[hirowla]

Hi,

I was after some thoughts on the 2♥/2♠/2NT in a multi two bidding structure. I know a few possible ways to do it and would like some thoughts on each.

1. 2♥/2♠ shows 5 of the major and 4+ of a minor and 2NT shows at least 55 in the minors. Each of these is 6-10 pts.

With this structure how would you show a hand with both majors and similar point range? Also how would partner structure a strong enquiry over the 2♥/2♠ bids?

2. 2♥ and 2NT as above, 2♠ as 5♠ and 4+ of any other suit.

With this structure how would partner structure a strong enquiry?

3. 2♥ as 5 ♥ and 4+ of another suit, 2♠ and 2NT as in 1 above.

With this structure how would you do a strong enquiry?

Of these 3 which would you recommend and why? Keep in mind the questions I asked about each!

Thanks,

Ian

[zhoraster]

I use the third option. The strong enquiry is 2nt, the answer 3♥ meaning spades. The advantage over the second option are

• if the opener has majors, and the responder is weak, than the major will be played on the second level
  
• it is much harder to overcall this opening with 2♠

[nullve]

 hirowla, on 2017-June-17, 21:22, said:

Hi,

I was after some thoughts on the 2♥/2♠/2NT in a multi two bidding structure. I know a few possible ways to do it and would like some thoughts on each.

1. 2♥/2♠ shows 5 of the major and 4+ of a minor and 2NT shows at least 55 in the minors. Each of these is 6-10 pts.

With this structure how would you show a hand with both majors and similar point range? Also how would partner structure a strong enquiry over the 2♥/2♠

bids?

2. 2♥ and 2NT as above, 2♠ as 5♠ and 4+ of any other suit.

With this structure how would partner structure a strong enquiry?

3. 2♥ as 5 ♥ and 4+ of another suit, 2♠ and 2NT as in 1 above.

With this structure how would you do a strong enquiry?

1. (Muiderberg 2M)

With this structure how would you show a hand with both majors and similar point range?

Some have put this hand type into their otherwise strong 2♣ opening. (See here, under "Flemish style".)

Also how would partner structure a strong enquiry over the 2♥/2♠ bids?

2M-?:

(...)
2N = INV+ relay
...3♣ = MIN, 4+ ♣
...3♦ = MIN, 4+ ♦
...3♥ = MAX, 4+ C
...3♠ = MAX, 4+ D
...(But I prefer
...3♠ = MAX, 2-OM4+D
...3N = MAX, 3OM4+D)
3♣ = P/C
(...)

2. (Muiderberg 2♥, Lucas 2♠)

With this structure how would you do a strong enquiry?

2♠-?:

Maybe:

(...)
2N = INV+ relay
...3♣ = MIN, 3-H4+C
...3♦ = MIN, 3-H4+D
...3♥ = MIN, 4+ H
...3♠ = MAX, 3-H4+m
...3N = MAX, 4 H
3♣ = P/C
(...).

3. (Lucas 2♥, Muiderberg 2♠)

With this structure how would you do a strong enquiry?

2♥-?:

Maybe:

(...)
2♠ = P/C
2N = INV+ relay
...3♣ = MIN, 3-S4+C
...3♦ = MIN, 3-S4+D
...3♥ = MIN, 4 S
...3♠ = MAX, 3-S4+m
...3N = MAX, 4 S
(...).

 hirowla, on 2017-June-17, 21:22, said:

Of these 3 which would you recommend and why? Keep in mind the questions I asked about each!

I've always found the following problems very annoying when playing around with Lucas Twos:

* Responder can't afford to search for a 4-4+ OM fit with < INV, 2M4+OM, so the fit may be lost on partscore deals.
* Even if a 4-4 heart fit is found after 2♠-3♣(P/C); 3♥, there will usually be no Law protection.

So until someone convinces me that these problems aren't serious in practice, I'd go for 1., with or without Ekren type hands in 2♣.

[nekthen]

I too prefer Muiderberg. I find weak hands with 2 majors can be passed and can compete or raise p quite comfortably. It is rare to use pass and correct as even 2 card support is generally better played in the major. Including the possibility that hearts can be the 2nd suit just makes constructive follow ups too hard to manage.

After 2N you can also use the structure 3m for a 4 card minor and 3M to show a 55 hand

[spotlight7]

 hirowla, on 2017-June-17, 21:22, said:

Hi,

I was after some thoughts on the 2♥/2♠/2NT in a multi two bidding structure. I know a few possible ways to do it and would like some thoughts on each.

1. 2♥/2♠ shows 5 of the major and 4+ of a minor and 2NT shows at least 55 in the minors. Each of these is 6-10 pts.

