2 Clubs Opening, once again.

[jfvc]

Hey all. Yes, its my first post here, even though i've been haging around reading your comments for some time now. Yee ha!

 

Well, i know that there's a zillion threads about this opening. I actually don't want to know if you use 2♥ as positive or negative or your opinions about Kokish.

 

What i'm trying to unveil is some sort of mechanism to unveil not so easy to find fits and still be able to identify them before rkc/cuebidding. It would also allow me to "invite" to slam, and, if possible, use stuff like serious NT and lttc. Come on, you know why discovering fits is important!

 

I've been using this:

 

2♦: GF, 6+ hcp.

2♥: Neg, 0-5 hcp.

Rest: Nat, 8+ hcp, two honors in bid suits (NT=♥).

 

We use 2♦ multi, so the balanced hand type always show good 24+ hcp.

 

After 2♣-2♦, we use:

2♥: Clubs or Hearts (2♠ asks, 2NT=♣, 3 level=♥. 3♣ after 2NT response reasks)

2♠: Spades (2NT/3♣ asks distribution, usually the second to avoid wrongsiding NT)

2NT: 24+ hcp balanced.

3 level: ♦+bid suit.

 

If it goes 2♣-2♦-2♠-3♣-3♠, that means i've got a spade single suit. 3♥ would go for 5+♠ and 4+♥. If we fail to relay, we usually have a 5+ card suit.

 

Well, there it goes:

2♣-2♦-2♠-3♣-3♥. Responder has something like:

 

Kx QJxx xx AQxxx

 

Does (s)he bid 6H, with quite a chance of missing 7? does he bid 4NT as regular blackwood, uncertain about H's king? Is 4NT blackwood anyway? Should he use 4 of a minor as some kind of fit bid? Now switch ♥s with ♦s. How does he find his fit? (By bidding a oh so very natural 6NT, i guess?)

 

I know these methods are not natural, but which one's are, anyway? Playing standard, should it probably goes 2♣-2♦-2♠-3♣-3♥, and the same ambiguities arise.

 

Do you have a complete structure over 2♣ opening or, well, a solution to this problems? Do you play it all on intuition? (which does seem to be the best way to handle this opening?)

 

Thanks a lot!

[TylerE]

If you require 6 pts for a GF, you're opening 2!C about 5x too often.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

In your seq.

 

2C - 2D

2S - 3C

3H - ...

 

If I got it right, you have made 3 natural calls (2S, 3C and 3H).

 

A sensible agreement is, that now a new suit at the 4 level

(in the given seq. 4D) is a cue agreeing the last natural bid suit.

Because you are able to agree openers first suit in a forcing way

below game level.

 

Since you dont have another "free" bid, the cue does not need

to promise a control, but having 30+ HCP between you, that is not

a big issue.

 

If you have a forcing raise available, a 4NT bid could be used as

natural, if not I would say it is RKCB for the last natural bid suit,

may not be a perfect agreement, but a simple one, avoiding

misunderstandings.

 

Another sensible agreement you could make is, that in the given

seq. 3NT is forcing, and again this would allow to play 4NT as natural.

..........................................................................

If you switch hearts with diamonds in responders hand, than i would

say, it is hard to discover a diamond fit using semi natural methods.

But that is not usual, discovering a fit in the 4th suit is never easy,

and how high is the chance to have a fit?

Do you really open 2C witha 3-suiter?

 

A possible option / solution is, that you are using methods in which

opener or responder is able to ask, which shape partner is holding,

you could also include strong 3-suiters in the 2D multi, meaning or

you go for strong club systems.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[mikestar]

If you require 6 pts for a GF, you're opening 2!C about 5x too often.

I think 6 HCP is just a bit light for 2♦--the purpose of this response is to show at least mild slam interest while denying the ability to show a suit. The typical 4-6 count should show lack of slam interest by making the negative 2♥ response then driving to game.

 

I agree that if 2♥ is meant as an immediate double negative (usually 0-3 HCP) non forcing that either 2♦ isn't being responded often enough or 2♣ is being opened too often.

[rogerclee]

I think you have written some interesting things, here are two comments that are hopefully useful to you:

 

1) Because your 2♣ opener is so often an actual suit instead of a random balanced hand, you should consider switching to a control style response scheme, perhaps even one where opener has the option to relay information about responder's hand.

 

2) I think if you are going to relay after opener rebids 2♠, you should bid 2N more often than you probably are right now. The extra space is worth a lot in my opinion, moreso than potential wrongsiding in some level of NT, which you are not even going to be playing that often. This is especially true if you have already responded 2♦ to show 6+ points, which means there is basically no way 3N is going down.

