Some Problems from the Thousand Oaks Sectional (Mostly): Answers

Today's Panelists: Chris Willenken, David Caprera, Mark Bartusek, David Weiss, Barry Rigal, Fred Curtis, Ed Davis, Kenneth Rexford, Len Vishnevsky, Mike Shuster, Kent Hartman

IMPs, both vul, you hold
AKQxxxx x — AQ10xx

CHO RHO You LHO

Pass 3 ?

CHRIS
6. Just guessing.
DAVIDC
Tough hand. 4.
MARK
4NT. I know the hand, but I believe bidding 4NT followed by correcting 5 to 5 shows this hand. (Just bid slam over 5.)
DAVIDW
It is tempting to simply blast 6, which might work but is too random for my taste. We could make anything or nothing, depending on whether my passed partner has just the right cards. Mathematically, unpassed LHO is more likely to have the goodies along with heart length. With this much shape, I will try the quiet tactical route of starting with 3. It is very unlikely that my starting point will also be the finishing point. If they bid hearts and my guy raises, I will bid clubs next. A slow auction may inhibit them from saving in a red suit.
BARRY
6. Can't explore intelligently—second choice is 4 then 5 over 4. But partner might not bid 4...
FRED
Of course, I have a gadget. I play 4 shows a 2-suiter with 5+ and 5+other. That gets me past this round (and might help to clue partner in when the inevitable crazy bidding comes on). E.g. he could hold A & K. However, I have some sympathy for taking a highly unsubtle approach of bidding 6 (albeit neither you nor partner will have much idea over a 7 sacrifice—less likely all vul). Other offshoots might include bidding 4 even if it is normal Michaels and converting high levels to so partner might get the gag...N.B., over 4 perhaps a jump to 5 (and this has the advantage of slowing down the opponents who think you have , and perhaps eliciting an unwise double).
ED
4 if it is any 2-suiter, otherwise, 4. I am willing to risk partner's being excited about hearts over my 4 bid in order to convey a very strong hand. Of course, there is a huge flaw in 4 being any two suits. When partner holds xx KJxxxx xxx Jx, we make 6 opposite AKJTx AQxxx x Ax but are not safe past 4 when the clubs and hearts are switched. [This partner thinks 4 is majors. --Jeff]
KENNETH
It would be nice to know what tools we have. Guessing, I suppose I'll bid 4, ostensibly Michaels. When partner bids the obvious hearts, I'll correct to an appropriate level of spades, hopefully showing a spade-club powerhouse.
LEN
I play 4 shows clubs and a major. Then I'll bid up to 5. Otherwise, I have to bid 4 now. [Len plays 4 as 100% forcing. --Jeff]
MIKE
4. I think I can get partner to cooperate if he holds the A. I plan on jumping to 5 over partner's 4. If LHO calls 5 instead I will shoot out 6 (5 call seems unlikely from a defender holding both the A and K). I'm not sure if partner will work out to bid on when holding the K, but I think that auction should show the blacks (else why not bid 5 the last time?)
KENT
4 and hope. I'll bid 5 over 4 and hope partner works it out!
JEFF AT THE TABLE
5.
WINNING ACTION
5. Partner has Jxxx xx xx KJxxx. He judged to pass 5, which I think is close. Prima facie, it looks as if we have just missed a slam, but if he had bid it, RHO would have doubled. LHO will probably lead the A and when his partner follows, give him a club ruff. The reason lower bids don't work out is that spades are 2-0, which means they are cold for 7 of either red suit. At the table, the opponents didn't compete over huge jumps (though I would with — AKJxxxx KJx xxx), so I assume they won't here, though in real life, other opponents might. One of the themes of this set is that the real layout is so unusual that we ought not consider it as a validation of our choices.
CONSENSUS

