[Elliotts]

Partner opens 1♦, next bidder bids 2♦Michaels, I hold 4♥, 4♦, 5♣ with 10 hcps - 2 red Kings and ♣Ace. I'm void of ♠s.

What is the recommended bid from me?

Thanks, Elliott

[Dumoti]

So your hand was:

♠ -
♥ Kxxx
♦ Kxxx
♣ Axxxx

?

[Elliotts]

 Dumoti, on 2018-July-12, 17:04, said:

So your hand was:

♠ -
♥ Kxxx
♦ Kxxx
♣ Axxxx

?

Yes, exactly. I had the A98xx of Clubs.

[ahydra]

I would bid 2S (good diamond raise), if I had that agreement and playing a system where 1D promises 4. Otherwise I guess I have to bid 3C.

ahydra

[rmnka447]

You need to have some agreement with your partner about how to respond over 2 suited takeout like the unusual NT and Michaels.

One of the more popular methods that is widely played among better players is called "Unusual versus Unusual".

Since the intervener has identified some suits by the two suited bid, Unusual versus Unusual uses cues of the opponent's suits to define responder's hand strength and some feature of his/her hand. So after a 1 m - (2m) Michaels bid, 2 ♥ would show ♣ and invitational values, 2 ♠ would show ♦ and at least invitational values. Depending on which minor was opened, the cue that shows that suit and values translates into at least a limit raise. The cue that shows the other suit and values also implies tolerance for the minor opened.

Then, direct bids of a minor over the two suited bid are competitive and non-forcing (1 m - (2m) - 3m/3om)

Double shows the ability to penalize one of their suits.

With the hand asked about, I'd probably cue 2 ♠ showing ♦ and values playing this way.

[FelicityR]

Whilst I agree with the other commentators that a conventional bid of 2♠ showing good ♦ support is the preferred action, partner needs so little for a contract of 5♦ to be viable if partner has a genuine ♦ suit. The ♥K looks well-placed, and you have first round controls in the other suits.

I assume that the OP listed this hand as the opponents next bid was 4♠, which partner passed and then responder had to make a decision whether to bid 5♦ or not, not knowing about partner's hand or the length of his/her ♦ suit.

[Tramticket]

What is the system and how many diamonds are promised?

I am more excited by this hand playing say Acol, where 1♦ promises at least a four-card diamond suit and will not be a balanced minimum, than I would be playing Standard American, where 1♦ might be a three card suit in a balanced 12-count.

Playing Acol, you might be tempted to bid 3♠, if this shows a splinter for your partnership. But playing Standard American I am more inclined towards the 2♠ bid suggested by others.

[ggwhiz]

 rmnka447, on 2018-July-12, 20:08, said:

One of the more popular methods that is widely played among better players is called "Unusual versus Unusual".

With the hand asked about, I'd probably cue 2 ♠ showing ♦ and values playing this way.

I agree and any concerns of partner owning only 3 diamonds is a false flag that only happens if we have a 4-4 heart fit. Really?

A knee jerk reaction would be to double since you can penalize hearts but lho is going to bid spades and perhaps a lot of them. It's important to get your offensive nature off your chest and on a good day you will be able to show clubs next.

[HardVector]

 Tramticket, on 2018-July-13, 03:10, said:

What is the system and how many diamonds are promised?

I am more excited by this hand playing say Acol, where 1♦ promises at least a four-card diamond suit and will not be a balanced minimum, than I would be playing Standard American, where 1♦ might be a three card suit in a balanced 12-count.

Playing Acol, you might be tempted to bid 3♠, if this shows a splinter for your partnership. But playing Standard American I am more inclined towards the 2♠ bid suggested by others.

It would be nice to know that partner has 4 diamonds, but playing standard, the only hand you are worried about is 4432 from partner. If you are truly concerned about this, you can start with a double. If you are playing unusual vs. unusual, this will show a hand that has interest in penalizing one (or both) of their suits. When they bid spades (likely), you can now bid 3d to show this hand. The problem comes if it goes 1d-1d-x-2s-p-3s. Then you have a decision to make. Personally, I'd go for the assumption that partner has 4d, which will occur about 95% of the time partner opens 1d and increases when RHO make a Michaels bid, and bid 2s (limit raise or better in diamonds).

[helene_t]

3♠, splinter for diamonds, can't be misunderstood. So if you don't have any agreements about what 2♥/2♠ would mean, you have to bid 3♠.

Don't worry about p having only three diamonds. It is unlikely, and if he has, he will bid 3NT over your 3♠ bid.