With this structure how would you show a hand with both majors and similar point range? Also how would partner structure a strong enquiry over the 2♥/2♠ bids?


****You could use 2H* as 5-5 majors @6-10 'or' 5H and 4+ of a minor.

2H*-2N*-3C/D/H* showing Cs, Ds and 3H*='spades' and lower range.

Max. range bids 2H-2N-3S*=Cs. ...3N*=Ds and ...4C*=Ss.


A 'pass or correct' 2H-3m* will find the minor. With 5-5 majors, 2H-3C-3H* shows the 5-5 M hand.****



3. 2♥ as 5 ♥ and 4+ of another suit, 2♠ and 2NT as in 1 above.

With this structure how would you do a strong enquiry?


****2M-2N* asks: 3C*=Cs lower range. 3D*=Ds lower range. 3H*=Cs upper range. 3S*=Ds upper range.

2H*-3C as pass or correct finds the minor without showing values.****


Of these 3 which would you recommend and why? Keep in mind the questions I asked about each!


****Depends on the regulations you play under. Also your 'risk' factor.


If you wish to include 5-5 majors, it is not a big problem(most of the time)****


Thanks,

Ian

[GrahamJson]

I used to play a variation on Tartan Two Bids. These go:/

2H/2S= Either 55 with the major and a minor, weak (6-10 say) or an Acol 2 in the major (can be two suited)

Responses are:-

2S Natural, invitational
2NT Asking for the minor. If opener rebids a major or jumps to 4m he is showing an Acol 2.
3C invitational hand without major suit support. opener rebids:-
- Pass with minimum and clubs
- 3D minimum and diamonds
- 3H max with clubs
- 3S max with diamonds
- 3NT Acol 2, single suit
- 4 any Acol 2, two suited.
3D Invitational to 4 of major. Opener bids 3 or 4 of his major. Other bids are Acol 2
Raises: to play, not invitational.

Opening bids of 2NT can be weak 55 minors or whatever else you prefer.

[msjennifer]

The Roman Club system has these bids.One may look for it on the internet.The further development is also given in derails in the original text book which may be available with sellers selling used copies in good condition.

[Tramticket]

2♥ = at least five hearts, at least 4 (5 vulnerable) in any other suit.

Responses:
- 2♠ pass or correct
- 2NT Enquiry
- 2♣ - 2nd suit is clubs - bottom of range
- 2♦ - 2nd suit is diamonds - bottom of range
- 2♥ - 2nd suit is spades - bottom of range
- 2♠ - 2nd suit is spades - top of range
- 2NT - 2nd suit is a minor - top of range
- 3♣/3♦/3♠ - Natural & forcing

2♠ = at least five spades, at least 4 (5 vulnerable) in any other suit.

Responses:
- 3♣ pass or correct
- 2NT Enquiry
- 2♣ - 2nd suit is clubs - bottom of range
- 2♦ - 2nd suit is diamonds - bottom of range
- 2♥ - 2nd suit is hearts - bottom of range
- 2♠ - 2nd suit is hearts - top of range
- 2NT - 2nd suit is a minor - top of range
- 3♦/3♥ - Natural & forcing

With 5-5 in the major we open 2♥.

[msjennifer]

 Tramticket, on 2017-June-19, 01:09, said:

2♥ = at least five hearts, at least 4 (5 vulnerable) in any other suit.

Responses:
- 2♠ pass or correct
- 2NT Enquiry
- 2♣ - 2nd suit is clubs - bottom of range
- 2♦ - 2nd suit is diamonds - bottom of range
- 2♥ - 2nd suit is spades - bottom of range
- 2♠ - 2nd suit is spades - top of range
- 2NT - 2nd suit is a minor - top of range
- 3♣/3♦/3♠ - Natural & forcing

2♠ = at least five spades, at least 4 (5 vulnerable) in any other suit.

Responses:
- 3♣ pass or correct
- 2NT Enquiry
- 2♣ - 2nd suit is clubs - bottom of range
- 2♦ - 2nd suit is diamonds - bottom of range
- 2♥ - 2nd suit is hearts - bottom of range
- 2♠ - 2nd suit is hearts - top of range
- 2NT - 2nd suit is a minor - top of range
- 3♦/3♥ - Natural & forcing

With 5-5 in the major we open 2♥.

Something amiss here.If 2NT is enquiry how are the responses shown at 2 level when it will be an underbid .?

[Tramticket]

 msjennifer, on 2017-June-19, 02:48, said:

Something amiss here.If 2NT is enquiry how are the responses shown at 2 level when it will be an underbid .?

