[ColdCrayon]

I have the opposite problem; I don't play Michael's, but I'm much more comfortable with the Qhestem/Questem or comprehensive two-suited systems. So when I play with another partner, and they make a Michael's bid I'm constantly bolloxing it up.

Anyway - momentarily forgot my point - Questem avoids Ghestem's ambiguity by making the 3c jump show top-and-bottom hands. So clubs are likely to be one of them anyway, and the bottom suit is usually the stronger one - otherwise you'd just bid the major.

I prefer Max Hardy's system - UnNT shows bottom two, a cuebid shows top-and-bottom, and a takeout double shows top-two. The advancer will at first treat it like a convention T/O; if he bids the one suit you don't have support for, you correct them to the lower of the top two that you have support for. If you move the higher suit, that shows a hand too strong for an overcall.

The occasions when you want to make a double showing an 18-19+ hand, AND advancer picks the suit directly below your suit are the only times you'll have ambiguity. To show the rock-crusher rather than the top-two, you have to jump.

If it sounds unwieldy it shouldn't. If you can master the whole negative/responsive/takeout/support/overcall/proper balancing/direct-seat/passed responder/take-out/for penalty/forcing pass system, adding a tiny wrinkle to it is nothing. [edit] I'd like to go on record by saying that bridge books really need to devote more time to the above, and just competitive bidding in general than they do. Typically most systems have about 9 chapters to show the most elaborate systems for uninterupted auctions for every one chapter on competitive auctions. It should be closer to 50/50, if not totally reversed.

[nige1]

With a tiny change, Michaels handles more 2-suiters. No change over 1M:

• 2N = 5+5+ minors.
• 2M = 5+ OM & 5+ minor.

Over 1m:

• 2N = 5+ ♥ & 5+ om as usual, but
• 2m = 5+ ♠ & 5+ another unbid.

Over the ambiguous cue-bid:

• Raise known suit = pre-empt.
• Cue = High card raise in known suit.
• 2N = Asks for other suit.
• New suit usually = Pass/Corrent.

Later, when your two-suits are known, opposite a silent "advancer", you can show:

• Extra shape by bidding a long suit,
• Or bidding no-trump with 6-6.
• Extra power by doubling.
• Both power and shape, by cue-bidding again.

When advancer shows a suit, then

• With a weak hand, pass or correct
• With a strong hand and a fit, cue-bid
• With a strong hand and the other suit, bid notrump.

Similarly with extra shape and extra power, when it isn;t clear which unbid suit you hold, then

• cue-bid shows higher ranking
• notrump shows lower ranking

Other refinements:

• When RHO bids a new suit that might be one of partner's suits e.g. (1♥) 2♥ (3♣) ?? then double = pass/correct.
• When RHO pre-empts e.g. (1♥) 2♥ (4♥) ?? then double = support for higher unknown suit - here ♦..
• When LHO pre-empts and partner passes e.g. (1♥) 2♥ (4♥) _P; (_P) ?? then I suppose you might agree that double shows extra power and ♣.

[Free]

There are probably 32519 different ways of showing 2-suiters and you let us choose only 3 of them I like Kuala Lumpuestem

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

first you should decide the answers to some question:

#1 Do you want to get in with a cont. range, or only with weak or
strong hands?
#2 Do you want to get in with 54 shapes as well?
This includes also the cases, where you go in, with 54,
pretendng to show 55, and afterwards saying,sry p, I mixed
up a card, a club was among my spades.

If you answer one or both qustions wih yes, than Michaels is
better, because it keeps the auction lower, i.e. you have more
room to figure out, what is going on.

With kind regards
Marlowe

PS: For whats it worth - we play Michaels.

[mikestar13]

nige1, on 2012-July-04, 10:13, said:

With a tiny change, Michaels handles more 2-suiters. No change over 1M:

• 2N = 5+5+ minors.
• 2M = 5+ OM & 5+ minor.

Over 1m:

• 2N = 5+ ♥ & 5+ om as usual, but
• 2m = 5+ ♠ & 5+ another unbid.