Action Votes

3 1

4 4

4 3

4NT 1

5 1

6 2

Wow—every number of spades from 3 to 6. I don't think I've ever seen votes for four levels of the same strain before, except for the 13-card suit in Reese's book.
JEFF UPON REFLECTION
I still like 5. I figure partner will bid slam with the A or with the K and the K unless he has 0 or 1 spades, in which case, he'll still bid with two working cards. That means I'll get to slam most of the time when it's good; I only miss it when partner has the K and enough black cards that the expected bad breaks don't set slam. The 5-level rates to be safe, though it's possible that 5 goes down. All in all, I think that's the best I can do.
Some play 4 is any two suits. As Ed points out, that has a weakness, and these days, most play it shows precisely the majors because of that weakness.
Some are bidding 4 even though they know partner will assume majors. They hope that correcting hearts to spades will cancel the previous meaning and replace it with spades and clubs. Mark, similarly, tries 4NT, knowing that partner will assume clubs and hearts. He thinks a correction there changes 4NT's meaning to spades and clubs. I disagree. I believe that when you make a bid which has a specific meaning, correction does not substantially change the meaning of the original bid, but rather fine-tunes it. Therefore, after 4 a jump in spades shows to me primary spades and secondary hearts, say 7-4. This can allow partner to move with secondary heart cards and primary cards elsewhere, but not secondary club cards. If hearts and clubs were switched on the actual hand, that'd be perfect. Similarly, 4NT followed by a correction to spades isn't spades and clubs, but clubs and hearts with a spade control looking for a grand. Maybe it's something like — AKQxxx x AKQxxx. I think this is an important metaconvention: unless your initial call includes an entirely different option within its definition, you can't change that with a weird call later; you can only fine-tune it. Mark might argue that 4NT should show clubs and a major, but without an express partnership agreement to that effect, it doesn't. Likewise, if one has the agreement that 4 is the majors, one cannot change it; 4 will then never show spades and clubs. I suppose it's possible to force the issue; if you bid 4 and then jump to 7, maybe logically you must now have clubs and spades, because 7 is available to give a choice between the major already chosen and 7NT, but the correction has to be 100% compelling. If there is any other possibility which is consistent with the systemic definition, that takes precedence.
IMPs, vul vs. not, you hold
Ax KQxx KQx AKJ9

LHO CHO RHO You

1 Pass Pass Dbl

2 Pass Pass Dbl

Pass 3 Pass ?

2NT by partner would have been scrambling, not Lebensohl.

CHRIS
3. I'll pass 4 if partner bids it. Giving up on the magic 3NT opposite Jxx/Qx/Txxx of spades.
DAVIDC
We play 2NT as "better minor" lebensohl, with 3 ambiguous as to strength. I should probably pass, but I can't stand it—3.
MARK
Pass. I agonized for a long time before passing. My second choice was 4.
DAVIDW
One of the benefits of having a reliably aggressive partner is that it is easy to pass this hand. If partner had as much as Qxxxx and a red ace, he would have bid 3 a round ago. I will lose out if he has longer clubs without the queen and a red ace. More likely, LHO has KQJxxx and two aces, and 3 is our limit. Sure, LHO could have more spades and only one ace; and partner could have 6+ clubs and the other ace, but those combinations are not likely to have been dealt. Sometimes you've got to guess, and I believe I am guessing with the odds despite the high payoff for a vulnerable game.
BARRY
3. One more try; will partner appreciate how little he needs? Not sure but must give him one more shot.
FRED
If I take the inference that partner has shown at least five clubs [Usually correct, but he could be 5224 or 4234 with decent clubs, etc. --Jeff]—but not necessarily any values—with his bid, 3NT will require him to hold either a second spade stop or a red A. 5 (or more clubs) requires either shorter spades (unlikely given the absence of opponents' pre-emption if they held 10+ spades), K or red A and value (on a presumed spade lead they will have one spade and 2 red A at least...) The lure of the vul game is strong. 3 if it asks for a stop will get me past 3NT unless he has it (unlikely) 3 if it shows a stop and strongly invites 3NT is great (otherwise he bids descriptively) and obviously the preferred option.
ED
Pass. Even if we have a second spade stopper and partner has Qxxxx, the red suit tricks are too slow to make 3NT without some help from partner. Since game is against the odds and bidding on can jeopardize our plus score, I think pass is the best action. If partner has a red ace and Qxxxx or xxxxxx, he should make a stronger bid than 3.
KENNETH
3
LEN
It's pronounced "lebensohl", even though Thunderbird gives that a red underline. 3NT.
[Bridge editors disagree about whether to capitalize "Lebensohl." The argument that it is not capitalized is that it is not someone's name, though it was intended to be. The argument that it is capitalized is that while it's not a name of a person, it's a name of a convention, hence a proper noun. Proper nouns are capitalized. I buy the latter, so I capitalize. To me, the only real argument for lower case is that it has been printed in lower case for decades. I think it's high time that quirkiness goes away. --Jeff]
MIKE
Pass. Eh... we are probably high enough already. 5 seems a stiff spade away, but we also have 3rd round tricks in both red suits to worry about. I could miss 3NT opposite Jxx of spades and long clubs, but it isn't worth the risk.
KENT
3. I'll pass 4.
JEFF AT THE TABLE
Wasn't there. Partner passed. I think it's pretty close, but said then I'd bid. I originally liked 4, but upon reflection, agree with the majority 3.
WINNING ACTION
Bid. Partner has xxx xx Axx 10xxxx. The Q comes down, so 3NT and 5 each make.
CONSENSUS

