[thebiker]

Once upon a time in England someone (maybe Terence Reese) proposed that to
pep up a strong 2C opener, players should also incorporate a Weak 2D option within the bid, to make things a little bit more difficult for the opponents.

Does anyone still play this style? and what is/was the recommended responding structure?

thanks in advance for your replies

regards

thebiker

Brian Keable

[whereagles]

I've played one such opener for a long time and it's very easy to deal with. The response scheme was very simple:

Responder looks at his hand and judges whether opener is strong or weak and bids accordingly. If he suspects a strong hand, he simply bids 2♦. Otherwise he bids as if the opener was a weak 2.

In practice, the opener does cause opponents some trouble, especially when they are WEAK. Since their bids over the opener over are strong, they are left with little way to preempt when the 2♣ is in fact strong.

The downside of the bid is that the extra step allows opponents to give more definition when it comes to majors. For instance

2♣ (..??)

2♦ = 5 hearts, 4 spades (you can also play it as any 5-4)
Dbl = take out of diamonds (can be 5 spades, 4 hearts)

Compare it now to

2♦ (..??)

Dbl = take out of diamonds. Can be any 44, 43 or even 54 major. Much more undefined.

And this not to mention the opener is basically forcing, which allows for overcalls in the 2nd round of bidding.

[Free]

I think Gerben has a page on his site about this kind of opening. I've played it, I've played against it, and I can tell you it's not difficult to defend against. Just handle it like a transfer preempt.

Only advantage is that opps won't intervene on trash.