Michelangelo:

A better alternative to Michaels

Gordon Bower

In part I we introduced our general structure of artificial overcalls:

• 1-2 shows precisely 4 spades, and 5 or more of a red suit;
• 1-2 shows precisely 4 hearts, and 5 or more diamonds;
• 1-2 shows precisely 4 of either major, and 5 or more clubs;
• 1-2 shows precisely 4 spades, and 5 or more hearts;
• 1-2 shows precisely 4 spades, and 5 or more of a minor.

If overcaller has a singleton in opener's suit, he may well opt for a takeout double rather than a Michelangelo jump. Over 1 for instance AJxx Kxx x QJTxx is clearly better described by a double, since we are happy to let partner play in hearts on a 4-3 fit. While overcaller may be 2-2 in the other two suits, and can be 4-6 or 4-7 in his own suits, overcaller's most common distribution is three cards in opener's suit and one card in the unbid suit. Even 5440 (4 cards in opener's suit, void in fourth suit) is possible. Some typical overcalling hands after a 1 opening:

• Kx QJxx AQxxx xx: the classic hand for 2, normal-overcall strength and 4-5.
• Jxxx xx AQJxx Kx: cuebid 2. A natural 1 overcall is OK, but here we gain both the preemptive value of denying responder a cheap 1M response, and the ability to show the 4-card spade suit to partner. Over a 1 opening this would be very minimal for a 2 cuebid, since we are no longer guaranteed to escape at the 2-level.
• x Kxxx KQTxxx xx: in standard bidding we'd be afraid to make a natural weak jump to 2 (or 3 at favorable vulnerability); playing Michelangelo, 2 shows this hand.
• AQJx x AKJxxx Ax: cuebid 2, and follow up with a strong rebid over partner's expected attempt to sign of at 2. The alternative, doubling first and then jumping in diamonds, may still miss a spade fit if responder has both majors.

• Axxx x Kxx KQxxx: the classic hand for the 2 cuebid. With the red suits reversed, a takeout double would be better. Over a 1 opening, a very close decision between a 2 cuebid and a takeout double (I favor the cuebid here; with AJxx x KQx QTxxx, I would double.)
• xx Kxxx xx AKxxx: not vulnerable, a 2 cuebid is more descriptive than a 2 overcall.
• AKJx QTxxx Qxx x: 2. Playing Standard, you are afraid to double for fear of a club response, and are forced to bid a lousy 1 and get partner off to a bad lead. (Over a 1 opening, double is fine but I favor a 2 cuebid to show the suit lengths exactly.)
• Qxxx — Axx K9xxxx: 2. you'd hate to sit back and watch while the opponents find their heart fit. Almost as much as you'd hate to overcall 2 on such a ratty suit.

And a few examples of when not to use the bid:

• Qxxx AJx KQxxx x: double a 1 opening. You are OK with partner declaring a heart partscore. (NV, I would cuebid 2 over 1.)
• JT9xx AKxxx Ax x: I know you are tempted to "pretend you only have 4 spades" and show this as a 4-5 hand. I prefer telling the truth about my suit lengths; I still overcall 1 here. Maybe with 9-high spades you could talk me into it.
• AJxx — KQJxx Axxx: over a 1 opening, in my style you are strong enough to overcall 1 and rebid 2 if it goes 1-Pass-2 back to you. Your partnership may agree on a different cutoff between weak, medium, and strong hands for cuebidding.
• Qxx AJxx AKQxxx —: over a 1 opening, partner will never play you for this strong of a hand if you jump to 2 now. Double and rebid the diamonds as in Standard, heading for 4 of partner's major or 5 if you get any encouragement x from partner.

Responding to the Roman jumps

After 1-2 and 1-2, advancer knows both of overcaller's suits. He assumes overcaller is 4-5 with a 7-loser hand. Raising to any level of either of overcaller's suits is to play. Cuebid is Western (see above re overcaller being more likely to have a fragment in opener's suit than shortness): overcaller bids notrump if he has the desired stopper, otherwise makes his most descriptive rebid. We haven't formalized our understandings of bids of the fourth suit and of notrump; right now I would expect these to be to play (rare).

Responding to the cuebid

Advancer's bids of cuebidder's known suit are to play. Bids below game in the suit cuebidder might have are "pass or correct." In the simplest and most common case, this simply allows the partnership to find out if a playable fit exists. For instance, you hold xx Axxx QJxx xxx and the bidding starts (1)-2-Pass. You bid 2. If partner has hearts and clubs, he will pass 2 unless he has a monster; if he has spades and clubs, he will rebid 2 and you will correct to 3. Less commonly, responder can manipulate the auction to bid as high as is safe immediately. More possibilities after (1)-2-Pass or (1)-2-(Double):

• KJxxxx Kxxx xxx — : start with 2; if partner has hearts, you want to be in a partscore. If partner corrects to spades, raise him to 4.
• Kxxxx xx xx Kxxx: you're prepared to leap obstructively in clubs to make it hard for your opponents to find a red-suit game. You could jump in clubs now, or start with a jump to 3, and let partner correct to clubs if he doesn't have a fit.
• xxx xxx Kxxxx xx: Just what you didn't want to hear partner bid. But at least you can bail out cheaply in whichever 4-3 fit you have. Bid 2 and be glad you aren't doubled.
• Kxx AQxx KJxx xx: Lacking the fourth heart you would just bid 3NT to play. With the heart you might cuebid 3, anticipating that partner won't have a diamond stopper and will tell you which major he holds, after which you'll choose between 3NT and 4.

