2d as game forcing open, help!

[jiamin_zhu]

As me know, 2d as gameing forcing opening is played by bocchi and duboin, Forum D plus, or even power acol, but how to continue? Does anyone know the detailed structure after 2d opening?

 

thanks alot.

[csdenmark]

Bocchi/Duboin I just checked as I wondered. Acc. to their cc 2♦ open is defined: Multi weak 2 in ♥ or ♠ or balanced 20-22.

 

The continuations you will find in note 22.

 

http://free.hostdepartment.com/c/csdenmark...cchi-duboin.pdf

 

http://free.hostdepartment.com/c/csdenmark...duboinnotes.pdf

[jiamin_zhu]

Mark, thanks.

 

in the recent Cavendish, bocchi-duboin played 2d as game forcing open. But I really don't have a detailed structure after 2d.....

 

Here is a frame:

2d - 2h=0-2 controls; 2s=3 ctrs; 2nt=4 and 4+ controls, 3x=nat, promise two honors.

 

but i never play this structure on the table.lol....

 

anyone could give me a nice structure? thanks

[MickyB]

It is played a lot in the UK, but it is an *awful* bid. A strong 2♣ has used up enough room already, you would be amazed how useful that extra step is.I think most pairs around here just use 2♥ negative, others positive, similar to over a strong 2♣ opener.

 

Just a thought - maybe some sort of reverse Kokish would work...

 

2♥: Bal or negative

2♠: ♥ +ve

2NT: ♠ +ve

 

After 2♦:2♥, 2♠ asks more, then bids to show 5 card suits, bal +ve and bal -ve.

 

Sorry if this is complete rubbish, it's too late to be writing stuff like this!

[Free]

It's not as awful as you think it is, it's just used in a different way. 2♣ is for all STRONG hands, while 2♦ is used for trick-based strength. Say you have AKJxxxxx-AQ-x-xx, you have around 9-10 tricks with ♠ as trumps, but you aren't extremely strong. Also the response scheme is usually based on a multi opening, show strength afterwards, since opener shows his hand quite nicely.

 

Let opener show his hand, responder just has to listen. If you turn that around, ofcourse it sucks... :lol:

[MickyB]

That's sounding like Reverse Benji. I know Ron Klinger has advocated Benji (2♣ any Acol 2 or a bal range, 2♦ any GF that doesn't want to open 2♣), it wouldn't surprise me if it was that. I think Reverse Benji is preferable because you need the space more when you aren't strongly suggesting your own suit, but I think either method is using too many bids to show strong hands, they are fairly rare.

[mr1303]

I modified the Reverse Benji openings in order to right side more contracts:

 

2C = 23+ bal, or any strong without primary diamonds

 

2D = 20-22 bal or any strong with primary diamonds.

 

Given that the most common responses are 2D and 2H respectively, this will right side the contract, keeping the strong hand as declarer.

 

I believe this is similar to the ROMEX openings, discounting the 1NT opening of course.

[Fluffy]

I´ve played 2♦ GF for a couple of years, My structure is the same as to 2♣, it is as follows:

 

2♦-2♥ = negative, 0-7(8)

2♦-2♠ = 5+♠ 8+HCP a good suit.

2♦-2NT = 8+ HCP no good 5 card suit.

2♦-3♣/♦= 6(5)+ suit 8+ HCP, good suit.

[mishovnbg]

Hi jiamin_zhu!

 

I personally don't like strong openenings at 2 level, despite played enough it, because of partner's opinion. To receive right schema after such autopreemtive opening, you need answers to several questions. I will give in my post best imo, but if you dont like them, just find your own answers before to use some conventions.

 

What information partner want to receive with GF hand?

 

He normally want number of A for slam, because game is already guaranteed.

He also like to know about unusual good suit, which he can't expect.

 

What GF doesn't like to receive from p?