[JLOL]

ahora tu ingles es mejor q mi espanol jajaja

[whereagles]

hablas espanol, justino?

[bid_em_up]

I've been using this:

 

2♦: GF, 6+ hcp.

2♥: Neg, 0-5 hcp.

Rest: Nat, 8+ hcp, two honors in bid suits (NT=♥).

 

......

 

Well, there it goes:

2♣-2♦-2♠-3♣-3♥. Responder has something like:

 

Kx QJxx xx AQxxx

Why would responder bid 2♦ on this holding?

[jfvc]

Thanks for your comments.

 

About the infrequent 2♦ response, well, not really. I guess i feel dishonest whenever i talk about hcps, and truth is we always respond 2♦ with an ace and quite some 5 hcp combinations, as long as they've got some nice feature or controls. Thing is, even after 2♣-2♥, we're usually in game and there's a real small number of signoff sequences. All balanced and minor suited hands are GF (and its really hard to stop in 3♥), and virtually our lowest contract is 3♠.

 

About the positive responses, we just don't like using them with 5minor and 4major, and i don't think we're in a minority here. (Usually, 2♣-3 of a minor needs a 6 card suit. It drains so much bidding space away!)

 

Something i didn't write down is that we play

2♣-2♦-3NT/4♣/4♦/4♥ as 4441s with the singleton in the inmediate suit. (2♣-2♦-4♦=4-1-4-4), so, if opener has three suits, he usually has a void.

 

) Because your 2♣ opener is so often an actual suit instead of a random balanced hand, you should consider switching to a control style response scheme, perhaps even one where opener has the option to relay information about responder's hand.

 

2) I think if you are going to relay after opener rebids 2♠, you should bid 2N more often than you probably are right now. The extra space is worth a lot in my opinion, moreso than potential wrongsiding in some level of NT, which you are not even going to be playing that often. This is especially true if you have already responded 2♦ to show 6+ points, which means there is basically no way 3N is going down.

 

Now, i really like both of these.

About 2), well, you're so right. I guess i never thought about what i was losing, but now i can distinguish between a semibalanced 6 card suit and something really unbalanced.

About 1), well, you're so right. We actually considered control showing responses a long time ago, but their biggest failure, was, as you note, the 22-23 balanced hand.

Thing is, what do you do next? Our model was an old roman-based asking bid based (similar to 1♣ precision - positive response) played by some older folks over here, which i guess can still work with some tweaks, but is still incredibly space consuming. (a new suit asks support in about 7 steps, that range from single-void to HHxx+) Are there other structures out there you're familiar with? I don't think going all natural can be that succesful over here. I really liked Martelsby responses, which went:

2♦: 0-1 controls.

2♥: 2 controls.

2♠: Positive suit response equivalent.

2NT: 3 controls

3♣: 4 controls, etc.

I didn't find much else about their methods, however.

Thanks a lot, anyway. I'd be awesome if i could get some other links/ideas.

 

JLOL   Posted on Apr 23 2009, 03:10 AM

   ahora tu ingles es mejor q mi espanol jajaja 

 

Not sure about that, but it is better than alamiro's. :lol:

 

I think there are some heavy quote issues on this one.

[miguelm]

Well, if I may, I would suggest the following to start with:

 

- condense the steps to three - 0-1, 2, 3+, or something like that...

 

- reverse the steps, so you get more room for inquiries: 2D = 3+; 2H = 2; 2S = 0-1.

 

You will have more room when you need it, and you also keep the 2NT slot free for the balanced hand.

[kenrexford]

If you want to go completely insane, you can do a Hell of a lot to get contracts agreed at a relatively low level, all with one opening bid.

 

As a starting point, realize that almost everything you could possibly want to accomplish along these lines can be done by inclusion of a second strong opening of 2♦. See "Super Standard System" or a similar system I have worked on. The pattern detail possibilities are amazing, and you can often establish fit at as low as the two-level.

 

Then, if you want to instead have it all in the 2♣ opening, you just change who shows primary pattern first. In response to 2♣, Responder bids whatever he would bid with his pattern had he opened a strong 2♣ two-way style and heard a 2♦ response, starting at 2♥+, of course. If he would have opened with bis pattern 2♦ in the two-way approach, he responds 2♦. In other words, you can jam all of the two-way approach into one bid -- 2♣ -- so long as Responder bids his pattern instead of Opener.

 

Of course, the weaker hand showing primary pattern first seems bizarre and I have never tried it. But, it might very well work out.