Action Votes

Pass 4

3 7

3NT 1

JEFF UPON REFLECTION
I agree that it's close, but I can't imagine my not overbidding with a prime 22-count. 3 is better than 4, because partner might have something like 109xxx Jx Jx Qxxx and 3NT will be better than 5.
IMPs, none vul, you hold
Jxxxx AKJ9xx Jx —
Dealer. You play Flannery.

CHRIS
OK, Flannery it is!
DAVIDC
1. What does Flannery have to do with it?
MARK
Pass. I remember this hand too. I suggested that pass is probably the least of evils, because Flannery is too much of a distortion.
DAVIDW
I am not a Flannery fan, but I guess if that club is in my bag, this is a hand on which to wield it. I am not worried about the extra spade or the paucity of high cards; perhaps the former will make up for the latter.
BARRY
I don't play Flannery and will pass a marginal hand to keep my record clean.
FRED
I understand why some would wish to bid Flannery but my hearts are too good and long for that to be ideal. I would be content with a 1 opening bid (and can even understand a Pass intending to back in with hearts at almost any level or a double if it goes 1NT-3NT) so partner gets the gag...Although I prefer to get in first and would open 1, there is much to recommend the initial pass on this particular hand.
ED
1, although pass is okay with me (intending to compete to at least 3). There is a big difference between this hand and a 4=5=x=x 13-count, but Flannery does have the advantage of getting spades into the picture immediately.
KENNETH
I play Flannery? Really? So, I must assume partner is an idiot. (Just Kidding—settle down. LOL)
I suppose I'd want to know if partner and I have agreed to play "Flexible Flannery." If so, this looks right. [4-6 minimums are pretty mainstream for Flannery-types these days. --Jeff]
BTW—I find it quite humorous that you added that all-important diamond Jack to avoid GCC problems. [Just because Flannery isn't legal without 10 HCP doesn't mean you can't stretch it. The only method on which the ACBL is draconian wrto an exact number of HCPs is 1NT openings with fewer than 10 HCP. --Jeff]
LEN
Ok, great. 2. Then I'll show my four-card diamond fragment when pard asks.
MIKE
I do it. Much safer than if your minors are reversed. Of course, I have means of showing a 6-5 after Flannery.
KENT
1. I'll miss a 5-3 spade fit to play in our 6-0 heart fit when partner is 3-0-5-5 and weak.
JEFF AT THE TABLE
2.
WINNING ACTION
1. Partner has 2146 and will bid 3 if you open 2 or pass. 3 doesn't make. 2 can be beaten, but in practice will not be.
CONSENSUS

Action Votes

Pass 2

1 4

2 6

JEFF UPON REFLECTION
After a few day's thought, I'm coming around to 1. Partner will bid his 4-card spade suit if he's weak and has short hearts, so the risk of burying spades isn't very large. He might even bid 1 with AQ10 — xxxxx xxxxx. I have. So the tradeoff is mostly between preempting the opponents and increasing the chances of stopping in 2. It's close, but I'm leaning toward 1 now. I'd probably open 2 in real life again, not being able to resist trying to jack around the opponents.
The best part about this hand is the story. I opened 2 and partner alerted. They asked and he explained, "four spades, five hearts, and 11-15 high card points." Oh-for-three.
IMPs, both vul, you hold
Kxxx Kxxxx J Qxx

