[Vampyr]

Looking for some guidance .

My favourite partner and I play Kokish over a 2♣ opening. We bid 20-22- the slow way, mainly since this allows us to play in 3 and show a couple of other hands. Anyway, the problem with this approach arises when a spade contract is reached via Puppet (or any variety of) Stayman.

Neither this issue nor the extra hand-types we get to show come up pretty much ever. So is there a clear advantage one way the other? (The other NT range in 2♣ is 25+).

[nullve]

Vampyr, on 2016-August-18, 09:37, said:

Looking for some guidance .

My favourite partner and I play Kokish over a 2NT opening. We bid 20-22- the slow way, mainly since this allows us to play in 3 and show a couple of other hands. Anyway, the problem with this approach arises when a spade contract is reached via Puppet (or any variety of) Stayman.

Neither this issue nor the extra hand-types we get to show come up pretty much ever. So is there a clear advantage one way the other? (The other NT range in 2♣ is 25+).

I think Welland-Auken play

2♣-?:

2♦ = 5+ H or waiting
...2♥ = 20-21 bal. / 5+ H, GF values
......P = 5+ H, very weak (assumes Opener has 20-21 bal.!!)
......(...)
...(...)
2♥ = 5+ S
...2♠ = 20-21 bal.
...(...)
(...),

which solves the right-siding problem and enables them to stop in 2M, the latter being an advantage of the "slow = weaker" approach.

[Vampyr]

nullve, on 2016-August-18, 10:17, said:

I think Welland-Auken play

2♣-?:

2♦ = 5+ H or waiting
...2♥ = 20-21 bal. / 5+ H, GF values
......P = 5+ H, very weak (assumes Opener has 20-21 bal.!!)
......(...)
...(...)
2♥ = 5+ S
...2♠ = 20-21 bal.
...(...)
(...),

which solves the right-siding problem and enables them to stop in 2M, the latter being an advantage of the "slow = weaker" approach.

That is interesting. Obviously we can also stop in 2M; it doesn't matter which way round for that purpose, but of course these contracts are always wrong-sided. I like the W/A methods.

[iandayre]

I don't follow this, Kokish is played over a strong artificial 2C opening bid, not 2NT.

[Vampyr]

iandayre, on 2016-August-18, 11:44, said:

I don't follow this, Kokish is played over a strong artificial 2C opening bid, not 2NT.

LOL just a typo. I will fix.

[gordontd]

Vampyr, on 2016-August-18, 09:37, said:

Looking for some guidance .

My favourite partner and I play Kokish over a 2♣ opening. We bid 20-22- the slow way, mainly since this allows us to play in 3 and show a couple of other hands. Anyway, the problem with this approach arises when a spade contract is reached via Puppet (or any variety of) Stayman.

Neither this issue nor the extra hand-types we get to show come up pretty much ever. So is there a clear advantage one way the other? (The other NT range in 2♣ is 25+).

I've been told that the reason for playing the weaker range through Kokish is that you can combine it with transfers to allow you to play in 3C/D opposite a weak hand.

[Vampyr]

gordontd, on 2016-August-18, 15:30, said:

I've been told that the reason for playing the weaker range through Kokish is that you can combine it with transfers to allow you to play in 3C/D opposite a weak hand.

Yes, that is our main reason but the trouble is that it rarely comes up, and one disadvantage is that with the vastly more frequent 20/21 all spade contracts are wrong sided.

[Jinksy]

Vampyr, on 2016-August-18, 09:37, said:

Neither this issue nor the extra hand-types we get to show come up pretty much ever. So is there a clear advantage one way the other? (The other NT range in 2♣ is 25+).

Absolutely. Playing it the unusual way round, you get to call it 'Diet Kokish'.

[Vampyr]

Jinksy, on 2016-August-18, 17:31, said:

Absolutely. Playing it the unusual way round, you get to call it 'Diet Kokish'.

Which way is unusual though? When we started playing it this way, we didn't know if anyone else had ever done so, but it seems to be popular now.

[Jinksy]

Hmm... I guess if there's a clear flow you go against it, otherwise just position yourself firmly on the wrong side of epistemology.