Good spot - yes the responses are of course at the three level.

[Stefan_O]

I'll give you what I consider a much better option:

Vulnerable:
* 2♦ = 5+major. 8-10hcp.
* 2M = 5+major. 5-7hcp.

Non vuln:
* 2♦ = 5+major. 7-10hcp.
* 2M = 5+major. 3-6hcp.

When I write '5+major', I mean either a normal 6-card-suit,
or a good 5-card-suit playable against a singleton,
preferably like: QJT8x, KQT9x, or similar/better.

I strongly prefer this method over 5M+4m, etc...
Who wants to see pd make preference to these often silly 3m contracts, anyways,
and - esp when vuln - just sit hope opps don't find the Double?

After 2♦-2NT (forcing invite+) bid, for example:
* 3♣ = 6-card major.
* 3♦ = 5 hearts. Minimum.
* 3♥ = 5 spades. Minimum.
* 3♠ = 5 hearts. Maximum.
* 3NT = 5 spades. maximum.

After 2M-2NT (forcing invite+) you can bid, for example:
* 3♣ = 5-card suit. Minimum.
* 3♦ = 6-card suit. Minimum.
* 3♥ = 5-card suit. Maximum.
* 3♠ = 6-card suit. Maximum.
* 3NT = AKQxxx.

If you still want to open weak-2♦ hands, you can do so, too:

2♣ =
* A) Weak-2♦ 7-10hcp.
* B) Normal strong 2C-opening.

Over this 2♣ opening, responder with 15+hcp or so, can bid a forcing 2NT or 2M with 5+major just like over a natural 2♦ opening.
Otherwise, responds 2♦ over which the weak hand will Pass.

ps. If you want to maximize the pain for opps, do not include any strong option in your 2♦-multi opening, only the above.
It's next to impossible to work out an efficient defense against 2♦, when you can no longer rely on opps to keep bidding over 2♦.

[Zelandakh]

Of your 3 options I prefer #1. A typical response structure is:-

2♥
==
2♠ = nat, F1
2NT = relay
... - 3♣ = min, 4+ clubs
... - 3♦ = min, 4+ diamonds
... - 3♥ = max, 4+ clubs
... - 3♠ = max, 4+ diamonds
... - 3NT = max, 0544 (an alternative here is to differentiate between 4 and 5+ diamonds)
3♣ = pass/correct
3♦ = good (inv+) raise
3♥ = PRE
--

2♠
==
2NT = relay
... - 3♣ = min, 4+ clubs
... - 3♦ = min, 4+ diamonds
... - 3♥ = max, 4+ clubs
... - 3♠ = max, 4+ diamonds
... - 3NT = max, 5044 (an alternative here is to differentiate between 4 and 5+ diamonds)
3♣ = pass/correct
3♦ = hearts, F1
3♥ = good (inv+) raise
3♠ = PRE
--

As you are worried about hands with both majors, you might also consider incorporating the assumed fit style into your repertoire, particularly NV. 2♥ showing 4+♥ and 4+♠ can be a very effective weapon. You can combine this with a variety of 2NT openings - natural, minors, ♥ + a minor, any 2 suits not including spades, etc. If you wish to know more about this style, including possible response structures, as well as other alternatives I would recommend Chris Ryall's website, which specialises in this area.

[wank]

Multi is a big loser in itself. Personally I don't think any 2M options are good enough to justify that loss.

Muiderburg I feel is particularly poor, being basically a tool for undisciplined players to justify opening even more crappy 5 card weak 2s.

Non-vul I can tolerate 2M as 8-11 6 cards and 2d as a crap weak 2, essentially a fert.

[phoenix214]

Could offer:
A) 2M as 10-13
b) 2H as Flannery/Both majors weak, pick your flavor
2S as Both minors weak or strong

[shevek]

2♥ as hearts & another is a poor method.
Some pairs are seduced by a desire to have all 6 2-suiters covered.

By the same token, 2NT = minors is a big loser, compromising 20-21 balanced and wrong-siding.
Better is to have 2♦ as always weak. Gives responder more options, some sneaky.
Also avoids wrong-siding and pre-empting that happen when 20-21 is thrown in.

2♥ with spades as well is poor. Too much for responder to cater for.
These hands can usually wait then Michaels, or stretch a Rule of 20 opening.

An opponent had this problem recently:
2♥ - ?

♠ KTxx ♥ Ax ♦Qxxxx ♣Ax

He should have passed but dreamed of 4♠ or at least more matchpoints if opener had majors.
So he tried 2♠ p/c, turning a plus into a minus when opener had clubs.