You LHO CHO RHO

Pass Pass 2 2

4 4 Pass Pass

?
CHRIS
Pass. Not close, as we rate to be down 500-800 at the five level, and they might go down on a good day.
DAVIDC
I can't imagine bidding.
MARK
Pass. I remember the hand, but I think you'll go for at least 500 sacrificing, so you might as well try to defeat them by leading your diamond stiff.
DAVIDW
When I bid 4, I assumed captaincy as though I would know what to do when the inevitable 4 came around. Opposite my own weak twos, which have an especially wide range in third seat, I am forced to defend because I don't know whether 4 can be set or whether 5 will get killed. The tough question is whether to play for a tapping defense or to try for a ruff. I lead the J.
BARRY
Would double be: wanting to bid 5 but just in case....? [A "Looby double." Nope, but maybe it ought to be. --Jeff] If so, then pass 4, else bid 5.
FRED
Obviously a fair amount depends on style of weak two, but on defence I would be surprised to take more than 3 tricks while I expect a likely set of 2 tricks against 5. Against that they may have a slam and we push them there but I'll take my chances with an aggressive 5 and sell out to 5 if they bid it and lead my singleton. Yes I can see hands where it will be a phantom but I think it is more likely than not to be right—and it may give the opponents a problem at the 5-level.
ED
5. My guess is that I have a 25% chance of beating 4 and will go for -400 as a datum in 5. If the opponents bid 5 as much as 15% of the time, I think 5 will be the winner. I didn't calculate the expected IMPs for bidding on versus pass but I'm sure you will let me know what happens under these assumptions.
[OK. Here's the equity calculation under those assumptions.
```
  25%:  +100 and -400 = +11 IMPs * .25 = +2.75
  75%:  -620 and -400 =  -6 IMPs * .75 = -4.00
  So passing is -1.25 IMPs vs. bidding.  It's really a little
  more complicated than that, though; 400 datum presumably
  means 2/3 -500 and 1/3 -200, so we need to IMP against
  those thusly:
  25%:  1/3: +100 and -200 =  +7 IMPs * .25 = +1.75 * 1/3
        2/3: +100 and -500 = +12 IMPs * .25 = +3.00 * 2/3
        = +2.58 IMPs
  75%:  1/3: -620 and -200 =  -9 IMPs * .75 = -6.75 * 1/3
        2/3: -620 and -500 =  -3 IMPs * .75 = -2.25 * 2/3
        = -3.75 IMPs
  So passing is -1.17 IMPs under Ed's assumptions.
```
--Jeff]
KENNETH
Objection!!! I do not bid 4 in this sequence unless I have pre-determined by decision when the obvious 4 comes back to me. If I am not going to be certain what to do here, I give partner a call that involves him in the process. I want to know, therefore, the partnership agreements as to my alternative options earlier. That is, unless 4 specifically showed this holding, but I doubt that.
What else? Probably 3 (non-descript, stating general values and some defense). [Since we are a passed hand, that won't create a force. --Jeff]
LEN
J
MIKE
Pass. Partner was in 3rd seat. We might beat this and there is little hope of being down only 1 in 5. FWIW, I think it is very close between the forcing defense and the diamond ruff. I'm not sure the force will work, since the short hand will likely be able to take a ruff, so I'd go for the diamond ruff instead.
KENT
Pass. I think we are more likely to beat 4 than to make 5.
JEFF AT THE TABLE
Pass. I led a heart.
WINNING ACTION
Pass. Lead a heart. We are down one or two in 5 (depending on the opening lead and early defense). 4 is touch-and-go. On a heart lead, if partner defends well, it has no chance. He probably won't, so it'll come down to declarer's guessing the KJ. In practice, he didn't. On a diamond lead, the play is much easier for declarer; dummy has the unpleasant surprise of the A.
CONSENSUS

