[jdonn]

Sorry if I was harsh, I really couldn't believe it. At best I think we can say your 3 sources (BWS, Lawrence book, Miles book) are not creating a very strong case. Of course that doesn't prove a strong case couldn't be made. But I'm still confident a random expert would know it's Michaels.

I'm sort of finding the 'any 2 suiter' vs 'strong takeout' side-debate more interesting. I had never even heard of using the cuebid as any 2 suiter. Is that a treatment common in certain regions?

[gnasher]

jdonn, on Jun 3 2009, 05:51 PM, said:

I'm sort of finding the 'any 2 suiter' vs 'strong takeout' side-debate more interesting. I had never even heard of using the cuebid as any 2 suiter. Is that a treatment common in certain regions?

I've seen it recommended in print somewhere, probably in an English book or magazine.

Justin plays 1♣-pass-pass-2♣ as any two suits:

http://forums.bridge...showtopic=31376

Perhaps he can tell us whether he does the same over a major.

[jdonn]

Nice to see it only took me a month to forget I'd seen something.

[P_Marlowe]

jdonn, on Jun 3 2009, 11:51 AM, said:

Sorry if I was harsh, I really couldn't believe it. At best I think we can say your 3 sources (BWS, Lawrence book, Miles book) are not creating a very strong case. Of course that doesn't prove a strong case couldn't be made. But I'm still confident a random expert would know it's Michaels.

I'm sort of finding the 'any 2 suiter' vs 'strong takeout' side-debate more interesting. I had never even heard of using the cuebid as any 2 suiter. Is that a treatment common in certain regions?

It is part of the French / German standard system, I am not
sure, how common the usage "arbitary" 2-suiter is in Germany,
but my guess is, that in France it would be standard.

The reason for playing the cue as arbitary 2-suiter is, that a
2NT overcall is played as natural (20-21), which is a way to
deal with the fact, that a direct NT overcall is weaker in the
pass out seat, X followed by 1NT is 15-17, a jump would be
18-20, and it is not clear if you really want to jump to 3NT with
20-22.

With kind regards
Marlowe

PS: Personnally I prefer to use the cue as Michaels and 2NT as
unusual due to simplicityreasons, the frequence is not high, and
because of this I dont want to change the meaning, even if a
other meaning would be superior.

[skjaeran]

jdonn, on Jun 3 2009, 06:51 PM, said:

Sorry if I was harsh, I really couldn't believe it. At best I think we can say your 3 sources (BWS, Lawrence book, Miles book) are not creating a very strong case. Of course that doesn't prove a strong case couldn't be made. But I'm still confident a random expert would know it's Michaels.

I'm sort of finding the 'any 2 suiter' vs 'strong takeout' side-debate more interesting. I had never even heard of using the cuebid as any 2 suiter. Is that a treatment common in certain regions?

I don't think this is a much discussed issue.

If you play 2NT as a strong balanced hand in the balancing position (you really need to IMO), you've got only one bid to show a 2-suiter (provided you keep all suit bids natural, which you really should too IMO). Then using the cuebid as any 2-suiter makes sense.

Undiscussed I'd assume Michaels with whoever I sat down to play with.

(In direct seat I prefer 1M-2M to show the other major + clubs.)