[Frank_lol_]

---

NS play a natural 2/1 GF system.
Matchpoints.
Would you Sacrifice?

Edit: 2H is Michaels mini/maxi.

[pescetom]

I don't play mini/maxi... imagine the 3♠ is pre-emptive and probably mini?
If so I'm not doubling but not sacrificing either.

[mikeh]

Partner should merely be competing…hopefully with six spades. Of course, that view is based on the perhaps erroneous assumption that the way one ‘should’ show the ‘maxi’ Michaels (over which I’d bid game, expecting it to have play or be a great save) is to double 3H. In no universe so far discovered would that double be penalty.

If he’s just competing, as I suspect, then his operation may have worked,..he made north guess. It’s a rule of competitive bidding that, absent a clear direction, one strains to avoid being the partnership that has to make the ‘last guess’. There’s little worse than pushing the opps into a doomed contract and then rescuing them by bidding a phantom save.

And we have some reason to think that we might go plus. While south has 6+ hearts, we might get a tap going if west leads a chunky minor.

If I knew he had diamonds, I’d save, but that’s making the last guess…they’re very unlikely to ever bid 5H.

Edit…I’m never, ever doubling

[nullve]

mikeh, on 2022-December-19, 18:04, said:

go plus

In what sense?

[thepossum]

I'm proud to say I voted without reading the thread

[mikeh]

nullve, on 2022-December-19, 18:17, said:

In what sense?

Think about it. We’re defending a contract and may go plus. What can I mean? Lol.

[LBengtsson]

Frank_lol_, on 2022-December-19, 15:22, said:

Edit: 2H is Michaels mini/maxi.

I actually do not like this variation of Michael's: the mini version comes up 20x more than the maxi, I guess, and with a strong hand with a ♠ suit, I'd rather bid 1♠ even with a two-suited hand here.

As for would I 'sacrifice' give me one good reason why I would want to? I realise at MPs it is fight for the part score, and now that partner has pushed the opps. into game, am I going to now fight for the game? If I think we had game in the first instance I would have bid it.

Partner does not need much for 4♥ to be down, and your balanced hand has no feature such as a stiff/void to make it more attractive to sacrifice than the two aces that you already have. Defense for me here also: I am passing.

[AL78]

LBengtsson, on 2022-December-20, 01:05, said:

I actually do not like this variation of Michael's: the mini version comes up 20x more than the maxi, I guess, and with a strong hand with a ♠ suit, I'd rather bid 1♠ even with a two-suited hand here.

I think the idea of min/max Michaels is to limit the hand to either one which is suggesting a sacrifice or one which is constructively suggesting a game, and eliminating the intermediate hands where it is not clear what you are trying to achieve. Do you have a limited strength range in your two suited overcalls?

[Frank_lol_]

LBengtsson, on 2022-December-20, 01:05, said:

I actually do not like this variation of Michael's: the mini version comes up 20x more than the maxi, I guess, and with a strong hand with a ♠ suit, I'd rather bid 1♠ even with a two-suited hand here.

As for would I 'sacrifice' give me one good reason why I would want to? I realise at MPs it is fight for the part score, and now that partner has pushed the opps. into game, am I going to now fight for the game? If I think we had game in the first instance I would have bid it.

Partner does not need much for 4♥ to be down, and your balanced hand has no feature such as a stiff/void to make it more attractive to sacrifice than the two aces that you already have. Defense for me here also: I am passing.

I was the guy sitting at north, so I cant control what my enemy uses lol
I'll show the ful hand later, not on my computer rn.

[Evies Dad]

Is the bidding by West typical of how one plays the mini ?
East has promised nothing so you make a bid that causes the opps no difficulties and practically forces them into game ?

[Frank_lol_]

Here is the full hand:

---

I passed at first, as our 3♥ promises a little bit more than what I have.
Having a very good 16 pointers with only 5 losers, my partner bid 3♥
Having 6 Spades, West bid 3♠ (if he wanted to invite 4♠, he would have doubled)
Hearing my partner's 3♥, I gladly bid 4♥.
East later told me that he bid♠ hoping for 2 things:
If West has a 6-5-1-1 shape with only 3 losers in the long suits (which is very likely), he can probably make the contract with his 2 Aces; if the contract goes down, he hopes that NS can make 4♥.