Action Votes

Pass 7

5 3

JEFF UPON REFLECTION
I think it's closer than the vote suggests, but about half the passers think it is not at all close, so the vote is really a bit more skewed than it is from the simple count.
I really ought to have included the lead problem. I agree with Mike that it's a tough call between a heart and a diamond. The problem with the diamond lead is that it looks only to aim at three tricks, the K, the ruff, and partner's entry, presumably the A, so we'll need another trick somewhere, which pretty much has to be a club, since if it's a diamond, there's a good chance that the ruff will mitigate it. That seems like a narrow target. On the other hand, the tap requires declarer to be short in hearts and for us to have another trick somewhere, either diamonds or clubs. And for declarer not to have a sixth trump. And for him not to be able to pitch on the second heart effectively. Close call—I break the tie with the J's maybe creating a trick if I don't lead it.
What about Ken's 3 bid? If we were an unpassed hand, 3 would create a force, but it seems impossible to force as a passed hand vs. a preempt. So maybe it ought to authorize partner to double or save, to show doubt what to do over 4. I can buy that.
IMPs, both vul, you hold
KQ108 AK10xxx xx x

CHO RHO You LHO

Pass 1NT 2* Pass

2 Pass Pass 3NT

All Pass

2 showed one major. Yeah, you might have bid more, but you didn't. 2 was pass or correct. Your lead.

CHRIS
High heart. Basic plan is to switch to a high spade unless it looks like we can run the hearts. Usually, pard has Qx when someone gives me this problem—the lead looks so clear.
DAVIDC
K. Not the Q because I might need the J as an entry.
MARK
Heart honor before deciding what to do at trick 2.
DAVIDW
They don't know whether they have hearts stopped. [Right you are! --Jeff] My hand provides a reasonable expectation that they do not. The tricky issue is whether partner will know to unblock his queen when declarer has Jx, and to signal it when he has Qxx and declarer has Jxx. I lead the heart ace. I hope that doesn't call for an automatic unblock. I don't want to lead the king and get attitude about the jack.
BARRY
Dummy sounds like a spade stack; small heart. Pay off to Qx/Jx mesh.
FRED
What inferences are there from LHO's pass: that he has long diamonds and was sure that it would not be passed out, and that he holds length or denies length in hearts? I would play a version of Lebensohl here to deny a heart stop by bidding this way— implying a heart stop in opener's hand. I expect that they can run diamonds, so I will start with K which is either AKJ or KQT against NT.
ED
K (asking for unblock or count). Maybe I'll catch Hx in dummy and part will play the other honor or show an odd number of hearts. If there is no future in hearts, I'll switch to spades hoping the loss of a tempo won't be costly.
KENNETH
What are the opponents playing? A pass-then-3NT sequence is strange. [They don't know. --Jeff]
GP, you ask?
A small heart loses when the opponents have 8 rippers. A small heart probably wins if the opponents must yield the lead. A top spade might win also if the opponents must yield the lead, but it could yield an extra trick also. [It's IMPs, so the overtrick isn't very important. --Jeff]
I suppose I'd lead a small heart.
LEN
Did 3NT deny a stop? K, I guess.
MIKE
A. I plan on shifting to the K unless something strange happens.
KENT
Fourth best heart. Sounds as if RHO has a penalty double of spades.
JEFF AT THE TABLE
K.
WINNING ACTION
High heart. The opponents have nine runners and the hearts are Jx xxx Qx around the table. I have no idea if the opponents had a Lebensohl mix-up or if declarer just decided to shoot out 3NT with Qx.
CONSENSUS

Action Votes

A or K 5

Low heart 3

K 3

JEFF UPON REFLECTION
I like the A. If a spade lead is right, you probably will be able to shift at T2. If a small heart lead is right, you have to commit at T1, but that looks inferior to the two-way shot of the high heart. Upon reflection, it's not close.
IMPs, both vul, you hold
— J109xx AJ987xx x
You play Flannery. Partner opens 1. RHO bids 2, Goren-style strong takeout.
a) what do you bid now?

