BBO Discussion Forums: multi over 1S? - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

multi over 1S?

#1 User is offline   straube 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 4,082
  • Joined: 2009-January-18
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vancouver WA USA

Posted 2010-November-23, 00:10

deleted
0

#2 User is offline   gwnn 

  • Csaba the Hutt
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 13,027
  • Joined: 2006-June-16
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:bye

Posted 2010-November-23, 09:26

you mean

1♠(limited) - 2♦=very weak raise to 2♠ OR signoff in 2♥? sounds cool :)
... and I can prove it with my usual, flawless logic.
      George Carlin
0

#3 User is offline   Flameous 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 475
  • Joined: 2008-March-07
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oulu, Finland
  • Interests:How to find out shape below 2NT.

Posted 2010-November-23, 10:08

I prefer multi over 1♦.

1♦ - 2♦ WJS in either major, NF.

For that multi over 1♠ I'd also add some strong options.
0

#4 User is offline   straube 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 4,082
  • Joined: 2009-January-18
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vancouver WA USA

Posted 2010-November-23, 20:39

View Postgwnn, on 2010-November-23, 09:26, said:

you mean

1♠(limited) - 2♦=very weak raise to 2♠ OR signoff in 2♥? sounds cool :)


I was going to make it invitational actually to cater to 6H inv or 2S inv hands, but opener has to react quite differently to both
0

#5 User is offline   MickyB 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,290
  • Joined: 2004-May-03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London, England

Posted 2010-November-23, 21:23

1S:1N, 2C:2D as multi works well.
0

#6 User is offline   WellSpyder 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,627
  • Joined: 2009-November-30
  • Location:Oxfordshire, England

Posted 2010-November-24, 03:27

View PostMickyB, on 2010-November-23, 21:23, said:

1S:1N, 2C:2D as multi works well.

...unless you want to be able to play in 2♦....
0

#7 User is offline   gnasher 

  • Andy Bowles
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 11,993
  • Joined: 2007-May-03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 2010-November-24, 07:57

I overcall 4♣ over your multi. Now what?
... that would still not be conclusive proof, before someone wants to explain that to me as well as if I was a 5 year-old. - gwnn
1

#8 User is offline   gwnn 

  • Csaba the Hutt
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 13,027
  • Joined: 2006-June-16
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:bye

Posted 2010-November-24, 09:24

gnasher don't you play that 1M-p-2C is either limit raise or balanced GF or GF with a minor? :)
... and I can prove it with my usual, flawless logic.
      George Carlin
0

#9 User is offline   gnasher 

  • Andy Bowles
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 11,993
  • Joined: 2007-May-03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 2010-November-24, 13:57

View Postgwnn, on 2010-November-24, 09:24, said:

gnasher don't you play that 1M-p-2C is either limit raise or balanced GF or GF with a minor? :)


No, I play it as balanced invitational without 3-card support, FG balanced, or FG with a minor. 4-card limit raises bid 1M-2NT; 3-card limit raises bid 1M-[2M-1]. 3-card game-forcing raises do bid 1M-2♣.

The 2♣ response is still a bit vulnerable to preemption, but at least all the hand-types are strong enough for us to be safe at the four-level.
... that would still not be conclusive proof, before someone wants to explain that to me as well as if I was a 5 year-old. - gwnn
1
Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

4 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 4 guests, 0 anonymous users