[LBengtsson]

There is Michael's Cue Bid 5/5 interference, and there is a 6/5 hand which has a lot more distributional strength. Personally I would not be using Michael's as West

[mikeh]

Frank_lol_, on 2022-December-20, 05:27, said:

Here is the full hand:

---

I passed at first, as our 3♥ promises a little bit more than what I have.
Having a very good 16 pointers with only 5 losers, my partner bid 3♥
Having 6 Spades, West bid 3♠ (if he wanted to invite 4♠, he would have doubled)
Hearing my partner's 3♥, I gladly bid 4♥.
East later told me that he bid♠ hoping for 2 things:
If West has a 6-5-1-1 shape with only 3 losers in the long suits (which is very likely), he can probably make the contract with his 2 Aces; if the contract goes down, he hopes that NS can make 4♥.

Well done by EW. Without detracting (much) from that, I wonder how the bidding would go were west to have QJ109xx void KJxxx Qx?

I’m not sure, having seen the hands, how I’d have bid either of the EW hands. I generally shy away from bidding Michaels with 6M 5m, since advancer is too likely to avoid looking for our major with a doubleton. But the hand isn’t strong enough for 1S then diamonds (although it’s a good hand if spades get raised…I’d hide the diamonds….note that 4S is, realistically, very good by west…on the almost assured heart lead).

I’m also not persuaded that I’d have bid only 2S as east, but maybe playing mini-max Michaels that’s the correct bid. I don’t play that and I’d have treated east’s hand as a constructive bid in spades…depending upon agreements, I’d expect something like 2N, ostensibly looking for the minor, followed by the minimum number of spades

I have two…count them….two aces! 3 spades and fitting cards for whichever minor west has.

[Frank_lol_]

mikeh, on 2022-December-20, 09:19, said:

Well done by EW. Without detracting (much) from that, I wonder how the bidding would go were west to have QJ109xx void KJxxx Qx?

If i had DQ iknstead of DJ, I would have raised to 3H.

So It would probably go like:
1H (2H) 3H (3S maybe?)
4H (4S maybe?) P (P)
X All Pass

[Frank_lol_]

mikeh, on 2022-December-20, 09:19, said:

Well done by EW. Without detracting (much) from that, I wonder how the bidding would go were west to have QJ109xx void KJxxx Qx?

I’m not sure, having seen the hands, how I’d have bid either of the EW hands. I generally shy away from bidding Michaels with 6M 5m, since advancer is too likely to avoid looking for our major with a doubleton. But the hand isn’t strong enough for 1S then diamonds (although it’s a good hand if spades get raised…I’d hide the diamonds….note that 4S is, realistically, very good by west…on the almost assured heart lead).

I’m also not persuaded that I’d have bid only 2S as east, but maybe playing mini-max Michaels that’s the correct bid. I don’t play that and I’d have treated east’s hand as a constructive bid in spades…depending upon agreements, I’d expect something like 2N, ostensibly looking for the minor, followed by the minimum number of spades

I have two…count them….two aces! 3 spades and fitting cards for whichever minor west has.

Yeah, if E bid 1♠ and they end in 4♠, I would definitely lead ♥. 4♠Xmake would give EW a very good score (and us a 0)

[mikeh]

Frank_lol_, on 2022-December-20, 10:10, said:

If i had DQ iknstead of DJ, I would have raised to 3H.

So It would probably go like:
1H (2H) 3H (3S maybe?)
4H (4S maybe?) P (P)
X All Pass

Without the club queen?

[Frank_lol_]

mikeh, on 2022-December-20, 11:51, said:

Without the club queen?

oh, didn't realize that.
I would pass in the first round, but still bid 4♥ over 3S. (I'm only 14 and I have only played bridge for 2 years, so forgive me if I make mistakes). But it wouldn't really work well because EW couldn't even make 3♠ over a ♣ lead.
This means that 4♠ would be even worse lol

Edit: If I were W, I wont bid 3S with the card you said.


Intrestingly, by switching up the queens, both N and W lost value ( Qx by W is basically useless in this senario, xxxxx by N is just... not optimal)

[mycroft]

IHNTA (and that hand is awful for mini-maxi, because it's "neither" or "both", but also not really "spades then diamonds" either), but as someone with a stake in the discussion, a reminder that it's a Michaels cuebid, not Michael's Cuebid. Even if the guy's first name was Mike.