Problems about Frelling Two

[billw]

I used frelling two with my partner for several weaks. There are some problems:

 

1. invitational hand

2. strong two suit hand

3. some single suit hand

4. other problem such as lead

 

for example:

1. partner open 2♥ show 4+♥4+♠ or 4+♥5+♣, 6-10HCP, you hold

♠xxx

♥Kxx

♦AKQx

♣Axx

 

2. partner open 2♦ show 4+♦4+♥ or 4+♦4+♠, 6-10HCP, you hold

♠AKxxx

♥x

♦Kx

♣KQxxx

 

3. partner open 2♥, you hold

♠KQ

♥x

♦AQJxxxx

♣Kxx

 

4. partner open 2♠, show 6+♠ or 4+♠5+♣, 6-10HCP, then

2♠ 2NT Pass 3NT

Pass all

you hold

♠x

♥KQ9xx

♦xxxx

♣AJx

how to choose your lead?

 

I have designed a new structure over 2♥

2♥

2♠:to sign off in minor or inv in major or inv with shortage in M, maybe a strong GF hand

2NT:balanced, inv

3♣:ask for second suit, maybe a strong GF hand

3♦:♠, GF

3♥:preempt

3♠:♦, GF

 

2♥ 2♠

2NT: ♠, min

3♣:♠, max

3♦:♣

 

2♥ 2NT

3♣:to play

3♦:5+♥ then pass=to play,3♠=55M,3NT=45M,other=6♥

3♥:5+♠ then pass=to play,3NT=54M, other=6♠

3♠:5♥5♣, maximum

3NT:to play

 

2♥ 3♣

3♦:♠,5+♥

3♥:♠,4♥

3♠:♣,4♥

3NT:♣,5+♥

 

but the structure has a big problem, it can't show a preference to play black suits. several times, we have to play 4-1 trump 2♥ at vul. B)

 

how to solve those problems?

 

thx

 

bill

[Sigi_BC84]

I used frelling two with my partner for several weaks.

Not surprised about that...

 

(SCNR :-)

 

--Sigi

[MickyB]

2♥:2♠ pass or correct is vital. Giving this up will cause 10 times as many problems as it solves. There aren't perfect answers to your questions, but there are reasonable ones.

[mikestar]

Like all weak preempts, Frelling Twos steal opponent's bidding space--and Frelling does it on very frequent hands. The downside is that they also steal your own bidding space. The fact that the second suit is unknown makes them harder to defend and harder to bid constructively over. Much of your constructive bidding wil be "guess and hope you guess right" no matter what scheme of responses and rebids you play--and the same goes for the enemy. Because your hand is weak, the occasions where it messes up up the opponents will be more frequent than the occasions it messes your side up.

 

If your partnership is not comfortable with this, an aggressive convention like Frelling is not for you. This is not a criticism--many fine players are not comfortable playing this type of preempt.

[foo]

:) I note that "Frelling" is a curse word in many Sci Fi and Fantasy books/movies/etc... <_<

 

"Frelling Two!" now seems strangely accurate and appropriate... :unsure: :unsure:

[hrothgar]

I very much agree with Mike when he notes that Frelling 2s are not for everyone. Personally, I beleive that the benefits of the methods outweight the costs, particularly when coupled with a light opening style. However, you are on occasion going to damage your own constructive bidding. Worse yet, you could be exposed to some nasty penalties.

 

In any case, I think that using a 2♠ advance over 2♥ as an artifical ask is unplayable.

 

For what its worth, he is how I'd advance on each of the hands in question.

 

1. This is a nasty hand where any number of bids could be correct. Personally, I'd consider three different bids.

 

Pass (hoping to whack the opponents)

3N hoping to find partner with a suitable hand

3C (probing for the right level / game)

 

My choice would probably depend on vulnerability / scoring. However, I like a 3♣ best. If partner bids 3♥ (showing a minimum) I'll pass even if it means playing in a Moysian. If partner shows a max I'll be well positioned to identify strain.

 

2. Partner almost certainly has ♥ and ♦. I'll bid 2♠ (puppet to 2NT).

 

3. 2♠ (pass or correct)

 

4. This hand I'd probably go passive and lead a Diamonds. Partner rates to have 5 Clubs, however, I expect that a club lead will blow a trick.

[billw]

Thanks. We partnership prefer this type of destructive preempt. Bridge is much fun with that. :)

 

When my 13 cards are not suitable to try a game, I prefer to pass and hope it can push all pressure to opponents. B)