looking for a set of destructive 2 openers

[wank]

what 2 openers would people suggest assuming a totally free hand and assuming all hands of opening strength or better are opened at the 1 level? presumably these will all be pretty pre-emptive then.

 

brown sticker is fine

 

2C-2S available

 

I know wilkosz is popular. obviously it would be an option to move it to 2C though now or play something else entirely.

 

obviously they should work as a set.

[gwnn]

We played the following:

 

2♣=strong any or 5-7 with diamonds

2♦=8-10 with diamonds or 5-7 with hearts

2♥=8-10 with hearts or 5-7 with spades

2♠=8-10 with spades

 

it's pretty fun (and when I'm saying 5-7, of course you can have less than 5 sometimes). you can perhaps put in clubs any into 2♣ if you don't need it for strong hands?

 

in an unrelated paragraph, another one that I liked and played with a strong club was

2♠=4 spades and a longer minor

[hrothgar]

Please don't help popularize the word "Destructive"...

Accepting this sort of perjorative labeling can only hurt the cause.

 

Here's my preferred methods

 

3♠ = Single suited with Spades

3♥ = Single suited with Hearts

3♦ = Constructive three level preempt in Diamonds

3♣ = Constructive three level preempt in Clubs

2N = Bad three level preempt in either minor

2♠ = Either 4+ Spades and 5+ Clubs or 6+ Spades

2♥ = 4+ Hearts and either (4+ Spades or 5+ Clubs) - NOT three suited

2♦ = 4+ Diamonds and either (4+ Hearts or 4+ Spades) - NOT three suited

[Gerben42]

If you leave my crazy mind total freedom, how about:

 

2♣: W2 in ♣ or ♦, or both majors

2♦: Wilkosz

2♥: W2 in ♥ or ♠

2♠: 4♠ + longer minor

2NT: minors

[helene_t]

Sunday we played a team match against someone who played

2♣= diamonds or strong

2♦ = 5+ in either major, weak

2♥ = 4-5 clubs, 3-5 diamonds, 3-4 hearts, 0-1 spades. weak

2♠ = 4-5 clubs, 3-5 diamonds, 0-1 hearts, 3-4 spades. weak

2NT = minors, weak

[Echognome]

When I played a system with 5 preemptive openings at the 2-level, I really enjoyed the following:

 

2♣ - 4♥+4♠

2♦ - 4♦+4♥/♠

2♥ - Natural

2♠ - Natural

2NT - 5♣+5♦

[wank]

my best effort currently is a mixture of gwnn's method and wilkosz.

 

2C = bad wk2 hearts/ bad wk 2 diamonds/constructive wk 2 clubs

2D = wilkosz

2h = bad wk2 spades/constructuve wk 2 hearts

2s = constructive wk 2 spades

 

i like the idea of making it tricky for RHO to float LHO's value showing double to await developments son i like the ambiguity over whether opener has the suit or not

[sty2000]

2♣: majors

2♦: mini multi (weak two in one major)

2♥: ♥+m

2♠: ♠+m

2NT: minors

 

all legal, no brown stickers :)

[kayin801]

2♥ multi plz

[mtvesuvius]

Perhaps something like inverted psycho suction openings?

 

2♣ - ♣ or ♦+♥ or ♥+♣

2♦ - ♦ or ♥+♠ or ♠+♦

2♥ - ♥ or ♠ and ♣

2♠ - ♠ or ♣ and ♦

[dake50]

Look at Amsbury-type openers:

2x shows 6-suit in bid -- sits a double

OR 3-suited not bid suit -- redoubles a double: SOS

OR 2-suited not bid suit -- lower suit over double: P/C

 

Confounding, yet paradox-type raises are possible --

this 'raise'/new suit is our spot or the correction finds the right spot.

[Free]

The most agressive, which also lets you alert your pass as 6-10HCP is Lorenzo two's:

2X = 0-7HCP, 4+X (Majors first style), never a decent hand

I've played 2M as such in the past when NV 1st & 2nd seat (2m was needed for something else). Was a lot of fun, we had lots of fun deals.

