[Liversidge]

My partner and I play Benji weak 2's in the majors. He has another partner who plays weak 2's in Diamonds Hearts and Spades and has asked if we can play this too. I am OK with this, though It means giving up the Strong 2 Diamond bid. In our current system 2 Clubs shows 23-24 points balanced or 8/9 playing tricks M/m, and 2 Diamonds shows 25+ points balanced or 9/10 playing tricks M/m, and Rule of 25 etc. for both.
We will now have only one strong bid other than 2NT - i.e 2 Clubs. I assume this will still show 23-24 points balanced, but what do you recommend regarding required playing tricks with an unbalanced hand?
Also, under what circumstances do you suggest responder can stop short of game. At present we say 2 Clubs is usually game forcing with 2-3 points and 2 Diamonds is usually game forcing unless responder has a bust. For example, if the bidding goes 2C-2D-3m, what sort of hand would responder have to justify a pass, (I assume 2C-2D is still just a relay and 2C-2D-2M-2NT is the negative response with 0-7 points. )

[helene_t]

To keep it simple just open 2c if you want to be in game opposite a 0-5 count and open at the 1 level otherwise.

It means that you will sometimes open at the one level with a hand that is too strong for a jump rebid of your own suit. Make sure that partner understands that
1x 1y
3nt
shows a one suited hand. A balanced 19 would rebid 2nt.
However you need stoppers in the unbid suits so without that you have to reverse or jump shift on a 3card suit.Or rebid 4M if your suit is a major.

Playing weak nt however
1x 1nt
3nt
unfortunately is a balanced 19 so here you don't have this option. That is why some open 2nt with 19 but that is a bad idea.

You can also agree to play 2c as forcing only to 3M in some sequences but that gets complicated.

By the way I don't think it is so good to use playing tricks as a criterion. Consider
AKxxxxx
-
KJx
KJx

You have only four clear cut tricks according to the ebu definition although you may count it as 5 or maybe six. Anyway, give partner both minor suit queens and three small trumps and you are cold for 11tricks. I am not saying you should open 2c with this hand but it is close.

Compare to
AKQJT9
AK
xxx
xx

Now you have eight pt but partner needs two pt for you to make 4S.

[Gerben42]

Somehow I also don't get enough strong hands to justify two strong opening bids.
In fact this is the standard way of playing it in the United States.

The simplest way to respond to this is for responder to count each Ace as 2 controls and each King as 1 control, then bid:

2♦ = 0 or 1 controls (e.g. no Ace and at most one King)
2♥= 2 controls
2♠ = 3 controls
etc.

You would include all hands into 2♣ that are worried about missing game if opened 1 of a suit opposite approximately a working King.

[GrahamJson]

If you are asking questions like this then I think you should keep it simple. In that case, 2C should be forcing to game except for the sequence 2C - 2D - 2NT, which can be passed, or play in 3M after a transfer.

This approach is pretty standard in any case.

[Vampyr]

GrahamJson, on 2015-April-19, 08:04, said:

If you are asking questions like this then I think you should keep it simple. In that case, 2C should be forcing to game except for the sequence 2C - 2D - 2NT, which can be passed, or play in 3M after a transfer.

This approach is pretty standard in any case.

Yes this is normal.

The control-showing scheme outlined above is not hugely popular, but it is up to you obviously. However it is normal to use both 2 ♠ and 2NT as showing 3 controls, with one being 3 kings and the other an ace and a king.

[Bbradley62]

Vampyr, on 2015-April-19, 11:59, said:

Gerben42, on 2015-April-18, 05:52, said:

The simplest way to respond to this is for responder to count each Ace as 2 controls and each King as 1 control, then bid:

2♦ = 0 or 1 controls (e.g. no Ace and at most one King)
2♥= 2 controls
2♠ = 3 controls
etc.

You would include all hands into 2♣ that are worried about missing game if opened 1 of a suit opposite approximately a working King.

The control-showing scheme outlined above is not hugely popular, but it is up to you obviously. However it is normal to use both 2 ♠ and 2NT as showing 3 controls, with one being 3 kings and the other an ace and a king.

This approach was somewhat popular in the Northeastern US in the 1980s, although I haven't seen anyone playing it since I returned to play online five years ago.

[waldorf1]

I hate showing controls (or anything else) with an artificial bid because it sometimes wrong-sides the contract. The very first time I tried controls, my partner opened 2C and I responded an artificial 2S. The final contract? Six spades, played from the wrong side and defeated because of the opening lead. Ever since then, I have played that all responses to 2C are natural (except 2D), but any positive response guarantees at least three controls (A = 2, K = 1). I have never had a problem with this, and I have been playing it for almost forty years.