CHRIS
6. When I jump to 6, pard might consider 7 with AKQ of trumps. I'd obviously never bid 6 with two defensive tricks in my own hand; I'd want to look for seven (or stay out of six) without too much fear of the opponents. [I'm not so sure he'll bid if you double in front of him. I wouldn't; I'd think that if you jump to 6 and then double 6 you aren't asking my opinion. If you jumped to 6 and then passed 6, I'd carry on with his actual hand (which included the AKQ). --Jeff]
DAVIDC
4 fitting
DAVIDW
I bid 4. There's not much upside to a fit-showing jump even if that were available. I'm glad I learned Flannery on Hand 3, and it may be a good convention even when both sides are vulnerable.
BARRY
4 is fit; will pull a double of 4 to 5.
FRED
If playing Fit-Showing-Jumps (FSJ) I bid at least 5 as FSJ.
ED
Walking the hand up to 5 hoping to get doubled certainly could work since RHO has created a forcing auction. I think I'll give that a try. Otherwise, I'd bid 4 as a fit bid. I will not let them play 4. [He starts with 3. --Jeff]
KENNETH
Diamond fit-jump. [I assume 4. --Jeff]
LEN
4.
MIKE
4.
KENT
6, fit-showing.
JEFF AT THE TABLE
4, fitted. I don't normally play fit jumps to game or above, so 5 and 6 were not available to me.
WINNING ACTION
hard to say.
CONSENSUS

Action Votes

3 1

4 5

4 1

5 1

6 1

6 1

Rats, no 5 bid or we'd have another 4-levels of the same strain. On the other hand, we have three different levels of two different strains!

b) assuming partner doesn't double in front of you, what's the lowest contract you will defend?

CHRIS
I'll double 6 and lead hearts unless 6 is doubled on my left.
DAVIDC
5
DAVIDW
5. I'm guessing they won't play 5. I will lead a heart against 5 or 6.
BARRY
Will bid on till they double or partner does.
FRED
If I have indicated my huge fit for hearts and diamonds, I would sell out to 7 as partner knows what I have. Obviously I can't help 7 but if partner does not double them I will probably go to 7 noting I am in much better shape after I start with 5 FSJ (obviously more extreme shape than 4). [Looks like he talked himself into bidding over 7. --Jeff]
ED
Depending on the auction, I may not stop below 6.
KENNETH
6.
LEN
Technically, 4. I suppose you mean the lowest non-red contract, and that's 5.
MIKE
7.
KENT
6.
JEFF AT THE TABLE
7. I would have bid 8 if it were legal.
WINNING ACTION
7. Maybe 8.
CONSENSUS

Choice Votes

5 5

6 4

7 4

c) What will you lead against it?

DAVIDC
Not a good question without the auction. [Yeah, but if I give you the auction, I can't ask you the other questions. --Jeff] But let's say it goes 4-(P)-4-(4)-5-(5)-all P. I guess I lead J.
DAVIDW
Heart.
BARRY
A
FRED
assuming 7 undoubled it would depend on the auction: either trump or A depending on how revealing.
ED
Probably a count heart.
KENNETH
A, maybe. I'd like to know the sequence leading up to my decision. If the sequence is 1-2-4-6, I'm not on lead. So, someone bids something useful.
MIKE
J.
KENT
A.
JEFF AT THE TABLE
luckily, I did not get the chance, but my choice is a heart.
WINNING ACTION
heart.
CONSENSUS

Lead Votes

5

A 4

THE HAND
Partner held xxx AKQxx 10 Qxxx. RHO had two hearts and no diamonds and the AK. So we can make 6, 7 on a non-club lead. They can make 6, 7 on a non-heart lead. At the table, the auction went

CHO RHO Me LHO

1 2 4 Pass

4 4 5 5

Pass 6 7 Dbl

All Pass

JEFF UPON REFLECTION
I like 4; it may let partner double in front of us at some point. If he doesn't, I'm convinced that we shouldn't sell ever. This is a freak hand, and we aren't going down a whole lot in 7. The way to get a disaster is to let them play any contract, so I'm taking an adequate score, even if it's not optimal.
I think the real goal on the hand is to play hearts at any level under 7. I don't know the best way to achieve that. I see two reasonable approaches: walk the dog the whole way or leap. Maybe bid 3 or pass initially and just keep bidding until they double. The downside of that is they may be able to learn that 7 is cold. Alternatively, jump to 6 at once and bid 7 if they outbid you. My compromise auction has the advantage that if partner has some defense, he can stop me from bidding sometimes. Since that will require LHO's bidding something he can double, that seems a little unlikely, so maybe a more tactical approach is better. It's my style to involve partner if I can, so I'd probably bid the hand the same way again.
Matchpoints, non vul, you hold
xxxx Kxx Axx Jxx

LHO CHO RHO You

1 2 Pass ?