 

An alternative very agressive opening is the random 2♣: 0-5HCP any hand. If you're too scared you can decide opener must have some 5 card suit. You can still play 2♦ and 2M as whatever you want. I've played that a few times, until our club decided to ban BSC because of lots of old people were getting angry at us. This came up several times every session and we never got a bad board (perhaps because people didn't know how to defend). It's a perfect example of a destructive method. B)

 

Some more constructive but still agressive method is something I played a few years ago:

2♣ = 4+♣, 4+M

2♦ = 4+♦, 4+M

2♥ = 4+♥, 4+♠

2♠ = 5+♠

Comes up a lot since 4432 with values in the 4-card suits is already enough to open.

 

Obviously all the above are best played when NV. ;)

[Trinidad]

How about:

2♣: weak two in a minor

2♦: weak, 5M + 4+m

2♥: weak two in a major

2♠: weak, 55+♥+♠ or 55+♣+♦

 

All brown sticker, all non forcing

 

Rik

[MickyB]

Not sure I'd fancy playing your suggested method when vulnerable, playing in the suit that oppo have game in becomes rather less attractive. I think that something like Tutti Frutti [2D = spades+minor or hearts, 2H = hearts+minor or spades] would be almost as good when NV but much better when vul.

[gnasher]

If you're going to play a Multi that includes the suit bid, I think it should be this sort of thing:

2

♥

= 6 hearts, opening strength; or weak 2

♠

or even

2

♦

= 6 diamonds, opening strength; or a weak two in a major

That makes it safer to pass the opening when you don't have much, and it's still OK to make a pass-or-correct bid when you have a scattering of high cards. Because the hand-types are of similar freuqncy, it's quite hard to devise a good defence.

 

I also like

2

♣

= 4-4 or longer, clubs + a major

2

♦

= 4-4 or longer, diamonds + a major

but to limit damage to your own constructive bidding I think you have to play them very weak - about 0-6 probably - and that makes they fairly rare.

[lamford]

If you're going to play a Multi that includes the suit bid, I think it should be this sort of thing:

2

♥

= 6 hearts, opening strength; or weak 2

♠

or even

2

♦

= 6 diamonds, opening strength; or a weak two in a major

That makes it safer to pass the opening when you don't have much, and it's still OK to make a pass-or-correct bid when you have a scattering of high cards. Because the hand-types are of similar freuqncy, it's quite hard to devise a good defence.

 

I also like

2

♣

= 4-4 or longer, clubs + a major

2

♦

= 4-4 or longer, diamonds + a major

but to limit damage to your own constructive bidding I think you have to play them very weak - about 0-6 probably - and that makes they fairly rare.

 

It is legal, and more destructive, to play that 2H is three-way, 6 hearts opening strength, weak 2S or 5-5 in the minors 0-5ish. You correct to 2S and redouble with the last named, and they are still guessing after two rounds of the auction.

 

And 2D as six diamonds, opening strength, weak two in major, or bad pre-empt in clubs. That still makes it safe to pass when you don't have much. Apart from the odd -700.

[the hog]

2C both Majors 4+ 4+ 6-10

2D Wilkosz

2H Weak 2 in H or S

2S Pre empt in either minor

[gnasher]

It is legal, and more destructive, to play that 2H is three-way, 6 hearts opening strength, weak 2S or 5-5 in the minors 0-5ish. You correct to 2S and redouble with the last named, and they are still guessing after two rounds of the auction.

 

And 2D as six diamonds, opening strength, weak two in major, or bad pre-empt in clubs. That still makes it safe to pass when you don't have much. Apart from the odd -700.

Do you mean that it's allowed in the EBU? If so, can you explain why?

[Zelandakh]

2C both Majors 4+ 4+ 6-10

2D Wilkosz

2H Weak 2 in H or S

2S Pre empt in either minor

Would it not be more logical to play

2C Wilkosz (5+M, 5+m)

2D Weak 2 in H or S

2H both Majors 4+ 4+ 6-10

2S Pre empt in either minor

 

if you are showing these 4 hand types?