Over the ambiguous cue-bid:

• Raise known suit = pre-empt.
• Cue = High card raise in known suit.
• 2N = Asks for other suit.
• New suit usually = Pass/Corrent.

Later, with the two-suited hand , opposite a silent partner, you can show:

• Extra shape by bidding a long suit,
• Or bidding no-trump with 6-6.
• Extra power by doubling.
• Both power and shape, by cue-bidding again.

Other refinements:

• When RHO bids a new suit that might be one of partner's suits e.g. (1♥) 2♥ (3♣) ?? then double = pass/correct.
• When RHO pre-empts e.g. (1♥) 2♥ (4♥) ?? then double = support for higher unknown suit - here ♦..

This is exactly what my favorite partner and I play, but you have better-defined followups (which we will probably adopt). Ghestem is likely to get you too high, and in any case I don't think
5-5's are frequent enough to use three bids on, especially the devastating (1♦ )-3♣ sequence. If I really insisted on an unambiguous method, perhaps this:

(1♣)-2♣ = ♠ and ♦.
(1♣)-2♦ = ♠ and ♥.
(1♣)-2NT = ♥ and ♦.

(1♦)-2♦ = ♠ and ♥.
(1♦)-2♥ = ♠ and ♣.
(1♦)-2NT = ♥ and ♣.

(1♥)-2♥= ♠ and ♦.
(1♥)-2♠ = ♦ and ♣.
(1♥)-2NT = ♠ and ♣.

(1♠)-2♠ = ♥ and ♣.
(1♠)-2NT =♦ and ♣.
(1♠)-3♣ = ♥ and ♦.

This make the non-cue bid suit show two other suits, so it can also be used on strong hands. I still don't like to give up a WJO, but if I must, let it be the cheapest.

[the hog]

Yes it is a good convention if you remember it.

[Vampyr]

Why has Lurpoa upvoted most of the posts on the first page of this thread, but not mine?

[nige1]

Free, on 2012-July-04, 13:49, said:

There are probably 32519 different ways of showing 2-suiters and you let us choose only 3 of them I like Kuala Lumpuestem

Minor suit openings are becoming increasingly suspect, so, after (1m) ?? you may also consider:

• 2N = 5+ ♥ and 5+ ANY other (including the bid minor)
• 2m (cue-bid) = 5+ 5+ in two suits suits NOT ♥ (again the bid minor is a possibility)

Over either of these, advancer, with a weak hand, can bid the cheapest suit (pass/correct).

Over 2N, 3♦ asks the 2N overcaller to transfer to his second suit

• 3♥ = ♠ & ♥
• 3♠ = ♣ & ♥
• 3N = ♦ & ♥

Similarly over the cue-bid, 2♥ asks for clarification

• 2♠ = ♠ & ♣
• 2N = ♠ & ♦
• 3♣ = ♣ & ♦

[gwnn]

Vampyr, on 2012-July-07, 00:37, said:

Why has Lurpoa upvoted most of the posts on the first page of this thread, but not mine?

There are 28 posts in this thread (up to and not including this one) and Lurpoa has upvoted 7 of them (but you're right that she upvoted mostly on the first page). She is upvoting posts either from newcomers (less than 500 posts I think...) or from people who insult some posters that she has a grudge on.

Ghestem is not bad if you don't forget it. I agree though that 3C can be very valuable, particularly when NV.

[Zelandakh]

nige1, on 2012-July-07, 14:19, said:

Minor suit openings are becoming increasingly suspect, so, after (1m) ?? you may also consider:

Note that you can also adjust my method to allow either minor as part of the meaning if desired. So

1♣
===
2♣ = wjo in a major, or spades and a minor, strong
2♦ = wjo
2♥ = both majors, weak
2♠ = spades and a minor, weak
2NT = hearts and a minor
3♣ = both majors, strong

and

1♦
===
2♦ = wjo in a major, or spades and a minor, strong
2♥ = both majors, weak
2♠ = spades and a minor, weak
2NT = hearts and a minor
3♣ = wjo
3♦ = both majors, strong