[FelicityR]

The recent Michael's Cue Bid forum post by dickiegera in the Expert Discussion Forum - I'm only an advanced player myself - and the various replies made me look at my own methods and whether I was doing things at the table correctly.

You have this hand, or similar. Do you bid the suit, at the one or two level, or the shape by way of a Michael's Cue Bid? I have made the poll reflect different table positions and vulnerabilities, and whether you are playing MPs or IMPs as much as I can. And, as always, thank you in advance for your replies.

An opponent opens the bidding with 1♥. You are next to bid. What do you say?

---

[nige1]

FelicityR writes 'The recent Michael's Cue Bid forum post by dickiegera in the Expert Discussion Forum - I'm only an advanced player myself - and the various replies made me look at my own methods and whether I was doing things at the table correctly. You have this hand, or similar. Do you bid the suit, at the one or two level, or the shape by way of a Michael's Cue Bid? I have made the poll reflect different table positions and vulnerabilities, and whether you are playing MPs or IMPs as much as I can. And, as always, thank you in advance for your replies. An opponent opens the bidding with 1♥. You are next to bid. What do you say?'
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

It depends on your Michaels style (weak/strong or whatever).
I prefer an aggessive style and my ageement is that Michaels suggests that (at the prevailing vulnerability and scoring method), we play the hand if we have a fit.
FeliciyR's hand is quite flat and weak in a Michaels context, however, it is pure (honours concentrated in the suits). Hence, I judge ...

• If partner hasn't passed, then venture Michaels, except at adverse vulnerability, but
• If partner has passed, then risk Michaels, only at favourable vulnerability. Otherwise try a 1♠ (or even 2♠) overcall.

---

[HardVector]

You should phrase it as: "In the direct seat" and "In the balancing seat". Direct seat actions and balancing seat actions are very different forms of competing. In the direct seat, you have no idea where the balance of power is as opener's partner has not acted yet. In the balancing seat, opener's partner has passed showing nothing, so you have that information to go on and can generally be more aggressive than in the direct seat.

[FelicityR]

HardVector, on 2019-July-09, 20:20, said:

You should phrase it as: "In the direct seat" and "In the balancing seat". Direct seat actions and balancing seat actions are very different forms of competing. In the direct seat, you have no idea where the balance of power is as opener's partner has not acted yet. In the balancing seat, opener's partner has passed showing nothing, so you have that information to go on and can generally be more aggressive than in the direct seat.

In my post I stated specifically: An opponent opens the bidding with 1♥. You are next to bid.

Maybe I have got this wrong, but I have always known "the balancing seat" as when partner has been forced to pass due to an opponent's opening bid, and the 4th player then "balances".

And obviously, that auction is another variation where a Michael's Cue Bud could be used. But, for the time being, I thought I would keep things - I hoped - a tad less complicated

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

Michaels, but red vs. green 1S.
This is basically our agreement, that red vs. green the Michales promises min+ opening strength,
and the given hand is not an 1 level opening hand for us.

In 3rd seat all 3 options are ok, and I would go with either of them, depending on mood,
but the default would be the Michaels.
If you weaken the club suit, direct spade bid will get more appealing, and if you weaken the
spade suit (maybe even removing a spade card), the Michaels will become more appeal.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Tramticket]

2♥ for me at any vulnerability and form of scoring - it is comfortably within the range of partner's expectations. But for us, it is Ghestem showing specifically spades and clubs. We are pretty aggressive with these bids and I like the feature that all of our points are in our two suits.

[nudnikbp]

One spade. I like having a concealed second suit when the second suit is a minor. Occasionally a club fit will be missed, but a spade contract is more likely.

[GrahamJson]

I don’t see much point in playing Michaels if you are not going to use it on this hand. It looks textbook to me.

[miamijd]

Looks to me like a very obvious 2H bid at any form of scoring and no matter whether RHO opened 1H in first, second, or third seat.

Cheers,
Mike

[bluechip10]

FelicityR, on 2019-July-09, 09:06, said:

The recent Michael's Cue Bid forum post by dickiegera in the Expert Discussion Forum - I'm only an advanced player myself - and the various replies made me look at my own methods and whether I was doing things at the table correctly.

You have this hand, or similar. Do you bid the suit, at the one or two level, or the shape by way of a Michael's Cue Bid? I have made the poll reflect different table positions and vulnerabilities, and whether you are playing MPs or IMPs as much as I can. And, as always, thank you in advance for your replies.

An opponent opens the bidding with 1♥. You are next to bid. What do you say?

If vul, I would probably overcall 1sp. The hand is weak, and the club suit is appalling. I might even pass. If not vul, then i would use michaels. I like Michaels for strong and weak hands. For intermediate hands, I'll bid the suits out. This is how Mr. Michaels intended this to be.

---

[msjennifer]

Sir,I am in 2nd seat so no Michaels.The straight forward 1 Spade is what we bid.Some may find it difficult to digest but that's the way it goes.