Nowhere do the contributors mention double negatives after 2C-2D; 2X (not 2N). There is divided opinion over how to show a terrible hand as responder. I use the cheapest non-NT rebid as a double negative, which makes opener's next bid non-forcing. Some respond 2H immediately with a double negative, which is OK as long as opener doesn't have hearts (wrong-sided again). Others don't use double negatives at all -- don't ask me h0w they sort it all out. Anyway, the use of double negatives means that you can have an auction that starts 2C-2D; 3D-3H! and get uncomfortably high. Therefore, I require opener's rebid of 3m to guarantee nine tricks in his own hand opposite a Yarborough, which helps a fair amount.

[blackshoe]

Bbradley62, on 2015-April-19, 13:34, said:

This approach was somewhat popular in the Northeastern US in the 1980s, although I haven't seen anyone playing it since I returned to play online five years ago.

Romex uses a control showing response scheme, but not with the two bids for three controls thing. They gave that up some fifteen or twenty years ago. The current scheme is:

2♦: 0-1 control
2♥: 2 controls
2♠: 3 controls
2NT: 4 controls
3♣: 5 or more controls (more is unlikely)
3♦: six or more hearts, like a wk two, but in this auction game forcing. With AK in the suit, show the controls with 2♠.
3♥: six or more spades, as above

There are meaning for some of the higher level bids, mostly involving long suits, but they come up very rarely.

Note that in Romex, if opener has a balanced hand, he will have at least seven, and probably eight, controls.

I grant you that not a lot of people play Romex. Shame really, it's a decent system.

[Vampyr]

waldorf1, on 2015-April-19, 19:08, said:

Others don't use double negatives at all -- don't ask me h0w they sort it all out.

No one need ask you; they can read some of the earlier posts in this thread.

[akwoo]

Advanced Standard in the US, as far as I can tell, is the following:

1) Any response other than 2♦ shows 8+hcp with 2 of the top 3 honors and at least 5 cards in the suit. (This means 2♦ is almost automatic.) (I've heard of promising a 6 card suit; this is more useful on the ridiculously rare occasions it happens.)

2) After a 2♦ response and a suit rebid by opener, the cheapest suit is a double negative, denying anything looking like a trick. (Some people will play 3N or 4♣ as a double negative over 3♦ because they want 3♥ natural.) After a double negative, the auction is only forcing to 3M or 4m.

2') Some use an immediate 2♥ double negative instead. This is easier but probably inferior.

2'') If you're up for more artificiality on auctions that happen about once in a full week of play, look up Kokish.

waldorf1, on 2015-April-19, 19:08, said:

I hate showing controls (or anything else) with an artificial bid because it sometimes wrong-sides the contract. The very first time I tried controls, my partner opened 2C and I responded an artificial 2S. The final contract? Six spades, played from the wrong side and defeated because of the opening lead. Ever since then, I have played that all responses to 2C are natural (except 2D), but any positive response guarantees at least three controls (A = 2, K = 1). I have never had a problem with this, and I have been playing it for almost forty years.

Nowhere do the contributors mention double negatives after 2C-2D; 2X (not 2N). There is divided opinion over how to show a terrible hand as responder. I use the cheapest non-NT rebid as a double negative, which makes opener's next bid non-forcing. Some respond 2H immediately with a double negative, which is OK as long as opener doesn't have hearts (wrong-sided again). Others don't use double negatives at all -- don't ask me h0w they sort it all out. Anyway, the use of double negatives means that you can have an auction that starts 2C-2D; 3D-3H! and get uncomfortably high. Therefore, I require opener's rebid of 3m to guarantee nine tricks in his own hand opposite a Yarborough, which helps a fair amount.

[helene_t]

Waldorf1: if you are concerned about wrongsiding then natural responses are bad. Play transfers.

Anyway this the n/b fforum so I think natural responses are appropriate. Maybe 2nt should show minors though since the natural 2nt response is terrible.

[wank]

just don't play any ace or control showing responses. those are too bad for words.

[blackshoe]

waldorf1, on 2015-April-19, 19:08, said:

I hate showing controls (or anything else) with an artificial bid because it sometimes wrong-sides the contract.

wank, on 2015-April-21, 11:43, said:

just don't play any ace or control showing responses. those are too bad for words.

By all means, lets supress any methods we don't like.