 

How strange may be for somebody, GF normally don't like to receive distribution from responder, becuase most of time GF is based on distribution and prefer to show own distribution and receive information about support.

 

Misho

[jiamin_zhu]

thx all...

if you hold 18-20balanced hand, you will open 1m then jump to 2nt in natural system. in fact. it's waste too much space to seek a better contract. that's the reason why I use 2c=18-bad 20, bal. and the result is that i have to use 2d as a game forcing hand. from misho's reply, i think maybe the responder shows his/her controls better. Before the GF hand showing his distribution, the responder should not occupy the space.

[1eyedjack]

thx all...

if you hold 18-20balanced hand, you will open 1m then jump to 2nt in natural system. in fact. it's waste too much space to seek a better contract. that's the reason why I use 2c=18-bad 20, bal. and the result is that i have to use 2d as a game forcing hand. from misho's reply, i think maybe the responder shows his/her controls better. Before the GF hand showing his distribution, the responder should not occupy the space.

I see few problems arising from lack of bidding space following 1m-1?-2N.

 

Note that in your example of opening 2C with the same hand type as the classical 2N rebid you have lost out on the fact that classical bidders will have conveyed some information via the 1-suit bids prior to the 2N rebid. Whilst 2C opener is superficially a lower bid than 2N, that loss of preliminary bids must be weighed in the balance.

 

You are also committing to 2N on a hand where responder might have passed 1m opener, and this seems to be an added danger (perhaps he can pass 2C? but what if he wanted to pass a 1D opener?)

[pclayton]

Sorry I'm late coming onto the scene here; just started reading this again from a long absence.

 

In my partnership #2, we play 2♣ and 2♦ as Rosencranz' "Standard International" which came out in a book called: "Bid Your Way to the Top" - published in 1978.

 

2♣ = 4-5 losers, 5 + controls, Usually 19-21 or so, but can be shaded to as little as about 15 with the right hand and a 2 suiter. ZAR Points anyone? :blink:

 

2♦ = 0-3 losers, 5 + controls, Usually 22+.

 

The response system is in control steps.

 

This was the first bidding system I ever learned, and I still think its a close 2nd to my strong club system. I like this set-up for a couple of reasons:

 

1. Like Precision, you don't have to make a courtesy response to a one bid with a trashy 4 count.

 

2. All reverses and jump shifts are natural and can be passed.

 

3. 2N is freed up as a preempt; minors, weak 3 level bid, whatever.

 

We had a nice pick up at the regional last week when I opened 2♣ at green holding:

 

♠ Qxx

♥ Ax

♦ AKQxxxx

♣ x

 

2♣ - 2♦ - all pass. +90. +500 at the other table when they sac'd over the cold 4♥ at the other table.

[EarlPurple]

It's not as awful as you think it is, it's just used in a different way.  2♣ is for all STRONG hands, while 2♦ is used for trick-based strength.  Say you have AKJxxxxx-AQ-x-xx, you have around 9-10 tricks with ♠ as trumps, but you aren't extremely strong.  Also the response scheme is usually based on a multi opening, show strength afterwards, since opener shows his hand quite nicely.

 

Let opener show his hand, responder just has to listen.  If you turn that around, ofcourse it sucks...  :rolleyes:

It IS awful because you are taking up 2 bids to show strong hands that will rarely occur.

 

It is far better to have only one hand for the strong bid, and maybe that hand could contain weak options as well.

 

That way you get to pre-empt more often. And if you play that 2♣ is, say, either a game-force or a weak 2♦ bid (partner responds 2♦ on most hands and if you are strong you bid on, otherwise you pass. If partner has a good hand and doesn't want to hear a pass when you have a weak 2♦ then he bids something else and if you happen to be strong, well - hey, we probably have a slam!).

 

Then you can use 2♦ as a weak 2 in either major (possibly with a strong option) ,and use 2♥ and 2♠ as 2-suited hands.