[the hog]

Would it not be more logical to play

2C Wilkosz (5+M, 5+m)

2D Weak 2 in H or S

2H both Majors 4+ 4+ 6-10

2S Pre empt in either minor

 

if you are showing these 4 hand types?

 

Absolutely NOT!

2H as a weak 2 in either M is extremely difficult to play against. It can be passed with or without a fit. It makes action by next hand very difficult. Read what its protagonists have to say.

The mini multi as you suggest, is a doddle in the park compared to the former.

2C as Ekrens allows you to bid 2D to find your longer M fit, (if one exists).

[lamford]

Do you mean that it's allowed in the EBU? If so, can you explain why?

 

At level 4. If I am reading this correctly:

 

<snip>

( B ) Any combination of meanings which either:

(1) includes one specified suit of at least four cards; or

(2) has a specification which does not include holding at least four cards in the

suit bid, and does not include two-suiters where the suit bid is the longer

suit.

 

So, for 2D, it either includes a four card-diamond suit or it has a specification which includes diamonds but they are not longer they are equal length.

For 2H, it either includes a four-card heart suit or it has a specification where the longer suit, clubs, is not the bid suit.

 

Perhaps they don't mean that, and perhaps I am misinterpreting it, as it is a bit of a struggle! And the OP did say brown-sticker is fine, anyway.

[Free]

I also like

2

♣

= 4-4 or longer, clubs + a major

2

♦

= 4-4 or longer, diamonds + a major

but to limit damage to your own constructive bidding I think you have to play them very weak - about 0-6 probably - and that makes they fairly rare.

I disagree, I've played them as 6-9 in the past with success. Playing as 0-6 makes the range bigger and you might ruin a simple hand where partner has an opening and you can respond 1M with 5-6HCP, or when partner has a strong hand.

 

We used 2♥ as P/C (I think 2♠ was also P/C, but not sure), we had an invitational relay and a GF relay. After 2♣ we used 2♦ as "bid the Major you don't have" which was either a signoff in an own Major, or the start of an invitational sequence (continue with 2NT). That was a great tool imo which made the 2♣ opening a lot better than the 2♦ opening!

[campboy]

Perhaps they don't mean that, and perhaps I am misinterpreting it, as it is a bit of a struggle! And the OP did say brown-sticker is fine, anyway.

They don't. 10C1 provides an explanation of how to discern what is meant.

If there is a list of options for a permitted agreement then a partnership may agree to play the particular call to mean only one item from the list if it says:

(a) Any one of ...

(b ) Either ... or ...

However, a partnership may agree to play it as a multi-way call, showing various possibilities from the list, if it says:

(a) Any of ...

(b ) ... or ...

© Up to three of ...

Since the regulation you quote says "either", sometimes one and sometimes the other would not be permitted.

[Flameous]

One opening not mentioned yet is sort of "reverse wilkosz", 2C as 5+m, 4M. I have very limited use of that opening so I'm not saying anything about how good it is, but at least it's very frequent. With that and wilkosz you are opening every two suiter you just dare to open. I'd throw in 2H as multi, it's wonderful toy when NV. I needed 2S for more constructive purposes, and there aren't much hands left. I think you can combine 55ms and bad 3m bid to single 2S bid. Respond 2NT with preference for Ds and 3C with preference for Cs. 3D can be either asking or P/C bid.

 

Vulnerable I'd go for something that actually shows some suits :)

[gwnn]

I don't like 2♣ as both majors if you can be 4-4. I played it for a few sessions and it seemed like we always had 4-4 exactly thereby rendering the 2♦ relay rather useless - opener would (almost) always bid 2♥, conveying very little in the way of information (suppose it was 70% 44 15% 45 15% 54, now it's 82.4% 44 17.6% 45). So if you play it as possibly 44 (and I think you should), you should put it in 2♦.

 

All that said, 2♦ as 4 diamonds and 4 in a major is probably more fun to play. However, I'm wondering about gnasher's idea of letting 2♦ be opening strength in diamonds or weak in hearts, that's kind of nice, then maybe you can play 1♦ then 2♦ as artificial, showing 4 hearts (over 1♠) or something else.