2 was normal Michaels.

CHRIS
4. Kxxxx AJxxx x xx provides a play.
DAVIDC
3. As I play 2NT, I could learn slightly more ( shows hearts>=, min; etc.) but as I think I want to play in spades and I have two cover cards and 4 trump, 3 seems like the right value call.
MARK
2. Seems normal. I will compete to 3 if pushed. I don't remember this hand.
DAVIDW
By normal, I assume no particular strength range is implied (some play weak or strong, with mid-range hands excluded. I prefer to allow wide-range and this is what I assume you meant. I have a pretty good hand, but not a great one, so I view the choices as 3 and 3. 3 is slightly stronger, and he will bid game over it with as little as AQxxx AJxxx xx x. If I were to bid 3 instead, he would need a better hand to accept. I refuse to allow match point concerns to keep me from my normal bids in constructive auctions. If he has bid with trash, it's his problem.
BARRY
In my book, 3/ are preemptive and 2NT starts invites for minors, 3 starts major invites, partner's bidding 3 to reject. So 3.
FRED
Is "normal Michaels" weak/strong denying intermediate at this vul or continuous range? [Good question. I thought continuous range was normal, but some think the opposite. I ought to have been more clear. --Jeff] Assuming weak/strong and showing at least 5-5 in the majors, they have a lot of minor suit cards but we have reasonable prospects in defence to 5m. If weak we are likely to lose 2 minor suit tricks and 1.5 Major suit tricks (surely AKxxx Axxxx is close to intermediate?). My inclination is to bid 2 and compete to 3 over 3m. I do not play continuous range because these problems become insoluble.
ED
3. I want a heart lead. The danger situation if I bid spades is that they bid 3NT and get a spade lead when a heart lead is best. If partner bids 4, I will correct to 4 and expect parther to work out what is going on (maybe I'll get lucky and partner will visualize my hand and we will reach slam with his holding AQJxx AQxxx x Ax). I assume that normal Michaels means that partner has a strong hand or a weak hand and that he would have overcalled spades and then bid hearts with an in-between hand.
KENNETH
3
LEN
3
MIKE
3. If we need to finesse the spades, it rates to work. 2 covers and 4 trumps is an invite. If playing split range Michaels (I don't) then 2! would be right, to help direct the defense.
JEFF AT THE TABLE
2.
WINNING ACTION
invite or bid game. Partner has AK109x A10xxx xx x, so he'll accept any invitation. Spades are 2-2, so game makes.
CONSENSUS

Action Votes

2 3

3 3

3 1

3 3

4 1

The majority invite. Since there are votes for less and more than inviting, probably the invitation is about right.
JEFF UPON REFLECTION
I don't know what I was thinking. Partner is a solid citizen; he won't have some joke hand for Michaels, so I need to invite game. With this guy, 4 might even be right.
I also ought to have been more specific. "Normal" Michaels means different things to different people. We were playing continuous range. Of course, I was thinking "normal" in contrast to the Goren cue bid on the previous hand.
For years, I've played that 2NT is the way to invite game here; partner responds:

3: better or equal hearts, reject invitation
3: better spades, reject invitation
3: better or equal hearts, accept invitation
3: better spades, accept invitation
With this, I play 3 as blocking, not invitational.
Upon reflection, that's not particularly useful. The wide range version of the convention really needs at least two, maybe three invitations, so I think 2NT, 3, and 3 all ought to be invitational with different strengths. That seems helpful. Maybe they ought to be: 2NT wants a good 8 to accept, 3 wants a good 11 to accept, and 3 requires a good 13 to accept. Or maybe LTC works here; Michaels can be done on as many as 7 losers. 2NT might require only a good 7-loser hand to go, say A109xx KJxxx xx x. 3 needs a good 6-loser hand, say AJ10xx KQJxx xx x. 3 needs a 5-loser hand to go on; it'll essentially be blocking, but a moose just bids game.
DavidC suggests that one of those three ought to be a game force; two invitations are enough.

Jeff Goldsmith, jeff@gg.caltech.edu, Feb. 24, 2009

LHO	CHO	RHO	You
1	Pass	Pass	Dbl
2	Pass	Pass	Dbl
Pass	3	Pass	?