TALES OF AKARANA 6

This week’s post provided lessons on the applications of Michael’s cue bids. Richard’s preference is for this bid to have some values but he asks how do you like them? Weak, strong, in between or some combination there of?

For an earlier post PLAY AND DEFEND.  Michael’s Mistimed Richard gave an example where competing with a weak Michael’s cue bid when both vulnerable gave information to declarer that enabled them to make an otherwise unlikely small slam and could also have resulted in a penalty exceeding the makeable opponents  game score if doubled.

A Michael’s cue bid can be used to be preemptive or constructive and as Richard suggests partnership agreement might be that the HCP strength might vary depending on vulnerability.

For those that like to combine the ability to be both preemptive and constructive an alternative option is to have a partnership agreement to play a Michael’s cue bid variant based on variable loser strength rather than HCP using the rule of 123.

The rule of 123 considers overcaller’s vulnerability and opener’s vulnerability to determine the number of losers the Michael’s cue bid will have. Simply if vulnerable vs non vulnerable the overcaller has a hand less losers that would go 1 light if there is a fit, if vulnerable vs vulnerable or non vulnerable vs non vulnerable the overcaller has a hand less losers that would go 2 light, and if non vulnerable vs vulnerable the overcaller has a hand less losers that would go 3 light. This allows partner to calculate the number of losers overcaller has (13 - tricks expect to make if a fit = number of  losers) and if there is a fit then use the rule of 18 to calculate the bidding level expected possible to make (18 - (combined loser +- adjustments = bidding level expected possible to make contract). Using the rule of 123 overcaller is less likely to go down sufficient tricks doubled to give away a score greater than opponent’s possible game score.

So for the first hand:

KQxxx

QJxxx

Kxx

 -

Vulnerable vs non vulnerable over a 1 opening North’s hand has 6 losers (with adjustments) and would expect to make 7 tricks with a fit in either . Using the rule of 123 can lose 1 trick therefore bids 2. 

Their partner has:

 xxx

 AK

 x

 KJxxxxx

This is a 6 loser hand which from the rule of 18 could mean a small slam may be possible. For  instance if partner had A  instead of K 6 would have a chance on all but a trump lead.  Bidding might proceed :

1 (2) - (2) 

-      (3) - (3)

-      (3NT) - (4)

The shape asking relay bid of 2 asks for more information about partner’s shape. Partner’s 3 response shows  553 and void in  9 total losers and by inference 3 - 4 cards higher than J. 3 CROSS relay in  then asks for information about key cards. 3NT shows 1 or 3 key card which must be 1 otherwise North would then have a 5 loser hand with adjustments. As South can then count 2+ losers they then sign off in 4.

As the over call is based on losers and rule of 123, not HCP, the HCP range of the Michael’s cue bid could vary from 0 - 19 HCP which makes it more difficult for opponent’s to judge their best actions.

The bidding sequence given of 1 (2) - (4) based on HCP alone is very blunt as neither partner is able to judge the combined potential playing strength and a possible slam might be missed. Although an advantage is that less information is given to the opposition and so might get a more favourable lead. Using rule of 123 fast arrival based on losers and rule of 18 this bidding sequence would instead be premptive expecting to go 1 light or to play expecting to make with no slam interest.

How do you like to play your Michael’s cue bid?

Started by SEAN LYNCH on 17 Nov 2018 at 12:56AM