[MrAce]

massem, on 2015-July-03, 22:28, said:

I believe that 3 H is not enough even after X.. if I had this hand I would say, or X or 4 D.... the first X is not right as well from my point of view.. i would bid 3 spades instead to show fit and strong hand..

Since you are at it, why don't you just ask aces and bid the ***** grand if pd has ♣ A ?

[Jinksy]

MrAce, on 2015-July-04, 00:35, said:

Since you are at it, why don't you just ask aces and bid the ***** grand if pd has ♣ A ?

Because partner might think your 4♣ bid was showing 4 clubs?

[rmnka447]

I agree with the basic criticism of North only bidding 2 ♥ originally. With a known 9+ card fit, doubleton in partner's other long suit, and ♣ A, the hand is much too good to make a bid that could be made on a doubleton ♥ and 0-4 points.

Nonetheless, one problem with Michaels is that the follow ups to the initial Michael bid and advancer's response are hardly discussed. The bidding can become somewhat confused and murky thereafter.

With a 4 loser hand as Michaels bidder, I'd take a different path then doubling 2 ♠. Yeah, it should show extras, but how much extra? Instead I'd make a 3 ♦ cue which advancer should have no problem recognizing as a big hand.

[neilkaz]

I've seen too many garbagy Michaels bids to want to jump right to 3♥ as north but after PD doubles 2♠ north needs to wake up and certainly after PD bids 3♥ north should carry on.

Blame is all on North from me.

[mike777]

blame north but all of you who blame north miss the big ..huge point

why does north get this wrong so often over so many years and decades.....


my answer is something is broken with michaels cuebid
solution...don't play it.
----------------
-------------------


I fully understand many of you will scream and yell about giving up a convention you have played for years. Fair enough....I just ask look at the alternatives

[MrAce]

mike777, on 2015-July-06, 01:09, said:

blame north but all of you who blame north miss the big ..huge point

why does north get this wrong so often over so many years and decades.....


my answer is something is broken with michaels cuebid
solution...don't play it.
----------------
-------------------


I fully understand many of you will scream and yell about giving up a convention you have played for years. Fair enough....I just ask look at the alternatives

Are you taking lessons in BIL from PhilG, Mike?

While you are at it also, why don't you scratch the negative doubles as well?
Hell, all I know is the fact that people have much more accidents with negative doubles than they do with Michaels!

[mike777]

MrAce, on 2015-July-06, 01:28, said:

Are you taking lessons in BIL from PhilG, Mike?

While you are at it also, why don't you scratch the negative doubles as well?
Hell, all I know is the fact that people have much more accidents with negative doubles than they do with Michaels!

ok I assume you have facts to back you up. If that is what you think best in your judgment... ok.


Again your facts, your opinion.

[MrAce]

mike777, on 2015-July-06, 01:44, said:

ok I assume you have facts to back you up. If that is what you think best in your judgment... ok.


Again your facts, your opinion.

Mike, trust me, neither you nor moderators want to hear my facts and opinions in a reply to you. Let's leave it at that.

[cherdano]

akwoo, on 2015-July-03, 14:05, said:

Most bridge players play by rote and never actually think about the game.

(C'mon, Arend - surely you know that the vast majority of students in Calculus pass the class by learning how to do calculus problems without actually understanding anything. Why should it be any different for bridge players?)

(Not singling out akwoo - just seems everybody misunderstood what I said.)

I never claimed anything different. "This is very basic" is not the same as "most people know this".

"Basic research" != "research everyone could do"
"It's a basic truth that currency union are only sustainable with constant transfer payments to poorer regions; yet most Europeans are seem to be unaware of this" is not a contradiction in terms.
Nor is "We spend 3 years teaching Calculus to high school and college students; yet afterwards they are good at complicated symbolic manipulations, but still don't understand basic concepts behind the notion derivative and integral".

Quote

Full Definition of BASIC

1
a : of, relating to, or forming the base or essence : fundamental <basic truths>
b : concerned with fundamental scientific principles : not applied <basic research>

2
: constituting or serving as the basis or starting point <a basic set of tools>

3
a : of, relating to, containing, or having the character of a chemical base
b : having an alkaline reaction

4
: containing relatively little silica <basic rocks>

5
: relating to, made by, used in, or being a process of making steel done in a furnace lined with basic material and under basic slag

[aguahombre]

I don't want to heat up anyone's firestorm, you guys can do that just fine. But the flaws in gadgets like Michaels are not built in to the convention; They are caused by its misuse.

Perhaps this North has seen South's Mikes before and doesn't trust him, or perhaps he doesn't know what to do about it -- like so many people who say o.k. thats what we play and have given it no further thought.

There are posters here who advocate doing it with 4-5, 5-4, and 4-4 hands. I would be reluctant to advance bids made by these folks, too.