• xx xxx xxxx Axxx: you're guaranteed a fit in partner's red suit, but are willing to go the 3-level only if partner has diamonds. Start with 2; if partner has hearts he will pass. If he has spades and diamonds, he will correct to 2 and you in turn will correct to 3.

Overcaller's rebid

KQJx		LHO	Partner	RHO	You
x				1	2
QJxxxxx		4	Pass	Pass	4!
x

If the opening side keeps on bidding

Here we have only one extra agreement -- in an auction where the opening side bids one of the two suits cuebidder might have, like (1)-2-(Double)-2-(2), cuebidder doubles to show they have bid his suit (inviting advancer to pass for penalty), and passes to confirm possession of spades and diamonds, but without extra length to justify a raise to 3.

The opponents can and should keep on bidding. My suggested defence to Michelangelo use the cheapest bid of my 5-card suit as a forward-going cuebid, the other bids natural and forcing one round by an unpassed hand (including bidding my 4-card suit). Responder can pass with a shapeless hand up to 10HCP or so. Double could show a desire to penalize one of overcaller's suit (as over Michaels), but if there is an un-shown major, negative is probably more useful: e.g., 1-(2!)-X to imply a 4-card spade suit, and 1-(2)-X to show 4 cards in either major. (These common-sense recommendations align with my philosophy on defending unusual opening bids.)

Here's a hand from a sectional in July 2009 showing Michelangelo at its best:

North dealer  EW vul	AQ54 T7 952 8654
QJ8 J65 AQJ7 T72		T6 Q98 KT843 KQJ
	K732 AK432 6 A93

West	North	East	South
	Pass	1	2!
Pass?	2	Pass	Pass
Pass?

West's passes are very timid, but apparently show a respect for the Losing Trick Count and an awareness of East's opening bid style. But E-W really are in a bind: they can either pass out 2 for a likely -140, or they can be set in 3. Notice that against a pair not playing Michelangelo, that light 1 opening followed by a 1 overcall would cause N-S to miss their spade fit. (South should double 1 for takeout, for that reason.)

In this hand from a club game in November 2008, both sides had some delicate maneuvering to do:

West dealer  NS vul	KJT2 KQ 9752 76 8
Q93 83 AQ2 KQT94		A865 A4 KJT8 J53
	74 JT6 9543 A762

West	North	East	South
1	2!	2?	2
3	3	4?	All pass

Without an agreement what a double would mean, East could reasonably have blasted 3NT. (Several pairs made 3NT on these cards, apparently after South failed to unblock the hearts.) As it played out at the table, South felt confident that North had the majors after the 2 bid, showed his 3-card support, and North took the push with his 6-card suit. Quite a remarkable deal, with 19 total tricks available despite 17 total trumps and three shapeless hands. (Not playing Michelangelo, the auction probably starts 1-1-X-2, and again East will have a tough decision about selling out to 3 or gambling on bidding on.)

As I said in Part I, normally partner is entitled to expect at worst a 7-loser hand. Overcalling more lightly carries risks. If you like gambling, you can try it and you may get away with it, but there is such a thing as "too light," even at favorable vulnerability. As a cautionary tale I show this deal from a club game:

West dealer  None vul	T3 AT63 QJT9 864
K943 Q9742 83 A3		QJ6 K5 AK752 K75
	A875 J8 64 QJT92

After East chose to open 1 instead of the more normal 1NT, I tried a excessively light 2 bid, and was lucky to escape with my skin. A good East-West pair would have succeeded in penalizing me, probably with an auction like Pass-Pass-1-2; Double-2-Pass-2; Double-3-Double-All pass, which could cost me very dearly if they lead clubs and prevent me from ruffing any losing spades in the dummy.

Finally, here's a hand from a club game in January 2009 with some real fireworks:

North dealer  EW vul	75 K8732 87 J654
KQT8642 4 T954 9		A93 T65 AKQ62 QT
	J AQJ9 J3 AK8732

This was the auction:

West	North	East	South
		1	2
2	3	3	5
5	Pass	Pass	Pass

South has to decide if his hand is "reverse-strength", in which case he overcalls 2, hoping to follow up with 2 if 2 comes back to him, or "very strong", in which case he cuebids 2 (4M5C). If I had chosen to cuebid, my partner could have bid 3 rather than 3. Either way West isn't going to give up cheaply. If I had been West I would have gone right to 4, which might have shut us out.

I'd love to hear from you if you use this system or a similar one. In the future I may post some additional details on when to use these conventional calls and when not to, or further details on followup sequences.