[hrothgar]

I certainly wasn't arguing that frequency is a sufficient mechanism to judge an opening bid. My comments constructive bidding and safety were an attempt to indicate that there are other factors that need to be considered.

I typically evaluate different opening bids based on Monte Carlo simulations. I have a fairl complete set of scripts for the Deale program that can be used to generate "X" hands meeting a given set of conditions.

I then evalaute these hands based on a number of conditions.

The frequency of the opening can be evaluated quite easily, as can the amount of bidding space that it consumes.

I judge "safety" based on the % chance that the partnership is able to scramble to a LAW protected bid. [This can be simulated quite easily]

To date, I've had to judge the constructive accuracy based on manual inspection.

My suspicion is that we are very near the point at which programs like GIB can be used to "test" bidding systems. For example, I could generate 100,000 Ekrens 2D openings and use GIB to test the resulting contracts. However, this requires a scripting interface to explain bidding inferences to the program.

[Laird]

Hello Marmot 101

I found the following link which may be helpful regarding a defence against the Multi 2D ...

http://www.blakjak.d...co.uk/multi.htm


It describes a defence strategy called 'Dixon' perhaps this may be of some use.
However Cave_Draco's comment regarding bundling of bids is interesting too.

Kind regards
John

[Rado]

Hi all friends,
When trying to evaluate Pros and Cons 2Di=Multi we have to examine all 2 level openings structure and not just to oppose 2Di=multi against 2He/Sp natural weak.
Also playing 2Di multi with some strong hadns types is optional - you may play it only with weak option, and partner will be free to preempt.
If we take 2Di/He/Sp = weak 2's as some standart classics and compare with
2Di=multi, 2M=5m4+m as some modern trend it's easy to see the advantages of one and the other:
Classic:
PROS - suit is known, Partner may preempt immediattely, Opps must act immediately
CONS - missing 5-4 preemts, missing possibility to handle some strong hands types
Modern:
PROS-preempting both on 6 and 5 cards Major
Option to handle strong hands which otherwise difficult to bid in standart
CONS - no Di preempt on level 2, "slower" preempt with 6card Major, Opps may have 2 chances to bid.

Viewing the above every partnership may decide for themselves which style suits more their temper.

I have played enough times both way ( as well at now play different 2 level openings with different partners) and I prefer Multi + 54 which seems to be a little bit better on long run, because knowing the exact length of the Major is crucial for high level decisions to be more often correct.

Regards, Rado