Join Bridge Winners
Mini-Maxi Michaels

I have "successfully" (for the most part) played Mini-Maxi Michael's cue bids for decades but recently an extremely good player (multiple world championships) and writer of numerous highly acclaimed award winning books stated that they are not a good approach.  He recommends that if you have the right distribution (more or less regardless of strength), you go ahead and use the Michael's cue bid. 

With mini-maxi and a weak hand (mini) you cue bid and leave the rest up to partner.  With mini-maxi and a good hand (maxi), you cue and raise partner (possibly to game with a really good hand).  With an in between hand, you overcall 1 and later hope to introduce .

With a weak (less than an opening hand), not using m-m, I suppose you cue and pass.  With a low to medium opening hand, I presume you cue and raise.  With a strong opening hand, you could cue and double raise.  With an even stronger hand, you could cue and then do something even stronger (anything other than a raise).

As I see it, m-m offers the advantage of being more precise (eliminating the middle range allows you to use tighter ranges for the raises). 

Not using m-m offers the advantage that if you bid 1 and then bid , that you are guaranteeing longer  than  (possibly being the same length if using m-m).  It also offers the advantage that you are able to show both majors immediately and don't need to fear that the auction might get too high before you can show the other major.

Which approach do think is best?

Not mini-maxi

Sorry, to answer polls. Registered users can vote in polls, and can also browse other users' public votes! and participate in the discussion.

Getting results...
Getting Comments... loading...

Bottom Home Top