 

With the hand you displayed, (8 card spade suit) you are unlikely to miss game by opening 1♠. Firstly, given that you hold an 8-card suit it is highly unlikely for the bidding to end at the 1-level, and if partner does not have enough to respond you might not be making game anyway. And even if you are the opps are probably cold for 5♣ or 5♦ or can at least save in it for just 1 off such that you don't lose too much from playing in a part-score.

 

If you want to be able to play a system whereby you can use 2♣ for Acol 2-bids and 2♦ for game-forcing two bids, then do so as part of a multi-system.

 

2♣ would be either an Acol 2-bid in any suit (with diamonds you'd bid 3♦ over partner's 2♦ I guess), or a 22-23 balanced (you rebid 2NT) OR a weak-2 in diamonds (you pass the 2♦ response). If partner makes a positive response you will have to agree how you distinguish between your hand types.

 

2♦ would be either a game-force or a weak 2 in either major.

 

See my other topic (My Strong Diamond system) where we got into the discussion about the advantages of having all 2 bids weak.

[Cave_Draco]

<It IS awful because you are taking up 2 bids to show strong hands that will rarely occur.>

 

One uses two bids because of the ambiguity in the term "strong hands".

The argument between Benji & Reverse Benji is only for Benji converts, :lol: Cf. 0314 or 1430...

The main argument for Benji is the usefulness of Weak Twos and the uselessness of 2♣ & 2♦!

 

I use one bid to say "Powerhouse! Do you have a suit, P?" and the other to say "BIG hand! I'm interested in your controls, P."

Both expect to go to game but neither is, per se, a game force.

[EarlPurple]

Yes but you lose out on the chance to pre-empt more. Maybe you don't realise the power of being to pre-empt more, but you'll gain more in the long run.

 

And as I explained, you can have your cake and eat it too if you play multi-meanings for the bids. Check they are licensed first though where you are playing.

[pbleighton]

EarlPurple writes:

"Maybe you don't realise the power of being to pre-empt more, but you'll gain more in the long run."

 

I agree with your point regarding the value of preempting, but you might want to work on your phrasing :lol:

[Cave_Draco]

Yes but you lose out on the chance to pre-empt more. Maybe you don't realise the power of being to pre-empt more, but you'll gain more in the long run.

 

And as I explained, you can have your cake and eat it too if you play multi-meanings for the bids. Check they are licensed first though where you are playing.

The only pre-empt I lose out on is a weak 2♦!! A small price to pay!

 

2♦ is the eternal problem child, unless you play Benji, :lol:

 

Still, one could use 2♦ as Flannery...

[EarlPurple]

You also lose the ability to play BOTH

weak 2h/2s

weak 5-5 hands.

 

But if you followed my advice of "multying" your 2-bids then you would play:

 

2♣: strong as you play it OR weak 2 in diamonds

(I guess that means Acol 2 in any suit (rebid the suit) or 20-22 balanced (rebid NT) or weak 2 in diamonds (pass 2♦ response). Of course partner may make a "strong" response) If you don't have a weak 2 in diamonds you'll have to discuss how to continue from there but certainly you should be thinking about slam.

 

2♦: strong as you play it OR weak 2 in either major

Partner will usually respond 2♥ and then if you have a weak 2 in hearts you pass, with a weak 2 in spades you bid 2♠, with a 23-24 balanced you rebid 2NT and with any other bid you now have to go to the 3-level, which means you've actually pre-empted yourselves, but then all you've really lost is the game-force with spades as you can no longer rebid 2♠ on such a hand.

 

2♥: weak 5 hearts + 5 card minor

2♠: weak 5 spades + 5 card other suit.

 

Simple enough: if partner bids 2NT you show your minor. New suit by partner is forcing, including 2♠ over your 2♥ (non-forcing if your bid were doubled).

 

2NT could be played as 5-5 in minors as the 20-22 balanced hands will be covered by 2♣ = 2♦ = 2NT