D promises
a 5 card suit, but it could be xxxxx, hence 3D is
enough.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[ochinko]

I think that 2C is completely reasonable. You have a 4 loser hand, and I guess you are going to jump to a game when your partner choses a major, or perhaps cue bid in clubs.

I don't understand the 2D. We told partner to pick up a major, and all he could do was to bid the other minor? If I was 6:6 in the majors, it would be easy to insist with 3C. Thankfully, I have a good diamond, so I bid cautiously 3D. Partner should be at most 2:1 in the majors, so his decision now will depend on the ratio of the number of cards in his minor suits. We could be facing a total misfit, or we could still have 3NT, 5D, or even 6D.

Petko

[bearmum]

[Gerben42]

Suggested auction:

1♣ 2♣ p 2♠
3♣ 4♠ p p
p

Agree heartily with 2♣. 2♠ in this auction should show real support, with 2-1 in majors bid 2♦ first.

[the hog]

2C is fine, but I do not understand your partner's 2D bid; what is wrong with 2S?

[luis]

2♣ is normal playing strong/weak Michaels which is the most accepted treatment. 2♦ seems to be a mistake since 2♠ is probably a lot better after 2♠ you can bid a normal 4♠ and play there.
Now that pd bid wrongly 2♦ your 5♦ bid is sound in the given context.

Luis

[pmacfar]

2♣ for the majors is very reasonable. The hand is in the upper edge of the higher point range for the Michael's bid.

As for the partner.....When the Michael's bid is made, the first objective should be to show the three card support for one of partner's 5 card suits. By not showing support for one of the suits is showing shortness in both suits. Thus, 2♠ should be his response....Then the o'caller can decide how to continue...

Being that duplicate awards for game, I would agressively bid to 4♠ with a 4-loser hand.

[RussK_NJ]

OK, i'm an intermediate player. Why not just overbid 1♠. Wouldn't a direct overbid show 5 spades? The partner could then directly reply 2♠. You could go directly to 4♠, show your clubs (requiring an answer) or go directly to 4♠.

[RussK_NJ]

Scratch the club showing, i was responding without having the hand in front of me.

[the hog]

RussK_NJ, on Jul 22 2005, 09:39 AM, said:

OK, i'm an intermediate player. Why not just overbid 1♠. Wouldn't a direct overbid show 5 spades? The partner could then directly reply 2♠. You could go directly to 4♠, show your clubs (requiring an answer) or go directly to 4♠.

Yes thats true, but in this case the Michaels bid allows you to show that you have a H suit as well. There may be some hands where your partner cannot bid due to lack of a S fit, but where you have a very good H fit and then don't find it.

[cherdano]

I agree with all your bidding and reasoning Wayne. 2♣ is 5/5 majors in standard Michaels, but some people play it as spades + another (in which case the auction from 2♦ on would have a completely different meaning).

Arend

[P_Marlowe]

sceptic, on Jul 21 2005, 11:13 AM, said:

Quote

2D promises
a 5 card suit, but it could be xxxxx

I dont understand if they had that diamond holding, then why would he would not bid a major, unless he had 5 diamonds and 8 clubs something I think I can live with as the chances of that happening are somewhat remote

Hi,

you are probably right, that 2D has to be a 6 card suit, altough xxxxxx
is still being possible, one possible shape would be 1-2-6-4.
Your hand with 8 clubs, would probably pass 2C .
Nevertheless 5D is to much, because partner may be broke, and
11 tricks is a long way to go.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[mikestar]

Assuming your agreement is Michaels, you bid is reasonable but a bit agressive. If partner is misfit in both majors, unless he has an astonishing string of diamonds (with which he would probably have jumped), he has club length opposite your void and three trumps may not give him enough club ruffs. Also your hearts are wasted opposite shortness.

Again assuming Micheals, your partner's bid is really over the top--if he bids 2♠ you go to 4 and make even if the diamond hook is off.

If your agreement really is Spades and other, then 2♦ is pass or correct, implying short spades and playable in the red suits or diamonds and spades with better diamonds, in either case only intersted in playing diamonds if it is one of your suits.


By the way, I heartily dislike ambigous two suiter bids.